Tag: Australia

abortion

A sombre symbol of abortion in Canberra

Published on by PresidentLeave a comment

A rally was recently held at Parliament House in Canberra to raise awareness about the problem of abortion in Australia.

Organised by the Australian Christian Lobby, the rally included an eye-catching display created in honour of Australia’s aborted babies. The display comprised a huge cross made of knitted booties which was set up on the grounds of Parliament House, representing babies lost to abortion.

The 10,000 booties, including many which had been hand-knitted by Christians throughout Australia, were collected by members of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) especially for the display. The ACL’s Baby Booties Campaign was begun in 2023 as a way of bringing awareness to the issue of abortion and of influencing national laws with the hope of providing greater protection for the unborn.

abortion
The cross made of 10,000 baby booties. Image courtesy of the Australian Christian Lobby.

According to the ACL press release,

“Before a single bootie was laid, we prayed. More than 1,000 of us gathered online across ten denominations, asking God to move on Monday. Then we watched Him do it. And then the media came. The Sunday Telegraph carried the story across Sydney. Radio stations from Cairns to Geelong told their listeners. Television cameras lined the lawns, and the newswires took it to local papers in every state. In two days: 169 media reports, reaching an estimated two million Australians.“

After the cross was dismantled, the baby booties were packed up to be sent to pregnancy resource centres across Australia.

Born alive after abortion

On the same morning as the cross was created, a bill known as the Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) Bill 2026 was introduced to federal parliament by Nationals MP Llew O’Brien. This bill seeks to ensure babies who survive abortions are given medical care instead of being left to die. The bill also seeks to recognise babies who survive an abortion as legal persons.

Commenting on the bill, Michelle Pearse of ACL said,

“Whatever your view on abortion, access, or a woman’s right to choose, this is about post-birth protections and babies having the same entitlement to medical care, pain relief or palliative care as a baby born prematurely. This is about legally recognising that each of these tiny humans is a person with human rights.” 

abortion

Current abortion statistics

Published on by PresidentLeave a comment

Although it is always difficult to get an accurate picture of abortion numbers for Australia, we have been able to find the number of surgical abortions committed in Tasmania as well as the total of chemical abortions for the entire country.

From our President, Anne Sherston:

Two years ago, I requested from Freedom of Information in Tasmania the statistics on abortions. At that time, nothing was available. A couple of weeks ago, I received a phone call followed by an email asking if I still wanted the information.

The Tasmanian stats are only surgical; however, the person directed me to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme to get the stats for RU486. You will find these all below.

I am now reluctant to go with the 88,000 (national) figure that keeps getting bandied about, because I don’t think this is accurate after seeing the figures below. 

We have a lot of hard work ahead of us if we want to change the tide on abortion.

Surgical abortions in Tasmania

The first table shows the number of surgical abortions in Tasmania over five years. This information was obtained from the Dept of Health Tasmania, under the Freedom of Information act.

Tasmania2020 – 20212021- 20222022 – 20232023 – 20242024 – 2025
Surgical Abortions453571688647667

Chemical abortions throughout Australia

The second table shows the number of RU486 prescriptions that were obtained over a five-year period, from 2021 – 2026. This information was obtained from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule Reports.

Item No:
10211K		Scheme
NSW		VICQLDSAWATASACTNTTotal
Services
PBS44,34650,34596,19816,62614,2895,05213853165231,406
RPBS2410302343278
2021-26Total44,37050,35596,2281662814,29250561,3883,167231,484

KEY: PBS – Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme / RPBS – Repatriation Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme

euthanasia

Anne Sherston euthanasia interview with Right to Life NSW

Published on by PresidentLeave a comment

A conversation with Anne Sherston of the Human Life Protection Society on euthanasia, an ageing movement, and why they won’t stay quiet.

The Fight Against False Compassion

by Right to Life

What is the Human Life Protection Society

Recently we had the opportunity to speak with Anne Sherston from the Human Life Protection Society. We spoke about their work in Tasmania and their fight for the dignity of life from conception to natural death. We discussed the dangers of euthanasia, which is becoming more of an issue right across Australia. We wanted to bring you this conversation directly, showing you what she’s seeing on the ground, and what it takes to keep advocating for life year after year.

We asked Anne how she got started, and how long the organisation has been around for.

