BIOLOGICAL PROCEDURE

The majority of abortions in New Zealand are carried out within the first 10 weeks of pregnancy – the procedure that is most commonly used in early-term terminations is EMA (Early Medical Abortions). This procedure induces a miscarriage and is done so by taking two types of medication. The first of these is Mifepristone – which blocks the hormones in the body which support the pregnancy, second Prostaglandin, which induces the uterus to expel the pregnancy. As a result of these medications, the pregnancy becomes inviable and a miscarriage occurs, this process takes between 2-3 days in total and can be performed only in pregnancies within the first 9 weeks. Surgical abortions are performed from the 7 – 15th week of pregnancy and are the most common abortion procedure in New Zealand. The patient is given an anesthetic, this can be either local or general. A small tube is then inserted into the uterus – this tube has a suction or vacuum feature which will remove the fetus from the uterus. This procedure takes between 5-10 minutes, which the patient can return home on the same day.

GROUP/ORGANISATION – FOR

WOMEN’S NATIONAL ABORTION ACTION CAMPAIGN (WONAAC)

WONAAC is an organization that promotes and advocates for lessened restrictions on abortion access in New Zealand. Their central belief is that the control of a woman’s reproductive rights must lie solely with her. Another key belief within the group is that abortion is a woman’s issue, with a prevalence of female leadership and decision-making being vital to the organization’s actions. They believed that freely accessible abortions were a recognition of women’s human rights – and vital in the emancipation of women. They believed that alongside the dramatic strides in women’s issues that were taking place in the late 20th century – access to abortion was another of these rights which should be realized in the quest for women’s freedom. They believe that ‘the right to be free from the fear of unwanted pregnancy must become a reality for all women.’ Alongside this, they also believe that restrictive policies result in disastrous health outcomes for women. They believe that restrictive policies do not limit the number of abortions that are carried out but rather dramatically increase the number of self-induced abortions, which can lead to serious bodily harm and in more serious cases, death. They believe that access to abortion is a basic human right, one that reduces harm and contributes to greater freedoms for women. This group’s ethics align with that of the ‘Autonomy’ and ‘Rights’ approach as they believe that it is a patient’s right to freely decide what to do with one’s own health and body.

ABORTION RIGHTS AOTEAROA (ALRANZ)

ALRANZ is a New Zealand-based group that advocates for wider access to abortion in New Zealand. The group can be seen to be pro-choice advocates. Their core belief is that “Abortion is Healthcare”, that women should be entitled to seek the medical procedures which they choose. They believe that women have the human right of bodily autonomy and that abortion should be a discussion between a woman and her doctor, rather than through parliament. As stated on their website, they believe that ‘women are people, with the intrinsic human right to decide what they do with their bodies. They believe that the government should put an end to restrictions surrounding women’s autonomy. An example of their advocacy for abortion access can be seen in an open letter, addressed to parliament from March 2020 the current national president of the organisation Terry Bellamark wrote; “The days when pregnant people must lie about their mental health to access the healthcare they need, must come to an end”.This essentially encapsulates the values of this organisation – in that restricting access to healthcare for women is dehumanizing, and robs women of their essential human rights.

The reasoning behind their beliefs falls under several economic, political, and cultural frameworks. They believe that restrictions on abortion are unnecessary in that the cost of political discourse, policing abortions, and certifying medical practitioners in operating under more strict anti-abortion laws – is money that would be far more effective if spent on preventing unplanned pregnancies. They believe that with further restrictions on abortion access, pregnancy is essentially enforced, they believe that this is not in the long-term interest of society as those who are forced to carry their pregnancies to term may be unable to support themselves or their child. This group’s ethics also align with that of the ‘Autonomy’ and ‘Rights’ approach as they believe that it is a patient’s right to freely decide what to do with one’s own health and body and that it is demeaning to women to be forced into an unwanted pregnancy.

