regulation

This page considers the regulation of online content about cybersuicide, including prohibition of exit chat rooms and e-suicide.

It covers -

• regulation - restrictions on publication and interaction
• Australia - experience in Australia and New Zealand, including key figures and proposed legislation
• the Act - the Criminal Code Amendment (Suicide Related Material Offences) Act 2005
• debate - controversy in 2006 and beyond
• other mechanisms?

     regulation

Constraints on attempted/completed suicide, on its discussion and its 'promotion' or 'facilitation' vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

Those constraints in the past have included -

• criminalisation of attempted suicide (decriminalised in England in 1828)
• public hanging or burning of completed/attempted suicides
• burying the departed (along with witches, heretics and sodomites) under crossroads or excluding them from 'proper burial'
• confiscation of the estates of completed suicides
• censorship of texts that "glamourize" suicide or provide guidance about suicide mechanisms
• bans on films and broadcasts that encourage suicide
• government expectations that the mass media will "exercise restraint" in reporting suicides
• criminalisation of those directly/indirectly "abetting" suicide.

Contemporary legislation about suicide sites/rooms varies considerably, reflecting community perceptions about the responsibilities of the state, emphases on free speech and the impact of particular campaigns that have sought to address concerns about online access to bombmaking information, 'death kits' or pornography.

That legislation is necessarily territory-based and accordingly is challenged by the global nature of the net. It is unclear whether any sites/rooms have sought to evade restrictions by moving to a friendlier jurisdiction. Some appear to have relied on a low profile, on the defense that information online is readily available offline or that information is offered in the spirit of scholarship or even entertainment.

One Swedish site thus notes

This file is provided for the purposes of amusement, and the actual use of any of these methods is not recommended without first considering other possibilities, such as dying of old age. Please do not pass it onto people whom you know to be actively suicidal ... you may find yourself in jail for considerable periods.

In Australia the Customs Act forbids the export and import under "any circumstances" of 'suicide devices', ie

Devices designed or customised to be used by a person to commit suicide, or to be used by a person to assist another person to commit suicide.

2002 amendments to the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 included an absolute prohibition on

documents that promote the use of such devices or counsel, incite or instruct a person to commit suicide using such devices.

That is arguably of little value if potential readers can simply turn to Google rather than their post box or bookshop.

In Japan there have been recurrent demands for official monitoring of online fora and to ban the word "suicide" from search engines. That contrasts with the availability of print format manuals that explore effective ways of ending it all, generally with a rating of methods in terms of the pain and trouble they cause to others (jumping in front of a train or bus is given a maximum rating of five). One manual has sold more than a million copies.

     Australia

Anxieties in Australia and New Zealand about cybersuicide have followed the same trajectory as overseas, with opportunistic statements by some advocacy groups and experts, claims by politicians and health service professionals, and inclusion of boilerplate in government strategies aimed - appropriately or otherwise - at 'high risk' groups (notably young males).

The suicide rate in Australia in 1996 was 13 deaths per 100,000 of population. That rate was broadly the same as the average for suicide in Australia over the preceding 75 years, given fluctuations associated with wars and the 1930's economic depression. Suicides in younger men tripled between 1960 and 1990 before youth suicide rates stabilised in the 1990s.

Rates for immigrants are approximately similar to suicide rates for the Australian-born. Unsurprisingly, rates appear to be higher for individuals born in cultures that have higher suicide rates (eg Northern and Eastern Europe and Oceania) and lower for individuals who migrated from cultures with lower suicide rates (eg Southern Europe, Asia and Muslim countries). In 1992 around 25% of all suicides in Australia were by migrants, with about 40% of those by migrants from English-speaking countries

The rate of completed and attempted suicide in Australia is generally recognised as being under-reported, with deaths for example attributed to other causes such as motor accidents or drug overdoses.