“I’ve only been with the Human Life Protection Society for three years,” Anne told us. “However, the organisation started in 1972, so they’ve been running for 54 years. They started with three doctors that founded it — founded the organisation — and two of them were gynaecologists, obstetricians, and one was a doctor of philosophy. When a young mum would come into their surgery and talk about abortion, and it was way before ultrasounds were about, but somehow they had these cameras — did the same job — and they would show the young mums a video of their unborn child. And it would change their minds.”

Sources:

Euthanasia’s False Compassion, Explained

Tasmania, like every state and territory in Australia, now has voluntary assisted dying laws in place. Tasmania’s own legislation is currently undergoing its first statutory review, with an expert panel due to report back later in 2026. We asked Anne how she responds to the argument that assisted suicide is an act of protecting someone’s dignity.

“I believe, and I truly believe, that it is just false compassion at the expense of truth,” Anne said. “Because you’ve got people like Neil Denneher, who lived for 34 years with MND, and then you’ve got Magda — she was diagnosed with cancer, I think it was 12 months ago, and now is in full remission. And I can go on with so many other examples. For people to encourage another person — a sick person — to give up hope is really short-changing that person, because like Neil Denneher was able to enjoy his family and watch his family grow. So people miss out on so much by giving up so quickly.”

We also asked Anne about a proposal she’s raised concerns over — removing the timeline requirement for accessing voluntary assisted dying — and why she believes that would be such a risk.

“If you can imagine putting yourself in that situation, you’ve just been given a terminally ill diagnosis by your doctor,” Anne said. “You, and anybody else in that situation, would be in total shock. So to go immediately to ‘yes, I want to access VAD’ is just like a knee-jerk reaction, when the person hasn’t even been given the chance to explore what treatments there might be to help them live longer, heal them maybe. I’ve got a lot of family members that have been put in that situation. My uncle is 89 now — he’ll be 90 in December — and about five or six years ago he was given an aggressive diagnosis of cancer, and he’s still alive.”

We asked what kind of support Anne believes should be offered before the conversation around assisted dying even begins.

“If they’ve gone through all the options with their doctor as far as what treatments are out there for their situation, and they’re still not coping, maybe ask their doctor where they could get counselling in that area,” Anne said. “There would have to be counsellors out there that would be specific for different causes. I mean, of course, contact us and we could possibly direct them in the right direction as well. The doctor would probably have better access to the support people in that person’s area.”

Anne’s point isn’t that suffering isn’t real. It’s that a diagnosis shouldn’t be the end of the conversation. It should be the start of one.

Sources:

Ageing Advocates, Silent Churches, Open Doors

We also asked Anne about capacity — who’s doing this work day to day, and what stands in the way of it growing.

“We’ve got a membership of 76,” Anne said. “They’re all older than me, and I’m 67, so they’re all in their 80s and reaching their 90s. They’re tired, and they can’t physically get out there and do the legwork. So we do need younger people on board. The members are quite good in feeding us information that comes across their desks — issues that are being raised — and then we do the legwork.”

We asked what the single greatest challenge has been in getting the message heard.

“The churches, surprisingly enough,” Anne said. “I will email our newsletter and different notices to all the different denominations in Tasmania, and we don’t get one answer. And it is so hard to believe, when we’re all supposed to be pro-life. One of our committee members spoke at her parish — the morning she spoke in her church, she didn’t get one response.”

That’s a difficult thing to hear. But it speaks directly to the reason Life in 5 exists — to make sure this conversation doesn’t stay quiet. Assisted suicide is not going away. It’s expanding. The safeguards we were promised are already under review. The eligibility criteria are already being reconsidered. The doctors who started the Human Life Protection Society back in 1972 didn’t wait for someone else to act. Anne didn’t either. Now the question is: will you? If you would like to support the Human Life Protection Society, you can reach them through their website.

Source:

Calvary

Calvary: Upholding the Dignity of Life at Every Stage

Published on by PresidentLeave a comment

The following statement is from Tony Brennan, the Regional Director of Mission at Calvary St John’s Hospital. In it, Mr. Brennan explains the philosophy underpinning Calvary’s decision to not provide assisted-suicide services in its hospitals.

At the heart of Calvary’s mission is a deep and enduring belief in the inherent dignity of every human life. This dignity does not depend on health, independence or productivity. It is present from the beginning of life to its natural end, and it is never lost through illness, disability, ageing or vulnerability.

