Skip to main content

Implementing exceptions to abortion bans

Around the world, countries that are slowly moving away from very restrictive abortion bans are struggling to implement legally-mandated exceptions (for example, for rape). In several countries their judiciaries are the prime movers, requiring more exceptions to general prohibitions on abortions.

The struggle then becomes drafting of rules to govern the exceptions and their implementation.

For example, in Argentina, the country's supreme court held that women must be allowed to obtain abortions in cases of rape. Provincial and city governments are apparently in charge of developing their own rules to effect the exception, and are struggling to do so in the face of pro-life opposition.

Recently, a Buenos Aires woman who was raped while a victim of human trafficking has had her abortion delayed due to activist outcry and a local judge's order. Anti-abortion activists shamed themselves by protesting outside the woman's home. The reason her case became public at all was because the mayor of Buenos Aires, who is pro-life, publicly announced that someone was going to get an abortion due to rape.

In Northern Ireland, Marie Stopes plans to open the first abortion clinic in the territory, in Belfast. Unlike in the U.S., where clinics are the primary venue for abortions, clinics are highly unusual in European countries. Northern Ireland is different from the rest of the UK in having highly restrictive limits on abortion. (While the rest of the UK has restrictive limits on paper, in practice abortion is generally available and accessible under broadly interpreted exceptions.) Hospitals in Northern Ireland are technically able to provide abortions for life-or-health reasons, but an absence of specific legal guidelines on abortions have deterred doctors from performing abortions (beyond strong political and cultural deterrents).

The Marie Stopes clinic looks as if it is intended to force the question of when abortions are permitted and to provide genuine access to abortions early in pregnancy (they will provide medical abortions for women pregnant up to nine weeks)-- which, of course, is why it is drawing such strong negative attention.

And, in an earlier post, I discussed how a life exception (yes, a life exception) for abortion was judicially imposed in the Republic of Ireland in 1992 and has not resulted in clear access to abortions for this narrow exception in the decades since.

One apparent difference between these countries and the United States is the speed and finality with which a judicial order in the U.S. is implemented. While there is a lot of scholarly literature about how judicial orders are implemented imperfectly in the U.S., when it comes to reproductive rights the judiciary does not make women wait for legislatures and bureaucratic agencies to come up with regulations. It is important to have democratic buy-in and utilize legislative and bureaucratic expertise when making fundamental changes in a sensitive policy area. But I think the U.S. system is clearly superior in allowing women much quicker access to their rights.

Links:

Article from Reuters about Argentina (October 12, 2012): Rape victims struggle to get legal abortions in Argentina

Article from the Washington Post (October 11, 2012): Belfast to open Ireland's 1st abortion clinic in test for murky anti-abortion laws on island

Article from LifeSiteNews (October 12, 2012): Marie Stopes situation in Belfast 'grim' unless politicians act swiftly: SPUC

Marie Stopes International web site

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

A Catholic EU health commissioner

The European Union Parliament approved a controversial choice for their top health official: The European Parliament backed a devout Catholic as EU health commissioner on Wednesday, brushing off critics who fear the Maltese politician could row back on EU policies on stem cell research, abortion and gay rights. Greens, Liberals and Socialists in the European Parliament had said they would vote against Tonio Borg, a former foreign and justice minister in Malta, saying his beliefs could influence EU policy. As commissioner, Borg's remit would include access to healthcare and contraception and the control of sexually transmitted diseases. Borg, who was in Malta on the day of the vote according to an EU Commission official, told EU lawmakers before the vote that his personal views wou

Four ways the presidential election could change reproductive politics

Setting aside all of the claims and counterclaims of the candidates and all related white noise, there are four concrete ways that the 2012 presidential election could cause policy changes on abortion, contraception, and family planning. If Barack Obama is reelected, little will change. If Mitt Romney is elected, I predict the following: The contraceptive mandate, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, would be withdrawn.  Barriers to defunding Planned Parenthood could be removed. As it is now, federal courts are stopping the complete defunding of the organization (i.e., withdrawing all federal funding) due to their interpretation of federal legislative language. With Romney as president, that language could be modified (assuming the changes could get past a Democratic Senate). The composition of the federal judiciary, particularly the United States Supreme Court, would be modified through appointments. If, say, Stephen Breyer or Ruth Bader Goldberg retired, Pres