NZ Herald’s attempt to dismantle concerns over latest Assisted Dying report review fails

NZ Herald’s attempt to dismiss Voice For Life’s concern for deaths to Assisted Dying and the strain it’s causing on healthcare services within the country fell short.

NZ Herald senior reporter Isaac Davison released a story titled ‘Big rise in demand for assisted dying in New Zealand – should we be worried?’ under the label ‘Analysis’ which allows senior reporters to present factual reporting which also incorporates interpretations and conclusions from the author.

However, the New Zealand Herald failed to publish our report  ‘Latest Assisted Dying report shows an unsupported, high-risk service under strain’ before their reporter attempted to dismantle its validity.

Davison’s article made multiple claims that readers should not be worried about the points we raised, justified by stating that recently-released statistics are following what was predicted by the Ministry of Health in terms of numbers of those using Assisted Dying.

“We are entitled to be concerned about the 37% increase in those dying by euthanasia and assisted suicide whether that’s a predicted number or not,” Voice For Life National President Lydia Posthuma says. 

“Just because growth was predicted does not make it ethically or socially benign. We believe a 37% rise in state-sanctioned deaths deserves sober reflection, not blithe dismissals from the media, the very institution tasked with public accountability.” 

That point aside, among data Davison provided to try and undermine our release, he incorrectly stated the ministry modelled a 25% increase in applications in the year to June 2025, and compared it to the 20% rise in active applications to suggest it shouldn’t cause concern as the numbers were tracking well below predictions.

However, the ministry model actually predicted a 23% increase, and the correct data for comparison is the 27.2% rise in new applications. We are tracking ahead of predictions.

“The number of cases is above predictions and worthy of concern, especially in the light of the falling numbers of healthcare providers willing to participate,” Posthuma says. “It’s important to remember that numbers, in this case, represent people’s lives.”

Davison attempts to dismiss a near 15% drop off in doctors participating in the process, stating the statistics released by the report are not a comprehensive total of doctors who can perform Assisted Dying in New Zealand. “Any doctor can participate in assisted dying if the patient is already under their care. However, if a doctor is providing these services to a patient outside their practice, they need to be on the list,” he says.

To say this fact should allay concern is unfounded conjecture. Under current reporting requirements of the Registrar of Assisted Dying, information regarding how many doctors involved outside of the SCENZ committee is not released and may not even be collected or monitored. 

“What we do factually know, however, is that a vast majority of doctors are opposed to this act based on feedback during the End of Life Choice Act legislation process and that the number on the SCENZ committee is  falling,” Posthuma says.

The Herald also pointed to a feature it produced showing doctors flying across the country performing assisted dying. Davison claimed this should allay concerns that people may face equity issues to access barriers. 

“Do palliative care doctors get flown around the country to provide palliative care to dying patients? How then can we say there is equity?” Posthuma asks.

“This also raises concerns about the risk of ‘drive-through’ euthanasias, where proper checks and balances are rushed or even completely missing as a small number of doctors involved are ferried around the country to end patient lives and then quickly leave town again.”

Continuing his attempt to dismiss our statistically-backed concern, Davison goes on to state that in countries where Assisted Dying is more established, assisted deaths typically make up around 2% of all deaths. Ours is currently at 1.25% for the last measured year, after just three years of it being operational. 

A graph presented (from a Ministry of Health Report released last year) shows NZ has the fourth highest rate behind the likes of Canada and Netherlands, Queensland, Australia and Western Australia ranking before us.

However the graph neglects to take into consideration the eligibility criteria difference in these nations, and therefore does not present a relevant comparison.

The Netherlands and Canada have wide, open legislation allowing almost anyone to use the MAiD (Medical Assistance in Dying). Even Queensland, which introduced its law in 2023, has a 12-month terminal prognosis criteria. Western Australia has similar eligibility criteria to NZ, but has been operational since 2019, two years before ours.

“We are fast approaching high rates of Assisted Dying compared to natural deaths in our country relative to our law. We need to ask why,” Posthuma says. 

“Again it highlights our concerns for the increasing numbers and the reducing rates of healthcare professionals engaged.”

Davison’s concluding statement is an invitation to look at the data from a differing perspective to ours; that the health system is increasingly meeting a demand for a wanted service that New Zealanders overwhelmingly backed “death with dignity” or “whakaahuru”. 

This statement ultimately reveals Davison's position on the issue. Kiwis were never asked in the referendum to vote for “death with dignity”, they were asked if they support the End of Life Choice Act 2019. To imply they are the same thing is seriously misleading.

Voice For Life is firmly committed to defending dignified and humane death, something which legalised euthanasia and assisted suicide place in serious jeopardy and even outright deny to many vulnerable people.