Calvary exists to heal where possible, to care always, and to never intentionally cause death. Our understanding of care is grounded in the belief that every life is worthy of compassion, respect and protection, especially when people are at their most fragile.

Importantly, Calvary will never block or interfere with a person’s lawful choice to access VAD elsewhere. Nor do we turn away from people who raise questions about it. When someone in our care expresses interest in VAD, we respond with respect, sensitivity and compassion. We listen. We remain present. We continue to care.

In all that we do, we seek to affirm this truth: every life matters, every person matters, and dignity is never lost.

In Tasmania, the End‑of‑life choices (Voluntary Assisted Dying) Act 2021 sets out a legal framework for Voluntary Assisted Dying (VAD). The act came into effect in October 2022 and includes provisions for an independent review which opens in May and June 2026. While this legislation forms part of the broader health system in which we operate, Calvary’s response is shaped first and foremost by our values.

No one is abandoned at Calvary — especially at the end of life. Our staff are there to have the difficult conversations, to accompany people and families through fear and uncertainty, and to ensure that every person feels heard, valued and cared for until the very end.

Some practices, including voluntary assisted dying, are not consistent with Calvary’s ethic of care. For this reason, Calvary does not participate in any step of the VAD process. This includes making formal requests, assessing eligibility, or administering substances intended to directly cause death. This position is not about judgment or exclusion. It flows from our long‑held commitment to protect life and to care without condition.

We take suffering seriously. People approaching the end of life can experience pain and distress that is physical, emotional, psychological, social and spiritual. Calvary is committed to walking with people through this suffering — not by hastening death, but by relieving pain, addressing distress, offering presence, and providing holistic care that honours the whole person. We also respect a person’s right to refuse treatments that are overly burdensome or no longer helpful.

Tony Brennan

Regional Director of Mission

Calvary St John’s Hospital

Image credit: Calvary St. John’s website.

For information about end-of-life care, please go to our Supports page.

assisted suicide

Young South Australian to die by assisted suicide

Published on by Kathy ClubbLeave a comment

26-year-old Annaliese Holland will end her life within months through assisted suicide in Adelaide. Her story has been appearing in mainstream media, leading to concerns that her case is glamorising assisted suicide. An excerpt from an ABC news article and a video from news.com are provided below.

Even when a patient like Annaliese has to endure severe suffering, it is never morally justified for them to take their own life. Likewise, doctors who assists in such a case are killing their patients, rather than abiding by their oath to protect life.

It is tragic that instead of peacefully living out her final days with her friends and family, in a spirit of acceptance, Annaliese has been encouraged to take her own life.

From ABC news:

“Annaliese Holland will end her life within months through voluntary assisted dying in Adelaide. The 26-year-old has been living with Autoimmune Autonomic Ganglionopathy since she was 18….

“Deciding to access voluntary assisted dying would have seemed unusual, even for Annie, just a few years ago.

“I used to be one of those people who was actually against voluntary assisted dying,” she tells hack.

“It wasn’t until I got sick that my views on it completely changed.”

Annie says she only realised assisted dying was an option when she met Lily Thai, a 23-year-old also suffering AAG, who ended her life just months after South Australia’s voluntary assisted dying laws came into effect in 2023.”

Read the rest of the article here

abortion

More ACT babies born alive after abortion

Published on by Kathy ClubbLeave a comment

A recent Freedom of Information request in the ACT has revealed that there is an increasing number of babies being born alive after an abortion.

by Minny Jackson

Recent information obtained through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request for data uncovered by ACT Right to Life has revealed troubling figures that deserve serious public attention and sober reflection. According to data drawn from a combined analysis of the Maternal & Perinatal Dataset Collection and the Perinatal Deaths Dataset, the number of neonatal deaths following termination of pregnancy in the Australian Capital Territory has increased steadily over the past decade.

The figures are as follows:

  • 2016-18: 19 neonatal deaths
  • 2019-21: 20 neonatal deaths
  • 2022-24: 27 neonatal deaths

These numbers, while small in absolute terms, represent a clear upward trend for the ACT. Behind every statistic is a human life that survived birth, however briefly, and then died. From a conservative and pro-life perspective, this raises profound moral, medical, and legal questions that cannot be brushed aside by euphemism or silence.

