Donate
The Abortion Legislation Reform Bill 2023 passed WA Parliament by the Cook Government on the 21st of September 2023, receiving Royal Assent on the 27th of September 2023. It is expected that the legislation will take approximately 6 months to implement, meaning Western Australia's abortion laws will remain unchanged until late March/early April 2024.
This means, that the WA Parliament have gone through the legislative process of a Member of Parliament putting forward said amendments, the Department drafting the Bill ( which I used to do for the Federal Attorney's General in Canberra), it went through First, Second and Third Readings in Parliament, which allowed politicians to ask questions, suggest amendments and keep the Government accountable to those amendments prior to taking a vote to pass the Bill.
Once it receives Royal Assent, it officially becomes the law.
Here is a helpful diagram to explain it all:
Despite being law side the 27th of September here in Western Australia, there is often a 'grace' period for implementation.
This legislation will dramatically affect the medical operations of nurses, doctors, midwives, doulas, coroners, and those who work in abortion clinics.
The premise of this Reform Legislation is to amend the pre-existing Abortion Laws in WA by
-
Fully decriminalises abortion and brings WA in-line with other state jurisdictions;
-
Reduces the number of health practitioners required to be involved in care from two to one;
-
Removes the requirement that those accessing an abortion receive counselling on the medical risk of termination of pregnancy and of carrying the pregnancy to term, by a medical practitioner other than the one performing the procedure;
-
Provides guidance to doctors who conscientiously object to abortion;
-
Increases the gestational limit for abortion to 23 weeks, bring WA in-line with other Australian jurisdictions;
-
Abolishes the Ministerial Panel for later term abortions;
-
allowing patients to decide whether to have an abortion up to 23 weeks gestation in consultation with their healthcare provider, after which two doctors would need to be involved in decision-making;
-
requiring doctors with a conscientious objection to respect their patient’s right to healthcare; and
-
removing abortion from the state’s Criminal Code, together with harmful legal barriers to timely abortion care, such as mandatory counselling and needing multiple doctors' approval.
In the Bill's Synopsis, we are told that: "The purpose of this bill is to amend The Criminal Code to remove offences related to abortion; and to amend the Public Health Act 2016 to regulate the performance of abortion by registered health practitioners and prohibit the performance of abortion by certain persons; and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts; and for related purposes."
The Explanatory Memorandum puts it into context: "The Abortion Legislation Reform Bill 2023 (the Bill) provides for an Act to establish a new model for abortion care in Western Australia under the Public Health Act 2016 (WA), amend powers in the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1911 (WA) regarding abortion processes, amend the Criminal Code and make amendments to other Acts to remove barriers to access and protect the privacy of individuals accessing abortion."
The Human Rights Law Centre welcomed the passing of new abortion laws in Western Australia, declaring that abortion by doctors has now been decriminalised and replaced by health-focused laws in each state and territory of Australia.
"The new laws will finally see abortion treated like healthcare in law. This moment is also a historic win for reproductive rights nationally – abortion by doctors is now decriminalised across all Australian states and territories.
This landmark achievement is a testament to the tireless determination of generations of women, community advocates and dedicated health professionals across the country.
“There remains much to be done to ensure that every person can access abortion care regardless of where they live or how much money they have. But it is a huge relief to know that abortion will be treated as healthcare in laws across the country, with the focus rightly being on the health, dignity and autonomy of patients" the Human Rights Law Centre has declared.
The Sexual Health Quarters has expressed that it is 'thrilled' to see the Abortion Legislation Reform Bill 2023 pass state parliament, as the "historic reforms acknowledge the importance of autonomy and privacy in making sexual and reproductive health decisions and is a monumental step towards improving reproductive health access in Western Australia".
My concerns with these Legislative Reforms are the following:
1.The Legislation ignores the natural law concept of Imago Dei - the sanctity of the life of the unborn, and therefore their voice in this debate.
As a living being with a heartbeat at just four weeks gestation, the unborn child's rights to life need to be. We cannot ignore the medical fact that the embryo's heart starts to develop at just third weeks of gestation, having rapid, irregular contracts - capable of pumping blood inside the vessels.
Decriminalising Abortion therefore legalises the termination of life. This is a dangerous slippery slpe. With the introduction of Euthanasia laws and the right of medical professionals to take life at the end of life -where do these reforms end?
Plainly put - if a person has a heartbeat - they have life - and they have the right to life! The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is clear on this matter: "Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life." (Article 6)
This Article is reiterated by the Australian Human Rights Commission as the standard of law in Australia.
2. A reduction the number of health practitioners required to be involved in care from two to one takes away the accountability and transparency process within medical decision making, and opens medical practitioners up to liability, for, if one doctor makes an erroneous decision while tired or distracted - the results could be life-altering.
