Search

Digital health, including telemedicine, has increased access to abortion care. The convenience, flexibility of appointment times, and ensured privacy to abortion users may make abortion services via telemedicine preferable. This scoping review systematically mapped studies conducted on abortion services via telemedicine, including their effectiveness and acceptability for abortion users and providers. All published papers included abortion services via telemedicine in the United States were considered. Articles were searched in PubMed, CINAHL, and Google Scholar databases in September 2022. The findings were synthesized narratively, and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines were used to report this study. Out of 757 retrieved articles, 33 articles were selected based on the inclusion criteria. These studies were published between 2011 and 2022, with 24 published in the last 3 years. The study found that telemedicine increased access to abortion care in the United States, especially for people in remote areas or those worried about stigma from in-person visits. The effectiveness of abortion services via telemedicine was comparable to in-clinic visits, with 6% or fewer abortions requiring surgical intervention. Both care providers and abortion seekers expressed positive perceptions of telemedicine-based abortion services. However, abortion users reported mixed emotions, with some preferring in-person visits. The most common reasons for choosing telemedicine included the distance to the abortion clinic, convenience, privacy, cost, flexibility of appointment times, and state laws imposing waiting periods or restrictive policies. Telemedicine offered a preferable option for abortion seekers and providers. The feasibility of accessing abortion services via telemedicine in low-resource settings needs further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the impact of supply-side abortion restrictions on aggregate abortion and birth rates in the USA. Specifically, I exploit state and time variation in the implementation of the first targeted regulation of abortion provider (TRAP) law in a state to identify the effects of the laws. I find that TRAP laws are associated with a reduction in the abortion rate of approximately 5% the year the first law is implemented, and an average reduction of 11–14% in subsequent years. There is also evidence that TRAP laws increased birth rates by 2–3%, which accounts for approximately 80–100% of the observed decline in abortion rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I argue that selective abortion for disability often involves inadequate counselling on the part of reproductive medicine professionals who advise prospective parents. I claim that prenatal disability clinicians often fail in intellectual duty—they are culpably ignorant about intellectual disability (or do not disclose known facts to parents). First, I explain why a standard motivation for selective abortion is flawed. Second, I summarize recent research on parent experience with prenatal professionals. Third, I outline the notions of epistemic excellence and deficiency. Fourth, I defend culpable ignorance as the best explanation of inadequate disability counselling. Fifth, I rebut alternative explanations. My focus is pregnancies diagnosed with mild or moderate intellectual disability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An expansive empirical literature estimates the causal effects of policies governing young women's confidential and legal access to contraception and abortion. I present a new review of changes in the historical policy environment in the USA that serve as the foundation of this literature. I consult primary sources, including annotated statutes, judicial rulings, attorney general opinions, and advisory articles in medical journals, as well as secondary sources including newspaper articles and snapshots of various policy environments prepared by scholars, advocates, and government organizations. Based on this review, I provide a suggested coding of the policy environment over the past 60 years. I also present and compare the legal coding schemes used in the empirical literature and where possible I resolve numerous and substantial discrepancies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars of "morality policies" have often assumed a signature characteristic of such policies is that advocates will frame them as clashes between fundamental moral and religious principles. Recent studies of issues typically considered under the "morality policy" rubric have found that advocates often frame these issues along multiple dimensions and that they do not necessarily favor frames that emphasize moral principles over other considerations. This paper examines this issue for abortion policy. We analyze verbatim records of debates over 26 recent proposals to restrict abortion rights in the 16 states for which data are available. We found that both sides in debates over abortion restrictions framed the issue along several dimensions with no single frame dominating most of the debates. While there is some empirical support for the morality policy perspective, the frequency that advocates employed morality frames was less than we expected given the disproportionately high levels of evangelical Protestant membership in the states we examined. Rather than simply casting the debate as one over irreconcilable moral principles, the two sides' strategies often converged by framing the issue in terms of various consequences of abortion and abortion restrictions for women. Advocates propensity to frame the issue in terms of "right to life" versus "woman's choice" principles rose when one side or the other escalated rhetoric about "life" or "choice" principles (inducing the other to respond in kind). Our data thus conform to the logic of a game of tit-for-tat in which individuals follow a strategy of "retaliation" if their opponents frame issues in highly moralized, judgmental terms, or they "cooperate" by emphasizing how their preferred policy will promote some widely shared value (like women's welfare or the authoritativeness of medical research). "Morality talk" was also more prevalent when the debates were about bans on abortion rather than other types of restrictions. The broad implication of our findings is that the propensity of advocates to frame issues in terms of fundamental moral principles has less to do with the general subject matter or issue area (e.g., abortion) and more to do with the context of debate and strategic considerations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Health service providers play a crucial role in providing post abortion care in countries where abortion legislation is restrictive and abortion is stigmatised. Research in countries where these factors apply has shown that health service providers can be barriers to women accessing post abortion services. Much of this research draws from attitude theory. In this paper, we utilise positioning theory to show how the ways in which Zimbabwean health service providers' position women and themselves are rooted in cultural and social power relations. In light of recent efforts by the Zimbabwean Ministry of Health and foreign organisations to improve post abortion care, we explore the implications that these positionings have for post abortion care. Method: As part of a larger study on abortion decision-making, the data featured in this article were collected using in-depth semi-structured interviews with six health service providers working in different facilities in Harare, Zimbabwe. Discursive and positioning thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Results: Our analysis points to women who have