Abortion law reform: minor changes to Bill

WELLINGTON: Proposed abortion law reform has been tweaked so that a doctor would need to consult at least one other before approving a procedure after 20 weeks.

However, the special select committee considering the Abortion Legislation Bill says that this was likely to have happened under the original Bill, and that the change was to ensure standard medical practice would be followed.

The Bill — which seeks to remove abortion from the Crimes Act and drop the current requirement for two doctors to confirm there is ‘‘serious danger’’ to the woman’s physical or mental health before an abortion is approved — was reported back from the committee yesterday without any major changes.

It passed its first reading 94 votes to 23 last year.

It would also drop the current test for eligibility for abortion after 20 weeks, which must be deemed necessary to save the woman’s life or prevent serious injury.

There would be no legal test for procedures before 20 weeks, leaving the decision up to the woman and her doctor; after 20 weeks, a medical practitioner would have to agree that an abortion was necessary for the woman’s physical and mental health and wellbeing.

Standard practice meant doctors would ‘‘always consult colleagues before performing abortions after 20 weeks gestation, and they would only be performed if the doctor deemed them medically appropriate’’, the committee said.

However, as that extra consultation was not explicitly written into the original Bill, the committee recommended adding it.

The Bill retains the 150m safe zone around clinics to prevent harassment, though committee members David Seymour (Act) and Agnes Lohan (National) objected to having a safe area at all.

The committee noted that women seeking abortions currently faced an average wait of 25 days between the first appointment with the referring doctor and having the procedure.

‘‘We also heard that access to abortion services throughout New Zealand is inequitable, resulting in some women having to travel significant distances for services,’’ the committee report said.

It recommended the Directorgeneral of Health report to the Health Minister at least every five years about whether access to services is timely and equitable.

It also recommended adding that conscientious objections should not apply in medical emergencies. The committee received 25,776 written submissions, 92% of which opposed the Bill.

The Bill will now return to the House for its second reading, probably in March, when a conscience vote will be held. — The New Zealand Herald