Liberal tension ignites over contentious SA’s historic abortion reforms, as debate continued until midnight

Liberal tension has ignited over the contentious abortion debate, with a war of words erupting between a federal backbencher and a state minister. Earlier, key changes were made to the historic reforms.

Several amendments are expected to be made to the Termination of Pregnancy Bill today.

Liberal tension has ignited over the contentious abortion debate, with federal backbencher Nicolle Flint accusing a state minister of patronising those who want to save unborn babies.

As debate on the state parliamentary move to decriminalise terminations continued until midnight on Thursday, Human Services Minister Michelle Lensink told MPs that South Australians wanted them to show compassion and respect.

“No one is interested in your carefully curated arguments, or your capacity to audition for your local debating team,” she said on Twitter.

Ms Lensink, who introduced the Termination of Pregnancy Bill to State Parliament in October last year, is a member of the Liberals’ Moderate faction.

Responding to her on Twitter, Ms Flint, the Boothby MP, said compassion and respect involved listening to and considering alternate views.

“I have dedicated my time in federal parliament to trying to SAVE the lives of unborn babies. How dare you be so patronising to those who wish to do the same,” she said.

Ms Flint is a member of a sub-group of the LIberals’ Right faction. The party’s SA conservatives are loosely grouped along state and federal lines.

The abortion debate, which has largely been respectful, will continue in state parliament today ahead of a conscience vote.

GENDER SELECTION FEARS COMPLICATE DEBATE

Earlier on Wednesday evening, an explicit ban on abortions for gender selection purposes and tighter regulations on late term procedures were among key changes made to the historic law reforms.

Attorney-General Vickie Chapman, who introduced the Termination of Pregnancy Bill to the House of Assembly, made some concessions to improve its chances of success.

A final vote on the Bill was expected to be reached late on Wednesday night, but following extensive parliamentary debate that started at 3.45pm, the sitting was adjourned on the stroke of midnight.

MPs spent more than four hours debating a single clause of the Bill that centred on late-term abortion provisions before it was adjourned for the night.

Ms Chapman put forward a series of amendments including a ban on abortions done for gender-selection purposes, addressing concerns raised by several MPs on Tuesday.

Attorney-General Vickie Chapman tabled amendments to the Termination of Pregnancy Bill ahead of another day of debate in parliament.

The Bill would decriminalise abortion in South Australia, turning it into a health issue.

It would allow for abortions beyond 22 weeks and six days’ gestation under certain provisions.

Under the original Bill, the only provision needed for a late-term abortion was for two health practitioners to deem it “medically appropriate”.

Under Ms Chapman’s amendments, a late-term abortion could be performed only if two medical practitioners deem the termination “is necessary to save the life of the pregnant person or save another foetus” or if the continuance of pregnancy poses a “significant risk of injury to physical or mental health”.

A late-term abortion could also be performed if there were “serious foetal anomalies”, or risk of them, associated with the pregnancy.

Her amendment to late-term abortion provisions eventually received the support of the House of Assembly on Wednesday night, following exhaustive debate on what is considered an “injury to mental health”.

The anti-abortion ‘Walk For Life March’ in the CBD earlier this month. Picture: Mike Burton

Australian Medical Association SA president Dr Chris Moy wrote to all MPs, saying Ms Chapman’s amendment on gender selection was “unnecessary” but not “beyond acceptable”.

“We believe that this amendment … is already adequately covered by the current health law and the ability of a health practitioner to conscientiously object,” he said.

Migrant groups also raised issues with the amendment.

An open letter, written by Democracy in Colour and signed by groups including the Australian Women’s Health Network, said it would exacerbate the problem of migrant communities’ poor access to healthcare.

“There is absolutely zero evidence that sex-selective abortions happen in Australia,” the letter said.

“We fear such an amendment risks amplifying racial profiling and discrimination in our healthcare system. (It would “subject (patients) to interrogations over their reasons for accessing abortion care – allowing for a high level of bias and racial profiling.”

Ms Chapman said she was satisfied it was “not a practice” here.

“But it has occurred overseas, as members (MPs) have pointed out … and therefore it needs to be addressed.”

[e-mail]

Originally published as Liberal tension ignites over contentious SA’s historic abortion reforms, as debate continued until midnight