abortions being positioned in negative terms, as transgressors of acceptable norms; irresponsible and manipulative; and ignorant. The health service providers drew from cultural, religious, gender and trauma discourses that portray abortion as evil and socially unacceptable. Reflexive positions taken up by the health service providers include positions as being experts, helpers and protectors of culture/religion, sympathisers and professional positions as health care providers. Conclusion: The continued strengthening of post abortion services should be conducted in conjunction with dialogical interventions that challenge health service providers to reflect on the power relations within which women who terminate pregnancies are located, that contest their negative positionings of these women and that present alternative narratives and subject positionings for both the women who have abortions and the health service providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In 2018, Ireland conducted a referendum, ultimately supporting the legalisation of abortion. The views of religious minority groups can go unheard 'by an insensitive majority' in national cultural debates. This study explores female Muslim Irish university students' perspectives on abortion and the impact of the 2018 Irish abortion debate on their sense of belonging within Ireland. Methods: Ten female Muslim university students completed semi-structured interviews. The interview comprised seven open-ended questions examining perspectives on abortion and a sense of national belonging. A thematic analysis was carried out on the data. Results: Six major themes emerged: (1) specific circumstances, (2) Islam, (3) family, (4) misuse of new laws, (5) stable sense of national belonging, (6) consequences of historical abortion legislation. Participants were largely supportive of the legal changes. Participants indicated that their sense of national belonging might have been affected if their religious beliefs had conflicted with the referendum outcome. Conclusions: Participants largely supported the legalisation of abortion in Ireland, provided that the new laws aligned with their Islamic beliefs. The research indicated the referendum did not affect young Muslim women's sense of belonging in Ireland. Policy Implications: Many national debates on social issues focus on winning majority support. This research highlighted the importance of canvasing and reflecting on the perspectives of people from minorities in order to reinforce a sense of larger political belonging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Abortion is a health practice that people might choose for a variety of reasons. In public discourse, a subtle hierarchy of legitimacy frequently emerges in relation to abortion' motivations, thereby establishing an implicit distinction between abortions deemed acceptable or justifiable and those considered unacceptable or unjustifiable. Methods: We conducted an experimental study to examine the impact of different motivations commonly perceived as "good and acceptable" (i.e., health risks or rape) and "bad and unacceptable" (i.e., lack of desire to have a child or incompatibility between women's lives and their careers) on the stigmatization of women who choose to abort (i.e., moral outrage and attribution of humanness) and the perceived severity of hostile behaviors against them. Results: Findings show that participants experienced more moral outrage towards the woman when she chose to abort for "bad and unacceptable" reasons (vs. "good and acceptable"), attributed her less humanness, and perceived hostile behaviors toward her as less severe. In addition, we found that "bad and unacceptable" reasons influenced participants' perceptions of hostile behaviors through the mediation of moral outrage and the attribution of humanness to her. Conclusions and Policy Implications: Highlighting motivations for abortion reinforces not only the divide between "good" and "bad" abortions but also between "good" and "bad" women. The key conclusions, limitations, and directions for the future are explored in the context of combating abortion stigma and backlash, ultimately advocating for reproductive justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Abortion was legal and available at one facility in Mississippi before the June 2022 United States Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Residents' awareness of abortion's legality and knowledge of how to obtain an abortion – indicators of one's ability to seek abortion care if needed – may have varied by their proximity to facility-based care. Methods: Between September 2020 and February 2021, we used social media to recruit Mississippi residents assigned female at birth who were aged 18–45 years and not pregnant or planning pregnancy for an online survey about their reproductive healthcare access. We used multivariable-adjusted Poisson regression models with robust standard errors to assess whether residing ≥ 50 miles from an abortion facility (versus < 50 miles) was associated with three indicators that support one's ability to seek care: awareness of legality, knowledge of a facility, and awareness of self-managed abortion in the community. Results: Of 565 respondents, 262 lived < 50 miles and 303 lived ≥ 50 miles from a facility. Overall, 57% believed that abortion was legal in Mississippi, 26% correctly identified an abortion facility, and 29% had heard about self-managed abortion in their community. Those who lived ≥ 50 miles (vs < 50 miles) from a facility were less often aware that abortion was legal (49% versus 67%; Prevalence Ratio [PR]: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.70–0.95) and less often able to identify an abortion facility (15% versus 38%; PR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.38–0.72). There was not a detectable difference in awareness of self-managed abortion between distance groups (32% versus 25%; p = 0.104). Conclusions: Many Mississippians face information barriers about abortion legality and location of an abortion facility, particularly those living further from care. Policy Implications: Following implementation of Mississippi's law prohibiting most abortions, efforts to bridge existing and new information gaps about abortion will be needed to support residents' reproductive autonomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that, if we are committed to a Pro-choice stance with regard to selective abortion for disability, we will be unable to justify the prohibition of sex-selective abortion (SSA), for two reasons. First, familiar Pro-choice arguments in favour of a woman's right to select against fetal impairment also support, by parity of reasoning, a right to choose SSA. Second, rejection of the criticisms of selective abortion for disability levelled by disability theorists also disposes, by implication, of the key objections to SSA, as developed, most notably, by feminists. The paper, then, consists of a conditional defence of SSA, under which SSA should be available, and protected by a right, if selective abortion for disability is. Opponents of SSA might respond by conceding additional restrictions on selection against disabled fetuses. It should become clear throughout the paper, however, that any such new restrictions would be unacceptably onerous for women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the extent to which banning women from having abortions affected the fertility of their children, who did not face a similar legal constraint. Using multiple censuses from Romania, I follow men and women born around the time Romania banned abortion in the mid-1960s to investigate the demand for children over their life cycle. The empirical