Abortion Law: Global Comparisons

Abortion Law: Global Comparisons
A recent spate of state laws to restrict abortion services in the United States has reignited debate over the procedure. How does the United States’ regulation of abortion compare to the rest of the world?

by Rachel B. Vogelstein and Rebecca Turkington
July 15, 2019

The past fifty years have been characterized by an unmistakable trend toward the liberalization of abortion laws, particularly in the industrialized world. Amid ongoing debate over the procedure, the trend has coincided with a drop in abortion rates worldwide. As nations across the globe have expanded the grounds on which women can access reproductive health services, the quality and safety of abortion care has improved, as has maternal survival.

Abortion rates are relatively similar between countries with highly restrictive abortion laws and those where the procedure is permitted without restriction, at between 34 and 37 per 1,000 women annually [PDF], but the safety of the procedure diverges widely: almost 90 percent of abortions in countries with liberal abortion laws are considered safe, compared with only 25 percent of those in countries in which abortion is banned.

Continued: https://www.cfr.org/article/abortion-law-global-comparisons

UN General comment No. 36 (2018) on article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE – General comment No. 36 (2018) on article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, on the right to life, 30 October 2018 (CCPR/C/GC/36)

by International Campaign for Women's Right to Safe Abortion
Nov 2, 2018

This document contains 70 paragraphs on the meaning of the right to life, one of which (para.8) is about abortion. Paragraph 8 calls for a right to safe abortion, and prohibits any restriction that might lead to an unsafe abortion or risk of death from unsafe abortion. It calls on states to reform their laws, and not to apply criminal sanctions against women and girls undergoing abortion or against medical service providers assisting them in doing so, since taking such measures compel women and girls to resort to unsafe abortion.

The first two paragraphs quoted below from the document define the right to life, followed by paragraph 8 on abortion, para.60 on children, and para 61 against discrimination. References to para.8 are also included.

Continued: http://www.safeabortionwomensright.org/un-human-rights-committee-general-comment-no-36-2018-on-article-6-of-the-international-covenant-on-civil-and-political-rights-on-the-right-to-life/

02.11.2018

Featured

News

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

right to life

UN and abortion

UN Human Rights Committee

Amicus Brief: Decriminalization on Abortion in South Korea

Amicus Brief: Decriminalization on Abortion in South Korea
May 22, 2018

I. Introduction

Human Rights Watch has the honor of submitting this amicus brief in connection with case 2017Hun-Ba127, which is before the Constitutional Court of Korea (Constitutional Court). This case involves a review of the constitutionality of the Republic of Korea (South Korea)’s criminal law on abortion.

Under articles 269 and 270 of the Criminal Act, abortion is a crime, and any woman who undergoes an abortion risks up to one year of imprisonment or fines up to 2 million won (US$1850). Healthcare workers who provide abortions can face up to two years in prison, or more under certain circumstances.[1]

Continued: https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/05/22/amicus-brief-decriminalization-abortion-south-korea

Exporting Censorship: How U.S. Restrictions on Abortion Speech and Funding Violate International Law, Part 2

Exporting Censorship: How U.S. Restrictions on Abortion Speech and Funding Violate International Law, Part 2
May 7, 2018
Akila Radhakrishnan & Kristin Smith

Part 2: The Global Gag Rule and Freedom of Association

This is the second of a two-part post illustrating how U.S. abortion restrictions violate the ICCPR’s requirements for lawful restrictions on the freedom of speech and association, which is examined in more detail in the Global Justice Center’s recent brief. Although the Helms and Siljander Amendments (discussed in Part 1) also violate the freedom of association in various ways, this post focuses on the Global Gag Rule and its unique effects on the freedom of association.

Continued: https://ilg2.org/2018/05/07/exporting-censorship-how-u-s-restrictions-on-abortion-speech-and-funding-violate-international-law-part-2/

Exporting Censorship: How U.S. Restrictions on Abortion Speech and Funding Violate International Law, Part 1

Exporting Censorship: How U.S. Restrictions on Abortion Speech and Funding Violate International Law, Part 1
May 7, 2018
Akila Radhakrishnan & Kristin Smith

Part 1: The Helms Amendment and Freedom of Speech

This is the first of a two-part post exploring how U.S. restrictions on abortion-related speech, activities, and funding violate U.S. human rights obligations under the ICCPR. Although much attention is rightfully paid to the devastating impact of the reimposed Global Gag Rule, the Helms and Siljander Amendments (which have been permanently in place since the 1970s) often command less consideration. These restrictions are discussed separately here in order to illustrate their unique effects on freedoms of speech and association. However, Helms, Siljander and the Global Gag Rule all fall short of the ICCPR’s requirements and therefore violate freedoms of speech and association in complex ways, as examined in more detail in the Global Justice Center’s recent brief. This post explores how the Helms and Siljander Amendments fail to meet the ICCPR’s standards for lawful restrictions on the freedom of speech. Part Two will focus on the Global Gag Rule and its violation of the freedom of association.

