Panel system ‘will not work’

Press, 15 June 1977, Page 1

Panel system ‘will not work’

A member of the Rot al i Commission on contraception, sterilisation. and abortion has now decided that the panel system fm considering abortion applications would not work effectively. Mr M. R. McGregor said ; in Christchurch yesterdav that he had come to this conclusion after considei ! ing further information from doctors and social workers since the commission’s report was published. “I believe that since the report has been published there has been a considerable expression of opposition from the public and from health and welfare professionals to State interference through the panel system in the decision making process for abortion,” he said. “1 took an active pari in drafting rhe panel prove dures which, ar the time. 1 favoured because 1 thought they would provide a uniform and impartial assessment. “Subsequent informed statements made by doctors and social workers have satisfied me that the panel system will not work effectively. “I can no longer see any justification for this depersonalising system and my conviction led me as a private citizen to vote against panels at a recent public meeting held in Christchurch,” Mr McGregor said. “Methodologically sound opinion polls and surveys referred to in chapter 20 of the commission’s report show that in Auckland (1973) and Tokoroa (1975) 68.7 per cent and 63.8 per cent respectively of persons interviewed considered that an abortion should be legally allowed if a woman and her doctor considered that it would be advisable for her not to continue her pregnancy,” Mr McGregor said. “A survey of medical practitioners (1975) found that 79.2 per cent of all medical practitioners thought that abortion should be legally allowed where the woman and two doctors considered it desirable. “The commission based its recommendations on a consensus of all its members on the evidence put before it. No evidence was submitted on statutory abortion panels and the plans for these arose from the thorough discussions of the commission during the drafting of the report. “On the issue of the decision-making process an alternative, but less acceptable, recommendation was suggested by the commission and this was that the decision should be made by two doctors after the

woman had been counselled. “1 consider that the in formation that has now come to hand concerning rejection of the panels and that the decision should b< made bv doctors,” said Mr McGregor. “It is clear from the sur veys quoted above that this is strongly supported by the public and the medical profession.” h< said. The chairman of th, commission (Mr .lustn McMullin) is confident that all other members of the commission still stand in the report, according to the Press Association. The vice-president of the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child (Dr John Bergin), said that Mr McGregor was “assisting to undermine the most vital recommendation of the commission.” "The panel system would, it properly applied, do the most to reduce the number of abortions carried out Mr McGregor will have t . explain his own vacillate n and one-foot-in-both-camps position.” Coaction, a coalition of pro-abortion groups, said yesterday that Mr M< Gregor’s comments had raised grave doubts about the credibility of the whole of the commission's report f——— — -