Australia's restrictions on telehealth in voluntary assisted dying (VAD) programs create unnecessary barriers to access, according to health policy experts. Current rules prohibit certain assessments and consultations from occurring via video or phone, despite evidence that remote care works effectively in other medical contexts.

The regulations require eligible patients to meet practitioners in person for critical steps, including initial eligibility assessments. This requirement poses real obstacles for patients in rural areas, those with mobility constraints, and people living far from participating physicians. Travel costs and time burdens compound existing emotional strain.

Telehealth restrictions contradict how VAD operates in other jurisdictions. Oregon, where physician-assisted death has been legal since 1997, permits remote consultations. Canada's Medical Assistance in Dying program also allows virtual assessments. Both systems maintain strict safeguards while reducing logistical friction.

The policy rationale emphasizes identity verification and the need to observe patients directly. These concerns merit attention but do not require wholesale rejection of telehealth. Remote consultations can incorporate robust verification protocols, document sharing, and video observation of physical signs. Medical standards already accommodate telehealth across oncology, palliative care, and psychiatry without compromising safety.

Patient autonomy sits at VAD's ethical core. The law recognizes that terminally ill people deserve choice about end-of-life decisions. Telehealth restrictions paradoxically limit choice for those least able to travel. A patient in outback Queensland faces different practical constraints than one in Melbourne, yet current rules apply uniformly.

Health ministers should review these restrictions with fresh evidence. Regulated telehealth access would expand equitable access while preserving safeguards. Regulators could require video assessments with identity checks, mandate practitioner qualifications, document requirements, and maintain audit trails. These controls protect against coercion without eliminating remote options.

Scrapping blanket tele