An Audience with Peter Warren – Presention Notes

7 May 2026

Peter’s PowerPoint presentation is saved as a PDF for you to access below.

Notes as published in Seniors Voice:

I can tell you, worldwide, some things never change. Opponents to Assisted Dying are still using the same arguments that Marshall Perron faced back in 1995. Be ready for them. As much as you think that it is almost inevitable that you will pass the law here, it isn’t.

The arguments you hear and will hear against AD in NT are the same that were used in Scotland — when it failed to pass its law. They are being used in the UK Westminster Parliament right now. They are being used elsewhere — Canada — Slovenia — France — USA.

Fear of coercion An ever-present argument. Used by opponents to suggest that someone, often that an older person may be persuaded or coerced, into an assisted death. Arguments such as carer fatigue or loss of family inheritance through extended health care costs for example, means someone could face subtle or not-so-subtle suggestions that it is time for them to ‘do the right thing.’ Except…Extensive experience across jurisdictions clearly point to the opposite being the case. Families and loved ones don’t want to see the person dying, Coercion is most likely going to be for them to ‘soldier on’ rather than ‘pull the plug’. Should a loved one take a medication or undergo an operation, stop or start a new medical regime.
Fear for the vulnerable
Linked to coercion — the mantra is that those who are ill, or live with a disability, or elderly are, by the very nature of their condition, vulnerable. People can also become ‘vulnerable’ at many other points in their lives. The loss of a job, unstable housing
situations, and illness can often make life difficult. To protect people, some jurisdictions, including here in the NT have suggested or have included a gag clause in assisted dying legislation. Except…With the strongest voice possible the WF says don’t do this. Evidence from elsewhere is that it stops the medical teams from doing their jobs. VAD legislation always includes strong guidelines about what is legal and ethical — why would a medic step outside these boundaries and jeopardise not only their
career but possibly their freedom as well? Repealed in Victoria — NZ also want to repeal.
Fear for the disabled Time and again, opponents of assisted dying claim that people living with a disability live in fear of being persuaded into an assisted death. Some jurisdictions have included prognosis periods as a ‘protection of the disabled’. Except…There is no evidence from any jurisdiction anywhere that people living with a disability disproportionally access assisted dying. Given the work that has gone on for decades around disability rights, and returning agency to those living with disability, the Federation is disappointed that such arguments are offered. We suggest that it would be cruel in the extreme to exclude someone from an assisted death if they qualified under a jurisdiction’s law but were excluded by dint of some prior part of the law excluding them on the basis of their disability. To be clear… Structural inequality is often part of living with disability. However, many people who live with a disability want to know that if a time came when they might need to access an assisted death, they should have the same right that any other person has. For these reasons, the Federation strongly pushes back on prognosis periods — ACT has got it right — the NT has the chance to do the same.

The Opposition Playbook: Tactics, tone and international cohesion. A gentle heads up!

In both the Scottish and UK Bill, we have seen the emergence of a much more cohesive coordinated attack on Assisted Dying.

Beyond the UK, we see conservative faith organisations working together to either undermine or overturn VAD legislation. These organisations are well-funded and are willing to intervene directly into national conversations on VAD. In the UK, this was evidenced, for example, by ‘volunteer’ researchers being brought into Parliaments to bolster opposition activity — funded by faith organisations. Other examples: Slovenia — referendum, European Centre for Law and Justice — Christian NGO based in Strasbourg with international connections, protecting the disabled, endless warnings about coercion and protecting the vulnerable, removing ‘faith’ from frontline arguments, honing the language they are willing to use to disrupt the conversations round VAD (poison not medication, suicide not assisted dying, killing not relief of suffering).