Extremely good article Amanda. Of all the articles on abortion I have seen on OLO, this is by far the best, as it incorporates so many of the issues. An extremely well presented and well thought out article. An excellent article.

It seems that few statistics are being routinely collected on abortion in Australia, but there is evidence that Australia’s abortion rate is much higher than in some other comparable countries, and a serious question should be why?

The rate of usage of highly reliable contraception drugs such as Implanon is lower than in other countries, and the rate of adoption in Australia is almost 0.

The rate of male sterilization in Australia is now about 5 times that of female sterilization, and the rate of female sterilization is now well below that of comparable countries.

There is evidence that some ethnic groups are using abortion as a routine type of contraception.

The abortion laws are confusing, and many doctors (who legally are the only persons who can give a referral for an abortion) seem to have minimal understanding of those laws, and in the mean time, abortion clinics freely advertise on the internet, and state that the woman does not need to have a referral from a doctor anyway.

So when such factors are incorporated, then why should the public have to continue to subsides so much abortion.

If those dreadful male politicians had not said anything, then the amount of abortion could continue indefinitely, and ways to reduce abortion and unwanted pregnancy would not even be thought about.

A well-balanced article – well done!

There's been recent discussion on a couple of other threads here and I think all have come to the conclusion that prevention is far better than cure.
The major problem I see is that contraception – while widely available – is not really as effective (from the amount of abortion) as it should be.
I think there are a number of factors (including human error) which contribute to this but one important one is that people think they are ‘safe’ when in actual fact they are far from it.

Take the pill (everyday at the same time….ha ha – pun intended!) for example – it is often touted as having a 99% protection rate against pg, but we are not robots and are subject to the inconsistencies of human life.
People DON’T take a medication at exactly the same time, they don’t necessarily make a connection between last nights curry turning your bowel to liquid and being unprotected as far as contraception is concerned, they haven’t all been told that a myriad of medications or even a high temperature, can render the pill ineffective. That’s how easy it is to slip one by. After a decent bout of the runs, there goes your protection for the next three weeks….

I think too – and you’ve said it with your language – there is too much onus on the female to ensure she will not fall pregnant as opposed to the male. Not that I think it should MORE be on the male – just equal. He has as much opportunity to protect himself from impregnating her as she has of protecting herself against impregnation.
This all goes back to the myth of the perpetual virgin. A female who falls pregnant out of wedlock or unintentionally with an unwanted baby is ‘bad’ ‘irresponsible’ etc but the man who impregnated her more or less slips by without social judgement. Perhaps this is why medical science has really only worked on female contraception methods and the Mythical Male Pill still remains in a lab somewhere, untested.

I support the idea in this article that abortion is not a simply a yes or no choice. I think the decision on the legality of abortion is a classical dilemma.

If you consider it from the viewpoint of the woman, it is obviously her body and her womb and the state should have no say as to what she does with it. In Sydney, the state has control of the water, the trains and the roads and has totally mismanaged all of these entities and now we want to consider giving them the control over a woman’s womb. It’s not possible, they are simply too incompetent.

If you consider the viewpoint of the foetus, it is obviously alive, the heart is beating and the cells are multiplying. It doesn’t have any choice about its domicile. It has to live in the womb because humans have a mammalian ancestry and we have to assume that it has the will to live. Perhaps if we evolved from dinosaurs and we grew up in an egg the choices would be much easier.

Anyway, the point that I am trying to make is that there is no absolute answer to the abortion question. I think we will have to live with it but we should also support those women who choose to have their babies at inappropriate times. For those woman that choose an abortion, we should encourage very early rather than late term abortions because it is not a pleasant experience and becomes less pleasant as the foetus becomes more developed.

Good article, balanced and compassionate.
There is never anything wrong with debating anything. But, in the end, women will decide whether they continue a pregnancy or not, whether we like it or not. They will do it either legally or illegally, either safely or unsafely, either calmly or in blind desperation.
We are not actually discussing stopping abortion (contraception and sex education have probably lowered the rate considerably already and hopefully that will improve) but about banning it, which rarely stops anything.
Women always have decided whether or not to continue pregnancy, often at terrible risk to themselves,and they always will, because, damn them, just like men, they make decisions about their own lives and then live with the consequences. Women are no more noble or more self sacrificing than anyone else and if they don't want to have a child, well, they'll find a way not to.

Good article Amanda, it clearly articulates some of the issues and debates around abortion. Perhaps some of the reasoning around attempts to suppress discussion around abortion is the fear that the debate will be dominated by the conservative agenda. Given the bias toward conservative values emanating from our leaders and the media, pro-choice supporters may feel they prefer to maintain the status quo, rather than open up the debate and lose hard fought for rights.

I am surprised you even read this article Timkins, given your comments from 10 October in response to Vicki Dunne’s article.

Newsroo, interesting points regarding the problems will the pill. I'm not real convinced that the options available to men are as viable yet as those available to women.

My understanding of the current options for men are
- abstinence: safe but not much fun
- condoms: they can come off in the heat of the moment or potentially leak.
- getting the cut: not regarded as reversable and it is expensive(ignoring the bit about letting someone put a knife there).

All are also available to women (what gets cut is different etc) plus some other options. Bring on the male pill/patch or whatever.

In the end we all have to take responsibility for our own actions and there are other reasons for condoms(or abstinence) than the risk of unwanted pregnancy which can impact on both parties.

Agreed that the debate needs to be out there and open. I'm undecided about the time when a fetus is no longer a bit of tissue.

If abortion is an option then
- the mother should have the following information available to her when she makes the decision
: Is the father of the child willing to parent the child?
: Is the father of the child willing to meet half of the financial responsibility for raising the child?
: Are the taxpayers willing to assist meeting the costs of raising the child?

- The father should have the opportunity to make the relevant decisions other than the bit about the mother carrying the child.

If we assume that the mother should have the right to choose about her own life then the father should likewise get to choose about the bits that impact most directly on him.

R0bert