approach combines elements of regression discontinuity design and the Heckman selection model. The results indicate that individuals whose mothers were affected by the ban had significantly lower demand for children than those who were not. One-third of the decline is explained by inherited socio-economic status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Questions about whether voters rely on their policy preferences when casting ballots have been present since scholars first began examining the determinants of voting behavior. This paper seeks to contribute to research in this area by analyzing abortion policy voting in Senate elections. Specifically, I investigate how the effects of national party position divergence, candidate position divergence, and voter information and salience moderate the relationship between abortion policy preferences and vote choice. The results suggest that the national parties' divergence on abortion does not directly strengthen the connection between abortion policy preferences and ballot decisions. Instead, candidate contrast appears to be the key. And, well informed and motivated voters are especially responsive. Taken together, the findings illuminate the nature of abortion policy voting and also inform the burgeoning scholarship on campaign effects, the role of information, and issue publics in American politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper suggests that the focus on abortion legalization in the aftermath of the Zika outbreak is distracting for policy and lawmakers from what needs to be done to address the outbreak effectively. Meeting basic health needs (i.e. preventive measures), together with research and development conducive to a vaccine or treatment for the Zika virus should be priorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abortion is among the most widely discussed concepts of medical ethics. Since the well-known ethical theories have emerged from Western world, the position of Islamic ethics regarding main issues of medical ethics has been overlooked. Muslims constitute a considerable amount of world population. Turkish Republic is the only Muslim country ruled with secular democracy and one of the three Muslim countries where abortion is legalized. The first aim of this paper is to present discussions on abortion in Islamic ethics in the context of major ethical concepts; the legal status of the fetus, respect for life and the right not to be born. The second aim is to put forth Turkey's present legislation about abortion in the context of Islamic ethical and religious aspects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the Kantian and Rousseauvian solutions to the conflict between autonomy and authority. First, I discuss how the categorical imperatives (CI) are the supreme source of the legitimate authority of a limited number of political laws. By extending the synthetic a priori nature of the CI, I demonstrate how Rousseau's General Will (GW) can justify political laws in a broader sense. I also refer to the theory of H.L.A. Hart and John Rawls to show that all political laws are binding if they are within the limits of injustice and have some moral foundation. I discussed the limits of authority of on debatable laws such as banning abortion. I analyzed the possibility of GW by using Condorcet's theorem. I conclude that GW cannot fully justify political laws based on majoritarian direct democracy, owing to problematic assumptions, although it may be an improvement to the current legislative procedure of the U.S. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1965, Warner developed an interviewing procedure designed to eliminate evasive answer bias when questions of a sensitive nature are asked. He called the procedure "randomized response." The authors have been studying the technique for several years and, in this paper, are re- porting some of the estimates of induced abortion in urban North Carolina using randomized response. Estimates of the proportion of women having an abortion during the past year among women 18-44 years of age are reported. For the study population indices were developed relating induced abortion to total conceptions for whites and nonwhites. The illegal abortion rate per 100 conceptions was estimated to be 14.9 for whites and 32.9 for nonwhites. Estimates of the proportion of women having an abortion during their lifetime among women 18 years old or over are also shown, Among ever married women, the proportion having an abortion during their lifetime declined as education increased. Estimates were high for women with 5 or more pregnancies. Most of the respondents stated that they were satisfied that the randomized response approach would not reveal their personal situation. Furthermore, they did not think their friends would truthfully respond to a direct question regarding abortion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Restrictive state abortion laws make it more difficult and costly for women to obtain an abortion. The fundamental law of demand posits that an increase in the cost of an abortion should cause the number of abortions to decrease. This suggests that restrictive state abortion laws should cause women with unintended pregnancies to have fewer abortions and concomitantly more unintended births. This paper investigates the impact four restrictive state abortion laws-No Medicaid Funding, Parental Involvement, Mandatory Counseling and Waiting Periods-have on the unintended birth rates of the 50 US states for the year 2006. Using a variety of methodologies, the empirical results show that, contrary to the theoretical prediction, these four antiabortion laws do not have a significant positive effect on unintended birth rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

South Africa has one of the most liberal abortion laws in the world, emphasising the right to reproductive choice, in keeping with the country's post-apartheid emphasis on human rights. Access to abortion may also be considered a public health consideration, due to the large number of complications associated with illegal abortions and the associated burden of care. Despite these justifications for a more permissive stance towards abortion, there remain large segments of South African society who are opposed to termination of pregnancy on request. This paper examines the status of reproductive rights in South Africa before looking more closely at public attitudes towards them in the country's largest city-region. It uses survey data considering attitudes towards abortion as well as the interaction of these attitudes with the variables of race, gender, education level and age using multinomial logistic regression. The results indicate that the largest proportion of respondents oppose abortion absolutely, while a smaller proportion would be open to abortion if the mother's life is in danger or if the pregnancy was a result of rape. Throughout, the smallest proportion of respondents was of the view that abortion on request is a human right. In terms of predictive value, educational attainment was a stronger predictor than age, race or gender, though there is a distinct lack of consistency in predictive validity of all factors, demonstrating the significant gap between the liberality of laws and the conservatism of public attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We quantify the impact of abortion legalization on the incidence of unintended births. While underlying much of the literature on abortion legalization, this effect had only been approximated by previous work. We find a strong decline in the prevalence of unintended births. Moreover, we find that this decline is mainly driven by 'pro-choice' women. We