This article is more than 1 year old

This article is more than 1 year old

Peak health and women’s groups have slammed proposed amendments to an historic bill to decriminalise abortion in New South Wales, saying the changes are a “perversion” of the legislation that would result in “an additional burden on medical practitioners and to delay access to care”.

On Wednesday the Australian Medical Association said it was concerned the objectives of the bill risked being “derailed by unfounded fear-mongering on abortion” while the NSW Pro-Choice alliance said the amendments “present a worse situation than the status quo”.

On Tuesday a number of 11th-hour amendments were floated by MPs including senior Liberal Party minister Mark Speakman and Rob Stokes.

The amendments put forward by Speakman and Stokes would place new restrictions on terminations after 22 weeks so that a pregnant woman would need the approval of a four-person hospital advisory committee, rather than a second medical practitioner as proposed under the original bill.

'Arrest us': women who have had abortions speak out to support NSW decriminalisation Read more

The procedure would have to be performed by a “specialist” medical practitioner in a public hospital, or private hospital designated by the health minister.

As well, doctors who have a conscientious objection to performing abortions would not have to refer a pregnant woman seeking a termination to another medical practitioner before 22 weeks.

And doctors would be required to receive “informed consent” before performing abortions.

Describing the amendments as “unnecessary and insulting” the AMA said the “clear intention” was to “impose an additional burden on medical practitioners and to delay access to care”.

The AMA said the most concerning amendment was the proposal to require abortions after 22 weeks to be subject of a review by a four-person panel.

Quick guide Abortion in Australia Show Hide Abortion law in Australia varies from state to state. New South Wales

New South Wales is the last state to decriminalise terminations, though it remains in the criminal code in South Australia and Western Australia in some form. Abortion has been a criminal offence in New South Wales since 1900, and unlawfully procuring an abortion is punishable by up to 10 years' imprisonment. Doctors are able to conduct abortions if they believe the pregnancy is a risk to a woman’s physical or mental health, and a common law precedent set in 1971 means social and economic factors may also be taken into consideration. Laws before the NSW parliament would make abortion legal on request up to 22 weeks, and with the approval of two doctors beyond that. Queensland

The NSW legislation is based off the bill that passed in Queensland last year. Abortion is legal until 22 weeks gestation, and thereafter with the approval of two doctors. Victoria

Legal to 24 weeks and then after 24 weeks with two doctors’ approval. ACT

Legal. Until last year, only a registered medical practitioner could carry out the procedure in an approved facility. However a change to ACT law last year now allows general practitioners to prescribe abortion drugs such as MS‑2 Step. South Australia

Legal up to 28 weeks but only if two doctors agree that a woman’s physical and/or mental health is endangered by pregnancy, or for serious foetal abnormality. Unlawful abortion remains a crime. Terminations must be performed in a "prescribed hospital". Western Australia

Legal up to 20 weeks but women must be given the opportunity to participate in counselling before a termination can be performed. Teenage girls under 16 require a parent to be informed. After 20 weeks, terminations become much more difficult to access. A woman must receive approval from two doctors from a statutory panel of six who agree the woman, or her foetus, has a "severe medical condition" that justifies the procedure.

Tasmania

Lawful on request up to 16 weeks, and beyond that point with the agreement of two doctors.

Northern Territory

Legal to 14 weeks with one doctor's approval, and after that to 23 weeks with an additional doctor. Beyond 23 weeks, abortions cannot be performed unless it is performed to save a pregnant person's life.

“This would place women at significant risk of unnecessary delay and only add to their suffering, particularly women in regional and rural areas,” it said.

“In the vast majority of cases, abortions after 22 weeks arise due to a significant abnormality in the foetus. Families and their doctors already face the most difficult decision of whether to end a wanted pregnancy and these amendments would draw out that process and make it more painful.”

It said it was unnecessary legislate to require doctors to receive informed consent as it is already a requirement of doctors, and that changes to conscientious objections changed the status quo as “doctors already have an obligation not to impede care”.

Wendy McCarthy, the chair of the Pro-Choice alliance, said the amendments presented a worse situation than the status quo and would “ensure that NSW would have some of the most restrictive laws in the country”.

“Removing abortion from the NSW Crimes Act 2019 is the clear goal of the bill currently before NSW parliament. These amendments are a blatant attempt to obstruct that goal,” McCarthy said.

“A small group of MPs are trying to railroad this important women’s health reform to wind back the clock and impose sanctions and restrictions that are more extreme than current practices.”

Earlier on Wednesday senior Liberal party minister Shelley Hancock called the amendments put forward by Speakman and Stokes “a distraction”, accusing her own colleagues of seeking to delay the legislation.

Hancock, one of 15 co-sponsors of the bill and another senior moderate in the party, referred to the amendments as “a distraction and a way to possibly defer this bill or oppose it”.

NSW abortion law reform: Brad Hazzard urges colleagues to 'right a wrong' Read more

“I am always suspicious of those who seek to make amendments because I think it is always a disguised act of trying to defer, delay or defeat a bill such as this,” she said.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Shelley Hancock is one of 15 co-sponsors of the NSW abortion decriminalisation bill. Photograph: Joel Carrett/AAP

The amendments and the original bill will now not be voted on until Thursday after debate continued into Wednesday afternoon. The premier, Gladys Berejiklian, is not expected to speak on the bill despite offering her support to the changes.

On Tuesday night Speakman told the parliament he believed “that life begins well before birth, that all life is precious and that the number of abortions in NSW causes me great sorrow”.

“But a focus on the criminal law will not solve this complex issue,” he said.

He said the amendments “maintain choice but also put in place some modest safeguards to address community concerns about its current drafting”.

“I am troubled by the lack of reference in the bill to the informed consent of the patient,” he said.

“I am troubled by the open-endedness, at least on the face of the bill, for late-term abortions – whatever might be current medical practice.”

Because abortion is regulated by a common law definition, there is currently no distinction between abortions before or after 22 weeks gestation, and in a speech in the NSW parliament on Wednesday Hancock called the focus on late-term abortions “a red herring”.

“All this prevarication about 22 weeks is another distraction,” she said.

“Oh late-term abortions, late-term abortions, well this bill is actually more strict in its regulation of late-term abortions than the current regulations. That’s another distraction, that’s another red herring thrown into the debate to defer, delay or defeat the bill.

“This is about more safe procedures post 22 weeks. I will listen to the amendments but I haven’t heard anything … to convince me.”

The original bill, introduced by the independent MP Alex Greenwich last week, would remove abortion from the state’s criminal code and make it legal upon request up to 22 weeks.

Women beyond 22 weeks gestation would need the consent of two doctors.

Despite having the support of MPs from across the major parties, including the premier Gladys Berejiklian and the health minister Brad Hazzard, the bill has been subjected to significant pushback from conservative MPs, the Catholic church and anti-abortion activists.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Anti-abortion activists rally outside the NSW parliament in Sydney on Tuesday. Photograph: Joel Carrett/AAP

The amendments moved by Speakman and Stokes are being sold as an attempt to placate those opposed to the bill because of the wording over late-term abortions.

Medical groups are understood to be opposed to the amendments, seeing them as onerous and unnecessary. In his speech to the parliament on Tuesday, Hazzard said the push for an “informed consent” provision was unnecessary because doctors were already required to obtain consent under medical regulations.

“The mere mechanical signing of a consent form is, of itself, of limited value,” he said.

“I note in passing there are also specific requirements regarding informed consent to minors. Informed consent is not a new idea for doctors and there is no need for it to be put into the reproductive health care reform bill as it is already existing practice,” he said.

Debate on the bill continued on Wednesday after it went late into the night on Tuesday.