GROUP/ORGANISATION – AGAINST

VOICE FOR LIFE

Voice for Life, formerly known as the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child (SPUC), is New Zealand’s largest and oldest anti-abortion organization. They believe that through lessened restrictions on abortion access, lawmakers were ignoring the humanity of the embryo and the fetus from the point of conception. The group believes that through wider access to abortions, the protections for what they saw as children who must be protected, were being ignored. Their slogan since the early 1980s has been ‘to value and protect human life. Alongside their vehement opposition to abortion, the organization is also opposed to Euthanasia and experimentation with embryos. They believe that life begins at conception, and ends at natural death – and so any intentional interference with this is immoral and shows a disregard for human life. It can be seen that VFL views all interference with the natural processes of life and death as harmful – in that they are unethical. Voice for Life is an organization that subscribes to Utilitarian philosophy. This philosophy essentially states that actions in society should be directed toward achieving the ‘greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Essentially, those who subscribe to this ideology believe that actions should be directed toward creating the least harm possible. They believe that as there are a nseveralre positive outcomes for unwanted pregnancies, such as state care for the child – these options far outweigh, what they view to be essentially murder. This group’s ethics align with the ‘Non-maleficence’ and ‘Utilitarianism’ approach as they believe that allowing the practice of abortion is to disregard human life, therefore creating harm that could potentially be diminished.

THE SALVATION ARMY

The Salvation Army is a Christian church and international charitable organization. The official stance of the church states: “The Salvation Army believes in the sanctity of all human life and considers each person to be of infinite value” They believe that each life is a gift from God which is to be cherished, nurtured, and redeemed. They hold the Salvationist perspective, which is heavily influenced by Christian tradition. Their perspective is informed by their belief that fertilisation is the beginning of human life, they believe that as Christians they have the responsibility to care for others – to protect and promote the welfare of vulnerable people. As they believe that embryos and fetus’ are viable human beings – they are strongly opposed to abortion as to them it can be seen as the taking of innocent human life.

TheThey believeat those who are complicit or in support of the taking of human life will be answerable to God. Despite this, the Salvation Army does recognize the complex circumstances surrounding abortion, thethey believeat as an organization they should support women in their decision through ‘prayerful and thoughtful consideration. Their belief system seeks to create no harm, and so while they are vehemently opposed to the principle and procedure of abortion in the vast majority of circumstances – they believe that in certain situations, in which the mother’s life is in danger or other dire medical situations. Their position is also supported by the understanding that unwanted pregnancies can be caused by poor social conditions, rape, incest, poverty, and war – and so advocate for a society free of these to decrease the necessity of finding solutions to unplanned and unwanted pregnancies. Much like the group ‘voice for life’ the salvation army’s ethics align with the ‘Non-maleficence’ and ‘Utilitarianism’ approach as their belief system seeks to create no harm.

IMPLICATIONS OF CURRENT LAW

The current law in New Zealand, as described earlier, states that women in New Zealand arecaneely seek abortions up until and including the 20th week of their pregnancy. These are relatively unrestricted laws in terms of the global perspective. From March 2020, abortion was no longer regulated as a criminal issue, but rather a healthcare issue. It can be seen that these laws have come with a myriad of implications, both positive and negative. Freely accessible abortion access in New Zealand has had an influence, not just on those who may need to seek terminations, but on the wider community as a whole.

SELF

In terms of personal implications, the decision to undergo an abortion procedure is doesve a long-term impact on a persons’ mental/emotional, and physical wellbeing. The current law states that mental health support for patients must be offered before and after the procedure, it cannot however be compulsory. This mental health support is generally a therapy session with a counselor who is trained in such areas. These sessions are subsidized by the New Zealand government, and so are instrumental in limiting the negative impacts that abortion procedures can have on the patient. In terms of mental health implications, the greater accessibility of these procedures can be seen to increase the mental health outcomes for patients. A 2016 study found that women who were denied access to legal abortions had higher levels of anxiety and lessened self-esteem.

This conclusion has been challenged by other studies on the implications of abortion on mental health, with a 2006 study conducted in New Zealand found that 42% of women who had undergone abortion procedures experienced major depressive disorder in the four years following when referring to Hauora this is a large long term effect on the emotional wellbeing. This was seen to be 35% higher than those who had continued their pregnancy and nearly twice the rate of those who had never been pregnant. It Likely,e impact of either receiving or not receiving an abortion and the long/short term effects that this has on an individual’s emotional wellbeing is largely dependent on the individual. However, it can be seen that the current legislation in New Zealand which states that patients must be offered mental health support before and after the procedure is able to limit any significant adverse consequences.

