Gary's Speeches

Abortion Law Reform Bill

Back to Speeches

I rise to join the debate on this critical issue with grave concern for what the outcome of the debate could be. This bill, if successful in passing through both houses of Parliament, will sanction the destruction of human life for whatever reason up to 24 weeks. I respectfully plead with my colleagues to really think about and understand exactly what this bill will allow and whom it will affect if it is adopted.

As the eldest of 11 children, the father of six, uncle of 35 and grandfather of nine -- and I know members are going to say 'typical Catholic' -- and having witnessed the joy at the arrival of each and every one of these precious gifts of life, I feel very strongly about the sanctity of human life and our responsibility to protect it to the best of our ability. Having said that, I must say that my family and I have been very fortunate in not having to face the terrible situation of having to consider an abortion. I feel for all of the families and individual women who have been placed in that situation.

I accept that I will never really understand what it must be like to be faced with such a decision.

While I am strongly opposed to this bill I want to put on the record that my voting against it does not in any way suggest that I am passing judgement on those who have, for whatever reason, felt it necessary in their personal circumstances to have an abortion. To pass judgement on anybody for whatever reason is unchristian. I strongly value the Christian ethics of respect, love, acceptance and forgiveness of others, but with those Christian values comes the need to respect, value and protect human life. Allowing abortion on demand up to 24 weeks completely contradicts what should be our first and most critical consideration.

Babies have been known to survive from 22 weeks with the outstanding assistance of our magnificent doctors and nurses who fight relentlessly to ensure a premature baby is given every chance to survive. Why would we now suggest that it is okay to end the life of a perfectly healthy baby at any time up to 24 weeks for whatever reason? Have we really considered the options? Have we really provided those options to an expectant mother who may feel abortion is her best option or may be trying to decide what is the best thing for herself and her baby? By allowing abortion on demand up to 24 weeks, are we actually suggesting it is okay to take this action as a form of contraception?

If we really value human life, should we not be providing education about the physical and emotional risks of abortion and the options other than abortion for teenagers before they get pregnant? Do we have in place appropriate and easily obtainable education, support and counselling services for women who feel it necessary in their circumstances to consider the option of abortion?

And more importantly, do we have these supports in place and easily accessible for a woman and her family after having a termination?

We have many families today desperate to adopt a child. Have we considered solving two problems here: an unwanted or inappropriate pregnancy being financially and morally supported through to full term with a view to providing a beautiful healthy baby to a family who would be absolutely over the moon with joy at the opportunity to adopt?

This bill does nothing to address what I consider to be critically important aspects of the whole process. I believe this clearly signifies the failure of the bill to uphold the value of human life and take genuine steps to maintain the short and long-term health and wellbeing of women.

I worry about our medical professionals with the way the structure of the bill may place our medical professionals in a difficult situation. Under the guidelines of the bill, pharmacists and nurses will be expected to supply or administer drugs to women up to 24 weeks of pregnancy without the supervision of a medical practitioner. This may well result in doctors, nurses and pharmacists having to act against their own moral, religious or cultural beliefs. This poses the question: is it a breach of human rights to force another to support an act they may be strongly opposed to?

I was contacted by a great number of medical practitioners who insisted that I oppose this bill because of the risk it poses to them and their profession. I have had an overwhelming number of contacts from constituents and concerned Victorians asking for my support in having the bill defeated; in fact something like 96 per cent oppose the bill while only 4 per cent support it.

The Victorian Law Reform Commission could have suggested options to the government that would have enabled the structure of the bill to put in place actions and direction that would lead to the reduction of abortions currently taking place in Victoria. In my view the bill does nothing to address this issue; in fact it does the opposite. After taking all of that into consideration, I have arrived at my position based on my responsibility as a Christian to preserve the sanctity of human life. I take that responsibility very seriously, and I will be opposing the bill.