Males accounted for around 75% of New Zealand suicide deaths in 1997 (440 males, 121 females), with a male suicide rate of 22.3 per 100,000 population. Maori deaths accounted for 18% of suicide deaths. The highest number of male suicide deaths was in the 25-29 years age group. For females it was in the 15-19 years cohort. Suicide Trends in New Zealand 1978-98 notes that the most common method of suicide in 1997 for both males and females was hanging (40%), followed by gassing (motor vehicle exhaust) with 28%.

Initiatives in Australia have largely centred on youth suicide. The 1996 Access to Means of Suicide by Young People: a background report by Australian Institute of Suicide Research & Prevention (AISRAP) concluded that

increased availability of a culturally accepted method of suicide tends to result in an increase in the rate of suicide for that method. Restricting the availability of a method of suicide tends to result in a decline in suicides by that method and may, but does not always, result in a decline in the suicide rate overall

In 2003 the Federal Justice & Customs Minister announced that "promoting suicide through the internet will become a crime", with new legislation and fines of up to $110,000. The Minister commented that the internet should not be used to provide information "that encourages vulnerable individuals to take their own lives". The legislation would reinforce existing bans on importing and exporting documents relating to suicide kits.

A year later the Criminal Code Amendment (Suicide Related Material Offences) Bill 2004 was spun out of the broader Crimes Legislation Amendment (Telecommunications Offences and Other Measures) Bill 2004. It featured new offences involving use of a carriage service to access, transmit or make available material that counsels or incites suicide. It also covered possession, production or supply material that promoted and provided instruction on a particular method of suicide.

The Bill was overtaken by the 2004 Federal election and was reintroduced as the Criminal Code Amendment (Suicide Related Material Offences) Bill 2005. Submissions to the Senate Committee inquiry on the 2004 Bill are here.

The 2004 and 2005 Bills were criticised as over-reaching and vague.

The federal Parliamentary Library noted for example that under section 31C of the NSW Crimes Act a person must actually 'aid or abet' or 'incite or counsel' someone to commit or attempt suicide. Obtaining information in physical form from a library would not be an offence under NSW law until actual assistance or incitement occurs (and suicide or an attempt results). Under the 2005 Bill obtaining exactly the same material from the net with the intention of passing it to a terminally ill relative would be an offence punishable by a fine of up to $110,000.

The Bill did not require any attempt to commit suicide in order for an offence to occur. It is unclear whether it would apply to private telephone conversations.

     the Act

The federal Criminal Code Amendment (Suicide Related Material Offences) Act 2005 (SRMO) received royal assent on 6 July 2005, with provisions in Schedule 1 to come into effect on 6 January 2006.

The 2005 legislation amends the Criminal Code Act 1995 (CCA), omnibus legislation codifying "the general principles of criminal responsibility under laws of the Commonwealth". Schedule 1 of the new legislation identifies offences regarding

• Using a carriage service for suicide related material
• Possessing, controlling, producing, supplying or obtaining suicide related material for use through a carriage service

In essence it is an offence under the legislation to use a carriage service (eg the net) to access, transmit, cause to be transmitted, make available, "publish or otherwise distribute material" that "directly or indirectly counsels or incites committing or attempting to commit suicide" if there is an intention

• to use the material to counsel or incite committing/attempting to commit suicide or
• that the material be used by another person to counsel or incite committing or attempting to commit suicide.

That material might promote or provide instruction on a particular method of committing suicide.

The legislation specifies that "to avoid doubt" a person is not guilty of an offence where a carriage service is used to

(a) engage in public discussion or debate about euthanasia or suicide; or
(b) advocate reform of the law relating to euthanasia or suicide

if the person does not intend to use the material concerned to counsel/ incite suicide or that the material be used by another person to counsel or incite committing or attempting to commit suicide.

     debate

In August 2006 the South Australian Government attracted attention over supression of comments in the state's Legislative Council by Australian Democrat MLA Sandra Kanck. The Premier characterised Kanck's comments as "basically a road map to suicide".

