Tuesday 30 September 2008 

Archbishop Hart wrote to Members of the Legislative Council on 19 September urging them to reject the Abortion Law Reform Bill as a breach of fundamental human rights. 

...

I write urging you to reject the Abortion Law Reform Bill 2008 as a breach of fundamental human rights.

From the moment of conception, a human being's rights as a person must be respected and this Bill, if enacted, provides no protection to lives in the womb, right up to 40 weeks gestation.

The Bill makes a mockery of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and the Equal Opportunity Act. It requires health professionals with a conscientious objection to abortion to refer patients seeking an abortion to other health professionals who do not have such objections. It also requires health professionals with a conscientious objection to abortion to perform an abortion in whatever is deemed an “emergency”. This is clearly intended to have the effect of requiring Catholic hospitals to permit referrals for abortions. As Ray Cassin observed in The Age on 12 September 2008, it is an insidious irony that this coercion of conscience is being carried out in the name of choice.

Nurses are in a particularly vulnerable position, since many would be under a duty to assist in an abortion if a doctor so requires, and determines that it is an emergency. I do not believe that our community wants to force nurses, many of whom have a conscientious objection, to assist in late term abortions. I do not believe that the community wants to force them and other health professionals to act contrary to the law, leave their professions or leave Victoria.

Catholic hospitals and the large number of Victorians they serve are also in a vulnerable position. Catholic hospitals will not perform abortions and will not provide referrals for the purpose of abortion. If this provision is passed it will be an outrageous attack on our service to the community and contrary to Catholic ethical codes. It will leave Catholic hospitals exposed for acting contrary to the law and pose a real threat to their continued existence. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to foresee how Catholic hospitals could continue to operate maternity or emergency departments in this state in their current form.

In its report on Abortion Law Reform, the Victorian Law Reform Commission created a false dichotomy in relation to conscientious objection, claiming to distinguish between “adequate justification” and “mere prejudice”. This distinction was subsequently relied upon in debate in the Legislative Assembly. The position of the Church is postulated as “mere prejudice” and without “adequate justification”.

The Church’s position, which it has held ever since the first century, is clear. The procurement of and complicity in abortion in every circumstance is a moral evil. It is an affront to logic to suggest that a belief held over the life of the Church’s existence and which has been subject to rigorous examination by theologians over the centuries can be dismissed as a “mere prejudice”. If this argument were to prevail, all beliefs of all religious faiths could be similarly dismissed. The argument itself smacks of prejudice, is a direct attack on religious expression and is unworthy of a place in a contemporary mature state which values diversity of thought.

Of particular concern is that the Legislative Assembly has approved the passage of a bill which removes the freedom to hold and exercise a fundamental religious belief, a freedom which is essential to the maintenance of tolerance and harmony in our community.

The Bill does nothing to reduce the number of abortions carried out in this state each year. The absence of a requirement for independent referral for late term abortions is likely to weaken the panel mechanisms in place in public hospitals and lead to an increase in the number of “social” abortions.

Instead of this Bill, policies ought to be directed towards giving women with unplanned and difficult pregnancies real support, rather than treating abortion as simply ‘another’ medical procedure. Far too many women carry silently the emotional grief and psychological harm of abortion, yet the Bill before Parliament offers no provision for professional counselling or help to women with unplanned or difficult pregnancies.

I urge you to consider these matters, assert the human rights of all concerned and reject the Bill.

Yours sincerely in Christ

+Denis J Hart
ARCHBISHOP OF MELBOURNE