By TANYA PLIBERSEK
For many Australian women the decision to terminate a pregnancy will be the most difficult they’ll ever make.
But it should always be one for the woman herself with the support of her family and doctor. Its not a decision that any government should make for her.
At the moment the majority of terminations in Australia are surgical, usually performed under sedation in hospitals or special clinics.
A much smaller number are “medical” terminations where mifepristone, better known as RU486, a synthetic steroid, is used to end early pregnancy.
Mifepristone is on the World Health Organisation’s list of essential medicines and its use has been endorsed by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. It was first registered in France and China in 1988 and is now registered in about 50 countries including the UK, the USA and New Zealand. Tens of millions of women around the world have used it.
No termination is without risks, but the risk of dying is higher from taking viagra than from medical termination.
An important difference when comparing medical and surgical termination of pregnancy may be that a woman need not travel to a hospital or clinic but can be supervised by a doctor who has had special training and be in her home with family support.
This would be who wouldn’t have to travel long distances and stay away from home overnight or longer and find extra money for transport and accommodation.
As health minister I believe that mifepristone and its companion drug misoprostol should go through the same rigorous processes as any drug allowed to be used in Australia.
In the past, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has taken a different view. In 2006, when health minister, Mr Abbott voted in Parliament to maintain his veto power over RU486 – he wanted to keep RU486 a special case so he could prevent it being imported into Australia.
Since a 1996 political deal between PM John Howard and conservative Tasmanian Senator Brian Harradine, the health minister was given the power to effectively ban the importation of the drug. But a 2006 conscience vote led by a cross-party coalition of women MPs overturned the veto. Current Opposition health spokesman Peter Dutton also voted to maintain the veto.
Since then, RU486 has been available in Australia through a small number of doctors who have had to specially import the drug. In August, the Therapeutic Goods Administration approved an application by non-profit organisation MS Health, to import the drug, making it much more accessible.
As Opposition Leader, Mr Abbott has for months ducked questions on the TGA listing of RU486. But that all changed last week when Mamamia publisher, Mia Freedman, went on ABC radio and said Mr Abbott, as the aspiring prime minister, needed to clarify his position on RU486. “Because he’s never addressed that on the record … it sort of lingered and festered like this bit of a suspicious issue among women.”
Mr Abbott responded, saying that as health minister, he did not receive any applications to regulate RU486. He said, “Had any such application come before me, I would have dealt with it on the basis of the science and the expert advice.” In fact Mr Abbott misrepresented advice given to him by the Chief Medical Officer at the time.
And his latest sound-bite on this vital issue skirts around what he did and said when he was a Howard government minister. If Mr Abbott has changed his view on abortion and RU486, he should tell people.
Otherwise we can only conclude that he still believes that “abortion is the easy way out.”
Tanya Plibersek is the Federal Minister for Health and Member for Sydney.
Editor’s Note: While Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott is unfortunately unavailable to write a response to Minister Plibersek at this stage, his office has provided Mamamia with the following comment: “Administration of RU486, as with other drugs, is a matter for the Therapeutic Goods Administration (the TGA) and the Coalition will not change that.”
Top Comments
I have trawled through all the comments. Clearly if a woman's life is lost terminating another life inside her, that is one life too many to loose. RU486 really needs through investigation to see how safe it really is.
Is a drug or a medically induced termination the only method to offer a woman who finds herself with an unplanned pregnancy and in need of a loving alternative?
Where are we as a society that we don't reach out to the women of Australia with a loving alternative to the termination of their child's life no matter how developed it is?
How about asking the health minister about the loving alternatives the Australia Gov't is channeling money into to give these woman a chance to consider giving their new baby a chance at life?
We all find ourselves in life in situations that are not part of our plans.
I would be interested if there are any?
I am not sure exactly where I stand on this issue. I am certainly pro choice but I am also coming across many women who just default to the abortion choice. I am not talking about the traumatised women who make a difficult decision one time. I am talking about the women who are having the procedure two or three or four times. Surely, this suggests that it has become an easy option for some and allows them to make irrespinsible choices. I dont know the stats but I would be interested to find out how common multiple abortions are because I know of two girls in my town and unfortunately I dont think they are exceptional cases. So Tanya, more facts would be good. Less emotional strings pulling at my conscience. How safe is this drug? How rarely or how often is it taken in the US, UK ETC and how easily accessible would it be? One visit to the GP? Five? How will situations be assessed? Etc. Stop playing the blame game and putting Tony down for asking more questions and trying to establish boundaries. Just give us the facts.
Tanya - please ask Minister Tony Burke to make clear to the Australian people his views on abortion ...!
Another misogynist , oops ! ... me thinks he's in the Labor Party .