Women's Electoral Lobby
Note: These notes were written by the Women's Electoral Lobby.
WEL's Background
The Women's Electoral Lobby (WEL) was formed in 1972 just
prior to a Federal election. WEL's first survey of political
candidates revealed a gross lack of knowledge or even interest in
the many issues affecting women in Australia.
Further surveys gained public notoriety and encouraged the
formation of branches in all capital and many regional cities. Since
then, winning government has often been attributed to the women's
vote. Over the years, WEL has continued to provide well
researched submissions to both sides of the political fence on a
range of issues, from economics and employment, to health and
human relationships. WEL policies have been based on the
assumption of women's right to choose and to control her own
destiny; WEL's approach has been to demand that right be
entrenched into legislation, and embedded in political, economic and
social structures.
Vision and Mission
The Women's Electoral Lobby in Australia is an organisation
dedicated to creating a society where women's participation and
potential are unrestricted, acknowledged and respected, and where
women and men share equally in society's responsibilities and
rewards.
WEL believes in the strength of women working together. WEL
asserts that women's knowledge, skills and experiences are essential
to a well functioning society, and that improving women's lives
improves society as a whole. In pursuing a feminist future, WEL
respects and values diversity among women. (adopted 1996).
The policies of WEL are based on the premise that a just society
must recognise that women's rights, responsibilities, contributions
and needs are of equal value with men's, though not necessarily
identical. Economic, technological, scientific, social development
and achievement must be pursed in ways that give the goals of
justice for all the highest priority. WEL policies are directed to two
basic ends:
- redressing resistant and persistent inequities in the current position
of women in Australian society;
- ensuring that women can make an equal contribution to its future
development.
WEL Structure
There are WEL organisations in every State and Territory, and in
some regional centres as well. Each organisation operates within its
own state jurisdiction but in addition, a National Office based in
Canberra ensures communication and co-ordination among WEL
organisations and acts as the prime voice on Federal issues. This
office has been funded by the Prime Minister's department for many
years in recognition of the legitimate role WEL plays in
representing the views of Australian women. The National
Co-ordinator reports to a National Management Committee,
comprising representatives from each major organisation around
Australia. WEL Australia is an incorporated body.
Since its inception in 1972, WEL has represented the views of
Australian women to governments at all levels through many letters
and submissions, and has contributed to women's education and
civic development through regular conferences, seminars and
workshops, and to wider community understanding of issues
through print and electronic media.
WEL Policies Relating to Abortion
Guiding principle:
WEL supports the well-established ethical principle that decisions
ought to be made by those most affected by them. Presently in
Australia, it is doctors who control the decision about pregnancy
termination. This interferes with a woman's right to make decisions
about her own body. WEL rejects the view that society must
somehow be protected from women's actions by making the medical
profession or the judiciary responsible for such decisions. On the
contrary, WEL asserts that women are perfectly capable of making
morally sound decisions and that research indicates the best outcome
is achieved if women are in control of the decision about pregnancy
termination.
WEL Policy on Women's Health
WEL sees the issue of abortion in the context of women's health.
WEL agrees with the World Health Organisation definition that
health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well being
and not merely the absence of disease of infirmity. To meet this
definition of health for women, WEL asserts that:
- all health services should be reviewed to ensure they accept the
social model of health, that health care, contraceptive care and any
other service must be available to all regardless of their ability to
pay;
- specific women-run health services must be available and broad
principles of gender equity in delivery, priorities, research and
service must be intrinsic to the entire health care system.
WEL Policy on Abortion
In order to achieve the above definition of health for women, WEL
believes that:
- safe, legal abortion should be one of the choices available to
women faced with unwanted pregnancy;
- no woman should be forced, either by laws or pressure from
others, to continue an unwanted pregnancy nor to obtain an abortion
against her will;
- these views are shared by the majority of Australian women.
Women will decide whether or not to continue their pregnancies in
the light of their own religious and/or moral values. It is
appropriate they do so. People who are opposed to abortion
regardless of circumstances are entitled to their view. They have no
right to impose that view on others, however.
