South Australian Upper House Rejects Late-Term Abortion Law Amendments

In a narrow and contentious decision, South Australia‘s upper house has voted down proposed amendments to existing abortion laws, aimed at altering the procedures for late-term termination. The legislation, introduced by Liberal Member of Parliament Ben Hood, sought to change the current law to require induced births rather than terminations for pregnancies after 28 weeks.

The proposed amendments were defeated with a close margin as nine members voted in favor and ten against. The vote followed approximately three hours of heated debate, concluding just before 10 PM on Wednesday evening. The bill will not proceed to the lower house, and thus, will not become law.

The proposal stirred significant controversy and was marked by intense disagreements among the Members of Parliament (MPs). The situation was further complicated when Liberal MP Michelle Lensink, undergoing treatment for breast cancer, made a surprising appearance in parliament to ensure her vote was counted. Lensink, a key advocate of the 2021 laws decriminalizing abortion in South Australia, opposed the proposed changes.

Problems arose when arrangements that were to ensure Lensink’s pairing vote were reportedly withdrawn at the last moment. Initially, Jing Lee, a Liberal Party colleague, agreed to abstain from voting to pair with Lensink, but later rescinded. Subsequently, Sarah Game from One Nation was perceived to be the replacement pair, but she clarified she would not participate in a pairing for a conscience vote, leading to a frantic situation for Lensink.

Following the turmoil, Dennis Hood, another Liberal member, agreed to pair with Lensink, acknowledging her past support during his health issues. Despite the challenges, the tightly contested vote proceeded without adjustments to the anticipated divisions.

The debate saw sharp exchanges, with prominent voices like Mr. Maher critiquing Ben Hood’s bill as being “insulting to women and girls” and “not based on evidence.” On the contrary, Hood defended the bill, describing it as a “compassionate response for both baby and mother” aimed at protecting viable pregnancies at 28 weeks.

The proposed amendments garnered support from some quarters, including Labor’s Clare Scriven, advocating for the pro-life stance, arguing for the life preservation of potentially viable babies. However, strong opposition came from organizations such as the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RANZCOG), which views abortion as an essential service.

The legal fraternity, represented by the Law Society of South Australia, also opposed the amendments, emphasizing that medical professionals are best placed to determine patient care without legal constraints. The society backed the current legal framework established in 2021, based on recommendations from the South Australian Law Reform Institute.