My reflections on abortion law reform

R. D’souza
{"title":"My reflections on abortion law reform","authors":"R. D’souza","doi":"10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101692","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We all bring our personal views to our practice, as this journal's new section, ‘Person in Practice’, highlights.1 My position on abortion is challenging to hold as a consultant in sexual and reproductive health (SRH) and I have spent much time reflecting on this. The following is an edited transcript of a talk I was invited to give at a recent meeting convened by the Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare at which abortion law reform was being considered.\n\nOne of the main purposes of the law is to protect the concerns and interests of the community as a whole, especially its vulnerable members. We have laws which protect newborn babies against abuse and maltreatment, and animals from being neglected or tortured in our own homes. We have laws governing the way animals are used in research. Similarly, we are concerned about the rights and interests of fetuses. The law against procuring an abortion except under the terms of the 1967 Abortion Act reflects these concerns.\n\nWe are also, as a community, concerned about the rights and interests of a woman who is pregnant but doesn't want to be, respecting her desire to abort her pregnancy, often for intensely personal and understandable reasons. It is important to acknowledge these, as well as the fact that women who choose to discontinue their pregnancy will use whatever means it takes to procure an abortion, even, if necessary, in ways that are unsafe. Surveys carried out by the Guttmacher Institute2 suggest that worldwide levels of abortion are more strongly linked to the incidence of unintended pregnancy than to the legal status of abortion, and that high abortion rates are directly correlated to high levels of unmet contraceptive need, often in countries where abortion is highly restricted.\n\nIn England, Wales and Scotland …","PeriodicalId":15734,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care","volume":"43 1","pages":"72 - 74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101692","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101692","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

We all bring our personal views to our practice, as this journal's new section, ‘Person in Practice’, highlights.1 My position on abortion is challenging to hold as a consultant in sexual and reproductive health (SRH) and I have spent much time reflecting on this. The following is an edited transcript of a talk I was invited to give at a recent meeting convened by the Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare at which abortion law reform was being considered. One of the main purposes of the law is to protect the concerns and interests of the community as a whole, especially its vulnerable members. We have laws which protect newborn babies against abuse and maltreatment, and animals from being neglected or tortured in our own homes. We have laws governing the way animals are used in research. Similarly, we are concerned about the rights and interests of fetuses. The law against procuring an abortion except under the terms of the 1967 Abortion Act reflects these concerns. We are also, as a community, concerned about the rights and interests of a woman who is pregnant but doesn't want to be, respecting her desire to abort her pregnancy, often for intensely personal and understandable reasons. It is important to acknowledge these, as well as the fact that women who choose to discontinue their pregnancy will use whatever means it takes to procure an abortion, even, if necessary, in ways that are unsafe. Surveys carried out by the Guttmacher Institute2 suggest that worldwide levels of abortion are more strongly linked to the incidence of unintended pregnancy than to the legal status of abortion, and that high abortion rates are directly correlated to high levels of unmet contraceptive need, often in countries where abortion is highly restricted. In England, Wales and Scotland …
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
我对堕胎法改革的思考
我们都把自己的个人观点带到了我们的实践中,正如这本杂志的新章节“实践中的人”所强调的那样作为一名性健康和生殖健康(SRH)顾问,我在堕胎问题上的立场具有挑战性,我花了很多时间思考这个问题。以下是我应邀在最近一次由性与生殖保健学院召开的会议上发表的一篇经过编辑的演讲,该会议正在审议堕胎法改革。该法律的主要目的之一是保护整个社会的关注和利益,特别是弱势群体的利益。我们有法律保护新生婴儿不受虐待和虐待,保护动物在我们自己的家中不被忽视或折磨。我们有法律来管理研究中使用动物的方式。同样,我们也关心胎儿的权益。除非根据1967年《堕胎法》的规定,禁止进行堕胎的法律反映了这些关切。作为一个社区,我们也关心那些怀孕但不想怀孕的妇女的权利和利益,尊重她们堕胎的愿望,通常是出于强烈的个人和可以理解的原因。重要的是要承认这些,以及选择终止妊娠的妇女将采取一切手段进行堕胎,即使在必要时采取不安全的方式。古特马赫研究所(Guttmacher institute)进行的调查2表明,世界范围内的堕胎水平与意外怀孕发生率的关系比与堕胎的法律地位的关系更密切,高堕胎率与未满足的避孕药具需求的高水平直接相关,这通常发生在堕胎受到严格限制的国家。在英格兰、威尔士和苏格兰……
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
0.84
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The trading of Professional, Managerial & Healthcare Publications Ltd has been transferred to its parent company, Keyways Publishing Ltd.
期刊最新文献
The Case of Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis (Abt-Letterer-Siwe Disease) in Twin Girls Multifetal Gestations Planning Methods in Ecuador’s Indigenous People Reproductive Health and Family Planning Services in Africa: Looking beyond Individual and Household Factors The Role of Information Technologies in Natural Family Planning
×
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