Continued: https://ilg2.org/2018/05/07/exporting-censorship-how-u-s-restrictions-on-abortion-speech-and-funding-violate-international-law-part-1/

Irish health minister defends abortion ban referendum

Irish health minister defends abortion ban referendum

The Associated Press
Gregory Katz
January 30, 2018

LONDON — Irish women are having abortions regardless of a near-total constitutional ban on terminating pregnancies, the country’s health minister said Tuesday in defence of a planned referendum that will ask voters whether the amendment should be repealed.

Health Minister Simon Harris said on Ireland’s RTE television that he is beginning work on a proposed abortion law that would be submitted to parliament if the May referendum removes the constitutional ban. The legislation would allow abortions during the first trimester, he said.

Continued: http://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/irish-health-minister-working-on-proposed-new-abortion-law

Ireland: State risks further abortion compo after €30k payout

State risks further abortion compo after €30k payout
Thursday, November 09, 2017

By Fiachra Ó Cionnaith
Irish Examiner Political Correspondent

Ireland is at risk of having to pay compensation to thousands of women forced to travel abroad to receive an abortion unless the law is immediately changed to make the procedure legal and easily accessible.

The US-based Centre for Reproductive Rights (CRR) made the claim after the State paid out €30,000 over an abortion case, for only the second time in its history, in response to a UN ruling on the matter.

Continued at source: http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/state-risks-further-abortion-compo-after-30k-payout-462516.html

State pays €30k in compensation to woman denied abortion in Ireland

State pays €30k in compensation to woman denied abortion in Ireland

Shane Phelan
November 7 2017

The State has paid €30,000 in compensation to a woman who had to travel to the UK for an abortion after a fatal foetal abnormality diagnosis.

The settlement with Siobhan Whelan was agreed in recent days, Independent.ie has learned.

It also involves a commitment to fund supports for the Co Wexford woman.

Continued at source: https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/state-pays-30k-in-compensation-to-woman-denied-abortion-in-ireland-36298487.html

07.11.2017

Centre for Reproductive Rights

Eighth Amendment

Siobhán Whelan

UN Human Rights Committee

UK: Woman paid €30,000 over having to travel for abortion

Woman paid €30,000 over having to travel for abortion
UN Human Rights Committee case concerns abortion in UK for fatal foetal abnormality

Nov 7, 2017
Pat Leahy

The Government has paid €30,000 in compensation to a woman who travelled to the UK for an abortion after a diagnosis of fatal foetal abnormality.

Siobhan Whelan, who successfully took a case to the United Nations Human Rights Committee earlier this year, has also been offered access to counselling services.

Continued at source: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/woman-paid-30-000-over-having-to-travel-for-abortion-1.3283416

07.11.2017

UN Human Rights Committee

Poland against UN standards on abortion and capital punishment

Poland against UN standards on abortion and capital punishment
Oct 30, 2017

The ongoing battle around fundamental reproductive rights in Poland becomes even more fierce. Government’s attempts to criminalize abortions and make one of the toughest anti-abortion laws even stricter are expressed in its statement delivered to the Human Rights Committee.

Polish non-governmental organizations are deeply concerned about the official remarks to the General Comment No 36 on article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights concerning the right to life. The General Comments refers to various aspects related to the right to life – from abortion and euthanasia to suicide to capital punishment and genocide. It clarifies how States that have ratified the Covenant are supposed to protect this right. Only two paragraphs – out of 22 pages – pertain to abortion by imposing the duty to provide access to abortion in case of rape, incest and fetal impairment. The document also underlines that “any legal restriction on the ability of women to seek abortion must not, inter alia, jeopardize their life or subject them to physical or mental pain or suffering which violates article 7”.

Continued at source: http://en.federa.org.pl/poland-against-un-standards-on-abortion-and-capital-punishment/