15 October 2026
Media release
Landmark ruling at High Court in favour of prisoner’s right to access reproductive health care
On Wednesday the High Court of Australia ruled in favour of a prisoner in Queensland being provided with access to health care to preserve her reproductive health.
This case marks the first High Court consideration of Queensland’s Human Rights Act 2019 and the first time the Queensland Human Rights Commission has appeared in proceedings before the High Court.
The Queensland Human Rights Commission intervened in this case at the Court of Appeal stage in relation to the application of section 48 of the Human Rights Act 2019 to the interpretation of ‘assisted reproductive technology’ under the Corrective Services Act 2006.
The High Court ruling in the Smith v Chief Executive, Queensland Corrective Services & Ors case unanimously allowed the appeal, finding that the phrase "assisted reproductive technology" does not include egg extraction and freezing, which assists to preserve fertility but is separate from the processes of reproduction.
The judgment found that Section 22(2) of the Corrective Services Act does not prohibit the applicant from applying for approval to receive medical treatment that would allow her to extract and freeze her eggs so that she may preserve her fertility and choose whether to have a child once she leaves prison.
The Commission contributed to the case by providing submissions on how laws should be interpreted considering human rights and the scope and application of the human rights principles relevant to the case.
Quotes attributable to the Queensland Human Rights Commissioner, Debbie Platz:
“Human rights belong to all of us. The Queensland Human Rights Commission considers that laws can promote both community safety and the human rights of people in corrective services. These objectives are complementary and human rights-based approaches can help achieve positive outcomes in both areas.
The judgment reinforces what humane treatment is for prisoners, including taking into account their special needs for their sex and age, both of which are included in the Queensland Corrective Services Act and the Human Rights Act.”
ENDS
Background information
The High Court unanimously found that ‘assisted reproductive technology’ does not include egg extraction and freezing for the purpose of preserving reproductive health and reducing age-related risks of infertility and chromosomal abnormalities after release from prison.
The ban in section 22(2) of the Corrective Services Act 2006 on participating in ‘assisted reproductive technology’ did not prevent the applicant from applying to freeze her eggs.
This interpretation prevents reproduction while in prison, while still being consistent with the purpose and objectives of the Corrective Services Act to provide humane containment, recognise basic human entitlements, respect offender’s dignity, and having regard to the special needs of some offenders because of their age and sex.
In the ruling, Justices Edelman and Gleeson confirmed that the requirements imposed by section 48 of the Human Rights Act 2019 to interpret laws compatibly with human rights is a mandatory consideration and part of the context in which statutory interpretation takes place.
Justice Edelman held that an interpretation of ‘assisted reproductive technology’ to include egg freezing limited the rights to humane treatment when deprived of liberty (section 30) and access to health services without discrimination (section 37) that could not be demonstrably justified in the circumstances.
The rest of the court made their decision by considering the objectives, which are consistent with human rights principles, embedded in the Corrective Services Act.
The Queensland Human Rights Commission intervened in this case at the Court of Appeal because it raised a question about the interpretation of a law in accordance with the Human Rights Act 2019. As intervener, the Commission provides independent and expert assistance to the Courts and does not act for either party.
The Commission contributed to the case by providing submissions on the role of section 48 of the Human Rights Act 2019 when interpreting laws, and what domestic and international law and cases say about dignity and human rights relevant to this case.
Media Contact
QHRC Media
Email: comms@qhrc.qld.gov.au
Phone: 0407 657 411