Strong support for abortion reform

Robin Briant

Opinion

Catherine Gillies thinks all abortions are bad; therefore in her counselling she frames all psycho-social distress as a consequence of abortion, even up to the third generation later, according to her op-ed on August 6. This is frankly ridiculous, totally without scientific merit, and a dangerous approach to counselling.

I strongly support the Government’s attempt to reform the 1977 Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act. It will provide NZ women with access to a safe medical procedure, without needing the intervention of two doctors to give “permission”.

In an earlier life I had first-hand experience in the provision of safe medical abortion for women who had unwanted pregnancies. Women presenting at the Auckland Medical Aid Centre (AMAC) had two stages in their assessment — the first day was medical and psychological assessment and in-depth discussion on their options, involving counsellors, social workers, nurses and doctors. When a woman was sure that the direction she wanted to take was abortion, she returned on another day for the procedure. This was done under regional anaesthesia, so the patient was awake throughout and her counsellor was present.

It is dishonest to suggest that coercion is involved — or that informed consent is not given.

I absolutely refute the assertions of Ms Gillies that studies here and abroad show serious detrimental effects of abortion on the mental health of men and women, children and grandchildren. She provides no references.

Reputable scientific studies conclude that rates of psychiatric disorder are the same for women after abortion as after childbirth; that women who abort are no more likely to be clinically depressed than women delivering an unwanted pregnancy.

In fact, while many women experience sadness, grief, and a feeling of loss after an abortion, few develop a serious psychiatric illness that was not present before the abortion. Indeed, there may be psychological benefits. For many women the abortion brings relief from the stress that accompanies an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy, and the abortion can be a learning experience and an opportunity to reassess priorities.

Before the days of safe medical abortion women died of sepsis following illegal non-medical attempts to end unwanted pregnancies. Let us move into the 21st Century; recognise that abortion should not be in the Crimes Act; that abortion is a safe medical procedure; that women are smart enough to know if they are able to carry a pregnancy to term and care well for a child; that while the ideal is no unwanted pregnancies, the reality is rather different.

The bill to be introduced to the House takes medical abortion out of the Crimes Act and treats it properly as a medical matter. The bill dis-establishes the complex and expensive system that tried to ration abortion but only made access unequal. We can concentrate on improving contraception availability and aim to make every pregnancy a wanted one.