Gendered Medical Harm through the Lens of the Australian Pelvic Mesh Litigation.

Abstract

The unprecedented scale of the pelvic mesh litigation in Australia highlights the devastating consequences of gendered health harm. Of the multiple class actions, only Ethicon Sàrl v Gill (2021) 288 FCR 338; [2021] FCAFC has run to final judgment. This decision validated the harm experienced by the representative plaintiffs and drew attention to the inherent misogyny associated with health conditions which affect women differently, disproportionately or uniquely. It is increasingly apparent that women's health has always been understudied and underfunded, and this contributes to a gender bias in medical education. Consequently, women suffer higher rates of misdiagnosis, undertreatment, unsafe stereotyping and preventable harm compared to men. Moreover, substandard health care for women arguably becomes most pronounced when considering female-specific pathology. This harm can be exacerbated by inadequate legal remedies and adversarial legal processes that risk reinforcing gendered harm.