‘Zoe’s law’ a threat to women’s rights
For the first time in Australia, a bill is under consideration that will grant legal personhood status to foetuses.
The Crimes Amendment Act 2013 (also known as Zoe’s law no. 2), currently before the NSW parliament, takes its name from the story of Brodie Donegan, who was 32 weeks pregnant when a drug-affected driver ran into her, causing the death of her unborn daughter Zoe.
Brodie and her partner Nick, who identify as pro-choice, argue that the bill is not intended as an intervention into the abortion debate. Rather, they want losses and/or injuries suffered by unborn children to be recognised as legally distinct from losses and/or injuries suffered by their mothers. The origin of Zoe’s law is tragic. However, the bill must be challenged.
The bill is being supported by a range of anti-abortion activists in the NSW parliament, such as Liberal attorney general (and former president of Right to Life NSW) Greg Smith and Christian Democrat Fred Nile. Their motivations are to undermine women’s confidence in exercising control over their own bodies. Their immediate interest in Zoe’s law is to generate guilt about abortion.
There are potentially other ramifications. If passed, the bill could open the door to attacks on women’s control over their reproductive rights. While the bill contains clauses to exempt medical procedures and is therefore not an immediate attack on abortion rights, it is easy to see how giving foetuses personhood status could potentially conflict with the rights of women who do not want to proceed with a pregnancy.
There is little to stop personhood status being applied to foetuses in other cases, if granted in this one. In the context of NSW, where abortion already falls within the Crimes Act, adding further legal ambiguities will do nothing to help women rightfully assert full control over their reproductive choices.
Defend abortion rights: oppose the Crimes Amendment (Zoe’s law) Bill
8am Thursday 24 October, Corner Martin Place and Elizabeth St, Sydney
