WA Assisted Dying Deaths: Reading the 2025-26 Numbers

Western Australia’s Assisted Dying Deaths: Why the Numbers Differ, What They Show and What an Inquiry Should Ask

When a statistic leaps off the page, it’s worth asking two questions. What does it actually measure, and who is using it?

This week, Western Australia’s Voluntary Assisted Dying (VAD) Board released its annual report for 2025–26. Within hours, two different headlines appeared: that deaths had risen by 243 per cent, and that they had risen by 181 per cent. A recent report on The Daily Declaration, republished from the advocacy group Right To Life UK, uses the first figure and calls for an urgent inquiry. The Board’s own chair, speaking to ABC radio, used the second.

Both can’t be the “increase,” and understanding why is the beginning of an honest discussion. This post sets out what the report shows, explains the discrepancy, looks at the specific concerns raised about doctor shopping, palliative care and the concentration of work in a few practitioners, considers what the Board proposes, and offers a Christian framework for responding with both conviction and compassion. It deals with death and suicide, so a note on support is included at the end.

What the Board’s Report Shows

According to the ABC and other coverage of the Board’s annual report for 1 July 2025 to 30 June 2026:

• 541 VAD deaths in 2025–26, equal to about 2.9 per cent of all deaths in Western Australia.
• Growth of about 12 per cent over the previous year, and about 181 per cent since the law began on 1 July 2021, according to the Board’s chair, Colin Holt.
• Far higher than predicted. The ABC reports that uptake is much greater than anticipated when the law was introduced, putting pressure on the small number of doctors who are authorised to administer VAD.
• Concentration among a few practitioners. The report notes that eight doctors performed 53 per cent of all practitioner-administered deaths last year.
• A Board recommendation to review time limits. The Board is considering whether the current requirements, that a person is expected to die within six months, or twelve months for neurodegenerative conditions, are too restrictive, and has recommended that the minister consider extending or removing them.
• Palliative care figures. According to figures cited by Right To Life from the report, the number of applicants who were not receiving palliative care at their first assessment rose from 124 in 2024–25 to 167 in 2025–26, and 154 of those 167 had received no palliative care in the preceding year. The same source says that 333 patients, or about 26.7 per cent of those making initial requests, made more than one request.

For context, earlier Board reports show that VAD deaths represented about 1.1 per cent of all WA deaths in the first year (190 deaths), 1.6 per cent in 2023–24 (292 deaths) and 2.6 per cent in 2024–25 (480 deaths). The 2023–24 report showed that 86 per cent of VAD deaths were administered by a practitioner and 14 per cent by self-administration, a very different mix from Victoria, where self-administration is the majority.

Why Do Two Different Percentages Appear?

The difference comes from the baseline year and the way the figures are counted.

• 181 to 182 per cent is the increase quoted by the Board’s chair and the ABC, comparing 541 deaths in 2025–26 with the first year of operation, a span of five years of data. Another way of expressing the same comparison is that deaths are now close to three times the 2021–22 figure of 192.
• 243 to 246 per cent appears to rely on a different set of numbers. One report cites a rise from 147 deaths in 2021–22 to 508 in 2025–26, which gives about 246 per cent. Right To Life’s figure of 243 per cent describes the rise “in just four years.” We couldn’t confirm exactly which categories of death these figures include, and the numbers differ from the Board’s headline totals of 192 and 541.

The important point isn’t to accuse anyone of bad faith. It’s that when two numbers for the same thing differ by more than 60 percentage points, readers should look at the original report, check what is being counted and over what period, and be wary of any source that quotes only the more dramatic figure, whichever side of the debate it comes from. An accurate statement is that deaths have nearly tripled since the scheme began, and that the share of all deaths has risen from 1.1 per cent to 2.9 per cent.

Putting WA in Context

Comparing jurisdictions helps put the figures in perspective:

• Western Australia: about 2.9 per cent of deaths in 2025–26.
• Victoria: about 1.1 per cent in 2025–26, which we discussed in a recent post, though the proportion there was historically lower than in several other states.
• Canada: more than 5 per cent of deaths in 2024.
• The Netherlands: about 6 per cent of deaths in 2025.

So WA’s rate is the highest in Australia, according to Right To Life’s claim and consistent with the figures available for other states, but lower than in Canada or the Netherlands. The trend, rather than the level, is what concerns critics: growth beyond projections, year after year.