To be clear, neonatal death refers to the death of a baby after birth, typically within the first month of life. When such deaths occur following a termination of pregnancy, it means the child was born alive after an abortion. This reality alone should prompt careful scrutiny as it exposes the pitfalls of modern medicine, which is not infallible.

A society that claims to uphold compassion, dignity, and human rights must be willing to ask hard questions about how such outcomes occur and whether current laws and medical practices adequately protect the most vulnerable.

The other ethical question on the table is, why are doctors allowing this when babies born alive after a birth are classified as legal entities with the right to life?

Over the past decade, the ACT has moved towards one of the most permissive abortion regimes in the Western world. Termination has been fully decriminalised, gestational limits have been expanded, and oversight mechanisms have been reduced.

Pro-life advocates have long warned that removing legal guardrails does not eliminate ethical responsibility – it merely transfers enormous moral power to institutions with little transparency or public accountability, and it completely does away with the foundational principle of medicine, the Hippocratic Oath’s “Do no harm”.

The rising number of neonatal deaths following termination appears to coincide with this broader legal and cultural shift that has promoted abortion and denigrated the sanctity of life.

What is particularly concerning is the lack of public discussion around neonatal outcomes following termination. These deaths are largely invisible in public reporting and rarely addressed in parliamentary debate. Yet the data exists, is collected by government agencies, and now through FOI has been brought to light in Australia’s most woke state.

If a baby is born alive following a termination, that child is no longer hypothetical or abstract. That baby is a person before the law, and therefore a patient. He or she is a human being entitled to care, dignity, and protection, under the law. Any system that allows ambiguity around this reality risks eroding the most basic ethical principles of medicine.

There are also implications for women and families. Late-term terminations and neonatal loss can carry profound psychological and emotional consequences on mothers and families. A culture that presents abortion as a simple solution while minimising its complexity does a disservice to women, particularly when outcomes are traumatic or unexpected. Compassion must extend to both mother and child.

Conservatives have long argued that the role of government is to protect life, especially where individuals cannot protect themselves. Neonatal deaths following termination sit at the intersection of law, medicine, and morality. They challenge us to consider whether current frameworks genuinely reflect community values or whether they prioritise ideological convenience over human dignity and if so, what can be done to halt the descent of society into dystopian norms?

At a minimum, these figures justify:

  • Greater transparency in reporting neonatal outcomes.
  • An independent review of late-term termination practices.
  • Clear clinical guidelines to ensure infants live born receive appropriate care.
  • Parliamentary scrutiny rather than quiet administrative handling.

The data tells a story that cannot be ignored: more babies are being born alive following terminations and then dying in the neonatal period. Any society that claims to be humane must be willing to confront that truth honestly. If humanity wishes to “progress” collectively, then it ought to inquire into the reasons why death is increasing.

The measure of our civilisation is demonstrated by how we treat those with the least power. Neonatal children born at the margins of legality and visibility are society’s most vulnerable entities. They deserve more than silence. They deserve our attention, and they deserve a voice because they are not being heard when they are left in kidney dishes to die in a society that has normalised infanticide.

The time has come for the ACT to rise up against this kind of injustice, and demand answers for those who cannot speak for themselves.

Minny Jackson is Director of Advocacy at Christian Faith and Freedom Inc and is an author and researcher. Reprinted from News Weekly with permission.

euthanasia

Euthanasia in Tasmania

Published on by Kathy ClubbLeave a comment

The Euthanasia legalisation is a form of killing which has traditionally been prohibited by the great world religions. It is now becoming increasingly routine and validated by contemporary cultural doctrine.

by Wayne Williams

From a traditional standpoint, killing oneself is still killing a human being and is forbidden as such. Nor is it only self-killing, for in the legislation, there is the provision for the doctor to kill the patient if the patient cannot do it alone. As for the medical profession itself, euthanasia negates the well-known affirmation of the traditional Hippocratic oath, “First do no harm”.

The doctor cannot annihilate if he is truly to heal.

Euthanasia, moreover, damages the doctor-patient relationship. Once the doctor is “licensed to kill”, the patients’ trust in the authenticity of a doctor’s professional commitment to their well-being will almost certainly be undermined.

The contagion of euthanasia is a slippery slope. Once legalised for the terminally ill at the end of life, its practice grows not only quantitatively but spreads qualitatively to new categories: children, the mentally infirm and afflicted and to those who are not even ill but old and tired of life.

