3RD
INTERNATIONAL
EXCHANGE
Learning How
LESSONS FROM
SAFE ABORTION
RIGHTS ACTIVISTS
IN THE CAMPAIGN TO
DECRIMINALIZE
ABORTION
March 16 & 17, 2021
9-11 PM PHT (GMT+8) | via Zoom
with funding support from
ARGENTINA
Ruth Zurbriggen, Soccoristas en Red
Note: We apologise for the loose translation from the internet. We have also attached the original document, witten in Spanish,
from Ruth Zurbriggen, for your reference.
- The Law of Voluntary Termination of Pregnancy in Argentina I - A bit of history on legal background1
History of abortion in Argentina
The history of the right to interrupt pregnancy in Argentina begins in 1886 with the sanction of
the first Penal Code, in which all cases of abortion are penalized without any exception.
However, with the first reform of the Code in 1903, the first exception is established: cases of
attempted termination of pregnancy are not punishable.
Years later, the second reform of the Code was carried out in 1921 and the cases were
established in which the termination of pregnancy should not be penalized: when it is practiced
in order to avoid a danger to the life or health of the woman, when a pregnancy is interrupted
as a result of rape or an attack against modesty committed on an idiotic or insane woman.
In 1968, during the regime of the so-called Argentine Liberation Revolution, Decree Law No.
17567 came into force, which establishes the non-penalization if the danger to the life or health
of women is serious; or in any case of rape, provided that it was prosecuted, and with the
consent of a legal representative if the woman was a minor, idiot or insane. In 1973, in a
context of democracy, these modifications were annulled through the enactment of Law No.
20509.
Despite this, in 1976 again under a de facto government calling itself the National
Reorganization Process, Decree Law No. 21338 was sanctioned, which incorporated the
modifications made in Decree Law No. 17567, sanctioned in 1968.
It was not until 1984 that the democratic government sanctioned Law No. 23077, which
retraces the legal framework to the Penal Code of 1921, where the cases of non-punishable
currently in force are restored. In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled with the “FAL” ruling on
abortion due to rape and ruled that raped women, be they “normal or unhealthy” (according to
the ruling), can terminate a pregnancy without prior judicial authorization or fear of suffering a
subsequent criminal sanction, exempting the doctor who performs the intervention from
punishment. According to the ruling, only a sworn statement is necessary that proves the crime
of which the person who wants to interrupt the pregnancy was a victim.
1
Fuente https://www.huesped.org.ar/informacion/derechos-sexuales-y-reproductivos/tus-derechos/interrupcionlegal-del-embarazo/historia-del-aborto-en-argentina/ consultada el 12-3-2021
In 2015, the Protocol for the Comprehensive Care of People with the Right to Legal
Interruption of Pregnancy (ILE Protocol) developed by the Ministry of Health of the Nation,
takes up the guidelines of the “FAL” ruling and adds considerations regarding the concept of
health, incorporating the physical, mental and social aspects and clarifies that the health
danger can be potential.
For the first time, in 2018, the draft Law on Voluntary Termination of Pregnancy was discussed
in congress. This was approved in the chamber of deputies but not in the chamber of senators.
Finally, in December 2020, Law 27610 on Access to the voluntary interruption of pregnancy
was approved. It was enacted in January 2021, thus establishing the right to voluntary
interruption of pregnancy, during the first 14 weeks of gestation, for people with the ability to
gestate equally. After that period, the practice can only be accessed for the reasons
contemplated in the previous legislation.
II - A little history about the National Campaign for the Right to Legal, Safe and
Free Abortion2
For decades feminists have been debating the issue of abortion and the consequences of its
current legal status for the life and health of women. The National Campaign for the Right
to Legal, Safe and Free Abortion is a broad and diverse federal alliance that articulates and
recovers part of the history of the struggles developed in Argentina for the right to legal, safe
and free abortion.
It has its seeds in the XVIII National Meeting of Women held in Rosario in 2003 and in the XIX
ENM held in Mendoza in 2004.
Promoted from feminist groups and the women's movement, as well as from women belonging
to political and social movements, it currently has the adhesion of organizations and
personalities linked to human rights organizations, academic and scientific fields, workers of
health, unions and various social and cultural movements, including peasant and education
networks, organizations of the unemployed, recovered factories, student groups,
communicators and social communicators, etc.
From the campaign we assume a commitment to the integrality of Human Rights, and we
defend the right to abortion as a just cause to recover the dignity of women and with them,
that of all human beings.
Those of us who make it up have collectively opted to converge on a great heterogeneity of
activities and strategic processes to:
• Install in society and in the State the debate around the need to decriminalize and
legalize abortion in Argentina;
• Help more women and organizations join in this process and claim;
• Achieve the debate and approval of a legal norm that decriminalizes and legalizes
abortion in Argentina.
2
Fuente: www.abortolegal.com.ar
It was launched on May 28, 2005, the International Day of Action for Women's Health, and
since then it has the ability and strength to coordinate activities simultaneously in different
parts of the country under the slogan: "Sex education to decide, contraceptives not to abort,
legal abortion not to die."
We consider the need to legalize and decriminalize abortion as a matter of public health, social
justice and women's human rights, which was reflected in the Project for the Voluntary
Interruption of Pregnancy prepared collectively in 2006, during a national plenary session.
held in the city of Rosario. The Project was presented in the Chamber of Deputies of the Nation
in 2007 and in 2009. In March 2010 it was presented again every 2 years. In 2018 it was
debated for the first time in the National Congress, a half sanction was obtained in the
Chamber of Deputies and Deputies, and it was not approved in the Chamber of Senators and
Senators.
III - Highlights of the IVE Law No. 27610
1. The right of women and people with other gender identities with the capacity to
gestate to decide to terminate pregnancy, request and access abortion care, and
receive post-abortion care in the health system services is enshrined.
2. Abortion will be allowed up to the fourteenth week inclusive, of the gestational
process. Outside this period, access can only be made in the event of rape or if the life
or integral health of the pregnant person is in danger.
3. Women and pregnant women have the right to access the interruption of their
pregnancy in the services of the health system with their assistance, within a
maximum period of ten (10) calendar days from their request.
4. In the case of minors under 13 years of age, they must have the informed consent
and assistance of at least one of their parents or legal representative.
5. In the cases of adolescents between 13 and 16, they must have a companion or
"affective reference".
6. Prior to performing the abortion, the informed consent of the pregnant person,
expressed in writing, is required.
7. The health professional who must intervene directly in the interruption of pregnancy
has the right to exercise conscientious objection. To do this, he must maintain his
decision in all areas, public and private, in which he exercises his profession, and refer
the patient in good faith to be treated by another professional in a temporary and timely
manner, without delay.
8. Private health centers or social security centers that do not have professionals to
perform an abortion due to conscientious objection must foresee and arrange for a
referral to a place with similar characteristics, where the provision is effectively
carried out.
9. Health personnel may not refuse to terminate the pregnancy in the event that the life
or health of the pregnant person is in danger and requires immediate and urgent
care.
10. Nor can conscientious objection be alleged to refuse to provide postabortion health
care. Failure to comply with the requirements to exercise the right to conscientious
objection will result in disciplinary, administrative, criminal and civil sanctions, as
appropriate.
