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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 9 Hansard (21 August) . . Page.. 2521 ..

MRS DUNNE (continuing):

aware that the particular patient if warned of the risk, would be likely to attach significance to it.

Mr Berry contends that the decision in Rogers v Whitaker has already set the bar high and that it is unnecessary to mandate any more information. However, as I have said before, I think that, in the case of abortion, doctors do not reach the bar. This is reinforced in the Bulletin of the Royal Australian College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians by Hamish McGlashan, in April 1998, where he says:

We have been content to delegate the commonest gynaecological operation, one that we dislike, to others less well qualified ... we have not ensured that the highest standards of practice have been available or reviewed, nor have we seen to it that adequate counselling and contraceptive advice has been made available.

If, by their own admission, doctors are not seeing that adequate counselling has been made available, there is a role for government to provide information. This is especially the case when abortions are being performed in government-owned or at least government-funded facilities.

Simply because the government is involved in it, there is a duty of care. If doctors are not supplying the information, then the government must. As Dr McGlashan said, they need to be given qualified counselling. As Rogers v Whitaker said, patients must be made aware of the risks-anything to which they might attach significance.

I would like to touch on a couple of those risks. The most contentious is the issue of breast cancer. There seems little doubt that there is a strong link between abortion and the increased risk of breast cancer. I say that, and I know that there are others in the room saying, "Boo! Nonsense! Not true!"

The pages of eminent medical journals have been running hot on this issue for two decades. There have been at least 35 epidemiological studies looking at abortion as a risk factor in breast cancer. (Extension of time granted.) Whilst not all the evidence is conclusive, the weight of evidence indicates that there is a strong link between abortion and breast cancer. If there is a strong link, it is incumbent upon people who are contemplating abortion to be made aware of that.

According to the dicta set down by the decision of Rogers v Whitaker, if there is a risk to which people are likely to attach significance, they need to be told-but Mr Berry does not want you to be told. This is why Mr Berry is moving his bills and why I am opposing them.

In a massive publication in the British Medical Association's Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health entitled "Induced abortion as an independent risk factor for breast cancer, a comprehensive review and meta-analysis", we find that there were 28 published reports which include specific data on induced abortion and incidence of breast cancer. The results of this are quite chilling. The cumulative evidence shows that there is a 30 per cent increase in the incidence of breast cancer among women who have had an abortion at some stage in their life. It is even higher-at 50 per cent-if a woman's first pregnancy ends in abortion.

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