then propose an empirical strategy to recover the effect of being 'unintended' on life cycle outcomes. We use the differential timing of abortion legalization across states interacted with the mother's religion (which facilitates or hinders legal abortion take up) to instrument for endogenous pregnancy intention. We find that being unintended causes negative outcomes (higher crime, lower schooling, lower earnings) over the life cycle. Our paper provides an initial step towards quantifying this key mechanism behind many of the well-documented long-term effects associated with changes in reproductive health policy [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The state has a duty to protect individuals from violations of their basic rights to life and liberty. But does the state have a duty to criminalize such violations? Further, if there is a duty on the part of the state to criminalize violations, should the duty be constitutionally entrenched? This paper argues that the answer to both questions is positive. The state has a duty not merely to effectively prevent violations of our rights to life and liberty, but also to criminalize such violations. Further, the duty to criminalize ought to be constitutionally entrenched. In the absence of criminal prohibitions on violations of the right to life and liberty individuals live 'at the mercy' of others. In the absence of a constitutional duty to criminalize, life and liberty of individuals is contingent upon the judgments and inclinations of the legislature. In both cases citizens' rights are 'at the mercy of others'. I also show that the decisions of the German Constitutional Court concerning abortion can be justified on such grounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Late-term abortions (after 20 weeks of gestation) are an issue of immense debate in India, where the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 permits abortions only up to 20 weeks of gestation. In special situations, such as pregnancy arising out of rape especially in the case of minors and the late diagnosis of congenital anomalies, there are no clear guidelines on the legal protocol that is to be followed, often resulting in a lack of consistency in terms of legal decision-making, as well as undue prolongation of legal procedures. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act prohibits late-term abortions on the basis of personhood and viability of the foetus, to reduce sex-selective abortions and as it considers such abortions to be unsafe. However, a legal prohibition of late-term abortions does not prevent them, and this has led to a surge in the number of illegal, unsafe abortions that are detrimental to the health of women. There is also physical, mental and financial distress to women who are forced to continue their pregnancy, coupled with a lack of governmental support for the same. In comparison of India's abortion laws with Singapore's, which are more liberal, and Philippines, which are more restrictive, liberalisation of abortion laws appears to have a better outcome in reducing the incidence of unsafe abortions. This paper argues that the way forward is to liberalise the laws in terms of not only extending the gestational limit to at least 24 weeks but also making exceptions allowing no gestational limit in special cases that warrant them, such as rape victims and late foetal anomalies. The laws, drafted and implemented in consultation with medical professionals in the field, must also be lucid and not leave any room for misinterpretation by courts and health care providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Abortion attitudes are influenced by people's socioeconomic and demographic circumstances and can be volatile during times of crisis. Brazil is an interesting case for examining abortion attitudes because of its strict abortion policies, changing religious landscape, high income inequality, and extreme uncertainty generated by the back-to-back Zika and COVID-19 crises. This study seeks to assess Brazilian women's attitudes toward abortion and whether religion and income explain these attitudes in the context of novel infectious disease epidemics. Methods: We used data from a population-based sample of 3996 women ages 18–34 in Pernambuco, Brazil, collected during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (May–September 2020). We conducted paired t-tests and multivariate-adjusted logistic regression models with adjusted Odds Ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs to assess differences in support for abortion in the case of fetal congenital Zika syndrome (CZS), maternal Zika infection during pregnancy, and maternal COVID-19 infection during pregnancy. Results: Significantly more women support the right to abortion in the case of fetal CZS (50%) than in the case of maternal Zika infection (40%) and maternal COVID-19 infection (31%). Support for abortion varies by income and religion. Controlling for other demographic characteristics, high-income women have higher odds of supporting abortion in the case of fetal CZS (aOR = 1.92; 95% CI: 1.25–2.94) and maternal Zika infection (aOR = 2.07; 95% CI: 1.33–3.21) than low-income women. Evangelical women have lower odds of supporting abortion in the case of maternal Zika infection (aOR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.45–0.93) and marginally lower odds of supporting the right to abortion in the case of maternal COVID-19 infection (aOR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.47–1.00) than women of other religious affiliations. Conclusions and Policy Implications: With increasingly conservative religious groups gaining size in Brazil, we expect to see increasing abortion restrictions. However, this research finds that a sizable portion of women across all incomes and religious affiliations support abortion, particularly in the case of fetal anomalies associated with Zika. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the past three decades Americans have come to view the parties increasingly in gendered terms of masculinity and femininity. Utilizing three decades of American National Election Studies data and the results of a cognitive reaction-time experiment, this paper demonstrates empirically that these connections between party images and gender stereotypes have been forged at the explicit level of the traits that Americans associate with each party, and also at the implicit level of unconscious cognitive connections between gender and party stereotypes. These connections between the parties and masculinity and femininity have important implications for citizens' political cognition and for the study of American political behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Latin America, it is recognised that social movements have a relevant role in changing social policies on abortion and marriage; however, little is known about the operating conditions accounting for the causal implication. Resorting to a qualitative comparative analysis of 24 Mexican policies, this research explores the conditions taken from moral policy literature. Drawing on extensive data, it argues three causal patterns, where influential movements are a necessary but no sufficient, (1) influential movements require a context full of "legal opportunities"—favourable legal precedents and Court intervention; (2) if they only find favourable legal precedents, conservative actors influence must be scarce, and (3) in cases where the Congress is conservative, the Court intervention, and the minimum conservative influence are required for movements to achieve legal changes on abortion and marriage. The novelty of this article consists of a new model that explains the conditions that play