The Christian Heritage Party has joined Christchurch SPUC in making ignorant statements about the current proposed
constructive changes to our abortion laws.
It is difficult to see how antiabortion women would be disadvantaged under the Code of Health and Disability Consumers
Rights. This requires practitioner disclosure of identity and affiliation and protects consumers from harassment. I hope
Mr.Capill is willing to extend the same rights to pro-choice women when it comes to anti-abortion doctors.
In 1982, Wall v Livingstone prohibited third party interference with women's confidential medical records in the context
of abortion decisions. It has no factual basis for its claim that mental health grounds are being used illegitimately.
Reactive depression is one possible legitimate clinical ground that could be used in this context.
Christian Heritage also refers to the Ministry of Health booklet on abortion. ALRANZ made four Official Information Act
requests to the Ministry of Health and Abortion Supervisory Committee on this matter. Neither organisation records
formal clinical consultation, pre-release testing, trial release, or other orthodox specifications for Ministry health
education resources. We urge the new coalition government to drop this travesty of an informed consent resource.
Finally, Christian Heritage demonstrates ignorance of current interpretations of our existing law. Wall Livingston found
that there was no statutory entity called "the unborn child" in New Zealand statute and case law. There is no legal
obligation to any such illusory being.