The recent move by Victorian Parliament under John Brumby regarding its decision to decriminalise abortion is an opportunity to evaluate the successes and failures of pro-life cause of the last half century. Let us begin in 1969, a critical year in the lives of Victorians. The year was marked by such events as the Richmond Tigers’ defeat of the Carlton Blues by all of 29 points in the AFL Grand Final. Spectacular as this outcome was, there was another “loss” that year which had a profound impact on the whole of society. Justice Menhennitt’s ruling in the Supreme Court of Victoria that abortions were “legal if necessary to preserve the woman from a serious danger to her life or health” changed the legal and medical landscape in Victoria. His case law ruling trumped Section 65 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), which held until recently that those who procure an abortion “to be guilty of an indictable offence.” This has only now been superseded by the recent Abortion Reform Bill 2008, which has been voted on and passed in both lower and upper house of state parliament. An understanding of these three developments and their implications, particularly the latest ruling, is the best way to make sense of the grave situation that Victoria now faces.

In the time after the Menhennit ruling up until the recent government ruling there had been a gradual decline in the illegality of abortion, to the extent where it was virtually no longer treated as a criminal offence. Following the Menhennit interpretation, the exception became the rule, and indifference and apathy inevitably followed. The use of the proviso in the 1969 ruling became justification for the abortion procedure in firstly a few, and then many cases. As a result, the number of abortions in Victoria rose to the figure of around 20,000 per year. There is now virtually ‘abortion on demand’ for a mother of an unborn baby within the first trimester. In other words, any Victorian woman would find little resistance to accessing abortion before the gestation age in the middle of the second trimester – even if the pregnancy falls outside the literal terms of the Menhennit ruling.

When the Abortion Reform Bill 2008 was made public before voting, it was a source of confusion amongst many people, given the circumstances stated above. The majority of the general public couldn’t perceive any reason as to why such a fuss was made over the bill. However, members of astute pro-life groups and legal academics had already predicted that soon or later such a bill would be proposed, and the ramifications that is would bring. Why this was so deserves an explanation.

The fact had always remained that abortion was, for all intents and purposes, practically legal. Victoria had therefore faced a legal anomaly for around 50 years. On one hand there was an old law which hardly anyone knew about that dictated that abortion was a crime. On the other hand was a more commonly known ruling which allowed abortion by the device of major exceptions applying in most circumstances. It was not difficult understand what would ensue. The criminal law against abortion had come to be seen as ‘unenforceable’ and therefore irrelevant. Since it is easier and more popular to change a law than change society’s attitude, it was only a matter of time before the bill would be introduced and passed. This is despite the fact that it is almost certain the new law will lead to even more abortions.

The sad reality is that the Abortion Law Reform Bill 2008 is merely another step- a significant step- along the road embarked upon nearly forty years ago after Menhennit’s Supreme Court ruling. It is yet another response to the demand for the law to ‘evolve’ so that the termination of a pregnancy becomes permissible. This is the reason why the Premier of Victoria, John Brumby, publicly stated his intention of making the law “fully consistent with current clinical practice.” State Minister of Women’s Affairs Maxine Morand agreed by maintaining that “the purpose of this Bill is to modernise the law in line with … community attitudes.” These comments are really a sad reflection of the public's loss of commitment to a law which was written to safeguard the most vulnerable citizens of society. It appears as though the state of Victoria has achieved destroying the only legal reminder of the importance of protecting the innocent unborn.

This deplorable state of affairs gives rise to a unique situation for Catholic students. The statement by philosopher Edmund Burke that “all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing” has never been more applicable. We have reached a point where inaction is no longer permissible; the stakes are just too high.