O'Rourke Anne, Belton Suzanne, Mulligan Ea
J Law Med. 2016;24(1):221-38.
This article examines the clinical and legal risks of early medical abortion. After providing an overview of the history of mifepristone in Australia, the evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of medical abortion is discussed. It is argued that the negligible medical risks associated with mifepristone do not justify the restrictive regulatory measures imposed on medical practitioners. The article then turns to the legal risks and considers whether medical practitioners are vulnerable to prosecution under existing State and Territory laws. It is argued that providing early medical abortion services in a number of jurisdictions is legally ambiguous, potentially posing a threat of prosecution to medical practitioners. The need for law reform is evident by the fact that in four jurisdictions it remains in the criminal statutes, creating legal uncertainty for both medical practitioners and women. The article concludes that there is sufficient evidence to allow some “demedicalisation” of medical abortion. However, this is only possible if the legal status of abortion in State and Territory laws is addressed.
本文探讨了早期药物流产的临床和法律风险。在概述了米非司酮在澳大利亚的历史后，讨论了有关药物流产有效性和安全性的证据。有人认为，与米非司酮相关的可忽略不计的医疗风险并不能证明对从业者实施的限制性监管措施是合理的。文章接着转向法律风险，并考虑从业者是否容易根据现行州和领地法律受到起诉。有人认为，在一些司法管辖区提供早期药物流产服务在法律上含糊不清，可能对从业者构成起诉威胁。四个司法管辖区的堕胎行为仍保留在刑事法规中，这一事实表明法律改革的必要性，这给从业者和女性都带来了法律上的不确定性。文章得出结论，有足够的证据允许对药物流产进行一定程度的“非医学化”。然而，只有在州和领地法律中解决堕胎的法律地位问题，这才有可能实现。