a relevant role in analysing abortion and equal marriage policy changes; in addition, valuable inputs are included for the benefit of the interested parties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reviews four legal policies in abortion from a critical theory of law perspective. Since the Comstock era, abortion policy has undergone radical shifts from criminalization in the last quarter of the nineteenth century to decriminalization in the late 1960s, followed by legalization and medical control over the last decade. Yet, until recently, little scholarly attention has been given to the social and political implications of these various policy shifts (almost all studies focus on the current legal phase only) often in isolation from other social and political realities. In this paper we draw on historical, demographic, participant-observation, interview, and documentary and legal materials to analyze the transformations of legal control structures in abortion. This shows both the creation of abortion law, which is imbedded in structures of sexual domination, and the contradictions in abortion law, which express antagonisms in civil society as well as promote alliances within ruling groups. The abortion case further clarifies the failure of legality to transcend existing gender inequalities, thereby contributing to further erosion of welfare rights for poor women and their children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to argue that the tactic of granting a fetus the legal status of a person will not, contrary to the expectations of opponents of abortion, provide grounds for a general prohibition on abortions. I begin by examining two arguments, one moral (J. j. Thomson's 'A Defense of Abortion') and the other legal (D. Regan's 'Rewriting Roe v. Wade'), which grant the assumption that a fetus is a person and yet argue to the conclusion that abortion is permissible. However, both Thomson and Regan rely on the so-called bad samaritan principle. This principle states that a person has a right to refuse to give aid. Their reliance on this principle creates problems, both in the moral and the legal contexts, since the bad samaritan principle is intended to apply to passive refusals to aid; abortion, however, does not look like any such passive denial of aid, and so it does not seem like the sort of action covered by the bad Samaritan principle. In defense of the positions outlined by Thomson and Regan, I argue that the apparent asymmetry between abortion and the usual type of case covered by the bad samaritan principle is only apparent and not a genuine problem for their analyses. I conclude with a defense of the morality of the bad samaritan principle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study employs sentiment analysis (SA) to examine the semantic structures of restrictive and protective abortion bills enacted in 2019. SA is a Natural Language Processing (NLP) technique that uses automation to extract affective indicators (emotive language) from text data. Assessing these indicators can help identify whether legal texts are framed, or intentionally biased in their wording. Identifying framing is important for understanding potentially biased interpretations of these laws. Methods: We identified a sample of 2019 abortion bills using the legislative tracking tool Legiscan and included those that met specified criteria (N = 19 bills). We categorized each bill as restrictive (n = 12) or protective (n = 7). We ran aggregate (i.e., all bills) and separate (protective × restrictive) SA, generating scores that we interpreted qualitatively (higher scores indicated predominance of positive wording). Results: In the aggregate analysis, 56% of text comprised negative terms (44% positive). Restrictive bills contained more negative language than protective bills (67% vs 58%). Although SA scores varied from −222 to +13, two laws scored 0, indicating neutrality. For comparison, the US Constitution's score equaled 1. Conclusion: Our findings confirm SA is useful to examine legal documents for language biases. The abortion bills we assessed seem framed along political ideologies, although the sample provided evidence that neutral wording is possible. Policy Implications: With the recent additions of conservative-leaning Justices to the US Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade is again at the center of partisan conflict. Thus, how abortion laws are framed draws further implications for how they may be interpreted when challenged in the court system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Abortion restrictions diminish access and perpetuate hostility toward abortion seekers. Support for restrictions is high, but at the same time, understanding of restrictions is low. We evaluated the effectiveness of a video intervention designed to increase knowledge of abortion restrictions in Arkansas and evaluated whether hearing a person's abortion experience changed their support for restrictions. Methods: Using a pre-test, post-test, and follow-up design, we randomly assigned a convenience sample of Arkansas residents (N = 369) to view one of two video conditions, either information on abortion legislation only or information followed by an abortion testimonial, in 2018. We compared knowledge of abortion restrictions (KAR) and support for abortion restrictions (SAR) across time with repeated-measures analyses of variance and McNemar's tests. Results: Knowledge increased over time for both groups and was higher among testimonial-watching participants. The 20-week abortion ban, counseling on "abortion pill reversal," and 48-hour waiting period yielded the largest knowledge gains for both groups. Support decreased slightly over time but did not differ by video condition. Conclusions: Combined information and testimonial videos were effective in increasing awareness of Arkansas abortion restrictions, potentially because of repeated information or emotional connections, making the information more memorable. Endorsement of restrictions remained high in the sample. Policy Implications: Participants in this sample did not seem to interpret abortion restrictions as burdensome, even after being given information in the video, and ended up simultaneously supporting choice to have an abortion and the policies that restrict access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research examines psychological concomitants of support for anti-abortion laws in Poland in the wake of the Constitutional Tribunal's 2020 ruling restricting access to abortion in cases of fetal malformations. Results of two cross-sectional studies conducted on representative samples of Poles (Study 1, N = 994 and Study 2, N = 432) indicated that support for an almost total abortion ban was associated with national narcissism – a belief in the national in-group's greatness that is contingent on its external validation. In both studies, the relationship between national narcissism and support for anti-abortion laws was mediated by hostile, but not benevolent, sexism. Study 2 additionally showed that this effect remained significant even when we accounted for other important variables, such as individual narcissism or prejudice towards people with Down syndrome. Overall, our results indicate that national narcissism may play an important role in shaping anti-abortion attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the twentieth anniversary of the periodical and discusses feminist scholarship in 2014. Topics include the twentieth anniversary celebration and roundtable held on May 18, 2013, abortion rights for women in 2014, and the release of a sister publication by the periodical. Information is provided on the development of feminist law.

