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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 9 Hansard (21 August) . . Page.. 2605 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

That is precisely the point I tried to make earlier, when I said this is designed around sending women on a guilt trip, creating the impression that something is wrong with what they're doing-something is wrong. Well, it is not wrong. It is not wrong for a woman to want to terminate a pregnancy, and women-not only the women who are considering an abortion but also those thousands of women who have had them in the past-should not be continually punished by this sort of legislation.

"Approval of facilities" is also covered in Ms Gallagher's bill-no obligation on any person to act in relation to an abortion. "Privacy" is covered in the privacy legislation. The next section is "Approval of information pamphlets". Approval of information pamphlets is an ethical decision which has to be resolved by medical professionals and has to be consistent with the High Court decision in relation to the matter, which has been set out in the document which I referred to, which has been provided to us by the good bishop.

The next section, "Quarterly reports from approved facilities", goes to the issue of information. People say, "Why is it that you are trying to keep information? These statistics are very helpful." Well, this is the reason why. This is a document that was produced by the Right to Life Association and it was in response to ACT abortion statistics in 1999-2000. The heading was, "Missing Children Damage Mothers". That is the reason I don't want to see quarterly statistics used to punish women for having an abortion. Those are the sorts of tactics that people use-or abuse. They abuse the statistics by producing that sort of information.

I go further with statistics. The Medicare statistics quite adequately cover abortion procedures right throughout the country. They will be useful to health professionals. Health professionals have never called for quarterly reports in the ACT. They have never called for quarterly reports in relation to any other medical procedure either. Why? Because it's of no particular health use. That is why they don't call for it. And, because it is such a small sample, there is very clearly a risk of going close to identifying people. Indeed, it would remind people who have had late-term abortions-who have been required to have them in the most tragic circumstances-time and time again that they had had one. Now, if you think that's a good idea, I think you're on the wrong wagon.

This particular act is one of the most offensive. It is most offensive because of its genesis. Its genesis, as I said earlier, was about preventing abortions in the ACT and, indeed, reminding women of their big mistake. And their big mistake was that they had an abortion. But it is not just reminding them once-it is continuing to do it, time after time. I can't abide that sort of legislation. I opposed it at the time, for very good reasons.

I heard Mrs Dunne say, "Who would worry about little postage-stamp-sized pictures?". I know that Mrs Dunne is very proud of the fact that she was somehow behind the design of that in Mr Humphries' office before he signed it into law. I've got to say, I would not be proud of that-because that was designed to dissuade women from considering an abortion. That is not the way to deal with this issue. It is a very harsh and cruel measure to deal with women that way when they are facing this very, very serious decision in their lives.

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