Doctors punished for helping pregnant women

In its 10-Point Plan for Victorian Women’s Health 2010-14, WHV says that “studies in Australia and internationally consistently indicate an emphatic association between partner violence and abortion”.

One of the largest studies of this kind was the 2007 La Trobe University investigation by Dr Angela Taft and Dr Lyndsey Watson. From surveys of over 24,000 women aged 18-27 they found that “partner violence is a strong predictor of termination and other reproductive outcomes among young Australian women”.

The researchers concluded that, as these women had a much higher incidence of depression, any strategy to reduce depression among women must involve “prevention and reduction of partner violence [which] may reduce the rate of unwanted pregnancy”.

This means that symptoms of depression in a woman asking for an abortion referral, particularly if it’s her partner or family members pushing for the abortion, is an indicator of a possible abusive relationship.

In such a situation, a doctor needs to be able to assess if the woman is depressed, and if her depression is impairing her ability to make a free choice.

The doctor needs to assess if the first priority is to refer the patient for the treatment of her depression (rather than for an abortion), so that she can make a free decision about her pregnancy.

The doctor also needs to assess if the patient is being coerced into an abortion and take appropriate action, depending on the level of abuse. If the young woman is also under the age of consent, a doctor has added reason to be concerned.

However under Victoria’s abortion law, a doctor with a conscientious objection is not even allowed to ask questions in order to make a proper diagnosis and recommend appropriate treatment.

The Medical Board has investigated the two doctors even though no patient made a complaint and no harm is alleged to have been suffered by any patient. The only ones to suffer harm in these instances were the doctors themselves who found themselves under investigation. It would appear to have less to do with standards of medical care and protection of patients from harm than with an over-zealous and bureaucratic monitoring of Section 8 to ensure no conscientious objector escapes the letter of its coercive requirements,

And perhaps the worst aspect of the matter is that the legislative coercion to refer imposed by Section 8 is unnecessary as no referral is needed for abortion anyway. Section 8 is bad law and should be amended.

The law should uphold the right of medical professionals to act according to their conscience and to provide the best medical care to women.