The Tasmanian legislation poorly protects the vulnerable. There should be an independent review mechanism that increases the prospects of an unwilling participant being identified and protected before it is too late.

What should be recognised is the important relationship between the patient and their GP. Any preliminary discussion on the topic of assisted suicide must be created and included in the medical records of the person’s GP practice.

Where a coordinating doctor carries out the first assessment of the patient’s eligibility for physician-assisted suicide, part of which the doctor is satisfied that the patient has made their decision voluntarily and had not been coerced or pressured into making it, the coordinating doctor must then provide a copy of the assessment to the patient’s GP. In addition, a subsequent assessment should be made by an independent doctor (independent of the coordinating doctor) and provided to the patient’s own GP. Each assessing doctor would be required to make enquires of professionals who have recently provided health or social care to the patient and such other enquires as the assessing doctor considers appropriate.

The last provision to be included will almost certainly require that the two doctors consult the patient’s own GP to intervene in circumstances which may appear questionable to the patient’s own GP. In Tasmania, there is no requirement that the person’s own GP participate in the eligibility process.

In Tasmania, members of the patient’s family may invite a practitioner who may never have set eyes on the patient before to become the coordinating doctor and who will be responsible for deciding whether the patient has been subjected to any form of coercion or undue influence by his or her family. Unlike the patient’s own GP, the introduced coordinating doctor will have no previous opportunity to know the illnesses, personality, hopes, expectations and fears of the patient; nor will that doctor have any knowledge or insight of the family dynamics at play.

Under Tasmanian Voluntary Assisted Dying (VAD) laws, once two doctors have carried out a positive assessment, all that is required to be done in general terms is for the relevant forms to be filled in and submitted. There is no other legal obstacle to the consumption of life-ending drugs.

A further consideration would be the appointment of a special Commissioner, a judge who has the power to appoint persons to be members of a Review Panel. The Commissioner, having received the patient’s declaration and the two doctors’ assessment, would refer the patient’s case to the Panel for determination of the patient’s eligibility to process to the final stage: the ingestion of life ending drugs.

 The Panel’s function should include satisfying itself that the patient has made his or her request voluntarily and not under pressure or coercion. The Panel must have the power to make enquiries of any person whom it believes has relevant knowledge or experience about the circumstances of the patient. The Panel would be statutorily obliged to hear from and may question both the coordinating doctor and the independent doctor.

Tasmanian legislation requires more rigorous standards and must adopt a more cautious and prudent approach to ensure that a person who wishes to pursue physician-assisted suicide is doing so in a truly voluntary way.

The Tasmanian safeguards are more cosmetic than real; there is no effective oversight of the conduct of family members and complicit medical practitioners because Australian practice is private and self- regulating and assumes that all VAD Practitioners are beyond reproach. It is necessary to have checks and balances in the Tasmanian legislation so often the trend is in the other direction, to relax the safeguards even further.

What should be strongly resisted is pressure from pro-VAD proponent lobby groups to remove the ability of Catholic, other Christian and Jewish entities to refuse to countenance VAD in their hospitals and aged care facilities. VAD proponents want the federal law changed so that an eligibility assessment can be conducted by telephone or Zoom. Hopefully, the Tasmanian legislation will not go down that path.

How a medical practitioner could safely conclude by a telephone call or a Zoom meeting that there is no evidence or suspicion of pressure from family members upon that patient is a dangerous form of lunacy, particularly where the patient’s own GP need not be involved.

Notre Dame bioethicist Margaret Somerville stated that “democracies do not necessarily produce ethical laws”.

Democratic Sweden overturned the social censure of incest when, in the 1960s, it legalised marriage between siblings from one parent.

The Human Life Protection Society is strongly opposed to euthanasia on traditional religious grounds that a human being is not the author of life nor its absolute owner and that it is a gift entrusted by the Creator so that it may find its fulfilled purpose in the service of the Creator and other human beings.

Suicide violates the inherent value of life and the fabric of civil society. Will the inherent value of life and our obligations to others persuade when the current secular culture does not accept or feel that these trump euthanasia’s offer of an exit from pain and its teaching of the primacy of one’s own wellbeing?

