katmeow
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 10,089
Given that the Government will be voting on this issue in the coming days, I thought it would be interesting to see what everyone here thinks.
In 1996, conservative Senator Brian Harradine struck a deal relating to decisions on RU486, in order to secure his vote on the sale of Telstra. For all other drugs in Australia, The Therapeutic Goods Administration is in charge of assessing safety based on medical and scientific evidence. However, due to the deal made with Senator Harradine, the fate of RU486 lies with one person: the health minister, Tony Abbott.
For those who don't know, RU486 (Mifepristone) is a pill which can be taken to induce abortion, offering women an alternative to surgical abortion. It is already being used widely around the world, including the USA and NZ. An article a few months back (which I'll try to dig out) mentioned that some Australian women had been traveling to NZ to utilise the procedure.
I find it really interesting that Viagra was pretty much rushed through the TGA here based on the expected demand for it, even though there has been a larger number of fatalities after using it than there has been associated with use of RU486 around the world - an enquiry in Aust by rural doctors found that properly supervised use of RU486 was no more dangerous than using aspirin. But my main concern is the fact that Tony Abbott, who has already made his views on abortion very clear, has the veto power at present. Having an abortion is never an easy decision for a women to make and I think that Australian women are currently being denied access to a perfectly safe drug on moralistic grounds.
Australia's family planning body has released the following statement:
A conscience vote is due to take place on 9th Feb, regarding whether decision making power should stay with the health minister, or move to the Therapeutic Goods Administration.
Thoughts?
In 1996, conservative Senator Brian Harradine struck a deal relating to decisions on RU486, in order to secure his vote on the sale of Telstra. For all other drugs in Australia, The Therapeutic Goods Administration is in charge of assessing safety based on medical and scientific evidence. However, due to the deal made with Senator Harradine, the fate of RU486 lies with one person: the health minister, Tony Abbott.
For those who don't know, RU486 (Mifepristone) is a pill which can be taken to induce abortion, offering women an alternative to surgical abortion. It is already being used widely around the world, including the USA and NZ. An article a few months back (which I'll try to dig out) mentioned that some Australian women had been traveling to NZ to utilise the procedure.
I find it really interesting that Viagra was pretty much rushed through the TGA here based on the expected demand for it, even though there has been a larger number of fatalities after using it than there has been associated with use of RU486 around the world - an enquiry in Aust by rural doctors found that properly supervised use of RU486 was no more dangerous than using aspirin. But my main concern is the fact that Tony Abbott, who has already made his views on abortion very clear, has the veto power at present. Having an abortion is never an easy decision for a women to make and I think that Australian women are currently being denied access to a perfectly safe drug on moralistic grounds.
Australia's family planning body has released the following statement:
There is considerable misinformation on RU486 and its safety. Sexual Health & Family Planning Australia (SH&FPA) has reviewed the evidence.
RU486 is as safe as surgical abortion. It offers women an alternative to surgery and it does not lead to more abortions in countries where it is used.
A conscience vote is due to take place on 9th Feb, regarding whether decision making power should stay with the health minister, or move to the Therapeutic Goods Administration.
Thoughts?