Tag Archive for: Voluntary Termination of Pregnancy

,

One more step: after the half-sanction, the IVE law goes to the Senate

Después de 20 horas de sesión, con 131 votos a favor, 117 votos en contra y 6 abstenciones, la Cámara de Diputados dio media sanción a la ley de Interrupción Voluntaria del Embarazo. Esta semana inicia el tratamiento el Senado, con reuniones de comisiones y un nuevo dictamen que será votado el 29 de diciembre.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

On Friday morning, after long hours of presentations by deputies and deputies, the vote on the IVE law was held, resulting in its half-sanction. While thousands of activists accompanied the discussion, from their homes or in public spaces in the vigils organized by the National Campaign for Legal, Safe and Free Abortion, the venue was once again filled with speeches for and against. Much of what we heard had already been said in the legislative treatment of 2018. It is that the scenario has not changed: the clandestinity of the practice poses a danger to life for pregnant people, and the possibilities of accessing it in conditions of legality and security are a matter of public health, social justice and human rights.

Deputy Gabriela Cerruti was in charge of making the closing speech of the majority opinion. Her words explain in a very simple way the sexual division of labor, and how women have historically been burdened with the responsibilities associated with reproduction and care. “It is not news that this world is unfair. […] We women know it perfectly, because for centuries they forced us to give birth to send our children to war. For centuries they forced us to give birth to exploit our kids in factories. […]. What we have come to ask you today is: stop making women’s bodies the territory of dispute of what the economy and politics cannot solve. The world is indeed unfair, but the answer is not in our womb. On the contrary: the world is unfair because it was built 500 years ago on a system based on the exploitation of women and nature. And we are the first to put ourselves in front of the battles that have to be fought to change that worldview of the world and so that the world is effectively for everyone, and so that we can live in a world in harmony, in a world better, in a world where we can all exercise our desire and our decision. “

At the end of the speech, he gave rise to an interpellation about the next discussions that should take place in our society: the distribution of care. “Care policies have to be part of State policies and they have to be part of our discussions because we have been the cheap labor that sustained this system in the last century. They would not have built their businesses, their fortunes, or their factories if we had not been in the houses taking care of the children, the parents and the husbands. We did it for centuries and we don’t want to do it anymore, or we want to do it when we decide to. Because choosing is not only choosing whether to be pregnant or not, choosing is choosing the life project, it is choosing at all times what we want to do ”.

How did the deputies vote according to their gender?

Voting results can be analyzed from several perspectives: by province, by party or political alliance, and by gender.

We are interested in specifying the latter. Of the total of 109 female deputies, 62 voted in favor, 45 against and 2 abstained. Of the total of 147 deputies, 72 voted against, 69 in favor, 4 abstained and 2 were absent. In other words, in proportion to the integration of the Chamber, it was the female vote that marked the trend in favor.

Este dato es importante para reforzar la importancia de la paridad de género en el Congreso. Las elecciones del 2019 fueron de estreno para la ley 27412 de paridad de género en ámbitos de representación política, y dieron como resultado un 10,3% de aumento en la proporción de mujeres que integran la Cámara. Y si comparamos el voto femenino de la votación de la ley de IVE de 2018 con el de 2020, el incremento es de casi un 20%.

All these data can be read in this report published by the Undersecretariat for Parliamentary Affairs of the Head of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Nation.

How is the opinion that was approved?

The approved bill is based on the one presented by the Executive Power, with the modifications introduced by the plenary of the committees prior to voting.

It is a law that establishes the right of women and people with other gender identities with the ability to gestate to decide to terminate pregnancy, request and access abortion care, and receive post-abortion care in the services of the health system.

Free access is planned until week 14 of gestation. Outside this period, access will only be possible in the event of rape or if the life or integral health of the pregnant person is in danger (that is, the causes that are already recognized in our legal system through article 86 of the Penal Code , with the interpretation made by the Supreme Court in the FAL ruling).

The term for access to the practice is 10 calendar days from its request, and the informed consent of the pregnant person expressed in writing is requested.

In cases of minors and people with disabilities or restricted capacity, referrals to the Civil and Commercial Code are provided to resolve whether they have the capacity to give consent and under what conditions they can do so.