From human rights or personal safety perspective, it can be seen that the current laws and regulations in New Zealand are largely positive. The laws in New Zealand that are currently in force give women bodily autonomy and the choice to make surrounding what is best for them in their own personal situations. For many, the ability to access safe and financially accessible abortions provides a sense of security. While each person’s situation is unique, it can be seen that those in situations of domestic violence or other abusive situations – the right that is afforded to them by New Zealand’s legislation to receive this procedure (which the law states must also be confidential) may enable them greater personal safety. On a personal level, the ability to access this healthcare is representative of their government recognizing the patient’s rights.

While, the New Zealand healthcare system and legislation that regulates abortion ensure that medical practitioners are qualified and are able to provide quality healthcare to patients – as with any medical procedure there are some risks to the abortion procedure, both surgical and EMA abortions. There is a risk of heavy bleeding, infection, adverse reactions to anesthesia, damage to reproductive organs and in some – extremely rare cases death all of these enforcing long and short-term effects on one’s physical and mental wellbeing. The risk of death from an abortion procedure is incredibly small – less than 1 in 1,000,000. In the long-term, there is an increased risk that those who receive abortions are at an increased risk of delivering children prematurely in the future. It can be seen that both the short and long-term negative health outcomes which can be seen as a result of abortion are incredibly rare. Particularly in New Zealand, in which the quality of the procedure is highly regulated, and medical practitioners must be highly qualified, it can be seen that these risks are largely minimized. For many, who seek abortion care for medical reasons, in that their health will be put at imminent risk as a result of continuing the pregnancy – the positive impact that abortion will lead to far outweighs the possible negatives.

OTHERS

In terms of the implications of abortion on others, it is a large complex issue. Many advocates for abortion believe that essentially, the conversation should be solely focused on the implications for the patient – however it can be seen that there are a number of influences for those who are associated with those who receive an abortion. As abortion does strongly influence the patient’s hormones, and will likely lead to a hormonal imbalance, this can lead to mood swings or other instances of emotional instability – while this is a relatively minor implication, it may put a strain on the relationships of those who receive the abortion, which is likely a short term negative implication that could potentially lead to being a long term effect on one’s mental wellbeing. Another possible negative implication that can be seen as a result of a woman’s decision to receive an abortion is for the sexual partner of the patient, or those who are directly related to the patient, eg parents.

It can be seen that the current law in New Zealand states that the decision to receive an abortion is one that is entirely up to the woman. For those who are under 16, parental consent is also not necessary to procure the procedure. It can be seen that for these people, the woman’s decision to receive an abortion may be a long-term negative result on emotional wellbeing as these people may have had a strong desire for the pregnancy to be carried full term and may be negatively affected by the patient’s decision to terminate. It can be seen that if the patient wishes to receive an abortion without the support of their sexual partner, New Zealand legislation permits this – something that may result in a long-term negative consequence for that person. For this same group, access to abortion care may be a long-term positive effect, in that the financial or other costs of helping to care for the child will not result due to termination.

 SOCIETY

It can be seen that the current legislation surrounding abortion in New Zealand has a large-term positive effect in terms of economic implications. It can be seen that while the initial government spending that occurs due to the procedure being subsidized by the public healthcare system can cost between $1000 – $2500 NZD. However, it can be seen that this is less than the subsidized cost of healthcare in supporting pregnancy through a full term, with the government spending on each full-term pregnancy and birth around $4000. It can be seen that from an entirely economic perspective, free access to abortion – as seen in New Zealand’s current legislation is largely a positive long term effect in that it will decrease the overall cost of maternity healthcare in New Zealand, as the cost of carrying an unwanted pregnancy full-term will not be realized.

The New Zealand foster care system is one that is fundamentally flawed – the system does not receive enough funding, and there are far too many children who must live within the system. It can be seen that the government is very rarely able to provide the same quality of life as the child’s own family. The policies in place within New Zealand are generally focused on ensuring that each child is able to be raised in a loving environment, a key aspect of this principle is in limiting the number of children in government care. It can be seen that the current system of legislation surrounding abortion in New Zealand is largely positive. The ability for women to seek abortions for unwanted pregnancies is having a direct influence on children in state care having a positive long-term effect on the wellbeing of the children who remain in government care as their quality of life remains intact. These policies ensure that women are able to make decisions about whether they are in a position to support and raise a child. Many see this as an important aspect in ending the cycle of poverty seen so widely in New Zealand in which is a positive long-term effect. By allowing people, particularly women who are living in poverty to be able to decide when to have children, rather than being essentially forced to raise a child they cannot afford to raise. Overall it can be seen that for New Zealand society as a whole, the liberalization of abortion is generally positive.