In her speech to the Legislative Council regarding euthanasia Kanck outlined methods of suicide using 'readily accessible household materials'. On 31 August the Minister for Police successfully called on the Council to direct the Leader of Hansard "not to publish on the parliamentary web site or otherwise electronically" those parts of Kanck's speech that

(a) describe the way in which the persons referred to as Jo, Shirley Nolan and Elizabeth by the honourable member were said to have committed, or to have attempted to commit, suicide;
(b) describe the methods of suicide referred to in the statistics said to have been compiled by the Australian Bureau of Statistics;
(c) describe any other method of suicide;
(d) describe the way in which plastic suffocating devices can be made;
(e) identify the drug said to have been used in connection with suicides assisted by Dr Philip Nitschke in the Northern Territory.
(f) describe any method of suicide involving the use of a motor vehicle and where such material is already published to take all reasonable steps to remove that material from publication.

The Minister proposed that

A copy of the entire speech of the Hon. Sandra Kanck may be provided to the Parliamentary Library where it may be made available to be read by any member of the public on request, subject always to the discretion of the Parliamentary Librarian to refuse that request after consultation with the President of the council where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that acceding to the request would create an unacceptable risk of harm to any person.

Amid brouhaha about suppression of free speech and differential treatment of the print and electronic Hansard the offending text was quickly republished by euthanasia advocates outside Australia (eg PDF).

In January 2007 the federal Attorney-General highlighted questions about content regulation, noting that in September 2006 the Australian Customs Service at Brisbane Airport seized copies of The Peaceful Pill Handbook (2006) by Philip Nitschke & Fiona Stewart, a book that provides information on assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasiathe book.

Seizure took place under the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956, with the book being treated as a prohibited import. However in December 2006 the Classification Board classified the same book as Category 1 - Restricted, meaning it had been approved for distribution. As the Attorney-General acknowledged, what that "means is that the publication is legally available within Australia but it cannot be legally imported into Australia".

The classification was overturned in February 2007, with the book being awarded a Refused Classification status on the basis that it features information about the manufacture of barbiturates. Under the National Classification Scheme, based on state and territory law, it is illegal to sell a Refused Classification publication (typically one that features bestiality, child pornography or other "abhorrent" content).

The effectiveness of the ban is uncertain, given that parts of the book are available online from servers outside Australia and because it is being sold by Amazon and other retailers. Presumably some copies are filtering through Customs' inspection of the post; other copies will arrive in personal baggage (undetected by the cute beagles looking for narcotics rather than stigmatised words).

     other mechanisms?

Recognising that legislation prohibiting sites that appear to encourage suicide might also "criminalise fictional depictions of suicide and hinder academics and counsellors writing about the subject", some governments have wondered about other mechanisms.

One UK official in 2005, for example, reportedly dismissed use of the Suicide Act 1961 (which prohibits aiding and abetting suicide) against chatrooms of "death sites" and instead sought a technological silver bullet.

When somebody keys in 'suicide' and 'UK', we would like them to be offered a link to the Samaritans long before they find a website showing them what they can do with a car exhaust and a hosepipe.

It is unclear whether that would encompass both search results and domains (with for example potential to avoid a warning by going going direct to the relevant site/page rather than relying on a search). It is also easy to imagine application of that model for other purposes ... kindly advice from the Chinese government when its citizens search for Falun Gong.

More importantly, it is unclear whether such links and popups would be effective.

As of August 2006 the UK Suicide Act 1961 provides for a prison sentence of up to 14 years for assisting a suicide. Suicide websites however are not illegal and there have been no prosecutions regarding such sites.

Governments have adopted a more positive attitude regarding coverage of suicide by the print and broadcast mass media, relying on self-regulation and codes that encourage 'sensitive reporting'. One example is the 2008 UK MediaWise Trust document Sensitive Coverage Saves Lives (PDF).

   next page  (mystique)