Oppression Of Women In Australia Essay
The oppression of women by the Australian government is still highly prominent in today’s laws especially in relation to the Queensland abortion legislation. The current legislation deems women as incapable to make their own decisions regarding their own bodies and takes on a simplistic approach to a much more complex issue. This following essay will evaluate the abortion legislation in Queensland’s and will highlight the inadequacies of the current law through investigating the legislation and identifying the current issues. It will then go onto evaluate competing lenses such as a deontological and consequential perspectives, and will furthermore conclude that the current laws are inefficient and serve no purpose other than to harm and oppress women.
The Current Legislation
Throughout history laws regulating or …show more content…
prohibiting abortion have been entrenched since the colonisation of Australia, with much of our laws being inherited or influence by the Westminster system. This current legislation is built based on deterrence theory, as it practises punishment to criminalise women who choose to have an abortion and to deter others that may want to do the same.The Queensland Criminal Code,1899 Sections 224, 225 and 226 are the relevant provisions which prohibit the assistance of inducing or aiding and the performance of abortions in Queensland, therefore making abortion illegal with prison sentence of up to 14 years. There is however, only one exceptions where abortion can be legal, that being only to prevent serious harm to a woman’s mental and physical health.
The Current Issues
The inconsistencies between state and federal laws have resulted in no clear legal precedent, therefore creating a legal grey area that no medical professionals or women can act upon due to the opaqueness of the law. An example of this grey area, can be seen in the cases of, R v Leach and Brennan where a woman attempted to conduct her own abortion however was found not guilty. This uncertainty in the law has sparked calls for major reforms with multiple bills being proposed to government to decriminalise and regulate abortion, not only because of the blurred laws, but due to ethical and health issues. However, these bills so far have been unsuccessful due to the lack of government support.
Competing Justice Perspectives
The deontological ethics standpoint views that actions should be moral and just, and doesn’t take into consideration the consequences of an action just the act.. Abortion is the act of killing an unborn child and through a deontological perspective the action of killing is perceived as wrong. An example of this can be viewed from a parent’s perspective, that being that within the discourse of being a parent you are to raise, care and provide for your children, all of which are actions that are moral and right through a deontological perspective. Therefore, if you choose to have an abortion you are killing something you are ought to protect, therefore the action of killing is then amplified by the of killing your own child, which is morally and ethically wrong. This perspective is the base of our current legislation as both intentionally killing and abortion are illegal Queensland regardless of the positive or negative consequences that may follow.
The consequentialism perspective on the other hand looks at consequences of the legislation and finds that the repercussions of the current illegalisation of abortion are detrimental.
Even though abortions are illegal it doesn’t stop women conducting their own, with 68,000 women a year dying through unsafe abortions or suffering from long term health complications such infections and genital trauma, all of which are consequence of the current legislation. Reasons why women choose to abort this way is due to that they don’t have access to the facilities that insure safe procedures therefore are left with a no choice but to put themselves at a risk. Another consequence of the current legislation is that women are not held equally within the law, as it restricts women of the rights over their bodies, yet there are no current laws that exhibit these same unjust controls over men. This failure by the government to recognise this, has caused “gender-specific harm”, as it confines women to either two groups when antenatal, that being either pregnant or deviant. Therefore, not only causing mental and physical consequences, for women but social
inequality.
Evaluation and Conclusion
When considering both views, the deontological perspective fails to recognise the later consequences of making a woman bare a child full-term due to the detrimental impacts it can have on a women’s wellbeing. This view is also the basis of our current legislation, which fails to recognise that women are conducting illegal abortions due to that the laws are only focusing on the action of abortion. When considering both lens it can be justified that even though the action of killing is a wrong within demonological perspective it fails to look at the positive consequences that could benefit women. Furthermore, through the evaluation of the current legislation and the critical lenses it was prominent that the current laws are inefficient due to that they serve no purpose other than to harm and oppress women.
The Current Legislation
Throughout history laws regulating or …show more content…
prohibiting abortion have been entrenched since the colonisation of Australia, with much of our laws being inherited or influence by the Westminster system. This current legislation is built based on deterrence theory, as it practises punishment to criminalise women who choose to have an abortion and to deter others that may want to do the same.The Queensland Criminal Code,1899 Sections 224, 225 and 226 are the relevant provisions which prohibit the assistance of inducing or aiding and the performance of abortions in Queensland, therefore making abortion illegal with prison sentence of up to 14 years. There is however, only one exceptions where abortion can be legal, that being only to prevent serious harm to a woman’s mental and physical health.
The Current Issues
The inconsistencies between state and federal laws have resulted in no clear legal precedent, therefore creating a legal grey area that no medical professionals or women can act upon due to the opaqueness of the law. An example of this grey area, can be seen in the cases of, R v Leach and Brennan where a woman attempted to conduct her own abortion however was found not guilty. This uncertainty in the law has sparked calls for major reforms with multiple bills being proposed to government to decriminalise and regulate abortion, not only because of the blurred laws, but due to ethical and health issues. However, these bills so far have been unsuccessful due to the lack of government support.
Competing Justice Perspectives
The deontological ethics standpoint views that actions should be moral and just, and doesn’t take into consideration the consequences of an action just the act.. Abortion is the act of killing an unborn child and through a deontological perspective the action of killing is perceived as wrong. An example of this can be viewed from a parent’s perspective, that being that within the discourse of being a parent you are to raise, care and provide for your children, all of which are actions that are moral and right through a deontological perspective. Therefore, if you choose to have an abortion you are killing something you are ought to protect, therefore the action of killing is then amplified by the of killing your own child, which is morally and ethically wrong. This perspective is the base of our current legislation as both intentionally killing and abortion are illegal Queensland regardless of the positive or negative consequences that may follow.
The consequentialism perspective on the other hand looks at consequences of the legislation and finds that the repercussions of the current illegalisation of abortion are detrimental.
Even though abortions are illegal it doesn’t stop women conducting their own, with 68,000 women a year dying through unsafe abortions or suffering from long term health complications such infections and genital trauma, all of which are consequence of the current legislation. Reasons why women choose to abort this way is due to that they don’t have access to the facilities that insure safe procedures therefore are left with a no choice but to put themselves at a risk. Another consequence of the current legislation is that women are not held equally within the law, as it restricts women of the rights over their bodies, yet there are no current laws that exhibit these same unjust controls over men. This failure by the government to recognise this, has caused “gender-specific harm”, as it confines women to either two groups when antenatal, that being either pregnant or deviant. Therefore, not only causing mental and physical consequences, for women but social
inequality.
Evaluation and Conclusion
When considering both views, the deontological perspective fails to recognise the later consequences of making a woman bare a child full-term due to the detrimental impacts it can have on a women’s wellbeing. This view is also the basis of our current legislation, which fails to recognise that women are conducting illegal abortions due to that the laws are only focusing on the action of abortion. When considering both lens it can be justified that even though the action of killing is a wrong within demonological perspective it fails to look at the positive consequences that could benefit women. Furthermore, through the evaluation of the current legislation and the critical lenses it was prominent that the current laws are inefficient due to that they serve no purpose other than to harm and oppress women.