RU-486 going to the vote today

[maharetr]

Well, the actual Bill is over who gets to make a decision about allowing a drug into the country. In practice, it's all about Abortion and who gets to control what. *crosses fingers*

ETA: The Religious Tolerance site has some reasonably balanced information on RU-486.

Comments

[black-samvara.livejournal.com]

[crosses more fingers]

[ascetic-hedony.livejournal.com]

I hate when they turn medical decisions into moral choices made by politicians. Given the majority are upper middle class of caucasian descent, how can they possibly be a representative democracy.
*sigh*
The medical vs moral is something I'm used to as a result of working in the addictions field.

[maharetr.livejournal.com]

Given the majority are upper middle class of caucasian descent, how can they possibly be a representative democracy.

Absolutely. The majority are also men ;)

The thing that really makes me grind my teeth is the original decision to give the Health Minister control of abortion drugs (just abortion drugs, no others) was made because Brian Harradine abused his position of power over the partial sale of Telstra, and the government (probably quite happily) let him. Democracy that wasn't.

[babalon-93.livejournal.com]

Given the majority are upper middle class of caucasian descent, how can they possibly be a representative democracy.

I agree with this also. I would love to see governments elected socio-demographically rather than geographically.

[maharetr.livejournal.com]

That? Is a frakking brilliant idea :)

[babalon-93.livejournal.com]

yes, it is an interesting debate - or rather interesting that there is a debate at all.

I personally think that whoever is normally legally required to make these decisions about drugs is the person who needs to make the decision about this one, and the only fair question to be asked is "is this drug safer, equal to, or more dangerous than a surgical abortion?". If the answer is either safer or equal to, and it is then prescribed under the same circumstances as a surgical abortion, I can't see how there is any reason for debate.

On the other hand, as someone who is currently pregnant it freaks me out to think that a drug with ru-486's capabilities could be floating around and could get into the wrong hands and be given to me or someone like me maliciously (which is really far fetched and ridiculous and there are probably things around that would have the same affect already anyway, but it just goes to show how emotive this issue is).

[maharetr.livejournal.com]

Yup, I agree :)

Another interesting point (as reported by The West Australian today): "It [RU-486 could also be useful in treating certain cancers and hormonal diseases."

If this Bill is passed, then it means that the Therapeutic Goods Administration (AKA whoever is normally legally required to make these decisions) can now consider this drug and its uses (that's actually all that's happening under this Bill). The TGA might decide that it shouldn't be used to induce an abortion but it should be an important part of treatment for X cancer. It's facinating stuff, really :)

[juffles.livejournal.com]

Senate has passed it:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18092749%255E1702,00.html

[maharetr.livejournal.com]

Heh, just found and posted the same article. Great minds think allike? :D

[babalon-93.livejournal.com]

http://www.religioustolerance.org/aboru486d.htm

interesting, according to that article it seems it RU-486 is as safe as a surgical abortion, and 14 times safer than actually having the baby.