Lee MelissaMELISSA LEE (National): Thank you Madam Chair. This is my second call and this time I would like to talk about clause 10 in terms of first opinion and second opinion in terms of the risk of a wrong diagnosis and wrong prognosis. Before I actually get to that I would like to address the comment that Brett Hudson made in terms of how members in this House cannot make an absolute correct decision. I would have thought that this was the one time that we wanted to be absolutely sure because we are dealing with people's lives—we make a mistake and we're sending people to death. There's no coming back from that: death is absolute. I would've thought that members would want to make sure that we want to protect the vulnerable and we want to protect the people who are perhaps coerced.I won't actually go into talking about the coercion but I would like to acknowledge Harete Hipango who talked about the cultural perspective. I know that earlier David Seymour had actually tried to say that you know I apparently speak for all of the Korean people. Well let me actually mention to that member that I am not a white Caucasian male so I have no idea about his perspective or his culture and he certainly does not know what it's like to be a Korean female and he does not know what is actually relevant in the Korean cultural perspective.What I want to talk about is the wrong-diagnosis issue. A couple of weeks ago when we were debating the Part 1 aspect of this bill I walked out of this debating chamber and actually managed to engage with a staff member who works in the parliamentary precinct. I will not mention who that person is but that person actually mentioned to me that 23 years ago she was diagnosed with terminal cancer and was given six months to live. She is still alive 23 years later. She also participates in this parliamentary environment in work. She also actually participates at our Christmas function and entertains everyone here. She actually told me how grateful she is that this bill was not in place back then when she was given the choice to terminate because she certainly would have felt the pressure to not be a burden on her family to perhaps commit—you know actually decide to die because that would've been the choice given to her. I'm glad she didn't.Now I want to talk about the diagnosis. The risk of wrong diagnosis and wrong prognosis is actually very significant. A 2012 study actually found that 28 percent of autopsies report at least one misdiagnosis. A study of doctors' prognoses for terminally ill patients found that only 20 percent of predictions were accurate within 33 percent of actual survival time. The Mayo Clinic in the USA cares for more than 1 million patients a year from all over the USA and other countries who have serious illnesses. A recent study found that a staggering 88 percent of patients who go to the clinic for a second opinion or confirmation of their diagnosis actually go home with a changed diagnosis.So in this clause 10 the first opinion of the medical practitioner I would actually say that I would like to question—in the experience of the staff member that I talked about having been given six months to live 23 years ago and she didn't. She has lived 23 years after she actually survived that disaster of a diagnosis that she was terminal. She was going to be dead within six months. I would like the independent medical practitioners—actually they should be specialists. They should have specialist training. It should not just be a medical practitioner who decides whether the patient can actually decide to terminate their life.In terms of Dr Nick Smith's comment about family having the right to actually make a comment which Louisa Wall talked about I think of the perspective as a parent. If my child was diagnosed with terminal cancer and he had only six months to live I would have thought that I should know as a mother of the only child—that I should know and I should be involved in the decision-making process of my only son. If I am excluded from that discussion what a terrible thing this bill is actually leaving. It's a terrible legacy and I should hope that members think about that.