This opinion piece was published in the Perpectives section of The Courier-Mail on 13 February, 2008 & is reproduced here with the permission of Queensland Right to Life

No Need to Change Abortion Law


By Donna Purcell

February 2008

WITH State Parliament resuming yesterday, it seems the member for Aspley, Bonny Barry, is still hell-bent on introducing a Private
Member’s Bill to decriminalise abortion in Queensland. Decriminalisation means abortion would be legal for any or no reason until the day of birth, a position only extremist ideologues would endorse.

A small group of radical protesters answered Barry’s call to arms when they attempted to drown out speakers at a Respect for Women Rally in the city on Saturday. Armed with megaphones, tin whistles and placards, some painted with simulated bloodstains, they were reminiscent of the type of protesters marching the streets of Brisbane in the 1970s for the same cause.

It is a pity that they didn’t listen. One speaker, a mother of four children, was born without a hand and part of her arm. She told how she in turn was a source of inspiration for another couple whose child was shown on ultrasound to have a similar defect. Although
they could have had an abortion, they could see that a disability need not be a death sentence and they had their baby.

Another speaker, a country Queensland GP, told of a child he fathered before he was married who was adopted out. Father and son
were re-united many years later and both are grateful abortion was not chosen. Barry’s personal conviction reportedly stems from a case of incest where a doctor helped cover up for the father’s crime. It was at his insistence and with him present that the abortion was performed.

Understandably she was moved by the young woman’s circumstances, but some reflection on the incident now is worthwhile.
Both actions – the incest and the abortion – were unlawful, but the abortion served to conceal the crime.

Incest is always very secretive, but a pregnancy in a minor serves to reveal it.

The solution, according to Barry, is to accept the need to get rid of the evidence in a guiltfree abortion.

As a parliamentarian now in a much more responsible position than a junior nurse, can she not see that freely available, no questions asked abortion is simply an open opportunity for incest and other types of sexual assault to go unpunished and unnoticed?

Does it not simply perpetuate the attitude among some sections of society that women must be always available to men, and that if pregnancy occurs, they can just get an abortion?

However, as always, the “hard cases” like incest are really just a smokescreen for the real reason for Barry’s Bill on abortion. She believes abortion is “a fundamental human right” and that keeping abortion in the Criminal Code “burdens (women) with criminal intent”. In other words, she wants legal abortion on demand with the woman being the sole arbiter of what happens.

This is actually official ALP policy, but one would have hoped that some of Barry’s training might have informed her political position. Does she not know anything about the development of the tiny human being therein, the marvellous and rapid unfolding of events dictated by the genetic make-up of the new human being?

There is no excuse these days for ignorance by MPs of facts so relevant to their considerations. There are two human beings
intimately involved in pregnancy, and there is no woman who has ever been pregnant who doesn’t in her heart know this. In order to submit to an abortion, a woman must suppress, at least unconsciously, this awareness.

Even countries like Japan that have no law against abortion have shrines where women can place floral and other gifts in memory of children lost through miscarriage, abortion and premature birth.

The importance of the law is that it is a measure of the seriousness of the action contemplated. The law on abortion was taken fairly directly from Britain in days when nothing was known about the development of the unborn. Yet such was the respect for all human life that a doctor could only be excused from a crime of performing an abortion if it was done to save the physical life of the mother.

The law has been variously re-interpreted to cover other reasons, but it is important to note that these judicial interpretations have
never been fully tested in Queensland. However, the law when enforced is not without teeth in protecting women. Recently in New South Wales where the legal situation is much the same as in Queensland, a female doctor was charged with procuring abortion
without proper consent, found guilty and her medical registration was cancelled permanently.

It would be anachronistic to remove a law giving legal recognition of the scientific fact that the unborn are also human beings
deserving equal protection. Such a situation would be reminiscent of the prevailing attitude towards slaves before the abolition of slavery in the 18th century. As the property of their masters, their lives and suffering counted for nothing.

Those wishing to see the decriminalisation or legalisation of abortion also refuse to acknowledge the humanity of the unborn, and
by urging no restrictions they become party to a furthering of violence on women and their children.

Women do not want abortion – what those with unplanned pregnancies want is to not be pregnant in the situation they are in.
So instead of removing the baby, let’s support these women to change their situation. Instead of promoting abortion, we should
be giving women real choice by empowering them to follow their hearts. Women with unexpected pregnancies deserve unexpected
joy, respect, love and support.

Parliament should keep the current law on abortion in place and address the issue of unwanted and unplanned pregnancies by
significantly increasing funding to pregnancy support and counselling services.

Donna Purcell is a Toowoomba GP and member of the state committee of Queensland Right to Life.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]