The right of choice is fundamental to a democratic society. The
right of choice assumes the control of one's body. Without it a
woman becomes subject to the beliefs and demands of others. It is a
basic right of a woman to choose when and if she will bear a child.
Equality is impossible without control of fertility. There is no
perfect contraceptive. For some women, it is not easily available;
for some it is a health hazard; for some it is too expensive; for
some the chosen method fails. WEL therefore affirms that:
- every woman has the right to choose when and if she will bear a
child;
- all references to abortion be removed from the criminal codes of
the States and Territories of Australia, thereby ensuring that
abortion is regulated, as are all other medical services, under health
care legislation;
- support services should be available to all women, those seeking
abortion and those wishing to continue pregnancies.
While demanding the right of access to safe, legal abortion, WEL
acknowledges that:
- contraception is preferable to abortion;
- there is no perfect contraception;
- reliance on abortion alone is not a responsible method of planned
parenthood;
- skilled, legal abortion is preferable to unsafe, illegal abortion.
Underlying Issues
Abortion will always be with us.
Abortion is a world-wide phenomenon and has been used as a
primary method of birth control for all of human history. The
World Health Organisation estimates that one in three pregnancies is
deliberately terminated world-wide. Many of these abortions are
carried out in unsafe circumstances and lead to substantial rates of
death and injury to women.
Major changes in rates of abortion only occur when reliable
contraception becomes available.
Moves in the last century in the United Kingdom to restrict access
to abortion were based both on a concern for the welfare of women
at a time when abortion was a dangerous intervention, and an
attempt at the same time to control women's sexuality. Access to
legal abortion was denied but this only forced women into illegal
and unsafe services, leading to injury and death.
Abortion today is the second most common therapeutic surgical
procedure in Australia. Yet it remains marginalised by health
services, and is not formally part of some medical curricula.
Abortion recognised by International Organisations.
WEL asserts that women's right to choose abortion is implied in
several articles of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination Against Women. Article 12 requires signatories to
ensure "access to health care services, including those related to
family planning". There can be no doubt that abortion is related to
family planning.
The United Nations International Conference on Population and
Development (Cairo, 1994) recognised abortion as a major public
health issue and governments agreed to take action to reduce the
harm caused.
The UN Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing, 1995)
confirmed this approach. Along with many other Governments,
Australia agreed to "Consider reviewing laws containing punitive
measures against women who have undergone illegal abortions" (par
107k). WEL has urged the Government to act on this undertaking
by removing abortion from all criminal codes in Australia.
Public Support for Abortion
The right of access to abortion enjoys a high level of community
support which has risen since the mid 1980s. In 1994, 85%
approved abortion if the woman's life were endangered; 70%
accepted abortion as a right if the woman is not married and does
not want to marry; 67% supported abortion in circumstances of low
income where a family cannot afford more children. In all cases,
these rates of approval were significantly up from ten years
previously, showing increasing community acceptance of the need
for abortion services.
In 1980, a survey conducted by the Women's Weekly magazine
asserted that "The Voice of the Australian Women says: Abortion
should be freely available".Their survey showed 94% of women
were in favour of abortion being available. Sixteen per cent of the
women surveyed said they had had an abortion, and contrary to
popular belief, the majority of women said they suffered no after
effects. WEL sent a copy of the magazine to all Victorian State
politicians, pointing out the strength of women's support for safe,
legal abortion services.
Based on statistics like these, WEL urged politicians to accept the
following messages:
- women must have the right to choose;
- abortion is practised and always has been;
- abortion is widely accepted in the Australian community;
- a pro-choice stand will not jeopardise their seat.
History of Wel's Activities Related to Abortion
Birth Control Policy
By 1975, WEL had an established policy on birth control (family
planning). WEL called for establishment of clinics separate from
existing medical services, staffed by specially trained personnel.
The policy recommended clinics should offer a full range of
contraceptive advice and services, including abortion referral, and
be publicly funded. Sex education was an integral part of the policy.
