Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 10 Hansard (25 November) . . Page.. 2891 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

Even if there is some acceptance that this link exists - and I think that that is a point of contention - how are we to say that in future years there may not be other information that should be provided or that the link between breast cancer and abortion has been ruled out?

Are the proposers of this Bill seriously suggesting that we will have to come back and amend it each time new information needs to go in and old information needs to be taken out? Is that the role of this place? Is it the role of the Assembly to determine exactly what type of information should be made available to a woman seeking advice on an abortion? I would prefer a different approach. Indeed, it is the approach that is taken now; that is, that information provided to a woman seeking an abortion should be specific to the needs, concerns and circumstances of the individual woman, rather than some set of prescribed rules, prescribed pieces of information. That, I thought, was what the patient-doctor relationship was all about - meeting the specific needs and concerns of the patient through the effective provision of information.

I move on to the issue of the provision of certain pictures, drawings or illustrations. This form of information provision, which is what is argued by the supporters of this Bill, I find particularly insulting. It is nothing more than an attempt to impose a guilty conscience on a woman who is already dealing with the significant moral and personal conscience issues associated with a decision on whether to have an abortion. It is designed to cause unnecessary suffering and distress and it again flies in the face of that specific role of a doctor in providing the information to a patient, which the patient needs on an individual basis, not on a prescribed uniform basis. Some advice from the Women's Legal Centre for the ACT and Region indicates that it could very well amount to degrading treatment and is contrary to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Again, unless those people opposite can justify and explain away that, how can they support such a provision?

Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, I would like to move now to the issue to do with the basis for lodging a certificate and what this may mean for the provision of an abortion in the ACT. The proposal in the Bill requires that, except in the case of a medical emergency, an abortion must not be performed unless a certificate has been lodged confirming that a woman has been given the prescribed information I outlined earlier. This certificate must be lodged within seven days of its being signed and it must be lodged with the prescribed officer, whoever that is, in an area in a clinic or in a hospital which is providing abortion services.

There is the clear potential that this requirement of up to seven days will delay access to terminations for up to seven days. As we are all aware, the amount of time that a woman waits to gain a termination potentially risks greater complication. The longer the period of pregnancy, the greater the danger of some problem in the termination. This proposal, too, is unacceptable. It is a possible threat to women's health, because the earlier abortions are performed, the less the risk. It also implies - and this applies also to the cooling-off period - that women have not already considered their decision and its implications with due thoroughness. (Extension of time granted) The cooling-off period

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .