A Member of Parliament questions the Minister for Health regarding conscientious objection rights for doctors in relation to abortion referrals, and potential penalties for denying requests on religious grounds. The Minister's response affirms the duty to refer despite conscientious objections.

AnsweredQoN 307Legislative Assembly
Asked
29 May 2025
Portfolio
Health

QuestionView source ↗

Abortion—Chief Health Officer
307. Hon Maryka Groenewald to the parliamentary
secretary representing the Minister for Health:
I refer to the legal
requirement established by the government's most recent abortion reforms that
doctors with a conscientious objection must refer women seeking an abortion to
a provider or to the Chief Health Officer to facilitate access to services.
(1) Is the minister aware that many people of
faith would consider a referral to be morally equivalent to participation in
the act itself?
(2) What penalties, if any, does the government
impose on doctors who might deny requests on religious grounds?
(3) Will the government amend the guidelines to
protect conscientious objection from doctors and medical staff?
(4) If no to (3), why not?

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the
honourable member for some notice of the question. The following has been
provided by the Minister for Health.
(1)–(4) Medical practitioners who may have
a conscientious objection to providing abortion services on moral or religious
grounds have the right to decline to personally provide or directly participate
in that care. However, in line with standard medical practice, they have a duty
to facilitate the patient to see another professional who does not have these
objections. The Public Health Act 2016 outlines the requirements for the performance of abortions. These reforms were
extensively consulted on prior to being introduced and passed, including
consultation with the Australian Medical Association.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more