Birth Control Clinic in Warrnambool
In 1977, a WEL group submitted a request to the Warrnambool
City Council for establishment of a Birth Control Clinic. Drawing
upon the 1968 UN Declaration on Population and Family Planning
which stated "Family planning is a basic human right", the
submission noted the lack of local services to inform and counsel
women about pregnancy and contraception, and argued that such
services should be freely available.
The Monbulk (Victoria) Election
In March 1982, The Right to Choose Coalition (WEL, the Union of
Australian Women, and the YWCA) nominated Dr Bertram Wainer
to stand for the Victorian seat of Monbulk, in order to allow
electors a means of expressing opposition to a Right to Life
candidate, Mrs Jean Langworthy. The result clearly showed that
people supported pro-choice policies: Dr Wainer achieved nearly
four times as many primary votes as Mrs Langworthy, and the
Right to Life movement failed to control the direction of
preferences.
Reproductive Choice
In 1986, WEL recommended that Federal funds be directed to
teaching health and human relationships courses in all Australian
schools, and to extending family planning services (particularly in
isolated areas and among non English speaking background
Australians). WEL also recommended that termination of pregnancy
be considered as any other medical procedure and called for the
repeal of all state and territory laws restricting abortion. WEL
called for continuation of Medicare funding of abortion.
Access to Abortion Services
In 1988, WEL made a submission to the United Nations Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women,
pointing out that Australia appears to be the only country in the
world where abortion law differs in different parts of the country.
WEL argued that while judicial interpretation of the law has
liberalised access in some states, restrictive statutes remain. Access
to safe abortion is therefore unequal and sporadic enforcement of
statutory laws causes uncertainty and fear. Because most abortions
are conducted in special clinics and these are generally located in
capital cities, women from rural and remote areas lack equal access
to services.
National Policy on Women's Health
Also in 1988, WEL submitted a response to the Discussion Paper
on a National Policy on Women's Health to the Special Consultant
to the Minister for Community Services and Health. While
endorsing the Discussion Paper's recommendations, WEL called for
more emphasis on acknowledgement of the health risks associated
with motherhood, especially for those who are geographically or
socially isolated. It recommended tied funding be used to expand
the role of Infant and Maternal Health Centres into "Neighbourhood
Health Centres".
A submission was also made by the Right To Choose Coalition,
representing WEL, the Union of Australian Women and the YWCA
of Melbourne. This submission asserted that it is vital to a woman's
health during her reproductive years to have the choice of abortion
if she does not wish to continue a pregnancy. It pointed out that
legislation banning abortion does not prevent women from
terminating pregnancies but causes them to resort to illegal and
unsafe abortion. It recommended immediate removal of abortion
from criminal codes ; funding for birth control information services;
funding to train teachers in health and human relationships courses;
guarantees of continued Medicare funding of abortions; and
immediate entry of the abortificant RU 486 for research purposes.
Abortion Funding
On a number of occasions, there have been attempts to restrict
access to abortions by removing their funding from Medicare. In
1979, the Lusher Bill was defeated after a concerted campaign by
WEL in conjunction with a coalition of other interested women's
groups. Again in 1990, Alisdair Webster (Liberal NSW) sought to
introduce a bill to abolish Medicare funding for abortions. WEL
lobbied vigorously to ensure this bill did not proceed, on the basis
that its intent was not to prohibit abortion but to prevent poor
women having access to a safe medical procedure and having to
resort instead to backyard abortion. WEL pointed out that no
legislation has ever prevented desperate women from terminating
unwanted pregnancies.
Review of Services
Last year, WEL supported all the recommendations of the Review
of Services for the Termination of Pregnancy in Australia (National
Health and Medical Rese arch Council Draft Consultation
Document, October 1995) but added the need to ensure abortion
was finally removed from criminal codes by recommending "That
all State and Territory Governments be strongly encouraged to
remove sections referring to abortion from their respective Crimes
Acts immediately". This is made all the more urgent given current
efforts to arrive at a National Model Criminal Code by the Standing
Committee of Attorneys-General. Their latest Discussion Paper on
"Non Fatal Offences Against the Person" includes a section on
Abortion, thus continuing the assumption that abortion should
remain on the criminal code.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|