A two-factor authentication for medical decision making is predominately in place to ensure an avoidance of a god-complex in the profession, protect against liability and claims, as well as protect the rights and due process of the patient's medical care.
3. Removing the requirement for those accessing an abortion to receive counselling on the medical risk of termination of pregnancy and of carrying the pregnancy to term, by a medical practitioner other than the one performing the procedure is pure medical negligence.
This step crucial medical is a denial of the emotional, psychological and even physical impacts of abortion on women and their significant others. The neglect of the patient's psychological care risks the rise of the development of mental illnesses in the patient such as depression and possibly anxiety, as many women report post-procedure.
In fact, medical professionals in the area of abortion have a heightened responsibility for the metal and emotional welfare of women who undertake such procedures that are steeped in deep psychological identities.
4. The guidance provided to doctors who conscientiously object abortion in fact restricts freedom of speech for medical practitioners who may have varying medical perspectives, which results in a toxic work culture, where anyone with a diverse thought feels that their job may be at risk if they speak out - even if they are speaking out in the interest of their patients.
5. The increase in the gestational limit for abortion to 23 weeks also raises human rights concerns for the right of the life of the unborn, and liability issues for Doctors, as the older the child in gestation becomes, the greater risk to the mother of medical complications, pain and recovery time.
This matter also highlights the further need for women to undergo psychological assessment, support and ongoing treatment both prior to, and after the procedure.
This decision is not in the best interest of either the patient, or the Doctor.
6. Abolishing the Ministerial Panel for later term abortions removes a layer of accountability, transparency, reporting and ultimately parliamentary protection for Doctors undertaking dangerous, life-threatening medical procedures that affect two lives, rather than the usual one in decision making.
This decision is not in the best interest of either the patient, or the Doctor.
7. The amendments as summed up in: allowing patients to decide whether to have an abortion up to 23 weeks gestation; requiring doctors with a conscientious objection to respect their patient’s right to healthcare; and removing abortion from the state’s Criminal Cod all raise human rights concerns for the patient, the unborn child, and liability risks for Doctors.
8. This Reform Legislation also stands in contrast to the Australian Medical Board AHPRA. Clause 4.2 deals with Doctor–patient partnerships, and states:
"A good doctor–patient partnership requires high standards of professional conduct. It involves:
-
4.2.1 Being courteous, respectful, compassionate and honest.
-
4.2.2 Treating each patient as an individual.
-
4.2.3 Protecting patients’ privacy and right to confidentiality, unless release of information is required or permitted by law.
-
4.2.4 Encouraging and supporting patients and, when relevant, their carer or family, to care for themselves and manage their health.
-
4.2.5 Encouraging and supporting patients to be well informed about their health and to use this information wisely when they are making decisions.
-
4.2.6 Recognising that there is a power imbalance in the doctor–patient relationship, and not exploiting patients in any way, including physically, emotionally, sexually or financially."
9. In Sum, the Abortion Legislation Reform Act 2023 places the patient (the mother) at further risk medically, ignores the rights of the unborn according to international law, places Doctors in danger of a higher risk of liability as it removes accountability, transparency in reporting within the industry and externally at the level of parliament, stands in contracts the the Australian Code of Conduct for Doctors, and ignores the international human rights principles as stated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child that the first point of authority for the best interest of the child should always be the parents - this legislation minimises the authority of the parents in
In a Constitutional Democracy, it is the responsibility of the citizen voter to voice all and any concerns they may have with new legislation passed by their parliaments.
Of course, legislation is much more difficult to change, once it passes Parliament. That is why we rely on our Elected Representatives to represent our voice.
WRITE YOUR OWN LOBBY LETTER - USING THE ABOVE INFORMATION.
I encourage you to write to ALL Members of the WA Parliament, your local Federal and State Member, to the Coroner, to Abortion Clinics, Hospitals, the Association for midwives, and other related groups which may benefit from this perspective.
Here is a list of WA Member's of Parliament Contact Details: https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/memblist.nsf/ScreenMembersEmails
WA Coronial Unit: https://www.health.wa.gov.au/Articles/A_E/Coronial-Liaison-Unit#:~:text=The%20Office%20of%20the%20State,Department%27s%20Legal%20and%20Legislative%20Services
Perth Coroner's Court:
Australian Nursing Midwifery Association:https://www.anmf.org.au
AHPRA Contact: https://www.ahpra.gov.au/About-Ahpra/Contact-Us/Media-Enquiries.aspx#:~:text=For%20all%20media%20enquiries%3A%20(03,team%20on%201300%20419%20495.
By Andrea Tokaji, international human rights law advocate (www.andreaconsults.org)