PERSONAL POSITION / PROPOSED ACTION

Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that it is a women’s right to have access to abortion services. To take these rights away would be detrimental to women who face the problem of unwanted pregnancy. I believe that all abortions should be legal and done safely with compassion and respect. Pro-choice is about respecting the right of women to end their pregnancy and the life of the fetus when the situation is not right for them. This is never an easy decision. Late abortions – after 20 weeks – need special consideration as babies born as young as 21 weeks into a pregnancy have been known to survive. Infant deaths following failed abortions create a minefield of ethical dramas. Thankfully, according to Family Planning, late abortions are very rare in New Zealand. Early medical abortions (EMA) are the safest and less intrusive for the mother and fetus. The choice is something that has historically been taken away from women on several fronts.

The choice to vote, to have sex, to walk the streets, to have a baby, to keep your baby, to have a career. Women have always traditionally been regarded as male property. In the New Zealand of today, women have reclaimed their choices and abortion should absolutely remain one of them. None the less there are still groups who oppose this choice and seek to strip women of their reproductive rights. An example would be the group ‘The Right To Life’ a dominantly Pro-Life group that views babies as a gift, and that ‘true feminist would view abortion as murder of the unborn and part of the war on women’. Many women find themselves in untenable situations in which continuing a pregnancy would be stressful and unideal. Deciding to go through with abortion could quite possibly be the hardest yet courageous decision they may ever have to do. While some women overlook the despair that comes to many during the process of abortion, a lot of women often suffer from their decision. Tension and prolonged suffering could quite possibly be created by introducing Pro-Life groups.

Overall Abortion is absolutely a woman’s right that should most defiantly be available to those who are in need. Abortion is no one’s business except the patients, especially not males who continue to think they have the right to objectify, control, and own women and their reproductive systems. Access to safe abortion and compassionate support during this conflicting time are the most important things to campaign for. Abortion is a highly debated topic that can cause a lot of tension among those who oppose it. Abortion is a right, that some believe should be taken away but have no right to do so in the first place. Rights are distinctive moral and/or jural entities. Rights are made to have and to decidedly exercise. Violating and infringing on them is to take away one’s freedom. To take away the right of abortion is to strip many women of their potential future, not only through placing them in a dissatisfactory position but by forcing some to partake in at-home abortions resulting which may result in infections and unfortunately death. I propose that abortion remain legal to those who stand by and oppose it. Abortion will forever remain a tense topic but by providing the clinical process to everyone, all of those implemented still have the right to choose. The choice is a keyword within this argument as I believe it creates a great solution to the two opposing parties (Pro-Life and Pro-Choice).

By having the right to choose, one may decide where their morals lie in regards to the action of abortion. Abortion should remain a personal topic that doesn’t need to be shared with others. Or shamed by others by any means. By keeping the legalization of abortion it allows those who have an unwanted pregnancy to exercise the right to terminate an unwanted child and those who oppose the idea of terminating a life choice that they do not want to partake in abortion. “You can’t understand someone until you’ve walked a mile in their shoes.” is a quote I believe should be taken into consideration by those who oppose abortion, as many have their own reason to choose to go through with the process of termination. Abortion is not a nice thing to think about or discuss, and nobody wants to see more abortions. The idea of aborting an unborn fetus is decidedly unpleasant. Women always have and always will continue to have unplanned and unwanted pregnancies, and no government or group of men has the right to choose for women what they should do. I believe the right thing to do is to continue legalizing the right to abortion, by doing this women are able to make their own decision on what is and what isn’t right for them personally. Overall Abortion is absolutely a woman’s right that should most defiantly be available to those who are in need. Abortion is no one’s business except the patients, especially not males who continue to think they have the right to objectify, control, and own women and their reproductive systems. Access to safe abortion and compassionate support during this conflicting time are the most important things to campaign for.