The Concerns Being Raised

Doctor shopping

“Doctor shopping” refers to a patient who is refused by one doctor and then approaches another until someone agrees. Critics argue that the figure of 333 patients making more than one request suggests this is happening, and they call for an inquiry into whether the safeguards work.

It’s worth presenting both readings. One reading is that people who are refused, perhaps because they don’t meet the criteria, are searching until they find a more permissive practitioner. The other is that many doctors decline to participate for reasons of conscience, others aren’t trained, and patients, especially in regional areas, have to ask more than once to find someone who is available. The Board’s own comments about pressure on a small number of doctors lend some support to the second reading. The data as quoted doesn’t settle the question, and a proper inquiry could examine the reasons for each additional request, the outcomes of refused applications and whether any patients who didn’t meet the criteria later received VAD.

Concentration among few practitioners

The fact that eight doctors performed more than half of practitioner-administered deaths is a legitimate concern from both perspectives. Supporters see it as evidence of unmet demand and a shortage of trained practitioners. Critics see it as a risk: a small group of doctors performing a large share of procedures could make independent oversight more difficult and normalise practice with less scrutiny. Either way, it’s a pattern that deserves examination.

Palliative care

The data cited shows that most applicants were receiving palliative care, but that a growing number weren’t, and that most of those hadn’t received any in the preceding year. That’s the kind of figure that supporters of improved palliative care highlight: a person who hasn’t yet had access to good symptom management may be choosing VAD before the alternatives have been tried. The reasons could include limited services in regional WA, patients declining it, late referrals or other factors. An inquiry could look at why, and what could be done.

“Waived safeguards”

The WA law specifies a nine-day period between a patient’s first and final requests. Under the Act, that period can be shortened in certain circumstances, for example where the person is likely to die or lose capacity before the period ends. Critics see any waiver as a weakening of a safeguard, while supporters argue that forcing a dying person to wait is cruel. How often waivers are used and why would be a natural subject for examination.

Expansion

The Board’s recommendation to review the six- and twelve-month limits will worry anyone who sees these limits as a boundary. As we noted in our recent look at Victoria, changes that widen eligibility are part of what critics predicted, while supporters say they address real hardship for people with conditions that progress unpredictably. The question of whether to widen the criteria should be decided openly by Parliament, with evidence and wide consultation, not by incremental drift.

What Should an Inquiry Ask?

Whichever side one takes, there are reasonable questions an independent inquiry could examine:

1. Why has uptake exceeded predictions by such a large margin, and what drives growth?
2. What do the data show about repeated requests, refusals and practitioner-switching?
3. How concentrated is practice among a few doctors, and what oversight is in place?
4. How many applicants have had adequate access to palliative care, and what barriers exist, particularly in regional and remote WA?
5. How are waivers of the nine-day period used, and are they justified?
6. How is capacity assessed, particularly for people with dementia or depression?
7. Are there signs of pressure from family, finances or fear of being a burden?
8. What would the proposed changes to time limits mean in practice?
9. How reliable and transparent is the Board’s data?

Such an inquiry would serve those who support VAD, because it would test and strengthen public confidence, as well as those who oppose it.

A Christian Lens

The Christian tradition holds that human life is a gift from God, made in his image (Genesis 1:27) and known by him from the womb (Psalm 139:13–16). Most Christian churches have long opposed euthanasia and assisted suicide, understanding the sixth commandment (Exodus 20:13) to protect life through to its natural end, while also teaching that we aren’t required to prolong dying by burdensome treatment.

The tradition also stresses what we owe to the dying and their families.

• Presence and comfort. Jesus said that visiting the sick is visiting him (Matthew 25:36, 40). Second Corinthians 1:3–4 describes the God of all comfort who comforts us so that we can comfort others.
• Carrying burdens. Galatians 6:2 calls us to bear one another’s burdens. A person who feels like a burden needs to hear, in word and in practice, that they are not one.
• Honouring the elderly. Psalm 71:9 prays, “Do not cast me away when I am old,” and Leviticus 19:32 commands respect for the aged.
• Speaking for the vulnerable. Proverbs 31:8–9 calls us to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, and to ensure that the rights of the poor and needy are defended.
• Honest numbers. Proverbs 11:1 says that dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord, and that accurate weights are his delight. That applies to statistics. We should be as careful with figures that support our case as with those that challenge it.
• Hope. Christians hold that death is not the end, and that God is with the dying (Psalm 23:4; Romans 8:38–39).

Our Take

Here’s where we’d like to add some commentary.

1. Check the numbers, and use the careful ones.

An accurate statement, that deaths have almost tripled since 2021 and are now 2.9 per cent of all deaths in WA, is concerning enough without a more dramatic number. Those who care about accuracy, on either side, should choose the figure they can defend.

2. The growth beyond predictions deserves a serious explanation.

Whether one welcomes or fears the trend, the fact that uptake has far exceeded expectations means that assumptions made when the law was passed need to be revisited.

3. An independent inquiry would be a good thing.

Even supporters of VAD should welcome a thorough, independent examination of how the system is working, because confidence is strengthened by scrutiny. The Board itself is both the overseer and, in its recommendations, an advocate for adjustment, and an external look would add credibility.

4. Palliative care should be a priority regardless of one’s view.

If some people choose VAD because they haven’t had good palliative care, that’s a failure of the health system that everyone should want to fix. Christians can advocate for greater investment in palliative and hospice care, especially in regional areas.

5. Changes to eligibility should be made openly.

Extending or removing time limits is a significant change. It should be debated publicly, with transparent evidence, and decided by Parliament, not drift in through recommendations and regulation.

6. Care for those who choose, and for those who don’t.

Whatever our convictions, we can affirm that people considering VAD are often suffering greatly, and that their families are going through enormous pain. The church should respond with compassion, and not with condemnation.

7. Be present.

The best answer to the desire for a quick exit is the experience of being accompanied. Visiting, listening, practical help and prayer are things every church member can offer.

The Other Side of the Conversation

In fairness, here are some perspectives from supporters of VAD and others:

• The Board and supporters say that the law is working as intended, that the growth reflects awareness and need, and that data show most applicants are receiving palliative care. They argue that the strict assessment process screens out people who don’t qualify.
• Advocacy groups such as Go Gentle Australia argue that the lack of trained doctors, geographical barriers and the federal restriction on telehealth for VAD discussions are obstacles to access, and call for Medicare funding for VAD practitioners.
• Supporters would say that repeated requests don’t prove abuse, and that they could reflect the difficulty of finding a willing and available doctor. They’d also point out that a nine-day waiting period is a safeguard that can cause suffering for people who are close to death.
• Critics respond that rapid growth, the concentration of work in a few doctors, the extension of time limits and falling rates of palliative care involvement are exactly the warning signs that were predicted, and that the safeguards need to be tested independently.
• Some Christians support a more limited form of VAD out of compassion, though this is a minority view among churches.
• Disability and mental health advocates have raised concerns about the pressure that availability of VAD may place on people who feel they are burdens, and about assessing capacity in people with cognitive impairment.

A thoughtful reader can recognise the force of arguments on both sides.

What You Can Do

• Read the Board’s report and the ABC’s reporting for yourself.
• Support palliative and hospice care, through giving, volunteering and advocacy, particularly for regional communities.
• Contact your MP. Ask about the case for an independent inquiry, about palliative care funding and about any changes to eligibility.
• Talk about wishes with family, and consider advance care planning.
• Visit the lonely, sick and dying, and offer practical help to carers.
• Pray for those who are dying and their families, for health professionals and for lawmakers.

If You Are Struggling

If you or someone you know is having thoughts of ending their life, or is grieving, please reach out today. In Australia, Lifeline is available 24 hours a day on 13 11 14, and the Suicide Call Back Service is on 1300 659 467. In an emergency, call 000. Your GP, a pastor or a trusted friend can also help.

Questions to Reflect On

• What do I want to be true of the care I or my family receive at the end of life?
• How careful am I with numbers and claims on issues I feel strongly about?
• Who among the elderly or sick do I know that needs a visit?
• What would it look like for my church to be known for caring for the dying?
• How can I hold strong convictions and still listen to those who see this issue differently?

A Short Prayer

Lord, you are the giver of life and the comfort of the dying. We pray for everyone who is facing the end of life, and for their families and carers. Give wisdom to doctors, legislators and review boards, and help us to speak the truth carefully. Provide good care to every person who needs it, in the city and in the country. Make your church a place of presence and practical love, where no one faces death alone. Amen.