On International Women’s Day (March 8), France became the first country in the world to make abortion a constitutional right. This came in response to concerns over the rollback of abortion laws in the United States.

In a statement after the Senate’s approval, Prime Minister Gabriel Attal said that “when women’s rights are attacked in the world, France stands up and places itself at the avant-garde of progress”. 

Will Australia follow suit?

The co-convener of the South Australian Abortion Access Coalition, Flinders University associate professor of women's and gender studies Barbara Baird, says not only is it "highly unlikely” that Australia will entrench the right to abortion in the constitution, but also “it is not the solution Australia needs”. 

“Roe v Wade being overturned is unlikely to have an effect on Australia’s policy," says Baird, who is the author of Abortion Care is Health Care.

"Australia has a different legal framework to America. It has different challenges to abortion access that need to be addressed." 

How is abortion regulated in Australia? 

Abortion is now decriminalised in all states and territories in Australia. Western Australia became the last state to decriminalise abortions in September 2023. However, abortion care is still over-regulated in the criminal legislation of each state, experts say.  

The World Health Organisation advises that “all properly trained health-care providers [should be able to] safely provide abortions”.

Yet abortion laws in all but two states (South Australia and Victoria) limit the provision of abortion services to medical doctors only.

Other provisions relating to abortions in the criminal code include the requirement for informed consent in some states, the differing gestational limits (with the exception of the ACT, which has no limit) and the conscientious objection provision in all states except SA and Victoria. 

The conscientious objection provision allows health practitioners to exempt themselves from providing abortions due to a “conflict in conscience”. 

Baird says these provisions “unnecessarily single out” abortion and prevent it from being fully integrated into health law, which already ensures only qualified people perform abortions and doctors seek informed consent for medical procedures. 

“These upper limits must be removed. They are unnecessary hurdles towards accessing abortions," Baird says. 

"There should not be any specific reference to abortions in criminal law." 

Negligence of the medical system

With the exception of WA and the ACT, abortion care is provided in the private sector, making it unaffordable for many and inaccessible. Currently, hospitals that receive government funding, including those with religious affiliations, are not required to offer abortion access.  

Baird says this is an example of abortion exceptionalism, whereby abortions are singled out as the only medical service that public hospitals are not obligated to provide.

Abortion exceptionalism refers to “the idea that abortion is regulated both differently and more stringently than other medical procedures that are comparable to abortion in complexity and safety”. 

Despite abortions being decriminalised, research has found that “structured and standardised teaching of abortions in [medical schools] are lacking”. Subsequently, only about 10 per cent of general practitioners provide abortion and this number is less in rural areas. 

“There is a culture of ‘exceptionalising’ abortions across many medical institutions that leads to many doctors not having any experience, training or encouragement to become abortion providers,” Baird says. 

According to Monash University Global and Women’s Health Unit research fellow Dr Shelly Makleff, the lack of abortion training received by anyone working in the health sector perpetuates and affirms the anti-abortion stigma present within the industry.

“Stigma is a main barrier towards access to abortion care," Makleff says. 

"Abortion exceptionalism is underlined by stigma and is stigmatising itself. To reduce stigma, abortion content must not only be made compulsory within the medical curriculum but must be taught with a stigma lens." 

What can be done? 

Baird says that because abortion exceptionalism in both the legal and health systems continues to exist, there is a need for ongoing activism and advocacy from the community to hold higher levels accountable.

“It must be a matter for activism because otherwise it won’t change. This could be as simple as hassling your lecturers or even the Australian Medical Council to make abortion content compulsory in the medical syllabus,” Baird says. 

The South Australian Abortion Action Coalition is building an "Ask your GP" campaign to persuade more GPs to provide abortions and reduce the stigma towards providing the service.

“The campaign that we are building is aimed at encouraging people to ask their GPs whether they provide abortions," Baird says. 

"We believe that patients asking this question can encourage more GPs to provide the service and eliminate the stigma." 

Dr Sarah Ratcliffe is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the University of Sydney, School of Psychology and is measuring the stigmatisation of those who provide abortions. She agrees that activism can achieve meaningful change.

“When we talk about change in legislation and a change in attitudes, that does not come on the back of thin air, it comes from collective action,” Ratcliffe says.

For Australia to make similar strides to France in ensuring the right to an abortion is guaranteed, experts have said that the Australian Government must remove the provisions relating to abortions in criminal legislation and invest money in education that will help reduce the stigma towards abortions in the medical system.