Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Risking women's health, breaching Australia's laws

By Jocelynne Scutt - posted Friday, 11 May 2007


The United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) is similarly breached, and government reports to the CEDAW Committee ought to reflect this. The World Health Organisation (WHO) - which carries international responsibility for ensuring women have access to healthcare, advice and treatment without discrimination on grounds of sex-gender - should bear down upon the federal government, too.

The federal government is also complicit in promoting breaches of the Sex Discrimination Act, state policies and CEDAW in funding counselling services providing misinformation and no information on particular health care, viz pregnancy termination or pregnancy termination services. As well, the government breaches the Act in funding these arguably substandard services.

It is highly unlikely that the federal government would provide funding to services giving out false and misleading information about men’s health care and services. If a service purporting to cater for men’s health refused to acknowledge prostate or testicular cancer, or heart disease, as conditions for which men may require counselling and treatment, funding would likely be cut or never granted.

Advertisement

Why then is funding not only given to counselling services purporting to cater for women’s health, but given exclusively to those failing to provide full, clear information about all services - including pregnancy termination? This is unequal treatment on grounds of sex-gender and pregnancy, detrimental to women’s health and wellbeing. It runs counter to Sex Discrimination Act and CEDAW provisions, as well as state government Acts.

So too with hospitals or clinics receiving federal government funding and failing to provide the full range of services and health treatments, including pregnancy termination. Government funding policies breach sex-gender discrimination laws - international, federal and state. The hospitals arguably breach the legislation and put women’s lives at risk: pregnancy termination is a health-saving operation, recognised by medical practitioners and legal decisions alike. Failure to provide health-saving treatment may lead not only to discrimination claims, but provide an opening for negligence claims as well.

Not advising women of the full range of health treatments and services available in respect of pregnancy breaches the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) and state and international disability provisions, too. The law classifies pregnancy termination as a life-saving operation or one for the wellbeing of the patient - the woman who seeks and undergoes it.

Abortion is legal because it is necessary for the life, health and wellbeing of the putative mother. Hence, if a service fails to provide information about the treatment, or provides false and misleading information about it, this breaches disability laws. In funding services denying the right to information or the services themselves to women, the federal government ignores Disability Discrimination Act principles. Services, including hospitals, which refuse accurate information and treatment to women seeking pregnancy termination breach the Act’s requirements, too.

There are no over-arching federal Religious Discrimination or Political Discrimination Acts. The states and territories’ discrimination laws generally outlaw religious and political discrimination, though jurisdictional differences exist and some are more comprehensive than others.

Pregnancy counselling services which, upon religious or political grounds, provide misleading or false information about abortion, and hospitals which fail to provide the full range of health treatment for pregnant women, including pregnancy termination, arguably breach state laws. Services and treatment should never be provided so as to cater only for those who believe, on religious or political grounds, that abortion is unacceptable.

Advertisement

Health treatment should never be based in political and religious discriminatory policies. Sadly, Australia - like the US - currently is ruled by those appearing to adhere to policies based not in women’s health and wellbeing, but in politics and religion as a basis for women’s health treatment.

All members of federal Parliament who accept that women have a right to full and accurate information in respect of women’s health - including pregnancy whether carried to term or not - should be supporting the Transparent Advertising and Notification of Pregnancy Counselling Services Bill 2005.

In not doing so, members show themselves not only to be ignorant of Australia’s domestic discrimination legislation and obligations in international law. They may reveal themselves as supporting funding initiatives, counselling and health services that put women’s health rights second or even further down the list.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

62 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Jocelynne A. Scutt is a Barrister and Human Rights Lawyer in Mellbourne and Sydney. Her web site is here. She is also chair of Women Worldwide Advancing Freedom and Dignity.

She is also Visiting Fellow, Lucy Cavendish College, University of Cambridge.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Jocelynne Scutt

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 62 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy