Unpacking the legality of termination of pregnancy based on ‘social grounds’ under South African law

IF 0.5 Q4 MEDICAL ETHICS South African Journal of Bioethics and Law Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.7196/sajbl.2023.v16i1.1033
M. Khan
{"title":"Unpacking the legality of termination of pregnancy based on ‘social grounds’ under South African law","authors":"M. Khan","doi":"10.7196/sajbl.2023.v16i1.1033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\n\n\nThe topic of abortion was in the limelight again in Dobbs v Jackson, where the US Supreme Court overturned the decision of Roe v Wade, ‘which guaranteed women and pregnant people a constitutional right to abortion’. While not bound by the judgment, this gives us an opportunity to reflect on the current law in South Africa which regulates the termination of pregnancy. The primary piece of legislation which governs abortion is the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act. Section 2 of the Act lists the grounds under which one may lawfully terminate a pregnancy. One of those grounds relates to the period of the 13th up until the 20th week of the gestation period, and states that if a medical practitioner, after consultation with the pregnant woman, is of the opinion that the continued pregnancy would significantly affect the social or economic circumstances of the woman, then the pregnancy may be lawfully terminated. The question is: What exactly is meant by ‘social grounds’? This article considers this aspect from a legal perspective and attempts to provide clarity on the issue, in the hope that this will be of assistance to medical practitioners who are concerned about the outcome of their actions, when assisting persons in this position.\n\n\n\n","PeriodicalId":43498,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Bioethics and Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Bioethics and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7196/sajbl.2023.v16i1.1033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The topic of abortion was in the limelight again in Dobbs v Jackson, where the US Supreme Court overturned the decision of Roe v Wade, ‘which guaranteed women and pregnant people a constitutional right to abortion’. While not bound by the judgment, this gives us an opportunity to reflect on the current law in South Africa which regulates the termination of pregnancy. The primary piece of legislation which governs abortion is the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act. Section 2 of the Act lists the grounds under which one may lawfully terminate a pregnancy. One of those grounds relates to the period of the 13th up until the 20th week of the gestation period, and states that if a medical practitioner, after consultation with the pregnant woman, is of the opinion that the continued pregnancy would significantly affect the social or economic circumstances of the woman, then the pregnancy may be lawfully terminated. The question is: What exactly is meant by ‘social grounds’? This article considers this aspect from a legal perspective and attempts to provide clarity on the issue, in the hope that this will be of assistance to medical practitioners who are concerned about the outcome of their actions, when assisting persons in this position.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
根据南非法律,基于“社会原因”终止妊娠的合法性
在多布斯诉杰克逊案中,堕胎的话题再次成为人们关注的焦点,美国最高法院推翻了罗伊诉韦德案的判决,“该判决保障了妇女和孕妇享有宪法赋予的堕胎权利”。虽然不受判决的约束,但这使我们有机会反思南非现行规定终止妊娠的法律。管理堕胎的主要立法是《终止妊娠选择法》。该法第2节列出了合法终止妊娠的理由。其中一项理由涉及妊娠期的第13周至第20周,并指出,如果医生在与孕妇协商后认为继续妊娠将严重影响该妇女的社会或经济状况,则可以合法终止妊娠。问题是:“社会基础”到底是什么意思?本文从法律角度考虑了这方面的问题,并试图澄清这一问题,希望这将有助于那些关心其行为结果的医生在帮助处于这种境地的人时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
18
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Pragmatic ethical approaches to evangelising in the medical encounter The situation in Gaza – will cruelty and hatred triumph? Gaza and international law: The global obligation to protect life and health Is there a legal and ethical duty on doctors to inform patients of the likely co-payment costs should they be treated by practitioners who have contracted out of medical scheme rates? Three to one – an ethicolegal outline of mitochondrial donation in the South African context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1