The abortion debate once more!

Tony Abbott, the newly reappointed Minister for Health, and some other Liberal Party males have ressurected the abortion issue. Of course there was no mention of it during the campaign, but here it is again now that they have control of the senate.

These father-figures of the nation believe (1) that there is an epidemic of abortion caused by the fact that it's available on Medicare and it should, therefore, be removed from Medicare and (2) that late-term abortions should be stopped altogether.

The supposed 'epidemic' consists of the fact that approximately one quarter of all pregnancies are terminated. This is no higher than in several other western countries (including the US and Canada), but higher than in some others. However the data also ignore the fact that not all abortions are deliberately induced. Comparisons with countries that allegedly have lower rates obscure several other possibilities - that reporting is better in countries where abortion is quite legal; that the data are not directly comparable; that abortion rates are higher in countries where women have more equality and control over their lives.

According to the medical professionals, late-term abortions are rare, and scarcely ever carried out for reasons other than danger to the life of either mother or foetus.

To his credit, the leader of the opposition refused to comment. He said it is a question for the women concerned and their medical advisers to decide. He would be presumptuous to express a view on something in which he is unqualified to speak. Unfortunately, Messrs Abbott and co., recognize neither the competence of the women nor the qualification of the medical profession to make a good decision. This is really the crux of the matter. It is the implied assumption that women are irresponsible.

If you look at things without the usual coating of sentiment, a human foetus is actually a parasite. It cannot survive independently of its host (that which we term 'mother') unless there is massive technological intervention. It may have the potential to survive as an independent entity, but under normal circumstances this only happens after 9 months of absolute dependence and several years more of gradually diminishing dependence. Supposing the mother aborts this foetus (with or without intention), medical science can - at huge expense - keep it alive until it reaches that stage of relative independence. By spending very large amounts of money, we are now capable of keeping the parasite alive after only 12 weeks of natural incubation.* In such cases, however, the foetus inevitably becomes so damaged as to have significantly impaired future potential for independence. In other words its parasitical dependence on the host (mother) is likely to be hugely prolonged.

Of course the foetus-parasite is invested by us with special qualities since it is comprised of our own DNA and arouses our emotions. But it is, nevertheless, a parasite and will remain so to a gradually lessening degree for many years.

Women are usually abandoned to raise this parasite alone. Three quarters of women reporting domestic violence say that it first happened during their first pregnancy. Even if that doesn't happen to them, they are treated as invalids - their careers are interrupted as they have to leave work and lose promotion opportunities. They are expected not only to conform to biological imperatives such as breastfeeding (though they often have to hide away and not carry on with normal activities in case somebody is "offended" by the sight of an infant eating food), but to non-biological ones such as doing 90% of the housework.

While fathers often continue to provide money, they equally often consider it to be their own money to be distributed (or not) to mother and child as they see fit. I cannot remember how many times I have seen a father, totally besotted with his baby, hand it over to mother at the first sign of trouble. Whether it's pooh, vomit, a tantrum or just boredom, it's mum's responsibility not dad's.

In short, mothers are the ones who have their lives taken over by kids. Normally, it is only the fathers who have the choice to walk away from the whole problem. Indeed it could be taken as an indication of just how responsibly women act that more of them don't just walk away. Currently, however, women do have the option to terminate the parasite in cases where they will not be able to give it the attention and resources that a growing child deserves. Abbott & co. want to remove this right.

* I got this figure from Lord David Steel, the former British Liberal leader who also wants to curb the rights of women.