Page 4770 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 20 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the early 20th century was a dramatically different disease from what we see today. Women very often watched lumps in their breasts grow without seeking help and there was no sense of urgency about what to do because many women did see it as a death sentence. By the time women made it to the doctor, tumours were often at a size which was untreatable.
In the mid-60s and 70s, however, there was a significant feminist movement in relation to health and women became much more actively involved as consumers. A feminist healthcare movement started to take an active role in addressing breast cancer. Many physicians were men and they decided during the surgery whether a radical mastectomy should be performed. But by the 1970s, as feminism and women’s liberation were emerging, this type of arrangement was increasingly unsatisfactory for many women.
Women had also begun to question other areas of their health care. Most notably, women had begun to question the ability of male doctors to make decisions during reproduction and when women were giving birth. In the case of breast cancer, the same occurred. Women became involved in deciding what type of treatment they should receive. The women suffering breast cancer at that stage did much through their activism for all women, no matter what disease they were suffering from.
The activism informed other women through magazine and newspaper articles that they should ask their doctor questions, they should research the issues themselves and share their experiences with other women. The improvement in breast cancer treatment over the last 50 years is a testament to those women who were involved in the campaign and I do support the words that Mr Hanson noted about all those women that, through their tireless work, have really had an impact on the sort of campaigns we see now and the awareness that has been raised about breast cancer for women across the world.
I will speak briefly to Mr Hanson’s amendment to the motion. We will not be supporting the amendment from Mr Hanson. While it may be partly true, there are mitigating reasons for the two points. Point (5A) is a national target and the ACT is the highest performer in the country against this target. Regarding point (5B), this is typically due to the way that breast screens are booked.
We did speak to Bosom Buddies about what were the key issues for them currently. I outlined these earlier in my speech but I will just say that they said the key issues for them were regarding the number of breast cancer nurses, the lymphoedema clinic at Calvary hospital and also the access to the lymphoedema physiotherapist.
I do take Mr Hanson’s point that there are still issues that need to be addressed. I have actually raised a number of these in my speech, but there are reasons behind the two parts of the amendment put forward by Mr Hanson that are not straightforward. I actually think it could be potentially misleading if they were included.
I would just like to note that the amendment was not circulated prior to being tabled in the chamber. I think that it would have been a common courtesy, as is typically the practice, to circulate it, particularly to Ms Porter, as she was the mover of this motion.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video