Sociology and Abortion in Australia

An estimated ninety thousand abortions are performed every year in Australia. One out of three women in Australia have had an abortion (Healey, 1999). In a society that is estranged from God, abortion is a tragic common phenomenon; a social and ethical issue which resolution requires reconciliation of the society to God. This paper will demonstrate two sociological theories, functionalism and feminism and how these theories explain and perceive abortions. This paper will also highlight issues of power and authority, social groupings and inequality in light of functionalism and feminism. The final section of this paper will demonstrate Christian perspective on abortion through scriptures and actions of the church.

Functionalism is defined as “a theoretical framework that defines society as a system of interrelated parts.” (Carl, Baker, Scott, Hillman & Lawrence, 2012). This theory perceives relationship with God, religion or faith, as a function of society, necessary for stability. This perspective is different from the biblical perspective that the society is a function of God’s creation. The Bible gave clear instructions to seek first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness. It appeared that functionalism did not seek first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness but rather placed the stability of the society as first and foremost priority. This paper suggests that this difference in order of priority is contrary to God’s will and therefore functionalism will likely be inadequate and flawed.

Victorian legislation defines abortion as “intentionally causing termination of a woman’s pregnancy by; (a) using an instrument; or (b) using a drug or a combination of drugs; or (c) any other means”. (Sifris, 2013) Surgical abortion is the use of instrument and medical abortion is the use of drugs. These definitions are functionalist terms with no mention of how individuals might be affected by abortion. In addition, functionalism views abortion as a societal feature that is necessary for the society to function stably. Pro-abortion proponents used the argument of maternal mortality and morbidity caused by unsafe illegal abortions to explain that legislated abortion is necessary to prevent death and loss of women in the society. Katherine Betts (2009) quoted The World Health Organisation in this assertion to argue that women’s health is affected by whether abortion is legal.

The situation in Australia is confused because abortion laws vary from state to state. The relevant statutes in Queensland were drafted in 1899 and are the oldest in the country. Section 224 of the Queensland Criminal Code (QCC) states that it is a crime to administer ‘any poison or noxious thing’ or use ‘any other means what ever’ to procure the miscarriage of a woman. The maximum penalty is 14 years imprisonment. Section 225 states that if the woman herself attempts to procure her own miscarriage she is ‘guilty of a crime and is liable to imprisonment for 7 years’ and section 226 states that it is illegal to assist in a surgical procedure or in administering a ‘noxious thing’ to ‘unlawfully’ procure a miscarriage. The maximum penalty here is three years imprisonment. (Betts, 2009, pp.25-26)

Functionalism in relation to abortion is evident in the legislation and provision for Australian citizens. To provide safety and prevent unsafe illegal practices, Functionalism legislates abortion, regulates abortion facilities and provides for abortion through Medicare. Functionalism may reduce the rate of abortion when it provides expectant mothers with alternative choices through providing welfare provision for children.

Functionalism attempts to maintain stability of the society by attributing power where it is perceives need. There have been many debates and bills presented to the parliament for legalisation of abortion, availability of RU 468 and medical subsidies for medical abortion (Sifris, 2013). However these requests have been denied and placed under scrutiny. They have been examined for how they might destabilise the society. The power and authority in the above scenario is in the hands of government officials and legislators. In addition, medical professionals and medical service providers are given tremendous power and authority to grant abortions to women as the legislation stipulates need for certification of physical or mental health condition that warrant abortion. In Victoria and Australian Capital Territory, abortion is legal. All other states and territories in Australia deny abortion with exceptions for health reasons. Ronli Sifris (2013) highlighted criticisms of giving the medical profession power to decide the best interests of individual woman. In some cases, the parents of pregnant teenagers have power because of their function as parents, although parental consent is not required for abortions in Australia.

The Christian Democratic Party MP Fred Nile, in New South Wales, introduced a bill, Zoe’s Law, with the intention of adding an offence for causing grievous hurt or death of child in utero to the Crimes Act. This bill was campaigned by parents of a child who was lost in an accident involving ‘an allegedly drug-affected driver’. Unexpectedly, some feminist and pro-choice groups opposed this bill. The author of the article highlighted that these opponents, although advocates of a pro-choice movement deemed as compassionate, respectful, inclusive and empowering to women who were pregnant but did not wish to continue their pregnancies, were not able to empathise with the mother who lost her unborn child (Alstin, 2013). This phenomenon is not unique in functionalism where legislation is aimed at providing majority care and ensuring the longevity of the society rather than providing care for individuals or minority groups.