Regarding conscientious objection, individual-type objection is allowed, and it is also indicated that those private health centers or social security centers that do not have professionals to carry out an abortion due to conscientious objection must foresee and order the Referral to a place, with similar characteristics, where the provision is actually made. On these points of the project we develop more in this note.

However, health personnel may not refuse to carry out the practice in the event that the life or health of the pregnant person is in danger and requires immediate and urgent care. Nor can conscientious objection be alleged to refuse to provide postabortion health care.

In addition, it strengthens the State’s responsibility to implement the Comprehensive Sexual Education law, and to establish active policies for the promotion and strengthening of sexual and reproductive health for the entire population.

What are the next steps in the Senate?

This Monday it is expected that the treatment of the project will begin in the Senate, with the presentation of members of the Executive Power before the plenary of the Justice, Health and Women’s Banking commissions. Tuesday and Wednesday will be dedicated to receiving specialists nominated by senators and senators. On Thursday, it is expected that there will be a discussion between members of the commissions to pass the opinion to signature, with the expectation of taking it to the site on December 29.

In this second instance of legislative discussion we reinforce our request for a respectful debate with arguments, and we hope that the voluntary interruption of pregnancy will be law before the end of the year.

Contacto

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

With agreement on the opinion, the discussion begins in the Chamber of Deputies

After the plenary meeting of the General Legislation, Criminal Legislation, Social Action and Public Health, and Women and Diversity commissions, an agreement was finally reached on the bill for the Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy that will be voted on tomorrow at the venue. of the Chamber of Deputies. What modifications does it have with respect to the project that the Executive Power had presented in November? What can we expect from today’s session? We tell you here.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

As planned in the legislative agenda, this Wednesday, December 9, the committee meeting was held to rule on the IVE bill. With 77 votes in favor, 30 rejection and 4 abstentions, an agreement was reached on the text of the project. The same thing had happened hours before in the plenary session of the Budget and Social Action and Public Health committees, which had discussed the First 1000 Days bill. Both projects will be discussed at the venue this Thursday, December 10.

What is the agenda for the day?

The call for the session was set at 11 in the morning, and the order of treatment of the projects will be first that of IVE and then that of Attention and comprehensive health care during pregnancy and early childhood, known as the program of the First 1000 days.

Throughout the day, the Campaign for Legal, Safe and Free Abortion called to accompany the vote in public spaces throughout the country. In Buenos Aires, the vigil will begin at 10 am in the vicinity of Congress, with activities throughout the day and until the law is voted. In Córdoba, the call is in the former Plaza Vélez Sarsfield from 6:00 p.m. As the right to abortion is a matter of public health, and taking care of ourselves as well, we reinforce the recommendations to participate in the vigil:

  • We wear a nose mask at all times.
  • We wash our hands with alcohol gel.
  • We keep the distance of 2 meters.
  • We take care of the sun with sunscreen, light clothing and a hat.
  • We bring fresh water to stay hydrated.
  • We do not respond to anti-rights provocations and we try to always be accompanied and attentive.

As the two bills will be discussed, the session is expected to last several hours. On IVE, a total of 170 deputies would speak, so the vote on the law would be in the early morning hours.

What does the opinion say? What modifications do you propose?
A few weeks ago we published this analysis with a systematization of the bills that would serve as the basis for this debate: the one presented by the Executive Power in November and the one presented by the Campaign in 2019, contrasting with the opinion approved by the Chamber of Deputies in 2018.

Yesterday a new opinion was approved, which foresees some modifications in the project presented by the Executive Power. What are they about?

In Art. 8, which regulates cases where the person requiring the practice is a minor, now a reference is made directly to art. 26 of the CCyC. Before the amendment, it was specified that those between 13 and 16 years of age have sufficient aptitude and maturity to decide on the practice and give due consent, unless a procedure that involves a serious risk to their health or life must be used. The reference to the applicable legal framework for these cases is maintained, as proposed by the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Law No. 26.061 on the Comprehensive Protection of Boys, Girls and Adolescents, which always provides that their best interests are protected and their rights guaranteed. to be heard.

On the other hand, the new Art. 11 is added, which indicates:

CONSCIOUS OBJECTION. OBLIGATIONS OF HEALTH ESTABLISHMENTS. Those health effectors of the Private Subsector or Social Security that do not have professionals to carry out the interruption of pregnancy due to the exercise of the right to conscientious objection in accordance with the previous article, must foresee and order the referral to an effector actually perform the service and that it is of similar characteristics to the person requesting the benefit consulted. In all cases, the practice must be guaranteed in accordance with the provisions of this law. The procedures and costs associated with the referral and the transfer of the patient will be the responsibility of the effector who performs the referral. All referrals contemplated in this article must be billed according to the coverage in favor of the effector performing the practice.

