Sponsor speech Supports
Matthew Canavan
Canavan supports the bill and argues it is needed to protect babies born alive after an abortion by ensuring they receive the same medical care as any other child.
Read in Hansard ↗Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection)
Current status
This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.
Policy area
Law, justice & rights
What does this bill do?
Australian law would treat a child born alive after a termination as a person under Commonwealth lawFederal Australian law, which this bill would use to say a child born alive after a termination counts as a person under national law..
Why was it introduced?
Babies born alive after some terminations were being recorded inconsistently, and in some states were given palliative careComfort-focused care at the end of life; the page says some babies born alive after terminations were given this instead of active treatment. and left to die. The bill makes those babies persons under Commonwealth lawFederal Australian law, which this bill would use to say a child born alive after a termination counts as a person under national law. and requires practitioners to give them the same care as any other newborn, backed by reporting and offences.
Broader context
Australia had already accepted international obligations to protect children’s right to life and healthcare, but the bill’s backers argued that babies born alive after some terminations were being recorded inconsistently and, in some states, were given palliative careComfort-focused care at the end of life; the page says some babies born alive after terminations were given this instead of active treatment. and left to die rather than being treated like other newborns. The bill, introduced in late 2022 as a revived version of an earlier proposal, sought to make those babies persons under Commonwealth lawFederal Australian law, which this bill would use to say a child born alive after a termination counts as a person under national law. and require equal medical treatment, reporting and penalties for non-treatment, but it did not pass and lapsed when the Parliament ended in July 2025.
Key criticism
No significant public case against the bill is recorded so far, beyond a possible concern that it could override clinical judgment by mandating treatment and reporting rules in rare, highly sensitive cases. in publicly available sources here, no party represented in the debate is shown opposing it, and any criticism appears limited or unrecorded rather than broad or sustained.
Who supported it?
Senator Matthew Canavan introduced this bill. Speeches supporting it came from LNP.
Introduced in Senate 30 Nov 2022
Failed in Senate 21 July 2025
Did not reach House —
Did not become law —
Did it become law?
No
The bill did not complete passage through Parliament.
Final passage
No final passage
The bill has not completed passage and is no longer proceeding.
Time before failure
964 days
From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
Australian law would treat a child born alive after a termination as a person under Commonwealth lawFederal Australian law, which this bill would use to say a child born alive after a termination counts as a person under national law..
-
Doctors, nurses and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health practitioners would have to give a child born alive after a termination the same care as any other newborn.
-
Health practitioner registration boards would have to handle failures to treat these babies as professional breaches, even if other clinical guidelines said otherwise.
-
Health practitioners could face a criminal offence for not providing appropriate care, including emergency life-saving treatment or palliative careComfort-focused care at the end of life; the page says some babies born alive after terminations were given this instead of active treatment., to a child born alive.
-
Health practitioners present at the termination or birth would have to report the birth and the care given for national statistics, without identifying the mother, and the mother could not be prosecuted.
Show source excerpts
-
8. Clause 8 specifically defines a child born alive as a person for the purposes of the law of the Commonwealth of Australia.
Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) explanatory memorandum -
10. Subclause 9(1) provides that the duty owed by a health practitioner to provide medical care or treatment to a child born alive as a result of termination is no different than the duty (including a duty under the law of a State or Territory or the general law) owed to provide medical care or treatment to a child born alive other than as a result of a termination.
Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) explanatory memorandum -
12. Subclause 9(3) provides that subclauses (1) and (2) have effect despite anything to the contrary in professional standards or guidelines that apply to health practitioners.
Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) explanatory memorandum -
15. Clause 10 establishes the offence of contravening the duty to provide medical care or treatment to children born alive. A person commits the offence if:
Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) explanatory memorandum -
18. Clause 12 clearly exempts the mother from prosecution. The purpose of this Bill is to protect the children born alive. Any decision to terminate a pregnancy may be difficult and highly traumatic for the mother. This Bill does not seek to add to the trauma, rather, protect the rights of all children, including those born alive as a result of a late-term termination of pregnancy.
Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) explanatory memorandum
Context
Broader context for this bill
Australia had already accepted international obligations to protect children’s right to life and healthcare, but the bill’s backers argued that babies born alive after some terminations were being recorded inconsistently and, in some states, were given palliative careComfort-focused care at the end of life; the page says some babies born alive after terminations were given this instead of active treatment. and left to die rather than being treated like other newborns. The bill, introduced in late 2022 as a revived version of an earlier proposal, sought to make those babies persons under Commonwealth lawFederal Australian law, which this bill would use to say a child born alive after a termination counts as a person under national law. and require equal medical treatment, reporting and penalties for non-treatment, but it did not pass and lapsed when the Parliament ended in July 2025.
- 1990
Australia ratifies the Convention on the Rights of the ChildThe UN child rights treaty the page says supporters rely on to argue Australia already owes children protection of life and health.
Supporters of the bill pointed to Australia’s 1990 ratification of the convention as an existing commitment to protect every child’s right to life and healthcare.
Second reading speech ↗ - 30 Nov 2022
Explanatory memorandumThe note that explains how the bill works and why it was drafted, including the clauses and policy intent. cites inconsistent records and babies left to die
The explanatory memorandumThe note that explains how the bill works and why it was drafted, including the clauses and policy intent. said figures were hard to obtain because state recording practices differed and that, in some states, babies born alive during late-term abortions were given palliative careComfort-focused care at the end of life; the page says some babies born alive after terminations were given this instead of active treatment. and ultimately left to die.
Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) explanatory memorandum ↗ - 30 Nov 2022
Sponsor revives an earlier children born alive proposal
In his second reading speechThe speech used in Parliament to argue for the bill and explain why its sponsor says it is needed., Senator Canavan said he was carrying forward work done on a previous version of the bill by former MP George Christensen.
Second reading speech ↗ - 30 Nov 2022
Bill introduced to require equal treatment for babies born alive after terminations
The bill was introduced in the Senate to treat a child born alive after a termination as a person under Commonwealth lawFederal Australian law, which this bill would use to say a child born alive after a termination counts as a person under national law. and require the same care as for any other newborn.
Parliamentary timeline ↗ - 21 July 2025
Bill lapses at the end of Parliament
The proposal did not complete its parliamentary passage and fell away when the Parliament ended in July 2025.
Parliamentary timeline ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 30 Nov 2022
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 30 Nov 2022
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Community Affairs review 09 Feb 2023
Referred to Committee (09/02/2023): Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (31/08/2023)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesLapsed at end of Parliament 21 July 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
No significant public case against the bill is recorded so far, beyond a possible concern that it could override clinical judgment by mandating treatment and reporting rules in rare, highly sensitive cases. in publicly available sources here, no party represented in the debate is shown opposing it, and any criticism appears limited or unrecorded rather than broad or sustained.
No significant public case against the bill is recorded so far.
Votes
Recorded votes
No recorded votes were found before this bill stopped proceeding.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
All speeches by bloc
Coalition
1 speaker · 1 support
Coalition
1 speaker · 1 support
Record
Full record
- Status
- Not Proceeding -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- Senate
- 30 Nov 2022
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
- 30 Nov 2022
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
- 21 July 2025
Senate · Lapsed at end of Parliament
Lapsed at end of Parliament
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (31/08/2023)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (9 Feb 2023): Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (31 Aug 2023)
APH bill page notes