December 21st 2013


  Buy Issue 2915
Qty:

Articles from this issue:

CANBERRA OBSERVED: Australia's year of the three prime ministers

EDITORIAL: Australia needs to rethink East Timor policy

SOUTH AFRICA: Nelson Mandela: some inconvenient truths

CULTURE AND CIVILISATION: A clear and present danger:
Religious liberty and the family in the late-modern age

LIFE ISSUES: Belgium euthanasia experience teaches bitter lessons

VICTORIA: Liberal Party votes to restore GP's conscience rights

SCHOOLS: Extra money not the best way to raise standards

OPINION: The values needed to underpin Australia's economic growth

NATIONAL AFFAIRS: High Court challenge to same-sex 'marriage' in ACT

NATIONAL AFFAIRS: Scant media coverage of Parliamentary Prayer Service

CULTURE: The most dangerous idea in human history

TAIWAN: From putrid to clean and green in 30 years

BOOK REVIEW: Not the end of history but the return of history

BOOK REVIEW: A time for militancy

Books promotion page

survey link

FONT SIZE:

VICTORIA:
Liberal Party votes to restore GP's conscience rights


by Gabrielle Walsh

News Weekly, December 21, 2013

The state council of Victoria’s Liberal Party has voted overwhelmingly in favour of overturning a controversial provision in the state’s abortion laws which forbids doctors from exercising their right of conscientious objection to abortion.

Under Section 8 of Victoria’s Abortion Law Reform Act 2008, a doctor can be deregistered for declining to refer a woman seeking a pregnancy termination to an abortionist.

The Australian Medical Board has recently been investigating a pro-life GP, Dr Mark Hobart, who refused to refer a Melbourne couple to an abortionist. They sought to abort their girl at 19 weeks, because they had wanted a boy.

The board claimed that it has been forced to bring its action against Dr Hobart, because Section 8 overrides the Medical Code of Ethics which operates everywhere else in Australia.

Dr Hobart has protested in his defence that he doesn’t know any doctor who would be prepared to perform a gender-selective abortion. Furthermore, he has received overwhelming support from his medical colleagues. A recent article in Medical Observer (November 11, 2013) quoted an online poll which found that 82 per cent of doctors agreed with Dr Hobart’s decision not to provide a medical referral to the Melbourne couple.

A young perioperative nurse, Elizabeth Foley, moved a motion, calling for the overturning of Section 8, at the Liberal Party state council held in the Victorian seaside town of Lorne on the weekend of November 30/December 1.

The motion declared: “That this State Council call on the Victorian Parliament to remove Section 8 of the Abortion Law Reform Act 2008 (Vic) from the Act in order to restore freedom of conscience.”

Mrs Foley, a delegate from the Liberal Party’s Garfield-Bunyip branch in Victoria’s Gippsland, spoke of her commitment to providing quality care for her patients. However, she emphasised that she was not intending to discuss her job or the polarising issue of abortion, but rather the fundamental right to freedom of conscience.

She told the conference: “I am here to advocate for myself and represent health professionals who share my concern about the denial of this fundamental human right. Section 8 of the abortion law denies me, and other health professionals, including doctors and pharmacists, the right to freedom of conscience. Essentially, we are denied the right to follow our conscience and not to participate in an abortion.”

Section 8, in compelling a “registered health practitioner” (doctor or nurse) to perform or assist in an abortion, deprives these health practitioners of both the right to their personal beliefs and the right to exercise their conscience.

The Liberal Party state council delegates were told that this section contravenes Article 18 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which stipulates, “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to… manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance”. The section also contravenes Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Moreover, Section 8 also contravenes the codes of medical ethics of the Australian Medical Association (AMA), the Medical Board of Australia and the World Medical Association. Two days before the Victorian Liberal Party’s state council, the federal AMA issued its position statement on conscientious objection. In this statement, it made clear that it did not support section 8 of Victoria’s abortion law, declaring that a doctor should be free to refuse “to provide or participate in certain medical treatments or procedures that conflict with his or her own personal beliefs”. “Participation” is here defined to include “indirect actions such as referring the patient to another doctor who will provide the service”.

The AMA position statement specifically states that “a doctor with a conscientious objection should not have to refer to another doctor who will provide the service”. The statement goes on to say that “a doctor (or nurse) who has a conscientious objection should not be treated unfairly or be discriminated against”.

This debate is not about abortion or access to terminations. Access to terminations would not be affected by an amendment to remove section 8. The debate is purely about conscience. Even Melbourne’s left-leaning The Age newspaper, in supporting the removal of section 8, recognises this (The Age editorial, November 9, 2013).

Community support is gathering across Victoria for an amendment of Section 8, as indicated by a petition with 4,300 signatures, which was recently tabled in the state parliament. Nearly 300 medical practitioners in Victoria have also supported the proposed amendment through an online petition.

It is paradoxical that, were there to be a parliamentary debate on his issue, politicians would have the right to exercise a conscience vote. This is in contrast to health professionals, doctors, nurses and pharmacists in Victoria who, since 2008, have been denied their right to exercise their conscience.

Gabrielle Walsh is Victorian state president of the National Civic Council.






























Join email list

Join e-newsletter list


Your cart has 0 items



Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers



Trending articles

NATIONAL AFFAIRS Cardinal rebuts commission's 'Get Pell' campaign

COVER STORY Anti-discrimination law validates Safe Schools

U.S. AFFAIRS First Brexit, now Trump: it's the economy, stupid!

INDUSTRY AND ENVIRONMENT Wikileaks reveals U.S, funding behind anti-coal campaign

COVER STORY QUT discrimination case exposes Human Rights Commission failings

FOREIGN AFFAIRS How the left whitewashed Fidel Castro

ANALYSIS What is possible to a Trump Whitehouse



News and views from around the world

19-year-old homeschooled pro-lifer wins Ontario election by landslide (Lianne Laurence)

Trump makes right choice for education secretary (National Review)

Transgender conformity (Katherine Kersten)

Sex education programs do not reduce teen pregnancy or STI rates (Philippa Taylor)

Photographer who captured Safe Schools founder harassing bystander shuts down business (Frank Chung)

Is the global middle class here to stay? (Samuel Rines)

Donald Trump could end America's new feudalism (Joel Kotkin)

It just got easier to find the perpetrators of Stalin's purges (David Filipov)

Castro's death eradicate bacillus of old-style Marxism (Gerald Warner)

Labor MP Terri Butler in QUT race case apology (Geoff Chambers)



























© Copyright NewsWeekly.com.au 2011
Last Modified:
December 2, 2016, 2:36 pm