11. Social and prepaid works must include comprehensive and free coverage for
voluntary termination of pregnancy. These benefits are included in the National
Healthcare Quality Assurance Program and the PMO with full coverage, along with
diagnostic benefits, medications and supportive therapies.
12. The State is responsible for implementing Law number 26150 on Comprehensive
Sexual Education, establishing active policies for the promotion and strengthening of
sexual and reproductive health for the entire population.
IV - Soccoristas en Red (Feminists who Abort)3
Socorristas en Red -feministas que abortamos- (hereinafter SenRed) is an articulation of
collectives in Argentina. We provide information - following the protocols of the World Health
Organization - and accompany women and other people with the possibility of pregnancy who
have decided to interrupt unviable pregnancies for that moment in their lives. So that they do
it in a safe and careful way.
SenRed is currently made up of groups that we activate in different geographies of the country.
All collectives have autonomy in our operation. We find ourselves together in the construction
of cared, loving and affected accompaniments.
Our principles reflect a voluntary and supportive activism. Our disposition is framed in the
ethics of care, we seek to embody the bet that we have each other!
SenRed is possible in a complex network of relationships inscribed in a particular time. From
the beginning, in 2012, our activism was marked by the unavoidable presence of the National
Campaign for the Right to Legal, Safe and Free Abortion, and as an active part of it we
achieved, together with all the organizations that compose it and to the feminist movement as
a whole, to arm and provoke the Green Tide and that from December 30, 2020 the right to
voluntary abortion is law in our country.
It was in 2014 when SenRed acquired a clear sense of the network of companions, to insist
on taking care of the life and health of those who decide to abort, given the experiences and
empirical evidence that show that when a person decided to abort, they will do so. Since then
- and also now, with Law 27610 in hand - we inform and accompany the decisions of those
who decide to have an abortion, demanding that the rights won be guaranteed and deploying
wiretaps that accommodate the needs and desires of the people who come to us.
We set:
- Desclandestinize the practices of abortion and those of accompanying.
3
-
Depathologize abortion experiences.
-
Discuss, dialogue, demand from the experience of accompanying.
-
Collaborate in setting up networks, especially the Network of Health Professionals for
the Right to Decide, making articulations a mode of political activism.
Más información en www.socorristasenred.org
-
Let ourselves be challenged by the experiences of those who abort to review our own
stigmas with abortion.
-
To build pedagogies of “direct action” and of “being there”.
V - Some points for the debate on what has been achieved
-
The most collectively fought law: we managed to extend it beyond feminist borders.
We convinced.
-
The promotion of feminisms at a global and local level.
-
The Ni Una Menos movement (2015) and the capacity for mass mobilization. The
Paros of 8M. The impact of this on public policy and on social, trade union
organizations.
-
The place of Comprehensive Sexual Education.
-
The place of communication networks and the impact on the media.
-
The independence of political parties in the National Campaign for the Right to
Abortion.
-
An own bill and the bill of the Executive Power: articulations and dialogues.
-
The interest in extending the National Campaign to all territories.
-
Prioritize agreements over differences and build from there without losing autonomy to
deploy what distinguishes us (the slogan of the National Campaign).
-
The strategy towards anti-rights groups.
-
The Green Tide. The arguments. Creative vitality.
-
The activism of Socorristas en Red (feminists who abort) and its contribution to the
extension of the decriminalizing and legalizing sensibility.
- Ruth Zurbriggen La Revuelta Feminist Collective (Neuquén-Patagonia Argentina); Socorristas en Red (feminists who abort) National Campaign for the Right to Legal, Safe and Free Abortion.
Neuquén, March 13, 2021
1
-La Ley de Interrupción Voluntaria del Embarazo en ArgentinaI - Un poco de historia sobre antecedentes legales
Historia del aborto en Argentina1
La historia del derecho a la interrupción del embarazo en Argentina comienza en 1886 con la sanción
del primer Código Penal, en el cual se penalizan todos los casos de aborto sin excepción alguna. Sin
embargo, con la primera reforma del Código en 1903, se establece la primera salvedad: los casos de
tentativa de interrupción del embarazo no son punibles.
Años más tarde, se realiza la segunda reforma del Código en 1921 y se establecen los casos en los
que no se debe penar la interrupción del embarazo: cuando se practica con el fin de evitar un peligro
para la vida o la salud de la mujer, cuando se interrumpe un embarazo fruto de una violación o de un
atentado contra el pudor cometido sobre una mujer idiota o demente.
En 1968, durante el régimen de la autodenominada Revolución Libertadora Argentina, entra en
vigencia el Decreto Ley Nº 17.567, el cual establece la no penalización si el peligro para la vida o la
salud de la mujer es grave; o en cualquier caso de violación, siempre que éste estuviera judicializado,
y con el consentimiento de un representante legal si la mujer fuera menor, idiota o demente. En
1973 en un contexto de democracia, estas modificaciones fueron dejadas sin efecto a través de la
sanción de la Ley Nº 20.509.
A pesar de esto, en el año 1976 nuevamente en bajo un gobierno de facto autodenominado Proceso
de Reorganización Nacional se sanciona el Decreto Ley Nº 21.338 que vuelve a incorporar las
modificaciones realizadas en el Decreto Ley Nº 17.567 sancionado en 1968.
Recién en 1984, el gobierno democrático sanciona la Ley Nº 23.077, que retrotrae el marco legal al
Código Penal de 1921 donde se restablecen los casos de no punibilidad vigentes actualmente. En
2012, la Corte Suprema se pronuncia con el fallo “F.A.L” sobre el aborto por violación y resuelve que
las mujeres violadas, sean “normales o insanas” (de acuerdo al fallo), pueden interrumpir un
embarazo sin autorización judicial previa ni temor a sufrir una posterior sanción penal, eximiendo de
castigo al médico que practique la intervención. Según el fallo, sólo es necesario una declaración
jurada que deje constancia del delito del que fue víctima la persona que quiera interrumpir el
embarazo.
En 2015 el Protocolo para la Atención Integral de las Personas con Derecho a la Interrupción Legal del
Embarazo (Protocolo ILE) desarrollado por el Ministerio de Salud de la Nación, retoma los lineamientos
del fallo “F.A.L” y agrega consideraciones en cuanto al concepto de salud,
1
Fuente https://www.huesped.org.ar/informacion/derechos-sexuales-y-reproductivos/tusderechos/interrupcion-legal-del-embarazo/historia-del-aborto-en-argentina/ consultada el 12-3-2021
2
incorporando los aspecto físicos, psíquicos y sociales y aclara que el peligro de la salud puede ser
potencial.
Por primera vez, en 2018, se trató en el congreso el proyecto de Ley de Interrupción Voluntaria
del embarazo. Este tuvo aprobación en la cámara de diputados pero no en la cámara de
senadores.
Finalmente, en diciembre de 2020, se aprobó la Ley 27.610 de Acceso a la interrupción voluntaria del
embarazo. La misma se promulgó en enero de 2021, estableciendo así el derecho a la interrupción
voluntaria del embarazo, durante las primeras 14 semanas de gestación, para las personas con
capacidad de gestar de manera igualitaria. Después de ese plazo, sólo se puede acceder a la práctica
por las causales contempladas en las legislaciones previas.