The Euthanasia legalisation is a form of killing which has traditionally been prohibited by the great world religions. It is now becoming increasingly routine and validated by contemporary cultural doctrine.

Written by: Wayne Williams

Disability Commissioner Tasmania Newsletter-February 2026

Published on by PresidentLeave a comment

Here are some highlights from the February newsletter of the Disability Commissioner Tasmania.

disability

In this issue:

Join the Tasmanian Disability Inclusion Advisory Council

Expressions of interest are now open for Tasmanians to serve as council members or chairperson of the first Tasmanian Disability Inclusion Advisory Council under the Disability Rights, Inclusion and Safeguarding Act 2024.

The Council will advise the Minister and the Disability Commissioner on improving access and inclusion for Tasmanians with Disability.

Council members will receive sitting and preparation fees. Travel, accommodation and adjustments will be covered.

What will the Council do?

  • Provide consultation on the Tasmanian Disability Inclusion Plan – a roadmap for government action
  • Assist government agencies to improve access, uphold disability rights, and remove barriers once the Tasmanian Disability Inclusion Plan is implemented.
  • Provide policy advice to identify barriers and practical solutions.
  • Collaborate with other councils locally and nationally to share ideas and strengthen access and inclusion.

Who can apply?

If you are a Tasmanian with Disability or a Tasmanian connected to the Disability community, we encourage you to apply. We welcome applicants with different types of disability, living in all areas of our state, First Nations people, and LGBTIQA+ community members.

Support with applications is available through our office and Disability Voices Tasmania. You can phone Disability Voices Tasmania on 6215 6800 or email office@disabilityvoicestas.org.au. 

Information Sessions

Together with Disability Voices Tasmania, we will hold information sessions around the state to learn more about the council, to ask questions, and help with applications. Sessions have been confirmed for:

  • Burnie – 18 February, 1:15pm-2:15pm, Burnie Library 
  • Queenstown – 19 February, 12:30pm-1:30pm, West Coast Community Services Hub 
  • Launceston – 4 March, 11:15am-12:15pm, Launceston Library 

Information sessions will also be held in Kingston, Huonville, Bicheno, and St Helens. Stay tuned to our socials and website for dates and times.

Visit the Join our Council web page for more information and to register for a session.

Applications close 24 March 2026.

Add your voice to Tasmania’s first Inclusion Plan

Tasmania is developing its first Disability Inclusion Plan, and your voice is needed.

The plan is a key measure of the Disability Rights, Inclusion and Safeguarding Act. It outlines clear expectations for government to ensure Tasmanians with disability can participate fully, safely, and with dignity in everyday life.

We will make a submission to the consultation. If you would like to contribute but don’t feel comfortable making your own submission, please contact us to have your views included.

More information

More information on the Discussion Paper and ways to have your say, are available on the Department of Premier and Cabinet’s website – Department of Premier and Cabinet – Tasmanian Disability Inclusion Plan – Consultation.

Consultation closes 10 March 2026.

Submissions

We recently made submissions to the following consultations. You can read our submissions on the website.

Disability Safeguards Consultation

A submission was made to the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing as part of the development of a Disability Support Quality and Safeguarding Framework.Our submission focused on systemic issues rather than individual questions. We highlighted the need for reforms that are practical, enforceable and accessible, noting Tasmania’s high digital disadvantage and the importance of cultural change alongside legal reform.

Read our submission to the Disability Safeguards consultation


Disability Discrimination Act (Commonwealth) Review

The Commissioner has also made a submission to the review of the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act.In our submission, we supported modernising the way disability and discrimination are defined, introducing a positive duty to prevent discrimination, clearer obligations to provide adjustments across employment, education and services, and reforms to make the Act easier to use and more effective in practice, including protections against harassment, offensive behaviour and vilification.

Read our submission to the review of the Disability Discrimination Act. 

Other News

Local engagement officers needed for the Census

Do you have experience working with local communities? 

The Australian Bureau of Statistics is preparing for the next Census on Tuesday 11 August 2026 and is recruiting Local Engagement Officers to help support community participation.

Local Engagement Officers lead a team of field staff and coordinate Census activities to support people to complete the Census. They build relationships, answer questions at information sessions, and help make sure everyone is represented.

Visit the Australian Bureau of Statistics Census Careers web page for more information on the roles. 