Women of different states of Australia also experience social inequality, as the abortion legislation is different in every state. A woman seeking abortion might find it legal in one state or territory and illegal in another. Sifris (2013) claimed, “A woman residing in a State with stricter abortion laws may be forced to travel to a more liberal State to obtain an abortion”. In such cases, women from lower socioeconomic backgrounds who cannot afford to travel to another state might be forced to give birth to an unwanted child or resort to unsafe, illegal abortion practices.

Thus far, functionalism has shown inadequacy in providing for the unique situations of individual women who for myriad of reasons are considering abortion. One wonders if the government can provide necessary resources and support for women who are caught unprepared for pregnancy and child rearing? Will these women then be able to choose alternatives to abortion because of the support provided through functionalism?

In this next section, this paper will discuss feminism and its connection to abortion. Feminism, in relation to abortion, is defined as “woman’s right to exercise choice through her status as a liberal citizen to choose to continue or terminate her pregnancy”. This liberal feminist argument is often supported by the argument that woman should have full rights to their own body and should not be subjected to limitations by government, medical professionals or anybody else. This argument is in opposition to the Bible, where the Bible states in 1 Cor 6:18-20 that “you are not your own” and therefore does not have the right to do as one please to her body (Gorman, 1993). Abortion is seen as an invasion of nature’s process and destruction of women’s body and potential life.

Historically, women sought approval from partners or fathers to make any decisions including abortion. The abortion decision power belonged to the men. As women moved into different social position and participated in the labour market, women became “active decision-makers” with regards to child bearing. Through the feminist movement, women began to hold power to many areas of their lives. Many pro-abortion proponents claim that it is absurd to not allow women power to make abortion decisions without approval from a doctor or the state. Feminists view the power that medical professionals and the state hold unnecessary and say that it undermines women’s power and rights. According to feminism, the patriarchal system holds total power over women and should be changed.

Beti Poposka (2006) listed several liberal feminist arguments for abortion; women’s rights to body and reproduction; women’s refusal to be regulated by ‘patriarchal system’; abortion is private and not state business; sexual relations and the results of that interaction, pregnancy, is between the couple only. The strong desire to be free from control of the patriarchal system illustrates how feminism perceives social inequality. Feminism ascertains that women should have equal rights to their body. Poposka (2006) also highlighted Medicare part subsidy and the reimbursement system, where women have to pay in full for the procedure before claiming the rebate. This practice limits women, especially those from non-English speaking backgrounds, due to their high unemployment rates and consequent inability to access abortion.

In the case of Zoe’s Law, feminism had opposed the bill for fear of reversal of the lack of human value attributed to foetus. Feminism, in this case, is challenged by the equal rights of the child to life and respect. This discrimination and social inequality is evident in some forms of feminism in relation to abortion issues.

In the struggle to obtain equal rights for women, Feminism also seemed to have overlooked the risks and detriment of abortion to the individual, family and society. Sifris (2013) suggested that legalisation of abortion will reduce the stigmatisation of abortion and the harm done by stigmatisation. However, legalisation of abortion does not resolve many detrimental effects of abortion or the causes of unwanted pregnancy. Perhaps Feminism could investigate and advocate for reduction of unwanted pregnancy instead? In their attempt to break free from the patriarchal system, has feminism also broken free from the protection and provision of God? Feminism challenges God’s commandment of abstinence, the only sure means of contraception.

Scholars use many biblical verses to interpret abortion from the Bible. This paper will attempt to present these verses and scholarly interpretation that has been made on them. The latter section will also present some examples of the church’s response to abortion. Clark & Rakestraw (1996) claimed that the Bible is unclear and without directives for or against abortion.

Here, the paper presents four categories of interpretation about abortion. Scholars, such as Norman Geisler (1989) understand the Bible’s view of abortion through; discernment of the heart of God as being a heart for children, for life, and therefore against abortion; identification of scriptures that commanded punishment in case of accidental cause of miscarriage, and therefore God of the Bible is against abortion as a form of lost of unborn; scriptures highlighting human characteristics of the unborn and therefore implying that God sees unborn as much value as full grown adults; scriptures that expound God’s close relationship with the unborn and therefore implying that God attributes high value to the unborn and would not allow the unborn to be harmed.