II - Un poco de historia sobre la Campaña Nacional por el Derecho al Aborto Legal,
Seguro y Gratuito2
Durante décadas feministas venimos poniendo en debate el tema del aborto y las consecuencias
de su status legal actual para la vida y la salud de las mujeres. La Campaña Nacional por el
Derecho al Aborto legal, Seguro y Gratuito es una amplia y diversa alianza federal, que articula
y recupera parte de la historia de las luchas desarrolladas en Argentina por el derecho al aborto
legal, seguro y gratuito.
Tiene sus simientes en el XVIII Encuentro Nacional de Mujeres realizado en Rosario en el año
2003 y en el XIX ENM desarrollado en Mendoza en el 2004.
Impulsada desde grupos feministas y del movimiento de mujeres, como así también desde
mujeres pertenecientes a movimientos políticos y sociales, cuenta en la actualidad con la
adhesión de organizaciones y personalidades vinculadas a organismos de derechos humanos,
de ámbitos académicos y científicos, trabajadoras/es de salud, sindicatos y diversos
movimientos sociales y culturales, entre ellos redes campesinas y de educación, organizaciones
de desocupadas/os, de fábricas recuperadas, grupos estudiantiles, comunicadoras y
comunicadores sociales, etc.
Desde la campaña asumimos un compromiso con la integralidad de los Derechos Humanos, y
defendemos el derecho al aborto como una causa justa para recuperar la dignidad de las
mujeres y con ellas, la de todos los seres humanos.
Quienes la integramos hemos apostado colectivamente a converger en una gran
heterogeneidad de actividades y procesos estratégicos para:
•
•
•
Instalar en la sociedad y en el Estado el debate en torno a la necesidad de despenalizar
y legalizar el aborto en Argentina;
Contribuir a que más mujeres y organizaciones se sumen en este proceso y reclamo;
Lograr el debate y la aprobación de una norma legal que despenalice y legalice el
aborto en Argentina.
Fue lanzada el 28 de mayo de 2005, Día de Internacional de Acción por la Salud de las Mujeres,
y desde entonces tiene la capacidad y la fuerza de coordinar actividades simultáneamente en
2
Fuente: www.abortolegal.com.ar
3
distintos puntos del país bajo la consigna: “Educación sexual para decidir, anticonceptivos para
no abortar, aborto legal para no morir”.
Consideramos la necesidad de legalizar y despenalizar el aborto como una cuestión de salud
pública, de justicia social y de derechos humanos de las mujeres, lo que quedó plasmado en el
Proyecto de Interrupción Voluntaria del Embarazo elaborado colectivamente en el año 2006,
durante una plenaria nacional realizada en la ciudad de Rosario. El Proyecto fue presentado en
la Cámara de Diputados de la Nación en 2007 y en 2009. En marzo de 2010 se presentó
nuevamente cada 2 años. En 2018 se debate por primera vez en el Congreso Nacional, se obtiene
media sanción en la Cámara de Diputadas y Diputados, y no se aprueba en la Cámara de
Senadoras y Senadores.
III - Puntos destacados de la Ley IVE Nro. 27.610
1. Se consagra el derecho de mujeres y personas con otras identidades de género con
capacidad de gestar a decidir la interrupción del embarazo, requerir y acceder a la
atención del aborto, y recibir atención postaborto en los servicios del sistema de salud.
2. El aborto se permitirá hasta la semana catorce inclusive, del proceso gestacional. Fuera
de ese plazo solo se podrá acceder en caso de violación o si estuviere en peligro la vida
o la salud integral de la persona gestante.
3. Mujeres y personas gestantes tienen derecho a acceder a la interrupción de su
embarazo en los servicios del sistema de saludo con su asistencia, en un plazo máximo
de diez (10) días corridos desde su requerimiento.
4. En caso de menores de 13 años, se debe contar con el consentimiento informado y la
asistencia de al menos uno de sus progenitores o representante legal.
5. En los casos de adolescentes de entre 13 y 16, deberá tener un acompañante o
"referente afectivo".
6. Previo a la realización del aborto se requiere el consentimiento informado de la
persona gestante expresado por escrito.
7. El profesional de salud que deba intervenir de manera directa en la interrupción del
embarazo tiene derecho a ejercer la objeción de conciencia. Para ello deberá mantener
su decisión en todos los ámbitos, público y privado, en que ejerza su profesión, y derivar
de buena fe a la paciente para que sea atendida por otro u otra profesional en forma
temporánea y oportuna, sin dilaciones.
8. Los centros de salud privados o de la seguridad social que no cuenten con profesionales
para realizar un aborto a causa de la objeción de conciencia deberán prever y disponer
la derivación a un lugar, de similares características, donde se realice efectivamente
la prestación.
9. El personal de salud no podrá negarse a la realización de la interrupción del embarazo
en caso de que la vida o salud de la persona gestante esté en peligro y requiera
atención inmediata e impostergable.
10. Tampoco se podrá alegar objeción de conciencia para negarse a prestar atención
sanitaria postaborto. El incumplimiento de los requisitos para ejercer el derecho de
objeción de conciencia dará lugar a las sanciones disciplinarias, administrativas, penales
y civiles, según corresponda.
11. Obras sociales y prepagas deben incorporar la cobertura integral y gratuita de la
interrupción voluntaria del embarazo. Estas prestaciones quedan incluidas en el
Programa Nacional de Garantía de Calidad de la Atención Médica y en el PMO con
cobertura total, junto con las prestaciones de diagnóstico, medicamentos y terapias de
apoyo.
4
12. El Estado tiene la responsabilidad de implementar la Ley número 26.150 de Educación
Sexual Integral, estableciendo políticas activas para la promoción y el fortalecimiento
de la salud sexual y reproductiva de toda la población.
IV – Socorristas en Red (feministas que abortamos)3
Socorristas en Red -feministas que abortamos- (en adelante SenRed) es una articulación de
colectivas de Argentina. Damos información -siguiendo los protocolos de la Organización
Mundial de la Salud- y acompañamos a mujeres y a otras personas con posibilidad de gestar que
han decidido interrumpir embarazos inviables para ese momento de sus vidas. Para que lo hagan
de manera segura y cuidada.
SenRed está integrada en la actualidad por colectivas que activamos en diferentes geografías
del país. Todas las colectivas tenemos autonomía en nuestro funcionamiento. Nos encontramos
juntas en la construcción de acompañamientos cuidados, amorosos y afectados.
Nuestros principios dan cuenta de un activismo voluntario y solidario. Nuestra disposición se
enmarca en la ética del cuidado, buscamos hacer encarnadura la apuesta de ¡nos tenemos entre
nosotras y nosotres!
SenRed es posible en una compleja red de relaciones inscriptas en una época particular. Desde
el inicio, en el año 2012, nuestro activismo estuvo signado por la presencia insoslayable de la
Campaña Nacional por el Derecho al Aborto Legal, Seguro y Gratuito, y como parte activa de la
misma logramos, junto a todas las organizaciones que la componen y al movimiento feminista
en su conjunto, armar y provocar la Marea Verde y que desde el 30 de diciembre de 2020 el
derecho al aborto voluntario sea ley en nuestro país.
