Skip to main content

Abortion in Latin America

This article, from Time, is an excellent short review of abortion conditions in Central and South America, in the context of Uruguay's modest attempts to liberalize its abortion laws and the recent difficulty of an Argentinian woman to obtain a legal abortion after being raped.

When it comes to abortion, contraception, and family planning, Central and South American countries are a bundle of sorry contradictions. While strongly Roman Catholic in culture, this region has very high abortion rates compared to the U.S. and Western Europe and high numbers of unsafe abortions. Would this be, in part, because of cultural and socioeconomic conditions that make effective use of contraception difficult?

Those that support total bans on abortion-- like American House member Joe Walsh-- should consider the experience of women in the countries that have 'no exceptions' laws: "El Salvador, Nicaragua,  Honduras, the Dominican Republic, and Chile." El Salvador perhaps goes the farthest, as the women there who have abortions are themselves declared criminals and jailed. This is odd, legally speaking, even for restrictive abortion regimes. Those-- again, like Representative Walsh-- should consider the stories of women who have not received necessary medical care because doctors in these countries were wary of being punished if they gave medical care to a pregnant woman who needed it, for fear of being prosecuted.

Links:


Time article (October 19, 2012): Uruguay Diverges from a Continent Where Abortion Is Worse than Rape

Article from the Washington Post that explains Uruguay's political culture and how it helps to explain the how and why of its liberalization of abortion law (October 21, 2012): Legalizing abortion the Uruguayan way: through painful compromises and concessions

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Medically necessary abortions: The battle of the experts

Apparently, Representative Joe Walsh is not entirely alone! The assertion that an abortion is never medically necessary has been floating around in the pro-life universe for at least a little while. We are now witnessing a battle of the experts. One the one side is Joe Walsh and friends. Walsh himself released a pdf document with quotations from several doctors-- including some historically prominent pro-choice doctors, like Alan Guttmacher-- making the 'never medically necessary' claim seem quite reasonable. Also on Walsh's side are several doctors  who particpated in a recent "International Symposium on Maternal Health" in Dublin. Ireland, despite a European Court of Human Rights ruling in 1992 , has a total ban on abortion. Irish pro-lifers want the country's politicians to resist pressure to implement even a life exception, so the question of medical necessity is directly relevant there. The "Dublin Declaration," released after the S...

The exception of Scott DesJarlais

The news about Republican House member Scott DesJarlais just gets worse and worse. As it turns out, not only did he cheat on his wife with a patient and pressured his pregnant patient-girlfriend to have an abortion, he cheated on his wife six times, with patients and co-workers, prescribed drugs to one of his patient girlfriends, and  successfully advocated for his own wife to have an abortion. For a 'family values' and 'pro-life' conservative, that is quite a record. The great irony in all this, of course, is that Representative DesJarlais was reelected, despite all of the things he's done, while Republican Senate and House candidates ( Akin, Mourdock, Walsh, and Koster ) lost their races not for what they did but what they said (inflammatory, insensitive, and just plain factually incorrect things about abortion and/or rape). In this election season, words spoke louder than actions. Is there anything to be learned from the utter hypocrisy of Representative...