(Australia) Couple plead not guilty over abortion

[friendly_iconoclast]

http://www.smh.com.au/national/couple-plead-not-guilty-over-abortion-20101012-16h0l.html



Couple plead not guilty over abortion October 12, 2010 - 1:18PM


Tegan Simone Leach and Sergies Brennan are facing court over allegedly procuring an illegal abortion.

A young Queensland woman charged with procuring her own abortion has pleaded not guilty.

Tegan Simone Leach, 20, entered a plea of not guilty to one count of procuring her own abortion at the beginning of her trial in Cairns District Court today.

Her partner Sergie Brennan, 22, pleaded not guilty to a charge of supplying a drug to procure an abortion.

It is alleged Mr Brennan imported abortion drugs from the Ukraine and provided them to Ms Leach in late 2008....

[HEyHEY]

1. I can't figure out why they did this.

Why would you risk your health in such a way instead of going to a part of Australia where it is legal?

[TheMadMonk]

2. Cost. Privacy. Impossiblity of being absent. I can think of several. /nt

[HEyHEY]

5. Okay, I can THINK of reasons too... but what was her's?

If Australia is like Canada an abortion is free (I believe). As for the rest of it, privacy is absolute, can't speak for being absent. Just seems like a strange risk when you can have it done legally in the country.

[TheMadMonk]

6. Yes and no. Yes abortion is available as a medical procedure.

However, it is still partially under the criminal code (as a special case instance of unlicensed practice of medicine if nothing else) in some states, and there are strictures on timing and circumstance.

It isn't all that hard to "game" the system by claiming mental health issues to a sympathetic GP or OB/GYN who will then refer you directly to the clinic with a minimum of questions asked. There are AFAIK no requirements for a mental health referal. So either a sympathetic doctor was not available, or they were really paranoid about being "found out" by family (or perhaps congregation).

[friendly_iconoclast]

3. Why should they have to? It's her body and should be her choice....

...not that of the ass-backward state of Queensland

[HEyHEY]

4. It may be her body and her choice, but that doesn't mean she has to sacrifice her health

She could have been seriously hurt. So, I'm asking why would you risk yourself like that? She can still fight for the pro choice group.

[friendly_iconoclast]

7. Maybe it was stupid, but should people be prosecuted for choosing poorly?

If abortion is morally acceptable in one state, it's acceptable in another. The QLD wingnuts just love to control people

Malum prohibitum (something is bad because it is prohibited) is not the same as malum in se (something bad in and of

itself.)

Freedom of choice includes the freedom to make decisions that others wouldn't make. To argue otherwise is paternalist.

[HEyHEY]

8. Okay, your'e totally avoiding what I'm asking, put away the anger for a second....

I think she's obviously being denied her rights. What I'm saying is why would you choose to make such a dangerous decision? I could see if she lived in someplace where there was no feasible way to get to a proper clinic, but they do have proper clinics with trained doctors in Australia and I don't understand why she took the risk of having it done in backroom conditions.

[friendly_iconoclast]

10. I think Book Lover answered your question in reply #9

The methotrexate/misoprostol method has a lower rate of complications than surgical methods.

It also has the advantage in that it's damned hard to picket or firebomb pill bottles....

[HEyHEY]

12. Ah

I still find it hard to believe Queensland doesn't allow them. That's so fucking backward in this day and age.

[Book Lover]

9. From what I'm reading, the couple purchased RU486 and Misoprostol online

Taking these drugs in the manner prescribed to produce an abortion is much safer than a surgical procedure. So while it is a risk to health to do this without a medical exam and supervision, it's not nearly as dangerous as I think you are thinking. (Disclaimer: not a mind-reader)

[HEyHEY]

11. Ah, whenever I hear "illegal abortion" I think of the kind they had in the 50s

I had friends who were told not to take the pills version by their doctor, he said the opposite. Of course he could have just been trying to sell an abortion.

[Book Lover]

13. Or the use of those particular drugs may be contraindicated in her specific case

Either way, we can both absolutely agree that safe abortion on demand, supervised by a nonjudgmental medical professional is the desired goal here.

[iverglas]

14. Thread a little short on facts

First, an update:

Leach was acquitted.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/abortion-trial-woman-tegan-simone-leach-thanks-her-supporters/story-e6frf7jx-1225938694534

A Cairns District Court jury took less than an hour to find Tegan Simone Leach, 21, and her partner Sergie Brennan not guilty of charges of procuring an abortion and supplying drugs to procure an abortion following a three day trial.

The couple were charged after police found empty blister packets of abortion drugs RU486 and Misoprostol during a search of their home on an unrelated matter in February last year.

... In his closing directions, Judge Bill Everson told the jury they needed to be satisfied the drugs taken by Ms Leach were noxious to her own health.

Second, as in the US, criminal law is under the jurisdiction of the various states in Australia, and Queensland's law has indeed failed to keep up with the times:

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/did-abortion-jury-ignore-law-in-favour-of-common-sense-20101014-16lp8.html

Under Queensland's criminal code, abortion is unlawful unless it is performed to "preserve the woman from serious harm to her life or physical or mental health".

Elective abortions can only be legally carried out in the first trimester of pregnancy and usually take place in private clinics.

That is in contrast to Victoria and the ACT, which have decriminalised abortion.

... Australian Medical Association Queensland president Gino Pecoraro said the court decision had done nothing to allay the fears of obstetricians who refused to perform medical abortions because of the uncertainty surrounding prosecution.

But just as in the US, cirumstances (right-wing dominance of legislatures) may be such that it is better to let sleeping dogs lie just at present.

Attorney-General Cameron Dick confirmed the government would not vote to change abortion law, which would require a conscience vote.

"As we've said before, there isn't enough support in the current Parliament to pass a Bill to decriminalise abortion," he said.

"In fact, it's quite possible any such Bill could be amended in the Parliament to make these services less accessible - and that is the last thing we want to see happen."

And third, a lot of people don't seem to realize that exactly the same thing could and in fact does happen in U.S. states. Many states have "fetal homicide" laws, which essentially criminalize abortions not performed under the conditions the law requires, i.e. by physicians, within the permitted times, etc. They aren't just illegal abortions; they are treated like homicides.

Oh, with one big difference. They all exempt the woman herself from prosecution and punishment. Interesting, eh? They criminalize the contract "killing" (in some cases by the woman's partner, just as in this case), but not the person who actually planned and incited the "killing" and instructed the "killer" to perform it. That's the bass-ackwards bit, to me.

Queensland may be a little backward at the moment, but at least it isn't intentionally crawling back into the caves the way many jurisdictions in the US are.