Fue en el año 2014 cuando SenRed adquirió un claro sentido de Red de acompañantes, para insistir
con cuidar la vida y la salud de quienes deciden abortar, ante las experiencias y evidencias empíricas
que muestran que cuando una persona decidió abortar, así lo hará. Desde entonces - y también
ahora, con la Ley 27.610 en mano- informamos y acompañamos las decisiones de quienes deciden
abortar, exigiendo que se garanticen los derechos conquistados y desplegando escuchas que alojen
las necesidades y deseos de las personas que acuden a nosotrxs.
Nos propusimos:
-Desclandestinizar las prácticas de abortar y las de acompañar.
-Despatologizar las experiencias de abortar.
-Discutir, dialogar, exigir desde la experiencia de acompañar.
-Colaborar en el armado de redes, en especial, de la Red de Profesionales de la Salud
por el Derecho a Decidir, haciendo de las articulaciones un modo de activismo político.
-Dejarnos interpelar por las experiencias de quienes abortan para revisar nuestros
propios estigmas con el aborto.
-Armar pedagogías de la “acción directa” y del “estar ahí”.
3
Más información en www.socorristasenred.org
5
V - Algunos puntos para el debate sobre lo logrado
-La Ley más colectivamente luchada: logramos extenderla por fuera de las fronteras
feministas. Convencimos.
-El impulso de los feminismos a nivel global y local.
-El movimiento Ni Una Menos (2015) y la capacidad de movilización masiva. Los Paros del
8M. El impacto de esto en la política pública y en las organizaciones sociales, sindicales.
-El lugar de la Educación Sexual Integral.
-El lugar de las redes de comunicadorxs y el impacto en los medios de comunicación.
-La independencia de los partidos políticos en la Campaña Nacional por el Derecho al Aborto.
-Un proyecto de Ley propio y el proyecto de Ley del Poder Ejecutivo: articulaciones y
diálogos.
-El interés por extender la Campaña Nacional a todos los territorios.
-Priorizar los acuerdos por encima de las diferencias y construir desde ahí sin perder
autonomías para desplegar lo que nos distingue (el slogan de la Campaña Nacional).
-La estrategia hacia los grupos anti-derechos.
-La Marea Verde. Las argumentaciones. La vitalidad creativa.
-El activismo de Socorristas en Red (feministas que abortamos) y su contribución a la
extensión de la sensibilidad despenalizadora y legalizadora.
- Ruth Zurbriggen –
Colectiva Feminista La Revuelta (Neuquén-Patagonia Argentina); Socorristas en Red
(feministas que abortamos) – Campaña Nacional por el Derecho al Aborto Legal, Seguro y
Gratuito.
Neuquén, 13 de marzo de 2021
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 10 of 25
SOUTH KOREA
Kim Na Young, SHARE
The anti-abortion law of South Korea was made during the Japanese occupation. After
independence and the Korean war, when the first members of National Assembly made
Criminal Law in 1953, they decided to keep the criminal provision on abortion made by the
Japanese government. According to the Criminal Act of South Korea, women who get an
abortion can spend up to a year in prison or be fined up to 2 million won (about 1,850 dollars).
Doctors, midwives, and any healthcare workers who provide abortions can face up to two years
in prison.
However, during the 1970s, a dictatorial government drove national family planning policy with
an economic development plan, and the government enacted the Mother and Child Health Law
to push the population control. This law defines five exceptions to illegal abortion. The grounds
are an eugenic disease of parents or disability of parents, pregnancy by rape or incest, and
critical health problems by pregnancy. Also, this law requires the consent of (male) spouses
even on these grounds.
Under this law, many women with disabilities and who have the transmittable disease were
forced to have an abortion. Abortion issues dealt with injustice to the people with disabilities
and as just individual matters in the circumstances of ignoring socioeconomic, and sexual
inequalities of this society.
In this historical context, many women actually didn’t know the existence of abortion law
because the law did not work actually. Abortion was a very common experience for many
Korean women. Women who have experienced abortion tended to hide their experiences
because of social stigma not because of the law.
Since 2005. the Korean government turned the direction of population policy due to a trend of
fertility rate decline. And in 2009, the first anti-choice doctors' organization appeared. They
sued doctors and hospitals for performing an abortion. It was very effective to make doctors
refuse abortion services for fear of punishment. Most of the doctors refused abortion services.
And many women were sued by their partner or husband. During this period, women went
abroad for an abortion and the cost increased very highly. Furthermore, the black market and
broker of abortion pill appeared.
South Korean feminists mobilized people for the first time to raise problems of anti-abortion
law in 2010.
In 2012, the Constitutional Court reviewed the criminal provision on abortion in the Criminal
Code for the first time, and they decided the law is constitutional. Unfortunately, in November
of the same year, an 18 years old woman died during an abortion procedure. She was in 23
weeks of her pregnancy.
In 2016, the Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare announced an amendment that would
double jeopardize doctors who performed in terminating a pregnancy by listing surgical
abortions as an “unethical” medical practice.
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 11 of 25
This pulled out the fuse of the movement again, Korean feminists mobilized ‘Black Protest
Korea’ and launched ‘Joint Action for Reproductive Justice’. More than 235,000 people signed
a Blue House petition calling for the repeal of the anti-abortion act and the legalization of
mifepristone.
Co-founders of SHARE met in 2015, just one year before the abortion issue re-emerged, when
the organization Women with Disabilities Empathy initiated the Planning Group to Make a New
Paradigm for Reproductive Rights for Women with Disabilities.
In 2016, the Sexual and Reproductive Rights Forum was made, gathering activists, lawyers,
doctors, and researchers to analyze the intersectionality of abortion issues in a historical
context and to turn it into reproductive justice discourse. In 2017, there was a proposal to
launch the Joint Action for Reproductive Justice to other organizations which also include the
Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, an organization of women with disabilities, LGBTAIQ
groups, progressive doctors’ organizations, and progressive parties have been joining forces.
As a result of the continuous struggle, on April 11, 2019, the Constitutional Court ruled the
criminal provisions on abortion in the Criminal Act is ‘unconstitutional’. The court ordered that
the government and lawmakers should make an amendment which does not violate women’s
rights till the end of 2020, and if not, the criminal provisions in the Crime Act will not be effective
from 2021.
In last October, South Korean government proposed the amendment which allows abortion
only conditionally. The amendment states that women who need to terminate their pregnancy
during the second trimester have to get a confirmation that they have a legal reason from the
counseling center, and have to wait for 24 hours before they go to the hospital. And the
amendment allows so-called conscientious objection to doctors. When a doctor refuses, their
obligation is just to introduce another counseling center to the woman. Furthermore, women in
their teenage years need counseling confirmation or their parents' consent additionally.
The National Assembly failed to make an agreement for the amendment of the existing law.
As per the Constitutional Court's ruling of 2019, the criminal provisions on abortion in the
Criminal Act is no longer effective from January 1st, 2021.
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 12 of 25
THAILAND
Supecha Baotip, Tamtang
Thailand has first punished women for abortion 113 years ago. (60 years as the “panel code”4
and before that it is called something else) When Thailand did the country “modernization” and
adopt western trend of law. Before that, abortion was not the crime against women but the one
who cause abortion to women (both the health providers and other action.
Abortion was portrayed in Thai folk tales. Khun Chang-Khun Paen which belief was first
created in 1600 A.D has the scene in which one women was killed while being pregnant by
her husband and the fetus was taken out, put through some ritual that the spirit is tied to the
“father” to help him. In the same folk tales, the main women character was sentenced by King
to be excecuted as she can’t decide who she wants to be her husband after she was in love
with one men but was taken to married with another men. Wanthong Song Jai means a woman
who has 2 lovers (Wanthong is the name of this woman). This phrase has been used to
condemn women until now. We still learn about this in school and TV show still remake this
story.
It’s cleared that bias to abortion is the reflection of patriarchy Thai social structure. Not only
law and folklore and medias but also the Buddhist monk and non was concerting about how
the abortion is a sin of a woman, of course it hardly see men in this scene.
We are astonished also with the when the Constitution Court make it’s decision in February
2020 with the reason that the penal code art 301 is a limitation of the women’s rights to make
decision over her body which is against art 28 of the constitution, but it doesn’t against the art
27 which is about the equality of people in regard of sex and other factors. The Constitution
give the explanation that:
“An offence under section 301 of the Penal Code could only occur with a woman because by
nature only a woman could become pregnant and terminate a pregnancy. Since men and
women have different physical attributes, applying the penalty and offence under section 301
of the Penal Code to a man who had a relationship with a woman constituting the cause for
pregnancy to achieve equality and fairness would amount to the identical treatment of
essentially different objects. This would be an unfair treatment of the man.”5
This means to me that the patriarchy is subtly weaved in our laws as it reflects not only in the
panel code which is the law apply to everyone even in the personal in the highest court of the
country.
MOPH has been addressing abortion issue for about 5 years but the issue was twisted to be
the “unplanned pregnancy of teenager” and the aim is given more importance of maintaining
pregnant girls in schools than providing support for youth to access to safe abortion services
or make a huge turn about sex education in Thailand. The “Teenage Pregnancy bill” has been
issued for 5 years already with the national board composed of different ministries in Thailand,
4Content
of the old abortion law , retrieve in https://library.siam-legal.com/thai-law/criminal-code-abortionsections-301-305/ on 15/3/2021
5 Constitution Court Ruling retrieve in
https://constitutionalcourt.or.th/occ_en/download/BE2562_2019/2020/20_04_Constitutional%20Court%20Ruling.p
df page 5-6 on 15/3/2021
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 13 of 25
but we still see the news of girls who got complication for self-management late term abortion
which when it turns to news cover, she face a lot of stigma in school. She is considering to file
the case against the news agency as they violate her rights as the news cover her school name
and all the details that her school friends and neighbors easy to point out that it’s her in the
news.
Tamtang and our network has been working on decriminalize the abortion since 3 years ago.
CHOICE network (which Tamtang is part of) and Referral for Safe Abortion (RSA – network of
safe abortion providers) support a doctor to put the case to Constitution Court in which it turns
out to be the Ruling as mentioned above.
We also worked with Move Forward Party and finally they agree to submit the draft bill which
proposed to legalize abortion upto 24 weeks. 6
The passed bill has this following contents :
Art 301: women can get an abortion if the age of the foetus is up to 12 weeks. But if a woman
gets an abortion after 12 weeks, she can face being imprisoned for up to 6 months and will be
liable to pay a fine of 10,000 baht or face both.
Art 305 A pregnancy can be terminated beyond the permitted period of time when;
(1) if it poses a threat to the mother’s physical or emotional health,
(2) if the foetus is known to have abnormalities;
(3) if the pregnancy is the result of a sexual assault and women insist so to her doctor ( no
need to report to the police);
(4) when women insist in doing so;
(5) women at 12-20 weeks can obtain the safe abortion if women insist and get the “option
counseling”
This is a victory somehow as under 12 weeks it’s all legal.
12-20 weeks women still don’t need to be judged by doctor for her reason just get the
counseling session (ideally without threat or persuasion, only if she needs help)
And after that, she can still talk with her doctor about why she would like to do abortion.
But as we see how thai society is in it’s attitude. We still need to follow this closely.
…………………………………………………………….
Further reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Thailand
6
https://prachatai.com/english/node/9032
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 14 of 25
Appendix 1
Old Abortion panel code:
Chapter 3: Offence Of Abortion
Section 301. Causing Abortion
Any woman, causing herself to be aborted or allowing the other person to procure the abortion
for herself, shall be imprisoned not more of three years or fined not more of six thousand Baht,
or both.
Section 302. Procuring an Abortion with Consent
Whoever, procures abortion for a woman with her consent, shall be punished with
imprisonment not exceeding five years or fined not exceeding ten thousand Baht, or both. If
such act causes other grievous bodily harm to the woman also, the offender shall be punished
with imprisonment not exceeding seven years or fined not exceeding fourteen thousand Baht,
or both. If such act causes death to the woman, the offender shall be punished with
imprisonment not exceeding ten years and fined not exceeding twenty thousand Baht.
Section 303. Procuring an Abortion without Consent
Whoever, procures abortion for a woman without her consent, shall be punished with
imprisonment not exceeding seven years or fined not exceeding fourteen thousand Baht, or
both. If such act causes other grievous bodily harm to the woman also, the offender shall be
punished with imprisonment of one to ten years and fined of two thousand to twenty thousand
Baht.
If such act causes death to the woman, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment of
five to twenty years and fined of ten thousand to forty thousand Baht.
Section 304. Attempted Abortion
Whoever, attempts to commit the offence according to Section 301 or Section 302, first
paragraph, shall not be punished.
Section 305.
If the offence mentioned in Section 301 and Section 302, be committed by a medical
practitioner, and:
1. It is necessary for the sake of the health of such woman; or
The woman is pregnant on account of the commission of the offence as provided in Section
276, Section 277, Section 282, Section 283 or Section 284 the offender is not guilty.
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 15 of 25
HONDURAS
Grecia Lozano, Somos Muchas
Photo 2: Grecia Lozano (4th left to right) and a group of Somos Muchas activists in their last strategic meeting held
in February 5-7, 2021 in Lake Yojoa, Honduras.
Background on the situation of abortion in Honduras
Abortion in Honduras has been historically stigmatized since the colonialist era from 15001820’s. In 1984, the Congress approved a new criminal code that included abortion as a crime
and contemplating 3 circumstances in which women and providers wouldn’t be prosecuted: 1)
To save women’s lives and health, 2) When pregnancy was a result of sexual assault, and 3)
When the fetus couldn’t survive outside the uterus. However, during the socialization of the
“new criminal code” the Catholic church in Honduras pressed the congress the eliminate the
exceptions and successfully turned the law into a total prohibition of abortion. Since then,
thousands of women had been suffering the consequences of unsafe abortion and the
providers were forced to perform any procedure even to save women’s lives. In 2016, the
Congress launches a new criminal code maintaining the total prohibition of abortion and on
March 31, 2016 a group of activists and women’s rights organizations gather together to create
Somos Muchas, the national platform for the right to choose in Honduras. In 2017 the criminal
code passed with little support of the opposition and the social movements. Since then, Somos
Muchas stablished itself as a permanent platform with a strategic long-term planning to
eradicate forced maternities.
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 16 of 25
On January 12, 2021 the conservative party introduced a bill in the Congress to modify the
Constitution and include a total prohibition of abortion in the section 67 that protects the right
to live. This bill was supported by both Catholic and Evangelic leaders as a coordinated
regional response to the decriminalization of abortion in Argentina. The Congress virtually
passed this bill and the Constitution was modified to include this change, however, Somos
Muchas and other civil society organizations are challenging it at the Supreme Court because
the due process to pass the bill was not followed properly and the bill itself violates the rights
of women.
It’s very difficult to estimate how many unsafe abortions occur in Honduras every year,
however, according the Center for Women’s Rights 13,692 women were discharged from
public hospitals with an abortion diagnosis7. According to the Ministry of Health, more than 900
women have died in public hospitals as a result of preventable causes during pregnancy8. Both
data clearly show that restricting abortion in the Constitution and in the Criminal Code is not a
successful measure to prevent abortions.
7
Secreto a voces: unsa reseña del aborto en Honduras. (2015). Centro de Derechos de Mujeres. Consulted on
March 9, 2021. Link: http://derechosdelamujer.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Secreto-a-voces-una-resenasobre-el-aborto-en-Honduras.pdf
8 Optio’s internal research to be published in 2021.
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 17 of 25
POLAND
Urszula Grycuk, Federa
Abortion and post-abortion care in Poland
Recent 2021 change in the anti-abortion law
Poland has one of the most restrictive abortion laws in Europe. The 1993 Family Planning
Act9 bans abortion with the two exceptions (NEW!):
1. Continuation of a pregnancy endangers either the life or health of a pregnant person.
No statutory time limit. Statutory obligation: medical certificate. Service provision:
public hospital with an OB-GYN department.
2. Pregnancy resulting from an unlawful act e.g. rape, incest. Statutory time limit: 12
weeks. Statutory obligation: prosecutor’s certificate. Service provision: public hospital
with an OB-GYN department or private practice.
Until 27 January 2021 there were 3 exceptions to abortion ban: when a foetus was diagnosed
with severe and irreversible malformation or an incurable, life-threatening disease.
On 27 January 2021 the decision of the Constitutional Tribunal10 came into force in
which the Tribunal found the foetal impairment ground inconsistent with the
Constitution of the Republic of Poland. This decision results in a de facto ban on
abortion care in Poland. It created even greater barriers in access to legal abortion care
for women in Poland.
Since the Tribunal’s decision has in effect extended the scope of the prohibition of abortion
and criminal liability for those who perform or assist women in accessing abortion care outside
the law, the number of doctors reluctant to authorize or provide legal abortion care increase,
thereby further undermining women’s access to legal abortion care in Poland. Since late
January 2021, there have been reports of women who qualify for legal abortion because the
pregnancy poses a risk to their mental health and who despite having obtained a medical
certificate attesting that they meet the legal requirements, have nevertheless been denied care
and faced difficulties in obtaining access to legal abortion care in Poland.
Before the change of 2021
In 2017, according to the ministerial data11 out of 1000 procedures per year, 98% of them
were performed due to foetal impairment. Only 10% of hospitals performed legal
abortions12. The vast majority refuse to carry out abortions by invoking conscientious
objection or by rejecting patients without legitimate justification. The range of methods to
extend diagnostic and bureaucratic procedures is broad: ordering unnecessary tests,
9
The Family Planning, Human Embryo Protection and Conditions of Permissibility of Abortion Act of 7 January
1993, http://bit.ly/FPA_Poland.
10 The independence and legitimacy of Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal as an effective means of constitutional
review of Polish law has been severely undermined by reforms taken since 2015. The Tribunal can no longer be
considered an “independent and impartial court.”
11 The Council of Ministers, The Report regarding the implementation of the Family Planning Act in 2017,
http://orka.sejm.gov.pl/Druki8ka.nsf/0/6F82FBB36BAA945CC125839200434FC7/%24File/3185.pdf (January
2019).
12 Data obtained by the Federation for Women and Family Planning under The Public Information Act.
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 18 of 25
repeating diagnostic process, requiring additional certificates, summoning medical councils,
obligatory psychological consultations, and written refusals from local hospitals. There are no
uniform procedures for hospitals that could protect patients from abuse and undue burden.
Therefore, the number of women, who migrate to foreign abortion clinics despite having lawful
indications for a legal abortion, is on the rise. As depicted by the experiences of the Federation
for Women and Family Planning, interventions on behalf of patients, counselling, advocating
for procedures and strategic litigation are important strategies to improve abortion
accessibility.
The act stipulates that abortion can be carried out exclusively with a patient’s consent. Minors
need parental consent, and in case of disagreement, a guardianship court decides. Doctors,
nurses and midwives are allowed to deny the provision of healthcare services for reasons of
conscience. Legal abortions are performed with Misoprostol (Mifepriston is not registered in
Poland), followed by curettage (if necessary, commonly in the second trimester abortions).
A self-induced abortion is not punishable by the law. A person who terminates someone’s
pregnancy in violation of the law is liable to imprisonment for up to three years. The
same punishment is imposed on anyone who helps a pregnant person to terminate their
pregnancy against the law, or who persuades them to do so.
With 9.1 million women in a reproductive age the number of non-statutory abortions is
estimated at 80-120 thousand per year. Around 25%-33% of women have had an abortion13.
Abortion choices depend on many conditions such as financial resources, family and work
situation, pregnancy duration, time flexibility, knowledge, support and awareness. They involve
ordering abortion pills, migration to a foreign clinic, private practice in the abortion
underground, and (rarely) home methods.
Behind the initiatives to further restrict anti-abortion provisions stand anti-choice movements,
the Church, and the ultraconservative government, which proliferate anti-abortions myths and
narratives personifying foetuses. The main actor of backlash – the Ordo Iuris Institute uses
legal arguments stemming from ideological, manipulative interpretations of the Constitution,
and international human rights documents. A series of counter-protests i.a. the famous Black
Protest in 2016, has led to a historic and stable rise of pro-choice views. Depending on the
poll, 55-69% of Poles are for legal and accessible abortion14. In 2020-2021 the protests against
the ban on abortion were happening and continue to be organised by the feminist movement
in Poland15.
Contraception
The Family Planning Act obliges both governmental and local administration to provide citizens
with an easy access to "methods and means serving conscious procreation". This
responsibility has never been properly fulfilled. According to the latest Contraception Atlas,
13
Centre for Public Opinion Research, Abortion experiences of Poles,
https://www.cbos.pl/SPISKOM.POL/2013/K_060_13.PDF, (Warsaw, 2013).
14 Federation for Women and Family Planning, “Abortion is part of our lives”. International Safe Abortion Day 2018
in Poland, https://en.federa.org.pl/28sept2018, (September 29, 2018).