On 22 October 2020, the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland ruled that an abortion due to foetal impairment was unconstitutional. This article discusses the context of this controversial ruling as well as its main tenets, focusing on the interpretation of the human rights proffered by the Tribunal and on the rule of law concerns raised by the Tribunal's decision. Against the backdrop of a brief history of the legal regulation of abortion in Poland since 1945, the article offers a critical assessment of the human rights framework used in the Polish abortion debate. Based on a close reading of the Tribunal's ruling and the dissenting opinions, the article points out the particularities in the Tribunal's engagement with international law and human rights jurisprudence. The article argues that the Tribunal's decision is yet another symptom of the crisis in which the rule of law in Poland has found itself since 2015. It bears evidence to the closing of the jurisprudential horizon caused by the political change which has been taking place in Poland since 2015, consisting of the reduction of the role of international human rights debates as a reference in Polish constitutional jurisprudence. The ruling is therefore a portent of Poland's future compliance with its international commitments in human rights matters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Access to abortion care has been hugely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This has prompted several governments to permit the use of telemedicine for fully remote care pathways, thereby ensuring pregnant people are still able to access services. One such government is that of England, where these new care pathways have been publicly scrutinised. Those opposed to telemedical early medical abortion care have raised myriad concerns, though they largely centre on matters of patient safeguarding. It is argued that healthcare professionals cannot adequately carry out their safeguarding duties if the patient is not in the room with them. These concerns lack empirical support. Emerging evidence suggests that safeguarding processes may, in fact, be more effective within telemedical abortion care pathways. In this article, we address two specific safeguarding concerns: (1) that a remote consultation prevents a healthcare professional from identifying instances of abuse, and (2) that healthcare professionals cannot reliably confirm the absence of coercion during a remote consultation. We demonstrate that such concerns are misplaced, and that safeguarding may actually be improved in telemedical care pathways as victims of abuse may find it easier to engage with services. It is inevitable that some individuals will fall through the net, but this is unavoidable even with in-person care and thus does not constitute a strong critique of the use of telemedicine in abortion care. These safeguarding concerns set aside, then, we argue that the current approval that enables telemedical early medical abortion should be afforded permanence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the issue of abortion in the context of the dispute between progressive and neoconservative political forces in Brazil. The article analyses ADPF 442, a legal instrument known as a Motion of Noncompliance with a Fundamental Precept, which was lodged with the Supreme Court as part of a feminist litigation strategy in the country. The motion calls for the Supreme Court to decide on the constitutionality of the decriminalisation of abortion within the first 12 weeks of gestation. Methodologically, the analysis combines a literature review with participant observation and corpus linguistics analysis. ADPF 442 is considered a key event in the use of judicialisation to voice demands for women's rights in current-day Brazil, and this work examines the testimonies as representative of the discourse and strategies at play in the broader field of abortion and its major actors, both for and against its decriminalisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of the effect of parental involvement (PI) laws on the incidence of abortions to minors in the United States. We contribute to the extant literature in several ways. First, we explore differences in estimates of the effect of PI laws across time that may result from changes in contraception, the composition of pregnant minors, abortion access in nearby states, and differences in how these laws are enforced. We find that PI laws enacted before the mid-1990s are associated with a 15% to 20% reduction in abortions to minors, but PI laws enacted after this time are not associated with declines in abortions to minors. Second, we assess the role of out-of-state travel by minors and find that it is not a significant factor moderating the effect of PI laws. Third, we use a synthetic control approach to explore state-level heterogeneity in the effect of PI laws and find large differences in the effect of PI laws on abortions to minors by state that appear unrelated to the type of PI law or whether contiguous states have enacted PI laws. Finally, we show that estimates of the effect of PI laws using data from either the Centers for Disease Control or the Guttmacher Institute do not differ qualitatively once differences in the states and years available across these data are harmonized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of the present study is to determine if laws requiring ultrasounds prior to an abortion being performed have any effect on the demand for abortions. Using state-level data, a synthetic control model (SCM) and a fixed effects model, results of the present study suggest that ultrasound laws have no statistically-significant effects on state-level abortion rates. In the SCM analysis, 21 states were in the treatment group (state had enacted an ultrasound law) and 22 states were in the potential control group. Results also suggest that states with lower per capita incomes, more non-Whites, and more abortion providers had higher abortion rates. This study is important because it is the first to use an SCM analysis to examine the effects of any type of restrictive abortion law on the demand for abortions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why does #RepealedThe8th matter for feminist legal studies? The answers seem obvious in one sense. Feminism has long constituted itself through the struggle for sexual and reproductive justice, and Irish feminism has contributed a significant 'legal win' with the landslide vote of approval for lifting abortion restrictions in the referendum on the 25th May 2018. That win comes at a global moment when populist legal engagement is doing significant damage in countries that regard themselves as world leaders, and beyond. #RepealedThe8th offers Ireland, and the world, the actuality that the popular vote, and everything that contributes to it, could be something else. Repeal shows how legal tools like the vote may be made into an expression of care for reproductive lives. This expression is important in recognizing pregnant people as knowing agents who are best placed to decide, and in seeking