About Arts and Disability Network Australia

Arts and Disability Network Australia (ADNA), is a new organisation that connects, champions and amplifies the voices of d/Deaf artists, and artists, arts workers and screen practitioners with disability nationwide. You can learn more about ADNA and stay up to date on initiatives and opportunities by:

You can also book a 20-minute one-to-one consultation with Sarah-Mace Dennis, the National Director of ADNA. These take place on Mondays between 2:00pm-5:00pm AEDT (Melbourne). You can use this time to meet Sarah, discuss your practice or organisation and talk about any ideas you have for the future of ADNA.

Creative Workplaces Survey

The Creative Workplaces Survey is the first national survey by the Australian Government to understand the working experiences of people in creative industries. It will focus on pay and working conditions, safety at work, bullying, discrimination and harassment. Feedback from this survey will help inform future policies, programs, advocacy, and training opportunities to improve standards and safety in creative workplaces. 

ADNA is providing one on one access support to d/Deaf artists, and artists, arts workers and screen practitioners with disability to help complete the Creative Workplaces Survey. If you would like to participate, call ADNA on 08 8463 1689 or email hello@artsdisabilitynetwork.com.au. The survey closes on 23 February 2026.

More information about the survey

Events

Disability Commissioner Tasmania will share information about events we know are happening within the Tasmanian Disability community. These events are not run by the Commissioner and are not part of her work. Contact us if you would like to have your event considered for inclusion in this newsletter.

Australia’s Disability Strategy National Forum

24-25 February 2026, Adelaide, in-person and online. The forum will focus on two key topics­­: health and safeguarding, with presentations, discussions and sharing learnings and ideas. The forum is for people with disability, community leaders, allies, family members, carers, supporters, and governments.

In-person registrations have now closed; however, you can still register to join online. Learn more and register via the forum web page.

Looking Ahead

Living My Best Life Art Exhibition regional tour

We are working with Libraries Tasmania to tour the Living My Best Life Art Exhibition to regional libraries in the state. More details will be available soon. In the meantime, you can learn more about the exhibition, artists and artworks on our website.

Amanda Stoker

Amanda Stoker responds to the KAP abortion-gag rollback

Published on by PresidentLeave a comment

Queensland MP, Bobbie Katter, of the Katter Australia Party, this week made an unsuccessful attempt to overturn the LNP government’s ban on abortion being debated in Parliament. Anne Sherston, President of the Human Life Protection Society, wrote to Queensland MP’s prior to the vote, expressing her support for Mr. Katter’s bold attempt. Only one response has been received so far: from Amanda Stoker, Member for Oodgeroo and Assistant Minister for Finance, Trade, Employment and Training.

Both Mrs Sherston’s letter and Ms. Stoker’s response are reproduced below.

As an Australian voter and the President of the Human Life Protection Society, Tasmania, I am writing to strongly urge you to take immediate action to overturn the gag order placed on pro-life members in the Queensland Parliament, twelve months ago. Although our organisation is based in Tasmania, this gag order affects all Australians.

Politicians need to be reminded that they have been elected to their positions by the Australian people. Politicians need to listen to all views and need to be able to discuss them in parliament freely. There should be no exceptions. If exceptions are being made, Australians are being denied from expressing their democratic values and rights. It is denying us from free speech.

The Australian public needs all our Members of Parliament to be able to speak freely about this critical issue and not fear repercussions.

The current restrictions are silencing a significant portion of the community in enabling them to express their beliefs and engage in a civil debate. I urge you to support Robbie Katter in overturning this gag order and allow freedom of speech. 

Your action can pave the way for a more open discussion on life-affirming measures in Queensland and the rest of Australia.

Anne Sherston, President HLPS

amanda stoker

Here is the response from Amanda Stoker:

Good afternoon,

Thank you for taking the time to write to me about this important issue.

I share your concern about the practice of allowing babies born alive after abortion to be left to die, and about the prevalence of abortion generally.  It is something I have stood against for many years, because all lives have value.

Be assured that I am advocating for Baby Samuel, and for all babies, within my team.   

You will be aware that the government made a commitment prior to the election that it would not change the law relating to abortion in this term.  Like all promises should, it will be kept. But I believe there remain opportunities to make a meaningful difference in policies that directly address the drivers of people choosing abortion by providing better support for families and vulnerable women facing unplanned pregnancy.

