Abortion in Australia: Difference between revisions

In the mid-1990s, the conservative [[Howard government]] was in power in Australia, with conservative independent Tasmanian Senator [[Brian Harradine]] holding the balance of power in the Senate. Howard brokered a deal with Harradine to ensure his support for proposed bills, including the privatisation of national telecommunications provider [[Telstra|Telecom]]. In return, Harradine received support for introducing restrictions on abortion.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Keane |first=Bernard |url=https://www.crikey.com.au/2014/04/24/the-lethal-legacy-of-brian-harradine-his-long-war-on-womens-rights/ |title=The lethal legacy of Brian Harradine: his long war on women's rights |date=24 April 2014 |work=[[Crikey]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200623155511/https://www.crikey.com.au/2014/04/24/the-lethal-legacy-of-brian-harradine-his-long-war-on-womens-rights/ |archive-date=23 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> As a result, unlike other medications, [[abortifacient]] drugs were made to require approval from the [[Minister for Health (Australia)|Minister for Health]] before they could be assessed by the [[Therapeutic Goods Administration]] (TGA). As TGA assessment is a requirement for drugs to be sold in Australia, this created a ministerial veto.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.theage.com.au/opinion/tony-abbott-the-new-drug-watchdog-20051116-ge18va.html |title=Tony Abbott, the new drug watchdog |date=16 November 2015 |work=[[The Age]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200618032708/https://www.theage.com.au/opinion/tony-abbott-the-new-drug-watchdog-20051116-ge18va.html |archive-date=18 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> Accordingly, the abortifacient [[Mifepristone|RU-486]], which was widely used overseas, was banned in Australia.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Petersen|first=Kerry A.|date=2010|title=Early medical abortion: legal and medical developments in Australia|journal=Med. J. Aust.|volume=193|issue=1|pages=26–29|doi=10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb03736.x|pmid=20618110|s2cid=12758718}}</ref> The continued refusal by [[Tony Abbott]], then Minister for Health, to allow abortifacients into Australia led to a [[private member's bill]] being introduced in late 2005 to transfer the approval back to the TGA. The bill was madesubsequently lawpassed inas the ''Therapeutic Goods Amendment (Repeal of Ministerial responsibility for approval of RU486) Act 2006''.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-12-01/the-facts-of-tonys-life/1164632 |title=The facts of Tony's life |date=1 December 2009 |work=[[ABC News (Australia)|ABC News]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201023084928/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-12-01/the-facts-of-tonys-life/1164632 |archive-date=23 October 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |url=https://ro.uow.edu.au/artspapers/178/ |title=Too Many, Too Late and the Adoption Alternative: Shame and Recent Abortion Debates |last=Albury |first=Rebecca |date=2007 |journal=[[University of Wollongong]] |access-date=3 January 2020}}</ref> From 2006 to 2012, the drug was still not registered by the TGA, and medical practitioners needed special status from the TGA in order to prescribe it;<ref name=":0">{{Cite news |url=https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2019/ru486-time-lift-restrictions-medical-abortion |title=RU486: time to lift restrictions on medical abortion |last=Swannel| first=Cate|date=2019|work=Med. J. Aust.}}</ref> even after registration its use still has special conditions and restrictions.<ref name=":0" /> There is opinion among medical experts in Australia that abortifacients are over-regulated.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=O'Rourke|first1=Anne|last2=Belton|first2=Suzanne|last3=Mulligan|first3=Ea|date=2016|title=Medical Abortion in Australia: What Are the Clinical and Legal Risks? Is Medical Abortion Over-regulated?|url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30136784/|journal=Journal of Law and Medicine |volume=24|issue=1|pages=221–238|issn=1320-159X|pmid=30136784}}</ref>