to do justice to those who contribute to everyday reproductive life. But repeal, like the many who brought it into being, has multiple meanings. #RepealedThe8th matters because it is a moving process of socio-legal translation, which draws on a collective energy, 'repeal energy', to turn the travesty that was the Eighth Amendment and all it represents into a search for the rest of reproductive life. In opening up the meaning of the vote, much like feminists elsewhere have opened up the meaning of the strike, Irish feminists have turned public mourning over past mistreatment into a series of reproductive connections. This is not a strategy that can be rolled out. Figuring out #RepealedThe8th will take many tellings. Rather we need to give repeal, and repealers, room to breathe and rest. We need to feel our way through repeal's production of legal change so that this success is not reduced to some generic transferable set of legal instructions. I begin by reflecting on repeal as a process of feminist socio-legal translation, which shows us how legal change comes about through the motivation of collective joy, the mourning of damaged and lost lives, the sharing of legal knowledge, and the claiming of the rest of reproductive life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 7 June 2018, the Supreme Court delivered their long anticipated ruling on whether the abortion laws in Northern Ireland are compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. Although the case was dismissed on procedural grounds, a majority of the court held that, obiter, the current Northern Irish law was incompatible with the right to respect for private and family life, protected by Article 8 ECHR, “insofar as it prohibits abortion in cases of rape, incest and fatal foetal abnormality”. This Supreme Court decision, seen alongside the May 2018 Irish referendum liberalising abortion, and the 5 June 2018 Parliamentary debate seeking to liberalise abortion laws in Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK, places renewed focus upon the abortion laws of Northern Ireland and Great Britain, which suggests that the ‘halfway house’ of the Abortion Act 1967 Act finally be close to being reformed to hand the decision of abortion to women themselves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In any given society, rights are said to co-exist. When rights, however, begin to conflict, a balance must be sought. In few fields has the ability of governments to accommodate two conflicting sets of rights been so controversial as it has in the case of conscientious objection (CO) in reproductive health care. Today, states have an obligation under international law to protect the right to the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion of medical providers. They also, however, have an obligation to protect right to the highest attainable standard of health and other fundamental rights of women. Considering the extent to which CO has been invoked in the context of reproductive health care, international law recognizes limits to its use. Over the years, human rights bodies have sought to develop guidelines around CO in order to ensure the protection of women's basic rights. While some state practices have shown to be consistent with guidelines established at the international level, some countries have struggled to provide an effective balance so as to protect women's fundamental rights. Taking the example of countries in Latin America and Europe, this article provides an overview of the different ways states have sought to regulate CO in the medical context and the various difficulties ensued. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author comments on Professor Ni Peimin's essay on the idea of universal human dignity or worth. Particular focus is given to Professor Ni's claims on the link between Confucianism and dignity. Topics discussed include Confucian views on the value of life, justifications of human dignity, the source of humans' moral potential, and Western views of abortion rights.

This article presents a part of the results of an empirical study conducted at a Parisian hospital between 2011 and 2014. It aimed at understanding the women and couples' motivations to terminate or not a pregnancy once a prenatal diagnosis has revealed a genetically related disease in the embryo or fetus. The article first presents the social and legal context of the study, the methodology used and the pathologies that were encountered. Then, it examines the results of the interviews conducted with 5 women alone and 23 couples explaining their reasons for deciding to terminate or not the pregnancy. Finally, it explores the patients' views about the doctor's involvement in the decision-making process. The findings reveal the reasons they formulate when they ponder whether to terminate or not the pregnancy. It highlights the process of their deliberation, their hierarchisation of arguments and concerns. They also show how patients, though often consumed in sorrow, claim to be the legitimate decision-makers, especially women, in a social and legal context in which the rejection of eugenics is viewed as an undisputable principle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary & Nonprofit Organizations is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study empirically examined whether acts of antiabortion criminal activities and restrictive state abortion laws had an impact on the number of abortion providers. Using a unique data set, the Feminist Majority Foundation's 2000 survey of antiabortion criminal acts directed at clinics, providers, healthcare workers and patients, the empirical results showed that acts of violence and harassment reduced the number of abortion providers offering abortion services. An increase in the likelihood of violence or harassment by 10 % reduced the number of abortion providers per 100,000 women of reproductive age by 5.6 and 3.7 %, respectively and the number of abortion providers per 100,000 pregnancies by 7.8 and 5.9 %, respectively. In addition, antiabortion criminal acts were more likely in states with greater economic participation by women, higher levels of sexual violence against women, and western states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Low-income women and women of color are disproportionately affected by unintended pregnancy. Lack of knowledge of abortion laws and services is one of several factors likely to hinder access to services, though little research has documented knowledge in this population. Survey with convenience sample of 1,262 women attending primary care or full-scope Ob/Gyn clinics serving low-income populations in three large cities and multivariable analyses with four knowledge outcomes. Among all participants, 53 % were first-generation immigrants, 25 % identified the correct gestational age limit, 41 % identified state parental consent laws, 67 % knew partner consent is not required, and 55 % knew where to obtain abortion services. In multivariable analysis, first-generation immigrants and primarily Spanish speakers were significantly less likely than higher-generation