: Foetal Personhood Law For NSW?

Foetal Personhood Law For NSW?

Carolyn Jones
New South Wales

On 29 August 2013 Chris Spence MP introduced the Crimes Amendment (Zoe’s Law) Bill (No 2) 2013 (‘the Bill’) as a Private Member’s Bill into the NSW Legislative Assembly. The Bill is to be co-sponsored by Fred Nile MP in the Legislative Council.

The stated object of the Bill is to amend the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) to recognise harm to or destruction of some foetuses as a separate offence to any harm caused to a pregnant woman. It proposes to do this by inserting a new s 8A, which defines a foetus of 20 weeks or 400 grams as an ‘unborn child’ who is ‘taken to be a living person’ for certain grievous bodily harm offences. The definition of ‘unborn child’ is based on a definition of ‘stillborn child’, which is widely used in Australia. The Bill creates exceptions for ‘anything done in the course of a medical procedure’ (or ‘treatment’ as foreshadowed in a proposed amendment) or ‘anything done by, or with the consent of, the pregnant woman’.

The current criminal law in NSW provides that the destruction of a foetus, other than in the course of a medical procedure, is grievous bodily harm to the woman and carries a maximum prison sentence of 25 years. The proponents of the Bill argue that this is an inadequate response to criminal acts resulting in the destruction of a foetus at a particular gestational stage and that the law should recognise two victims not one.

Opponents of the Bill believe that the amendment is unnecessary, creates needless complexity and that the exceptions provide insufficient protection. There are also concerns that the proposed new law establishes a conflict of rights between the foetus and the pregnant woman. The appeal of legal consistency is strong and if a foetus is defined as a person for certain purposes it is not difficult to imagine other scenarios where a foetus could be argued to be a person as well. Additionally the choice of applicable offences appears arbitrary as not all of them refer to grievous bodily harm in the existing legislation and it is illogical that other offences have been excluded.

Most compelling is the fact that the issue was extensively considered in the Review of laws surrounding criminal incidents involving the death of an unborn child undertaken by the Honourable Michael Campbell QC in 2010. Mr Campbell found that the current law in NSW allows for an appropriate response to such incidents and that no amendments were required.

If the Bill passes it will be the first time in Australia that legislation defines a foetus as a person. Supporters have stated repeatedly that the Bill has nothing to do with introducing foetal personhood into our legal system, but the fact that all parties have allowed a conscience vote on this issue is a clear indication of the recognised possible consequences of such an amendment.

In other jurisdictions, such as the United States, the legislative recognition of a foetus as a separate victim has lead to a range of restrictive and punitive consequences for pregnant women and for people providing them with medical and other services. Those opposing the Bill in NSW, such as the NSW Bar Association, Law Society of NSW, Women’s Legal Services NSW, Community Legal Centres NSW, AMA and RANZCOG are concerned that the Bill may have similar implications in NSW, including for access to and provision of abortion care, and increased, unwanted and invasive scrutiny of the behaviour of pregnant women.

The Bill, including two amendments, passed the Legislative Assembly on 21 November 2013 by a vote of 63 to 26. Debate will commence in the Legislative Council when Parliament resumes in March 2014.

Further information about the Bill is available at the following website:


CAROLYN JONES is a senior solicitor at Women’s Legal Services NSW.

(2013) 38(4) AltLJ 277
You are here: Home News & Views DownUnderAllOver DUAO - Vol 38(4) Foetal Personhood Law For NSW?

Keep in Touch

Twitter Icon
Follow Alt Law Journal on Facebook


Monash University Logo