Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. Victoria University Student Newspaper. Vol. 37, No. 7. April, 17 1974

No concessions

No concessions

We are opposed to the idea that restrictive abortion laws need only to be slightly reformed. We think that the right to control one's own body is absolute, and those woman who seek abortions for reasons of physical or mental health, rape, economic and family difficulties, or risk of foetal deformity have a double claim to this relief.

Being a woman with an unwanted pregnancy is sufficient qualification by itself.

In fact this is the only qualification that that the vast majority of women seeking abortion have. If it is not legally recognised, these women will continue to seek relief in self-abortion or back street abortion and the problems will continue as before. They want a solution to their problem, which is an unwanted pregnancy. There is no other solution but abortion.

"Better contraception" is no solution to a pregnant woman. She cannot turn back the clock.

Adoption is no solution either. It is inhuman to force a woman to bear a child she does not want. Childless couples must be helped by other means which do not depend on the sacrifice of a woman's dignity.

It is lack of respect for this dignity which leads to the inclusion of some restrictions in "liberalised" abortion laws overseas. Many people are fooled into thinking that partial reform, while it may not be all that is needed, will at least be "a step in the right direction".

We wish to point out why it will not, and why it will instead be a setback. We will go over the-four restrictions which are most commonly made: