Australia: Abortion decriminalisation to get renewed push in NSW parliament

Abortion decriminalisation to get renewed push in NSW parliament

Greens proposal, which would create 150-metre protest-free zones around clinics, backed by medical and legal experts

Christopher Knaus
Sunday 7 May 2017

A proposal to decriminalise abortion and create protest-free zones around clinics is expected to come before New South Wales parliament this week, backed by doctors, lawyers, teachers, academics, unions and civil rights groups.

The Greens are leading the push to have abortion removed from the state’s Crimes Act, but are facing opposition from the Catholic church and the Christian lobby, which are seeking to lobby members of parliament against the changes.

Continued at source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/08/abortion-decriminalisation-to-get-renewed-push-in-nsw-parliament

MPs to discuss reform of UK’s Victorian-era abortion law

MPs to discuss reform of UK's Victorian-era abortion law

Under an act passed in 1861, women using pills at home to terminate an unplanned pregnancy can still be jailed for life in much of the UK

Sarah Boseley Health editor

Friday 10 March 2017

In years to come, it may be regarded as one of the last battles for women’s autonomy. Under an obscure Victorian law, passed when women did not even have the vote, the decision to terminate an unplanned pregnancy using pills in the privacy of a home is punishable by life in prison – for the woman and any doctor who helps her.

Now MPs are to discuss for the first time de-criminalising women who attempt to bring about their own abortion.

In modern-day Britain, most abortions take place before 12 weeks with the aid of pills. Yet if a woman orders those pills online and takes them without the consent of two doctors, she can be jailed. So can a doctor who gives them to her to take at home instead of in the clinic.

Continued at source: The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/10/mps-to-discuss-reform-of-uks-victorian-era-abortion-law

Abortion must be decriminalised in Australia: we can’t take our reproductive rights for granted

Abortion must be decriminalised in Australia: we can’t take our reproductive rights for granted
Mehreen Faruqi

Despite a majority of people supporting a woman’s right to choose, abortion is still a criminal offence in Queensland and NSW. It’s time to remove the shame and end the stigma

Mehreen Faruqi is a Greens NSW MP and the Greens spokeswoman on multiculturalism and transport

Wednesday 8 March 2017

It’s 17 years into the 21st century, yet the most basic right of women to have control over their own bodies is under attack not just in Trump’s United States but across the world – even in Australia.

One of the first executive orders signed by the US president reinstated and expanded the global gag rule which will strip US aid funds from NGOs that provide abortion or related services, including information or referrals, or even advocate for modernising abortion laws. This could impact millions of women in the most vulnerable circumstances by blocking their access to vital health services. Bolstered by this decision, the anti-choice lobby’s calls to cut off funding to Planned Parenthood have become even stronger and louder.

Continued at source: The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/08/abortion-must-be-decriminalised-in-australia-we-cant-take-our-reproductive-rights-for-granted

08.03.2017

Featured

Opinion

abortion criminalization

abortion law reform

decriminalisation

decriminalisation of abortion

Vote in Constitutional Commission of the Senate on Chilean abortion bill currently scheduled for 16 January

by Safe Abortion
Jan 10, 2017

On 15 December 2016, CNN reported that the Constitutional Commission of the Chilean Senate had decided that the bill to decriminalise abortion on three grounds – risk to the woman’s life, rape and fatal fetal anomaly – could be sent to the floor of the Senate for a final vote on 10 January 2017. The Commission conducted two day-long sessions on 2 and 3 January so as to be ready to vote on the bill the following day, 4 January, after almost a year and 10 months since the measure was first tabled in the Congress. But the vote did not happen that day.

On 7 and 9 January 2017, La Tercera reported that the Constitutional Commission will vote on the bill on 16 January 2016. They quote the President of the five-member Commission, Pedro Arroyo, who said: “The Commission has done a lot of serious work on the draft law… It has heard more than 35 experts in different areas of law who have given their opinions in favour or against the bill.” Over a period of three months, they have included professors of constitutional, civil and penal law.

The different positions within the group on this subject are said to augur tensions in the government’s New Majority coalition, which in part have contributed to the slow processing of the bill. However, the news site quoted several Senators who said the quality of the debate and points raised, in spite of personal views against abortion, made it clear that this was an issue of public policy that had to be addressed and was likely to pass. A spokesperson from Chile is Life also thought the debate was serious and professional, but that it would not have changed anyone’s opinions. Claudia Dides of Corporación Miles expressed the hope of many that a vote would finally take place and that sanity will prevail.

The date of the full Senate vote will depend on the Government and whether or not they decide to call an immediate debate and vote, next week or the next…. The Commission’s original timetable was that their vote would be today, 10 January, but this was subject to completion of a session in which legal scholars would be invited to resolve the last doubts of the legislators. That session was postponed due to problems in the diaries of the presenters, so the date for the vote was moved to 16 January.

Member of Congress, Guido Girardi, said in an interview in November 2016: “We have made progress on several issues, such as divorce and civil union, and today it is a matter of seeing what the status of Chilean women in society is… Today we want women to live their sexuality in a full way and that has to be done with sexuality education and contraceptive methods.” He confessed: “I would never have an abortion, but at the least I do not want any woman to be imprisoned for terminating her pregnancy… This is part of our country’s recovery of human rights… This is a priority, and it is an initiative that has 70% support of the country. In addition, we have been challenged from the outside for not recognising women as full subjects under the law… The pressure from conservative groups who oppose the reform is legitimate, but the Government has to govern… We want the Executive to show more urgency on this issue because they made a commitment to the country… even though it is easier not to cause conflict… Every woman must have the ability and the right to make her own decisions in these circumstances. Chile cannot go on like this.”

We are holding our breath until this vote takes place and send solidarity to all our friends in Chile who have worked so hard for so many years for messages like these to come from the mainstream, especially that this vote is about Chile still recovering human rights, in this case for women. [Editor]

SOURCE: CNN Chile, 15 December 2016 ; La Tercera, 7 January 2017 ; PHOTO ; La Tercera, 9 January 2017 (todos en español)

SEE ALSO Video (11 min): CNN Chile interview with Guido Girardi, 8 November 2016 (en español)

Source: International Campaign for Women's Right to Safe Abortion

10.01.2017

Campaigning for the Right to Safe Abortion: Highlights of the Year

22 December 2016, by Safe Abortion
WHAT HAPPENED AT THE "OFFICIAL" LEVEL

January 2016

– Sierra Leone President Ernest Bai Koroma refuses to sign the Safe Abortion Act, despite it being passed unanimously by the national Parliament twice with widespread support countrywide and from across Africa. He cannot veto it so he referred the new law to the Constitutional Review Committee in March. Then in June he called for it to be put to a referendum.

– Peru government compensates young woman almost a decade after she was denied a legal abortion for anencephaly in historic UN Human Rights Committee abortion case, supported by a range of women's rights and abortion rights groups.

– African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights calls for decriminalisation of abortion across Africa in line with the Maputo Protocol.

– European Union 2016 budget requires medical care in humanitarian settings to include access to safe abortion.

– Guyana Madam Justice Roxane George has interpreted the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act 1995 to permit mid-level providers to deliver medical abortion for pregnancies not more than eight weeks.

[continued at link]

Source: International Campaign for Women's Right to Safe Abortion

22.12.2016

decriminalization of abortion

Consequences of abortion law reform in Victoria, Australia: perspectives of 19 abortion providers

by Safe Abortion, Dec 19, 2016

In Victoria, Australia, abortion was decriminalised in October 2008, bringing the law in line with clinical practice and community attitudes. However, according to interviews with 19 abortion service providers from a range of health care settings and geographic locations in the state in 2014-15, while abortion law reform was a positive event, it was perceived to have changed little about the provision of abortion. All the providers agreed that law reform had repositioned abortion as a health service rather than a legal issue, had shifted the power in decision-making from doctors to women, and had increased clarity and safety for doctors.

However, all of them also described outstanding concerns, including limited public provision of surgical abortion, reduced access to abortion after 20 weeks, ongoing stigma, lack of a state-wide strategy for equitable abortion provision, and an unsustainable workforce. Thus, a number of significant issues in abortion service provision have remained, and may even have resulted in a lull in action.

ABSTRACT: Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care, by LA Keogh, D Newton, C Bayly, K McNamee, A Hardiman, A Webster, M Bismark, 2 December 2016. DOI: 10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101541 + VISUAL

Source: International Campaign for Women's Right to Safe Abortion

19.12.2016

decriminalisation of abortion

Campaigners urge Scottish Government to use devolved powers to decriminalise abortion

December 11, 2016
Exclusive by Judith Duffy, Reporter. Sunday Herald

SCOTLAND is being urged to radically diverge from Westminster on abortion law and make it a health issue instead of criminal one.

A group of women’s rights organisations has come together to push for decriminalisation of abortion, in the wake of laws over it being devolved to Scotland in May this year.

A report, published tomorrow, will argue that the Scottish Government now has the opportunity to remove abortion from criminal law and regulate it like any other healthcare issue.

It argues the requirement for two doctors to approve an abortion, which is permitted for non-medical reasons up to 24 weeks under the current law, should be scrapped.

[continued at link]
Source: Sunday Herald

A new ruling in the Brazilian Supreme Court prior to the hearing on the Zika submission

A new ruling in the Braziliuan Supreme Court prior to the hearing on the Zika submission: notes from Debora Diniz and Sonia Correa

by Safe Abortion, Dec 6, 2016

27 November - It has just been announced that the Brazilian Supreme Court is set to rule on the preliminary injunction of the Zika case on 7 December 2016. The preliminary injunction request refers to all demands of the case: access to information, to wider choice on contraceptive methods, to pregnancy termination for pregnant women infected with Zika and experiencing mental suffering, to free transportation to rehabilitation centres and to the disability cash transfer programme for all children with the congenital Zika syndrome.

At this point it it hard to anticipate how votes will go, although it is expected that the Court may deny the injunction regarding abortion by saying they need more in-depth debate on the issue.

The Anis Institute of Bioethics filed an amicus curiae request on the case (as have two anti-choice organizations), but none have been ruled upon yet. We are working to try and schedule meetings with the Justices before 7 December.

1 December On 29 November, when ruling on a case involved the release of five employees accused of illegal abortion in a clandestine abortion clinic in a city neighbouring Rio de Janeiro, three Supreme Court Justices (members of one of the Court’s two chambers, composed of five Justices) went further than the case involved and ruled that abortion should not be a crime if performed in the first three months of pregnancy.

This extended opinion was delivered on 29 November by Justice Luís Roberto Barroso, accompanied by two other Judges, Rosa Weber and Edson Fachin. This opinion went beyond sustaining the release of the clinic staff to weave an argument in defence of the decriminalization of abortion up to 12 weeks of pregnancy.

A news report on the judgement explains: ‘For Justice Luís Roberto Barroso, the anti-abortion articles in the Criminal Code disrespect women’s basic rights. “Women bear alone the burden of pregnancy. Therefore, there will only exist gender equality if women have the right to decide whether to continue a pregnancy or not,” he wrote in his decision. Moreover, anti-abortion laws penalize low-income women who don’t have access to private clinics that would perform abortions in secret. Barroso said that the state should avoid pregnancy interruptions – but with sexual education policies and the distribution of contraceptive methods.’ See: plus55, 30 November 2016.
Debora Diniz continues: It is important to clarify, as there’s been some confusion even in the national media, that this decision does not mean the decriminalization of abortion in Brazil: it is just one case, and according to our procedural law, it is not a binding precedent. It is, however, a clear and strategic message, led by Justice Cardoso (who was the lawyer of our anencephaly case), that some Justices are ready to ask the right question on abortion cases, which is: how can abortion be considered a crime under the Brazilian Constitution’s provisions on gender equality, dignity, and right to health?

It is also a relevant framing for our Zika case, although they may not get into this debate specifically next week when ruling on the preliminary injunctions – but it may be of great importance for the final decision, whenever it comes. And it is a debate that we can work to further develop on other cases as well. The christian fundamentalist caucus at the National Congress is already making noise to push back against the new ruling, but this is nothing new, it is more of the same of what they have been doing over the last 10 years.

4 November

Sonia Correa writes: This was the first time the Court has expressed a comprehensive position on abortion rights. Four years ago, when considering termination of pregnancy in the case of anencephaly and stem cell research, the Court solidly affirmed that the absolute right to life from conception was not enshrined in the Brazilian Constitution. Judge Barroso’s opinion expresses the understanding that the fundamental rights of women provided for in the 1988 Constitution make the complete criminalization of abortion unconstitutional, as defined in the 1940 Penal Code, which is still in force today. According to Judge Barroso, while the potential life of the fetus is obviously relevant, the criminalization of abortion before the end of the first trimester of pregnancy violates several fundamental rights of women granted by the 1988 Constitution: personal autonomy, physical and mental integrity, sexual and reproductive rights and gender equality. The opinion also refers to racial inequality and discrimination and considers that the law as it is does not sufficiently observe the principle of proportionality necessary for the fair application of criminal justice.

Unfortunately, as soon as the news of the Court’s opinions was made public, members of the House of Representatives created a committee whose aims was to contest the judgment as a breach of interference by the Court in “a matter that is fundamentally the responsibility of the legislature”. It is worth remembering that this is an overtly conservative legislature, which has been openly attacking abortion rights since it was elected in 2015, and that a number of regressive bills are pending for a final vote, including the nefarious provisions that grant rights to the “unborn” (Statute of the Unborn) and make abortion a heinous and punishable crime under any circumstances. It is impossible to predict the unfolding of this pitched battle over abortion that now appears to divide the powers of the Brazilian republic nor the effect on the hearing on 7 December.

We will continue publishing reports as events unfold. The Sexuality Policy Watch newsletter will carry an expanded version of Sonia Correa’s analysis above later this week.

SOURCES: Email from Debora Diniz; plus55, 30 November 2016; Email from Sonia Correa;

See also the Campaign newsletter from 23 November for a full report on the Zika hearing scheduled for 7 December.
Source: International Campaign for Women's Right to Safe Abortion

06.12.2016

decriminalization of abortion

International Campaign for Women’s Right to Safe Abortion

British women, please rally to support decriminalisation of abortion

Letter to the Guardian
Tuesday 11 October 2016 19.09 BST

In Poland mass protests have forced the government to drop plans to tighten its already draconian abortion laws. Yet here in Britain most people are unaware that women still live under the threat of being sentenced to life imprisonment if they end their own pregnancies by buying pills on the internet. Doctors also face harsh penalties if they do not fill in the correct forms before terminating a pregnancy.

Back in 1967 our law was changed to allow the legal ending of pregnancies if certain conditions were met. Otherwise the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act remained in place; and so it still is today – nearly half a century later.

Soon, a ten-minute rule bill is to be introduced to the House of Commons proposing that abortion in Britain is decriminalised. To do so would not only allow speedier and much less bureaucratic use of modern medical procedures, but would save a huge amount of NHS money while bringing us into line with countries such as Canada where medical abortion was decriminalised nearly three decades ago.

In Britain one in three women will have an abortion. Yet the views of the small but vociferous anti-abortion lobby garner most of the publicity and continue to dominate public argument. If only a small proportion of the millions of women who have benefited from the 1967 Act were to write to their MPs now asking them to be in the Commons on 24 October and to give support to this proposal, perhaps this punitive Victorian legislation would have a chance of being brought up to date.

Back in the 1960s when I was an abortion law reform activist, the Guardian and its readers did much to facilitate the liberalisation of the law. They now need to mobilise again so that their children and grandchildren can benefit in the same way that they already have from the activities of my generation.

Diane Munday
Wheathampstead, Hertfordshire

Source: The Guardian

11.10.2016

decriminalization of abortion

Destigmatizing and Decriminalizing Abortion: That’s Our Collective Work

Decriminalizing abortion is a major step toward ensuring that all individuals can end their pregnancies without fear of shame, blame, or prosecution. Shutterstock

Sep 28, 2016, 11:27am Leila Hessini

On this Global Day of Action for Access to Safe and Legal Abortion, we celebrate the millions who make a decision that is the right one for them, their families, and their communities. We celebrate the providers who are committed to truly providing patient-centered care regardless of age, sexual or gender orientation, marital status, reason for abortion, or ability to pay. And we celebrate policymakers and activists who have worked tirelessly to overturn laws that criminalize and penalize women.

Today, September 28, is the Global Day of Action for Access to Safe and Legal Abortion. But is “safe and legal” enough?

Why in the 21^st century do we still need a day of action? Who are abortions safe and legal for in today’s world, and who defines what is “safe” and what is “legal”? Are abortions accessible for people who have mobility or sight challenges, sex workers, or those with nonconforming sexual or gender identities? What about for adolescents who must seek parental notification, those who must pay the equivalent of their monthly wages for an abortion, and undocumented people trying to find an abortion provider in Texas?

Answering these questions requires going beyond the “safe and legal” frame to acknowledge the importance of transforming systems, structures, and services to meet the needs of all while also upholding individual autonomy and agency over health care. As members of our communities, health-care workers, and advocates, we must trust that those who can become pregnant know what’s best for them. And we must ensure they have the ability, access to resources, and power to pursue it.

To do that, we must destigmatize, decriminalize, and democratize abortion—here in the United States and worldwide.

Abortion stigma occurs when people are labeled, dehumanized, or discriminated against due to their need for, or association with, abortion. Stigmatization marks individuals who have abortions and health-care professionals who provide them as different and undesirable. Stigma is discrimination, and it provokes different consequences for young people, people with disabilities, or individuals with nonconforming gender or sexual identities, among others. And stigma doesn’t just play out solely at the individual level but also structurally in the systems, structures, and discourses that govern reproductive health care.

Decriminalizing abortion is also immensely important. It’s a major step toward ensuring that all individuals can end their pregnancies without fear of shame, blame, or prosecution. Existing laws are not consistent with individuals’ needs and preferences. Laws and policies must be shaped by those whose rights they seek to uphold. They must also protect, respect, and fulfill women’s autonomy and human rights pertaining to self-administered abortion pills and their availability. In the context of the increased criminalization of women’s self-use of abortion pills, we must also strive to make sure self-use is legalized.

By democratizing access to information, drugs, and care, we can build deeper and more nuanced understanding of different people’s reproductive-health preferences based on their circumstances. All individuals should have access to confidential, accessible, and evidence-based information that is conveyed through familiar communication channels, formats, and languages. At the global level, The World Health Organization has issued guidelines that advance the roles of community health workers and individual women as agents of their own health care. Organizations and networks, such as Women on Web and Women Help Women, have set up hotlines for virtual counseling services and access to pills in settings where abortion is restricted. And, on the ground, community-based groups are recognizing the safety of decentralized care and self-induced abortion during early pregnancy. They are also creating different literacy tools for women to safely terminate an unwanted pregnancy, documenting where women prefer to go for information, and working closely with local groups to increase women’s access to abortion pills.

So today, September 28, we celebrate the millions of women every year who make a decision that is the right one for them, their families, and their communities. We celebrate the providers who are committed to truly providing patient-centered care regardless of age, sexual or gender orientation, marital status, reason for abortion, or ability to pay. We celebrate policymakers and activists who have worked tirelessly to overturn laws that criminalize and penalize women. And we celebrate donors and supporters who know that, with rising anti-woman and repressive politics and practices in so many countries and contexts, funding for progressive movements for social change has never been so important.

When abortions are not only safe and legal but when information, drug access, and medical services are truly informed by those who seek care, and when all peoples have access to care free from stigma, shame or restrictions, that’s when we’ll know we’ve achieved our vision.

Source: Rewire.com