You may be interested to know that as a result of my determined and passionate advocacy the State Government in December 2025 funded a new service to provide wraparound residential support to women facing unplanned pregnancy.  It offers mental health support, parenting programs, health care for mother and baby and, if necessary, domestic violence assistance, so that vulnerable women have life-affirming choices available to them.  It will be delivered by Mercy Community as a pilot, and I am hopeful that it will make a positive impact for vulnerable women and their babies so we can make it available in more places.

This is the kind of family support that I truly believe drives down the hardship, alienation and vulnerability that drives women to seek abortion. 

You have expressed a desire to see me vote with Mr Katter, Labor and the Greens to open up the discussion of changes to the law relating to the termination of pregnancy in Queensland.  If you think that a deal to vote with Labor and the Greens – the architects of abortion to birth laws – is going to result in a rolling back of these laws, I respectfully suggest you are quite mistaken.  Sadly, Mr Katter has sold a narrative to some prominent pro-life voices that simply does not reflect the reality of the political environment.  Labor and the Greens want to open discussion of this subject for very different motives to those who care about human life, as they seek to drive pro-abortion policies further.   

I believe that for change on this front to really stick, a change in the law isn’t the easy answer some think it is.  We need a cultural change.  That requires support for people to have confidence to start a family, ensuring people are safe and supported for the task of parenting and appropriate education so that individuals are empowered to embrace life for themselves.  It means we have to address the human pain, fear and hardship that makes a person think abortion is their best or only option.  And while cultural change is slower, it is more enduring than legislation that Labor would not hesitate to change when next elected.  It is my sincere belief that this cultural change will make a deeper and longer-lasting impact for the unborn and their families.

I am committed to building a culture of valuing life in this state.  There is a long way to go. 

Thank you for writing to me.

Regards,

Amanda
Member for Oodgeroo (Cleveland)
Assistant Minister for Finance, Trade, Employment and Training

Calvery

HLPS statement on Calvary hospital takeover

Published on by PresidentLeave a comment

When the Hobart Private Hospital was bought by Catholic provider Calvary Health Care, there was an outcry over future access to some procedures, such as abortions, vasectomies, IVF, gender affirming surgery and assisted suicide.

Several news outlets covered the controversy, including the ABC and the Mercury (behind paywall).

Anne Sherston, President of the Human Life Protection Society, has responded to one such article which appeared in the Mercury; her letter was published in that publication on February 6th.

As President of the Human Life Protection Society in Tasmania, I am writing in response to the article “Access in Jeopardy,” by Judy Augustine, published in The Mercury on December 31, 2025.

Kelly Bruce, CEO of Women’s Health Tasmania, expressed concerns about women’s reproductive health in Tasmania, particularly the reduction of support for surgical terminations. This raises an important question: Why is abortion considered part of “reproductive health,” when the term “reproductive” means
producing new life?

What are people actually fearing? Is it that abortion is not going to be as easily accessible? Why are people so eager to make a human being so disposable?

CEO Kelly Bruce stated, “In practice, public hospitals really only provide surgical terminations up to 14 weeks, though there are some exceptions.”

Babies have been known to be born at 16 weeks. There should be no reason a baby needs to be aborted in a late-term pregnancy; caesarean needs to be the only option in these circumstances.

The fact that Calvary is a Catholic organisation would help uphold the values we should all hold dear. If Calvary is forced into allowing abortions, this would go against religious freedom.

Who are we to say who lives or dies when it comes to an unexpected pregnancy, or, for that matter, for someone who is near death? Not one person has the right to interfere with that. Regarding Voluntary Assisted Dying, there is no evidence that the existing safeguards are sufficient to prevent abuse.

When a woman has had an abortion, not only does the unborn baby die, but the woman’s spirit dies as well. This creates a list of numerous other issues and problems, starting with the mental health of the woman.

Family Planning Tasmania CEO Marcus Di Martino commented that
Pregnancy choices and empowering women to have control of their sexual and reproductive health are really important.” This being so important to women, more education needs to be provided to allow women to be completely informed of the choices they can be provided with, such as keeping the baby or
putting it up for adoption. The baby is innocent and the most vulnerable in this issue, and does not need to be aborted. An unborn baby, in fact, has “No Choice.”

We have enough babies being lost to abortion; we don’t need another facility to join the ranks.