15 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/28/world/europe/poland-women-abortion-strike.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54669257
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/27/world/europe/poland-abortion-law.html
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 19 of 25
Poland occupies the last place among 46 European countries16. Accessibility of modern
contraception was ranked at 31.5% based on respective policies, access to contraceptive
supplies, family planning counselling and online information. All types of contraception are on
prescription except for barrier methods - (internal) condoms, diaphragms, spermicides, cervical
caps.
Only two types of combined oral contraceptive pills are reimbursed, while one of them is
reported to cause more side effects, and the other is registered for therapeutic purposes, not
contraception. Other means of contraception like IUDs or patches are not even partly refunded,
which deepens social inequalities in accessing safe and effective contraception. The insertion
of IUDs is free of charge for those insured, yet awareness about such an opportunity is not
widespread and the procedure is priced too low. As a result, doctors direct patients to their
private practices charging them EUR 120-400 and it is very difficult to execute one’s right to
this service in the public system. Voluntary sterilization is illegal for both women and men, yet
vasectomy is available in the private sector (EUR 500-750).
There are no refunds or supporting mechanisms for vulnerable groups such as adolescents,
the unemployed, people with a low-income or disabilities. Intrauterine devices (IUDs), vaginal
rings, and emergency contraception are available in many or even most pharmacies. Other
types of hormonal contraception such as the combined patch, and female condoms are less
accessible, though they can be found in some pharmacies. Many forms of contraception,
especially LARCs, are not affordable.
According to the law, conscientious objection enables medical professionals not to carry out
procedures that are against their worldview. Legal interpretations indicate that writing out
prescription is an informational service and should not be denied by means of conscience
clause. Yet, it is not uncommon that doctors use it as justification. Moreover, there are
pharmacies that intentionally either do not sell contraception or do not have it in stock.
Ideology, lack of political will to fight abuse, commercialization of healthcare, no sexuality
education at schools, no family planning counselling, obligatory prescription, lacking
reimbursement schemes, parental consent in the case of minors – all of these factors have a
detrimental effect on accessibility of contraception. The current use of contraception method
is studied in opinion polls only, thus there are outdated and sometimes inconsistent (there is
no official monitoring). The most popular methods are condoms (66%), followed by pills (29%),
withdrawal (21%), natural methods (13%).17
Sexuality Education
The Family Planning Act obliges authorities to guarantee education about “sex life, principles
of conscious and responsible parenthood, the value of family, life in the prenatal phase and
methods and means of conscious procreation”. The course is called “Preparation for Family
Life”. The classes are conducted 14 hours per year in primary schools (grades 4-8) and in
16
European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights, Contraception Atlas 2019,
https://www.contraceptioninfo.eu/, (Brussels, 2019).
17 Zbigniew Izdebski, Krzysztof Wąż, “Reproductive plans and use of contraception in Poles of reproductive age”,
Public Health and Management 15, no. 2 (August 2017), http://www.ejournals.eu/Zdrowie-Publiczne-iZarzadzanie/2017/Tom-15-zeszyt-2/art/9885/, (January 15, 2020).
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 20 of 25
secondary schools. Theoretically, they are obligatory, but a parent may withdraw their consent
for a child to attend the course. The core curriculum focuses on promoting sexual abstinence,
family values, heteronormativity, and traditional gender roles. Both the curricula and text books
are consistent with the Roman Catholic ethics and norms. The course can be taught by a
person who is qualified to teach and has a university degree in family science or has completed
postgraduate studies/ training relating to the content of the classes.18 Both the content,
suitability, teachers’ qualifications are poorly evaluated by pupils, who find the subject
ideological, politicized and discriminatory (reinforcing gender stereotypes, homophobia,
misogyny, transphobia). Contraception and diverse sexual orientations are hardly ever
mentioned. Consequently, as little as 60% of youth attend the subject19.
In the absence of state-organized comprehensive sexuality education, it is for the NGOs,
grassroots groups and parents that adolescents are provided with proper education. The oldest
and most renowned actor is the Ponton Group, which has been providing peer-to-peer
education, informational materials about contraception, consent, safe sex etc., counselling
(helpline, online forum), and free workshops at schools. According to their experience, the level
of knowledge on sexuality education is low, while pregnancy paranoia is on the rise. A few
examples from the 2015 study on 18-year old people: 30% know how IUDs work and when
probability of getting pregnant is highest, and 50% believe that withdrawal prevents
pregnancy.20 The lack of sexuality education makes youth more vulnerable to sexual violence,
STI/STD and teenage pregnancy. In 2018, over 9,000 adolescents became mothers, whereas
39 were below 14 and eligible for legal abortion21. Given low rates of testing for STIs/STDs,
there are no reliable data, but experts point to a rise in HIV/syphilis infections.22 In Poland, 5070% of people are not aware of being HIV-positive.23
2019 was marked by intensified attacks by fundamentalists who spread misconception about
sexuality education (common ultraconservative frames of alleged sexualization), the
respective WHO standards and intended to link sexual educators to paedophiles. In October
2019 the Polish parliament discussed the citizens’ bill “Stop Paedophilia” which foresees
criminal penalties for “promoting sexual intercourse or any other sexual activity by a minor,
while acting in connection with holding a position”. The aim was both to prevent young people
from exercising their right to reliable education, and to intimidate those involved in sex
education and the provision of health care to people under the age of 18.24 Following massive
protests, the bill was directed to a special parliamentary committee [as of January 2020].
Backlash against sexuality education, similarly as with abortion, contradicts societal
perspectives. An opinion poll that was takes soon afterwards revealed that 80% of Poles
18
Ponton Group, “Sex education in Poland”, http://ponton.org.pl/en/sex-education-in-poland/.
The Council of Ministers, Ibid.
20 The Educational Research Institute, Opinions and expectations of young adults and parents of school-age
children concerning sexuality education and sexuality, http://bit.ly/37LokgO, (Warsaw 2015).
21 Central Statistical Office, Demographic Yearbook 2018, http://bit.ly/2u6GZVJ.
22 Ponton Group, “Sex education in Poland”, http://ponton.org.pl/en/sex-education-in-poland/.
23 Ewa Gosiewska, “Over a half of Poles are not aware of their HIV infection”, https://www.termedia.pl/mz/Ponadpolowa-Polakow-zakazonych-wirusem-HIV-o-tym-nie-wie,27862.html, (October 13, 2017).
24 Ponton Group, Position of the Ponton Group on the “Stop Paedophilia” project,
http://ponton.org.pl/en/statements/position-of-the-ponton-group-on-the-stop-paedophilia-project/
19
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 21 of 25
support sex education at schools and 47% believe that classes should start at primary
schools.25
Pre- and antenatal care
The Family Planning Act obliges central and local authorities to guarantee perinatal care as
well as medical, social and financial support to pregnant people.
Healthcare is free during pregnancy and six weeks of puerperium. Prenatal programme
involves 42 compulsory clinical and paraclinical examinations, including three ultrasound
scans and tests for STIs. However, according to the Supreme Audit Office, only a small
minority of women undergo all examinations (2% in gynaecological clinics reviewed)26. In the
case of specific medical situations – most commonly foetal abnormalities – patients are entitled
to specialist diagnostics like amniocentesis. Accessibility varies between regions.
