I think it raises the issue of political cultures also.
It seems de rigeur that politicians will not the rock the boat, particularly on issues with economic and or socio cultural "equity" implications. In effect, this refusal to "lead", even when priciples of breached ethics and palpable injustice are involved.
As have said elsewhere, the specific example deals with the consequences of an ideologically undertoned sub culture within a society capturing government.
In effect, the old ALP is now a misappropriated shopfront for a collusion of social conservative/DLP/ Hansonist, opportunist and eco ratonalist influences.
The ALP has assumed the role held by Howardism as a trucheon for different types of vested interests and authority, against individual autonomy, social concern and freedom of thinking. As with predecessors like Bjelke Peteren and Howard, the current tendency is content to masage publicopinbion rather than educate it or rouse it from its "self imposed tutelage".
Be it Cubbie creek or RU486, the reactionary corporatist entity, solely concerned with maintainence of power and ignorant of alternative uses for culture and society, turn on emancipatory thinking in the interests of the new inner clique. Logic and good intentions are turfed out the door.
Be it Howardism or Right-Laborism, self reflexivity and possibility take a back seat to the slaughter of the goose laying the golden egg, and misunderstood internal impulses to control seeking gratification.

It's commonly believed that abortion is illegal up here, which is what started this in the first place. The two young people currently in court for procuring RU486 from overseas and DIY abortion did it because they didn't know abortion was available here. There are clinics just over the border doing a roaring trade.

These reports of hospitals withdrawing the service would come as a surprise to an awful lot of people who never knew it was available.

Andrew Bartlett is right to say we need to debate it, even if it's only to clarify things. If Anna Bligh is right and the laws end up being tightened, it won't really change all that much.

Caroline de Costa says that only women resident in Cairns, with serious medical conditions that would be worsened by pregnancy, and who are referred by their general practitioners, can be considered for the use of RU-486 at the present time.

Lyn,
A debate is happening in Queensland. Do you mean a parliamentary debate and conscience vote? Bligh certainly has no intention of introducing a private member's bill even though Labor's policy platform, reaffirmed at the recent conference says that "all legal distinctions between termination of pregnancy and other medical procedures should be abolished by repealing sections 224, 225 and 226 of the Criminal Code".

Gary,
We need debate in the whole box and dice sense we saw federally over RU486. Demonstrations, letters to the editor, polls, talkback, embarrassing scenes in parliament, the whole thing.

It's not only doctors who need to understand where they stand or what's actually going on. It's something Qld needs to work out as a whole, and as Andrew Bartlett pointed out, parliamentarians should be openly accountable for their part in the decision.

Politically, supporting medical abortion in Qld wouldn't gain anybody any votes, but opposing it probably would, especially in the Gold Coast area where we're having a religion plague.

Actually, that whole losing-votes-for-supporting-abortion thing is a myth. The last comprehensive Qld-wide survey earlier this year showed people would be more likely to vote for candidates who supported abortion decriminalisation, than those who opposed it. The same survey also found 79% of people identified with the statement 'i want the law changed so abortion is no longer a crime'. Fairly conclusive, i would say, but still not enough to encourage any sort of parliamentary debate obviously.

Kate
re your comment :"Fairly conclusive, i would say, but still not enough to encourage any sort of parliamentary debate obviously."

Maybe Bligh does not have the numbers in her party to support having a parliamentary vote? The ALP is full of Catholic moral conservatives who would be happy with the status quo and keeping things closed down.

Lyn,
maybe you and Andrew Bartlett are right about the next step. Things need to be publicly stirred so the moral conservatives (and Right to Lifers etc) are publicly embarrassed by their defence of such bad criminal law.

As ever, I'd maintain that the problem is partly semantic: the misapplication of the term of the emotionally loaded "abortion" term to RU486, to what is a basically a pharmaceuticals based retrospective contraceptive measure; almost certainly in the case of the Queensland couple.
Why the persistent false linkage to the surgical approach involving later trimester situations by right to lifers?
These might do far better decoupling RU486 in order to argue on situations potentially more relevant as to an application to (foetal)life as actual life.
Let's get a meaningful sense back into how people define "life".
Although, of course, right to lifers would still have to bear in mind that any final decision, even in late trimester situations, would devolve ultimately to a woman and her doctor.
But please.
For all practical purposes, RU 486 is basically a retrospective contraceptive application.
At least, let's decouple contraception from termination, so we can finally move this antiquated debate along the road a little.

Kate,
I made the point about the Gold Coast because of the way that 79% of opinion is geographically (electorally) distributed.

Not that I know for sure on this issue, but since the Gold Coast is more conservative and religion is stronger here than Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast, it could do damage.