On 17 June 2012, Vaud became the first Swiss canton to give itself a legal basis for assisted suicide in care homes (EMS) and hospitals. Voters rejected EXIT's initiative and accepted the Grand Council's counter-proposal with about 61.6% in favour. Turnout reached 43.5%.
The counter-proposal enshrines in the Public Health Act (art. 27d) the right of a care-home resident or a patient in a recognised public-interest hospital to resort to assisted suicide, subject to conditions (capacity of judgement, serious illness or after-effects). It includes a conscience clause: neither the institution, nor staff, nor the physician is required to take part. EXIT's initiative sought a more direct obligation without comparable safeguards.
More than ten years after it took effect (1 January 2013), this briefing tests both camps' promises and fears against the facts observed in the canton and beyond.
Overall result Counter-proposal accepted: ~61.6% Yes. EXIT initiative rejected (~59% No). Turnout 43.5%. In force since 1 January 2013 (art. 27d Public Health Act) — a Swiss first. | Vote map Broad acceptance across the canton. A district-by-district breakdown is not reproduced here. |
Actors and figures
▲ Yes camp • Vaud Council of State (sponsor of the counter-proposal) • Vaud Grand Council (author of the counter-proposal, retained instead of the initiative) • Socialists and a large part of the centre-left (support) | ▼ No camp • EXIT (ADMD Suisse romande) (initiator; deemed the counter-proposal too restrictive) • Circles opposed to any obligation on care homes (including faith-based institutions) • Advocates of care homes’ right to refuse |
Arguments and verdicts
▲ Arguments FOR (Yes camp) Guarantee care-home residents regulated access to assisted suicide « A person at the end of life should not have to leave their home to exercise this choice. » — Argument for the counter-proposal, 2012 ✓ Argument confirmed Article 27d of the Public Health Act took effect on 1 January 2013; care-home residents and patients of recognised hospitals may invoke it, subject to conditions. The promised right was created and applied. Source: vd.ch (assisted suicide, art. 27d); humanrights.ch Regulate a practice with no legal basis — a Swiss first ✓ Argument confirmed Vaud was the first Swiss canton to legislate on assisted suicide in institutions. The model went on to set a precedent: Neuchâtel, then Geneva (2018) and Valais (2022) legislated in turn. Source: swissinfo « first assisted-suicide law adopted in Switzerland »; humanrights.ch Preserve the conscience of care staff ✓ Argument confirmed The law provides that neither the physician nor the institution's staff is required to take part in the act. This individual conscience clause was maintained in practice. Source: art. 27d Public Health Act; Le Temps | ▼ Arguments AGAINST (No camp) Forcing care homes to host assisted suicide denies their autonomy and care mission « A care institution should not be compelled to host assisted suicide. » — Opponents of the counter-proposal, 2012 ✗~ Partly refuted The fear of distorting the care mission did not become general: the individual conscience clause was preserved and palliative care kept developing. But some care homes, notably faith-based ones, resisted at first, forcing the State to reassert the obligation for subsidised institutions. Source: 24 heures « some care homes refuse to apply the law »; Le Temps Such a law will trivialise assisted suicide ✗~ Partly refuted No canton-specific trivialisation is documented as an abuse: recourse remains regulated and conditional. The overall rise in assisted suicides observed in Switzerland over the decade is a national, multi-factor trend that cannot be attributed to the Vaud law alone. Source: national statistics (FSO); cantonal press coverage |
Factual assessment
3 Confirmed | 0 Partly confirmed | 2 Partly refuted | 0 Refuted |
| ✓ | A Swiss first that took effect The legal basis (art. 27d) has been in force since 1 January 2013; Vaud was the first canton to legislate on assisted suicide in institutions. |
| ✓ | A model that set a precedent Other cantons later legislated in a similar spirit, among them Neuchâtel, Geneva (2018) and Valais (2022). |
| ~ | Resistance in some care homes Some institutions, notably faith-based ones, refused at first to apply the law; the State had to reassert the obligation for recognised public-interest, subsidised institutions. |
| ✓ | Individual conscience preserved Under the law, neither care staff nor the institution's physician is compelled to take part in the act. |
More than ten years on, Vaud's pioneering law has held and inspired other cantons. The Yes camp's promise — regulated access to assisted suicide for care-home residents and a first legal basis in Switzerland — was concretely delivered and later taken up elsewhere. The individual conscience of care staff, a sensitive point of the campaign, was preserved in practice.
Opponents' fears partly dissolved: the institutions' care mission was not generally distorted and palliative care kept advancing. They were not groundless, however, since some care homes refused at first to apply the law, forcing the State to enforce the obligation for subsidised institutions. As for the charge of « trivialisation », it remains unverifiable as a canton-specific effect: the rise in assisted suicides in Switzerland follows a national dynamic that far exceeds the Vaud framework.