As a 20 year old female university student, I would like to state that I believe it is NEVER ethically acceptable for a woman to have a convenience abortion. Statutory Legislation should not be changed to accommodate this.

Certainly there are mitigating circumstances. But "oops, I really didn't want to carry a child for 9 months yet" isn't one of them.

Stop making this issue about feminism. This is not about the autonomy of the mother. This is about non-maleficence to the foetus or embryo. When we're talking about the right to convenience vs. the right to exist, it is evident which right is more important.

James Purser said “Its about the right to choose. Pure and simple.”

And I wholly agree.

As for Sam said’s question “'who will be looking after the rights of the unborn human when their interests is in conflict with the mothers”

No one should. Where the interests are in conflict, the woman’s rights must prevail.

The rights of the unborn are the same as the rights of the un-conceived. If an unborn’s or unconceived’s rights were to prevail over the woman’s, you are declaring every pregnant woman a slave to her biology.

You would be declaring that a woman is merely a vessel for the procreation and production of the next generation, a life support system for a uterus - subordinate to the unborn -

and that is a heinous argument.

The phrase "abortion on demand" is a worn out and completely baseless assumption that women will simply turn up on a doctor's door and demand an abortion and the doctor will comply. This simply will not happen. Is it neccessary to legislate against "tonsillectomy on demand" or "hip replacement on demand"? Of course not. A doctor who behaved in this way would soon be sued by a patient who was unhappy with the outcome, or would be deregistered by the medical board. The same applies to any doctor who performed "abortion on demand". This is why it is not legally necessary to treat abortion any differently to other surgical procedure.

For any medical or surgical treatment, doctors are already required to take a detailed history, assess any risks to the patient and whether these risks outweigh the benefits of the treatment. If a patient does not meet these criterea, then the doctor can't proceed. This is already the requirement for ALL procedures, not just abortion therefore even without abortion in the crimes act or the Health act, it will never be "abortion on demand".

YngNLuvnIt: Perhaps you could expand on what "mitigating circumstances" you would deem acceptable for a woman to be able to circumvent the criminal stature on abortion? Does the termination that ena describes above satisfy your "mitigating circumstances" or does it fall within 'YngNLuvnIt's "oops" principle' (and is therefore unacceptable)? Because it's all subjective, isn't it? That's the problem with the ludicrous position of the law as it stands.

Why can't women be trusted to make their own reproductive choices; YngNLuvnIt could adhere to the "oops" principle and other women could decide their own priorities.

Also, "as a 20 year old female university student" I'm sure you must be aware that a "right to exist" is an ephemeral and contentious philosophical issue with no "evident" answer. Whilst you are perfectly entitled to your opinion, please do not presume that unsubstantiated assertions are "evident" to others.

white women shore do like that abortion, they jus gotta show who's got the power. Teach their men a lesson. Wonder how the world'll get on after white folks are gone with their power. There's no jihad like racialcide.

"With Margaret, women who seek abortions know just where they stand." - My suspicion is aroused as the author seeks to use her own licence to alienate both sides. Nothing is futher from the truth. Of all people, Margaret Tighe would have more compassion for the pregnant women than anyone else. Divide and conquor does not wash here Leslie.

"Unplanned pregnancy is a fact of life." - Profound statement! I think the debate has moved on a little.

"The ACT repealed abortion from the criminal code in 2002" - Is it a coincidence that the ACT is the porn capital of Australia. The place where degradation of women is promulgated.

"The position politicians and the public take on repeal reflects their view of women as moral decision-makers." - I don't agree. I think the fate of new life is a consideration here as well.