In the first category are scriptures such as; Psalm 51:6, “⁶ Yet you desired faithfulness even in the womb; you taught me wisdom in that secret place”. In this case, the Bible states God’s desire for the unborn to be faithful and the time and effort God spent teaching the unborn. This verse illustrates God’s heart for the unborn and infers that He would not spend time and effort teaching them if he did not care for the unborn. Another verses that indicate God’s heart for children is Mark 10:13-16. In this account, Jesus rebuked the disciples for not allowing the children to come to him and the verses further illustrated how he displayed affection for them. Scholars use these verses to indicate that God of the Bible cares for children and the unborn and therefore would not want abortion to happen.

In the second category, Exodus 21:22-25 NKJV, is commonly used as it commands punishment for fighting men who accidentally harm a pregnant woman. Scholars reasoned that if the Bible indicates punishment for harming a pregnant woman, God must be against abortion, which harms the woman and child.

“If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. ²³ But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life,²⁴ eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, ²⁵ burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

In the third category, verses such as Luke 1:41, Psalms 51:5-6 and Gen 25:21-26 illustrate human characteristics and behaviour of the unborn; leaping for joy, sinful from the time of conception, jostling with twin within the womb and grabbing twin’s heel on the way out of the womb. These verses have been interpreted as indications that God views the unborn as human as full grown human beings with human characteristics and behaviour.

In the fourth category, scholars mentioned verses that spoke of close relationships between God and the unborn. Psalm 139:13 NKJV described God’s careful formation of the unborn and intimate knowing of the unborn.

¹³ For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb. ¹⁴ I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well. My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. ¹⁶ Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, The days fashioned for me, When as yet there were none of them.

            Jer 1:4-5, “⁴ Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: ⁵ “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations”, is another verse illustrating the relationship. Some other verses such as Judges 13:2-7, Isaiah 49:1, 5, Gal 1:15 illustrated the unborn being set for great purposes from the womb.

The Durham Declaration is the United Methodist’s response to abortion, “by attempting to address it from a distinctly biblical and theological perspective while avoiding the language of rights that dominates all political discourse… and the abortion debate in particular… is an effort to view the abortion issue in a broad rather than a narrow framework that is shaped by the ethics of the New Testament” (Gorman, 1993).

Michael Gorman (1993) explained the Durham Declaration where the church, particularly the United Methodist searched biblically for a response to abortion issues that is not solely based on discussions of rights. This response is encouraging and inspiring as the church commit to providing practical solutions to the issue of abortion in the society.

In conclusion, functionalism and feminism provided explanation and part solution for the social phenomenon of unwanted pregnancy and abortion. However the theories do not provide wholesome solutions that address the root of abortion issue. Abortion is a complex social issue that implicates the majority of society. Perhaps only realising the truth about abortion and extension of grace to women who are experiencing unwanted pregnancy or have already aborted their baby can be the beginning of a long process of reconciliation to a society that trust God for his providence and protection. This trust will then help navigate the mother, child, father and other stakeholders through a fulfilling life destined by God.

Reference:

Alstin, Z. (2013). Pro-choice paradigm lacks compassion on Zoe's law. In Eureka Street, 23(18), pp. 24-25.

Betts, K. (2009). Attitudes to abortion: Australia and Queensland in the twenty-first century. People and Place, 17(3), 25-39. Retrieved 20 May 2013, from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA210931669&v=2.1&u=chc&it=r&p=GPS&sw=w

Carl, Baker, Scott, Hillman & Lawrence (2012). Think sociology. Australia : Pearson.

Clark, D. K. & Rakestraw, R. V. (Ed.). (1996). Readings in Christian ethics : Volume 2 Issues and applications. rlando, FL: Harcourt Brace. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House.

Geisler, N. L. (1989). Christian Ethics : Options and issues (pp.135-154). Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House.

Gorman, M.J. (1993). Ahead to our past: Abortion and Christian Texts. In P.T. Stallworth, (Eds.), The church & abortion: In search of new ground for reponse (pp. 25-43). Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Healey, J. (1999). Issues in society: The abortion debate. (Eds.) NSW: The Spinney Press.

Poposka, B. (2006). Woman and abortion: Liberal citizenship or patriarchal regulation?.  In Women in welfare education, 8, pp.20-27.

Sifris, R. (2013). The legal and factual status of abortion in Australia. In Alternative Law Journal, 38(2), pp. 108-112.