or primarily English speakers to display correct knowledge. Design and evaluation of strategies to improve knowledge about abortion, particularly among migrant women and non-primary English speakers, is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Currently, abortion can be lawfully performed in China at any gestational stage for a wide range of social and medical reasons. I critically explore the Chinese regulatory model of abortion in order to examine its practical effects on women. Although I focus on the post-Maoist abortion law, I also analyse the imperial Confucianism-dominated regulation and the Maoist ban on abortion in order to scrutinise the emergence of the notion of 'glorious motherhood'. By examining how 'glorious motherhood' is constructed and reinforced in the Chinese family planning context, I argue that the post-Maoist government intentionally made abortion 'law in the books' unrestrictive in order to impose its control over female fertility. As a result of this, women are persuaded and even forced to lead a 'glorious' maternal life, which means sacrificing themselves for the purpose of achieving the state's Malthusian and eugenic demographic goals. Furthermore, I argue that, in addition to exacerbating gender oppression, abortion law's embrace of the idea of 'glorious motherhood' also produces 'group oppression' of unmarried women and working-class women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using nineteenth century legal information combined with census information, I examine the effect of state laws that restricted American women's access to abortion on the ratio of children to women. I estimate an increase in the birthrate of 4 % to 12 % when abortion is restricted. In the absence of anti-abortion laws, fertility would have been 5 % to 12 % lower in the early twentieth century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the UK, regulation of clinical services is being restructured. We consider two clinical procedures, abortion and IVF treatment, which have similar ethical and political sensitivities. We consider factors including the law, licensing, inspection, amount of paperwork and reporting requirements, the reception by practitioners and costs, to establish which field has the greater 'regulatory burden'. We test them based on scientific, ethical, social, political factors that might explain differences. We find that regulatory burden borne by IVF services is greater than in abortion, but none of the explanatory theses can provide a justification of this phenomenon. We offer an alternative explanation based on regulatory 'overspill' from research regulation and policy making, conceptualisation of risk regulation and a high public profile that locks a regulator into self-preservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews recent developments in health care law, focusing on controversy at the intersection of health care law and culture. The article addresses: emerging issues in federal regulatory oversight of the rapidly developing market in direct-to-consumer genetic testing, including questions about the role of government oversight and professional mediation of consumer choice; continuing controversies surrounding stem cell research and therapies and the implications of these controversies for healthcare institutions; a controversy in India arising at the intersection of abortion law and the rights of the disabled but implicating a broader set of cross-cultural issues; and the education of U.S. health care providers and lawyers in the theory and practice of cultural competency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a sex selective abortion, a woman aborts a fetus simply on account of the fetus' sex. Her motivation or underlying reason for doing so may very well be sexist. She could be disposed to thinking that a female child is inferior to a male one. In a hate crime, an individual commits a crime on account of a victim's sex, race, sexual orientation or the like. The individual may be sexist or racist in picking his victim. He or she could be disposed to thinking that one race or sex is inferior to another. I argue that while a prohibition on sex selective abortions is anomalous in a liberal, criminal legal framework, hate crime legislation may not be. The former but not the latter constitutes a thought crime. I define a thought crime as one where an agent's motivation is not just relevant but sufficient to take an act from the domain of the non-punishable to the domain of the punishable. Ignoring a woman's sexist motivation in procuring an abortion suddenly renders her act of abortion legal. On the other hand, discounting an agent's bias in committing a hate motivated assault or murder does not transform the act from a punishable one to a non-punishable one. Assaulting or murdering is already a crime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although nearly 99% of abortions in New Zealand are permitted in order to prevent danger or injury to a woman’s mental health (the ‘mental health exception’), the reasons why mental health considerations should effectively control access to abortion are not altogether clear. This article analyses abortion case law, statutes and debates from New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States to attempt to explain the legal connection between mental health considerations and access to abortion. The article argues that the mental health exception evolved in response to a change in the predominant construction of women seeking abortion from ‘selfish’ to ‘desperate’, coinciding with increasing societal subscription to an expanded view of psychological harm. By conceptually accommodating both constructions of women seeking abortion, the article argues that the mental health exception usefully enabled society generally to proscribe the practice of abortion on the basis that it was unnatural and irrational, while nevertheless permitting it in cases considered to be deserving. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study uses pooled cross-section time-series data, over the years 1982, 1992 and 2000, to estimate the impact of various restrictive abortion laws on the demand for abortion. This study complements and extends prior research by explicitly including the price of obtaining an abortion in the estimation. The empirical results show that the real price of an abortion has a statistically and numerically significant negative impact on abortion demand. Over the period 1982–2000 approximately 20% of the decline in the incidence of abortion was due solely to the increase in the real price of obtaining an abortion. A state Medicaid funding restriction of abortion and a parental involvement law reduce the abortion demand, but a state waiting period and a mandatory counseling law have no statistically significant impact on the abortion demand. The empirical results also provide support for the hypothesis that increases in abortion costs not only reduce the number of abortions, but also reduce the number of pregnancies by altering women’s sexual/contraceptive practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]