Page 1111 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 23 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Today we seek to abolish a law which sets women in the ACT apart from other women elsewhere in Australia. As the Minister, Wayne Berry, stated in his speech:
The repeal Bill will ... allow for a termination of pregnancy to be carried out at a place other than a hospital conducted by the Board of Health if the termination would otherwise be lawful. Under sections 42 and 43 of the Crimes Act 1900 it remains illegal for a pregnant women to unlawfully procure her own miscarriage or for any other person to unlawfully procure a woman's miscarriage. The question of what is unlawful is left to the common law.
The basic premises on which I stood for election included the idea that all people are entitled to the highest quality health care, that individuals should have as much control as possible over their own health choices, and women's health care needs special attention and funding.
Why should one of the most civilised and highly educated cities in the country treat women who seek pregnancy terminations with such disdain? In Sydney, by contrast, a woman can ask for information about abortion in the event of an unwanted pregnancy. She will receive counselling about her decision, support while she undergoes the procedure, and health checks afterwards. As well, most centres have available contraceptive counselling which can help women avoid future unplanned pregnancies by finding the most appropriate form of contraceptive for their needs and lifestyle.
What does a woman who pursues the same procedure in Canberra face? The current position, as Ms Follett has outlined, as stated in the Act, is, "A registered medical practitioner shall not carry out treatment for the termination of a pregnancy otherwise than at a hospital conducted by the Board of Health". So, for a start, she has to find a doctor who will refer her to a specialist who can recommend the procedure, and then that recommendation has to be put before the hospital's medical superintendent, who has to give permission for the abortion to take place. If she gets this far, the woman is then booked into a day ward where the procedure is carried out under general anaesthetic. There is a lack of coordinated follow-up, which means that, unless the woman's specialist or doctor provides counselling and support, there is no assurance that proper follow-up health checks are carried out or contraceptive advice given. Is this the way we want to treat Canberra women?
While it may be seen as just an inconvenience to some for a woman to have to travel interstate for a procedure they themselves do not agree with, is it their right to intervene to make abortions less accessible here than in Sydney? What about women in adverse situations, those who become pregnant through rape, or whose family situation does not allow them to travel? What are their options? They have the same legal right to abortion services as women in New South Wales, but this right is thwarted by a law which regulates the number of abortions and which sets draconian conditions for provision of the service. What we do today by repealing this piece of legislation is prevent women from continuing to be at the mercy of administrators and the medical profession, and empower them to make decisions for themselves.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .