Who are we?

Together we represent the womens health, community

and legal sector in NSW. We work primarily with the
most vulnerable and disadvantaged women in NSW,
however our organisations have broad support across
the state and our work is respected and recognised.
Domesflc vlolence NSW
Famlly Flannlng NSW
F Collecflve
Rape and Domesflc vlolence Servlces Ausfralla
(lormerly NSW Rape Crlsls)
Women's Elecforal Lobby Ausfralla
Women's Healfh NSW
Women's Legal Servlces NSW
Why we urge you to oppose the Bill
There has been no consultation
We are concerned about how quickly this Bill has moved
fo debafe ln fhe Leglslaflve Assembly. There has been
no consulfaflon wlfh fhe women's secfor, and MFs
have not been given the opportunity to consult with
their communities. It is fundamental that when a Bill is
proposed that purports to support women in NSW, that
the views of women are sought.
The amendment is unnecessary
ln May 2010, The Honourable Mlchael Campbell OC
was asked by the then NSW Government to review
fhe Crlmes Acf 100 fo assess whefher fhe currenf
provisions enabled the justice system to respond
appropriately to criminal incidents involving the death of
an unborn child.
Mr Campbell concluded fhaf fhe currenf ollences allow
the justice system to respond appropriately and there
was no reason to change the law or to create a new
offence. He fook lnfo accounf fhe 2005 amendmenf fo
fhe delnlflon ol grlevous bodlly harm ln fhe Crlmes Acf
which included the destruction (other than in the course
of a medical procedure) of the foetus of a pregnant
woman, whether or not the woman suffers any other
harm.

. The Bill gives legal personhood to a foetus
If successful, this will be the rst piece of legislation in
NSW that draws a distinction in personhood between
a woman and the foetus she is carrying. In other
We acknowledge the signicant pain and grief
experienced following harm or loss of a foetus;
however fhe Crlmes Amendmenf (Zoe's Law)
Blll 2013 (No.2) ralses serlous legal and efhlcal
questions for the womens sector.
The Crlmes Acf 100 and specllcally fhe
2005 amendmenf fo fhe delnlflon ol grlevous
bodily harm have been reviewed and found
fo be approprlafe. An ollence ol fhls nafure
causing destruction of a foetus already carries
a maxlmum prlson senfence ol 25 years.
There can be no suggestion that the existing
criminal law is inadequate for responding to
violent offences of this kind. The amendment
before the parliament is unnecessary and
inappropriate.
Crimes Amendment (Zoes Law) Bill 2013 (No.2)
1
jurisdictions, recognising the foetus as an independent
person has been the rst step towards prosecutions of
women where they are deemed to have acted contrary
to the interests of the foetus they are carrying.
If passed, the new law would mean that if someone
caused the destruction of a foetus, they could be
charged with grievous bodily harm to the foetus, instead
of being charged with grievous bodily harm to the
pregnant woman.
The Bill uses the term unborn child, which is incorrect
and emoflve. Fregnancy lnvolves a zygofe and fhen an
embryo in the early stages, which develops into a foetus.
Upon live birth the foetus becomes a child.
Until the foetus achieves an independent existence it
should not be granted legal personhood in its own right.
The Bill has the potential to undermine the
reproductive rights of women
Giving personhood status to a foetus may affect the
lawfulness and accessibility of pregnancy termination in
NSW, particularly for procedures carried out later in a
pregnancy.
Aborflon ls currenfly a crlmlnal ollence ln NSW. The
courts have held that an abortion can be lawfully
performed if it is necessary to prevent serious harm to
the life or health of the pregnant woman, but there is
no clear recognition of this in the Crimes Act. Given the
uncertain legal status of lawful abortion in NSW, it would
be extremely concerning to have a provision in the Crimes
Act that recognises the foetus as a person. We believe
there is a real risk that this provision could be used in the
future to attempt to restrict the circumstances in which
abortions can be lawfully performed.
Reproducflve rlghfs are essenflal human rlghfs fhaf are
conrmed in the Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination against Women (Arf. 1(1)(e)).
If accepted, this legislative change could weaken the
right of women in NSW to access safe, legal pregnancy
termination.
While medical procedures and anything done by, or
with the consent of, the pregnant woman concerned
are excluded in the Bill, this is open to interpretation and
may not be sufcient to protect the rights of the woman
involved.
For example fhe exempflon lor "medlcal procedures"
may not be broad enough to cover medical (as distinct
lrom surglcal) aborflons. Medlcal aborflon has recenfly
recelved bofh TGA and FBS llsflng. There ls also no
clarity around consent and the recent Senate Inquiry into
the Involuntary or Coerced Sterilisation of People with
Disabilities in Australia highlighted the issues that exist in
regard to consent for medical procedures for people
with disability.
For further information:
http://www.womenslegalnsw.asn.au/law-and-policy-
relorm/zoes-law.hfml
Contact
Melanle Fernandez, Chalr, Women's Elecforal Lobby
Ausfralla, 0402 334 28
Georgla Foffer Bufler, Convenor, F Collecflve,
0488 217 535
Denele Crozler, Chlel Execuflve, Women's Healfh NSW,
0414 780417
Karen Wlllls, CEC Rape and Domesflc vlolence
Servlces Ausfralla, 041 43807
Jodl McKay, Dlrecfor, Communlcaflons, Governmenf
and Communlfy Allalrs, Famlly Flannlng NSW,
0414873
Carolyn Jones, Senlor Sollclfor, Women's Legal
Servlces ln NSW, 8745 00
We urge you not to support this Bill.
2
http://ourbodiesourchoices.good.do