Perinatal and Postnatal Care Standards were first introduced in 2016, updated in 2018. As
evaluated by the Childbirth with Dignity Foundation, the standards are one of the most
progressive regulations of its kind in the European Union. The document is based on WHO
recommendations and includes the latest research findings, guaranteeing a number of
patients’ rights before, during and after childbirth. One of the most important goals was to
decrease the medicalization of childbirth, which has yet to be attained. Women have a right to
(among others) prenatal education, care provided during midwife patronage visits, and nonpharmacological methods of childbirth pain management. There are both public and private
birthing schools, which include theoretical and practical lessons about delivery, breastfeeding,
child development, legal advice, postpartum depression, childcare and health lifestyle.
According to surveys, patients’ rights in ON-GYN departments are not fully respected. As
many as 54.3% of women experienced abuse related to the medical personnel’s
behaviour or not fulfilling all the procedures27. Patents report discrimination on maternity
wards based on their age, appearance or health condition. Harmful procedures are still present
- such as routine PVC insertion, birth induction, speeding up the birth by using oxytocin,
episiotomy, limiting the mobility, interrupting skin to skin contact and feeding with powder milk.
In 2017, epidural was used in only 10% of natural deliveries.
There are great disparities between cities and villages. In half of the municipalities, there is no
gynaecological clinic, however, in rural areas, a clinic has to serve over twice as many patients
as in urban ones. As a result, gynaecological care is privatized, depriving people with a lowincome of high-quality pre- and antenatal healthcare. Investigations by the Supreme Audit
Office indicated that in rural areas, there are higher infant mortality rates. Social disparities and
varying levels of education and awareness also impact accessibility of perinatal care. Another
Gazeta.pl, “80% of Poles for sexuality education at schools. 47% want such classes in primary schools”,
http://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/7,114883,25336268,80-procent-za-edukacja-seksualna-w-szkolachsondaz-dgp-i-rmf.html, (October 23, 2019).
26 Supreme Audit Office, Accessibility of prenatal testing, https://www.nik.gov.pl/aktualnosci/nik-o-dostepnoscibadan-prenatalnych.html, (May 17, 2016).
27 Federation for Women and Family Planning, Institutional violence in Poland. On systemic violations of
reproductive rights, federa.org.pl/przemoc-instytucjonalna, (December 2019).
25
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 22 of 25
barrier is conscientious objection, which is used – unlawfully - by some doctors to deny access
to prenatal testing.
The state provides 20 weeks of maternity leave (14 weeks are compulsory) for those with
employment contracts. During this leave, women receive 100% of their salary. Subsequently,
they can apply for a parental leave of 32 weeks (or more in the case of multiple births), which
can be shared between parents. If a woman decides to continue with the parental leave, she
receives 80% of her salary throughout 52 weeks. During pregnancy, maternity and parental
leaves, the employee is protected from dismissal. All insured fathers may take two weeks of
100% paid paternity leave.
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 23 of 25
USA
Marlene Gerber Gried, National Network of Abortion Funds
Abortion Access: Global Threats and Opportunities, Report from the U.S.
Marlene Gerber Fried, Faculty Director, CLPP (Civil Liberties and Public Policy Program),
Hampshire College, formerly, WGNRR board
Abortion was legalized in the U.S. when the Supreme Court issued its decision in Roe v Wade
(1973), declaring that abortion was protected under the constitutional right to privacy. This
decision repealed the existing restrictive laws in all states. However, Roe did not require any
action on the part of the government to ensure access. This left a huge gap between having a
legal right to abortion and being able to obtain one. Since that time, the opponents of abortion
have been filling that gap with restrictive laws and policies at both the state and federal levels–
over 1000 -- making it more and more difficult for increasing numbers of people to obtain a
legal abortion. These erosions of the right to an abortion fall disproportionately on those who
are marginalized by oppression and discrimination including people of color, those who are
poor, young, incarcerated, not citizens etc.
The anti-abortion forces are also working to have the Court overturn Roe, increasingly possible
with the Trump appointees. Legalizing abortion was an important step forward, but the battle
continues, on all fronts, legal, cultural, political, and in the streets. In addition to restrictive laws,
we have seen deadly violence and harassment aimed at clinics and those who work in them,
a decrease in the numbers of providers and facilities, an increase in stigma, and an expansion
of religious refusals (the opposition calls this conscientious objection).
The U.S. abortion history is a cautionary tale for all who are working to change laws – we can
talk about this in the breakout groups. But our focus today is the global impact of U.S.
international policies that limit abortion rights, health and access causing harm to people
globally. A stark example of this is, the Global Gag Rule (GGR), also known as the Mexico
City Policy. First implemented by executive order in 1984, it banned US funding for
organizations that performed abortion or related services, or advocated for the expansion of
abortion access, using any source of their funding. Since that time, every Democratic president
has repealed it and every Republican reinstated it. The Trump administration greatly expanded
the policy so that it applied to all U.S. global health assistance, increasing the amount of money
affected from roughly $600 million to an estimated $12 billion. almost all US health aid. This
affected most U.S. bilateral global health assistance, including funding for HIV under the U.S.
President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), maternal and child health, malaria,
nutrition, (https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/fact-sheet/mexico-city-policy-explainer/) and
family planning. The GGR has devastating effects. It heightens stigma and undermines health
and human rights, decreased access to abortion information, to providers, and to contraceptive
care. It silenced reproductive health and rights advocates, reduced outreach by community
health workers, and led to the imposition of other regressive policies.
https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/article_files/gpr2301320.pdf
-over-
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 24 of 25
Fried, p. 2
Resisting the Backlash
The Biden Administration rescinded the GGR by issuing an executive order soon after he took
office, but there is more to be done. The Helms Amendment is still in place – it is a law and
cannot simply be overturned in the same way as the GGR. Enacted in 1973, it restricts U.S.
foreign aid from going toward abortion. It specifically prohibits foreign assistance from paying
for the “performance of abortion as a method of family planning” or to “motivate or coerce any
person to practice abortions.” Like the GGT, is extremely harmful.
As in other countries, advocates in the U.S. are working hard to undo the damage, not just
from the Trump years, but of the decades long attacks on abortion rights. On the international
front, they are pushing the Biden administration to support the Global Health, Empowerment
and Rights (Global HER) act. This would prevent future presidents from reinstituting the “gag
rule.” Further, the proposed Abortion is Health Care Everywhere Act would repeal the
Helms Amendment. They are also pushing for the U.S. to allocate more money and resources
to reproductive health, both in the U.S. and internationally.
Expanding the Agenda: The Reproductive Justice Movement urges us to go beyond resisting
the threats to abortion rights and access. It promotes a broad, intersectional vision and agenda.
SisterSong (https://www.sistersong.net/)
defines Reproductive Justice as the human right to: maintain personal bodily autonomy (this
include sexual freedom), have children, not have children, and parent the children we have in
safe and sustainable communities.
3rd International Exchange | Abortion Situations Briefer | Page 25 of 25
3RD
INTERNATIONAL
EXCHANGE
LEARN.
INSPIRE.
GROW.