This new article provides a solution for the cases of private health or social security institutions where there is no non-objector professional, indicating that they must arrange the referral to another institution that does carry out the practice, guaranteeing that it is done in accordance with the law , and taking charge of all the procedures and costs associated with the referral and transfer.

At the same time, the wording of Article 10 is maintained, which recognizes the right to conscientious objection, with some limitations, such as that whoever objects must uphold their decision in all areas, public and private, in which they exercise their profession; She must also refer the patient in good faith to be attended by another professional in a temporary and timely manner, without delay; You must adopt all the necessary measures to guarantee access to the practice and finally you must comply with the rest of your professional duties and legal obligations.

It is also prohibited for cases in which the life or health of the pregnant person is in danger and requires immediate and urgent attention, and for cases that require post-abortion health care. This article also provides that non-compliance may give rise to disciplinary, administrative, criminal and civil sanctions, as appropriate.

However, this wording does not contemplate limitations that did arise in the opinion of the Deputies of 2018, such as that the objection had to be previously expressed individually and in writing, and communicated to the highest authority of the health establishment.

Another important point of that opinion is that it obliged the health establishments to keep a record of the professional objectors, having to inform the health authority of their jurisdiction, and explicitly prohibited institutional conscientious objection and / or ideology.

What does the inclusion of articles that admit the assumption of individual conscientious objection, and assumptions of institutions where there is no non-objector professional, mean?

We know that conscientious objection is a legal institute used to obstruct or delay access to sexual and (non) reproductive health services, as we have seen in cases of contraception and legal interruption of pregnancy. Recognizing it within the law, with the legal status of “right”, does nothing other than enable non-compliance with the law itself, seriously jeopardizing its effectiveness.

Conscientious objection is a legal institute that allows certain persons to be exempted from complying with a legal obligation, in cases where the action ordered by the norms contradicts their deepest religious, ethical or moral convictions; provided that this does not cause harm to third parties.

We understand that the incorporation of individual conscientious objection for direct intervention in the practice of IVE is based on respect for this freedom of conscience or religion, as long as it is exceptionally allowed and with all the limits mentioned. But recognizing the claim of private institutions to exempt themselves from the provision of pregnancy termination services is unthinkable. We fear that this may happen in the event that all the health professionals of an institution declare themselves as objectors. Even if it is not the institution that denies the service, if all its professionals are objectors, it becomes a disguised institutional conscientious objection.

A solution of this type violates the freedom and right to health of patients, and increases costs and problems for the public health system, which will be burdened by having to resolve the situations that the private subsystem derives. We are also concerned that as a consequence of this recognition, the situation in Uruguay will be repeated, where high levels of objection are identified, and there are even jurisdictions with 100% professional objectors. This exacerbates the difficulties that affect rural areas or areas far from large cities, where access to health services is more limited and there are fewer public institutions.

The private institutions that provide health services perform essential public functions: the provision of health services to the population. The fact that these functions are carried out for profit and through a private contract does not detract from the nature of the service. Therefore, the social function that these private companies fulfill is different from that of others that are not committed to guaranteeing people’s fundamental rights. In this sense, the social and legal requirement that is made to companies or entities that provide health services is much greater. Not only should they guarantee non-discrimination in access to services, but they are also subject to greater control and surveillance by the State.

In this sense, admitting that an entire institution can be exempted from the provision of IVE services is unjustified and would disproportionately put at risk the access to health of the people associated with them.

In any case, the opinion obliges these establishments to guarantee the referral, in a place with similar characteristics to the one that the person requesting the benefit consulted, where the practice must be guaranteed in accordance with the law. Then it indicates that the procedures and costs associated with the referral and transfer will be the responsibility of the institution that referred, providing that it will always be invoiced in favor of the effector who actually performs the practice.

It will be law

Despite these controversial points, we welcome the approval of the majority opinion and await treatment in both Houses before the end of the year. We recognize that reaching this instance was the result of the struggles of the human rights movement that has been promoting this law for so many years.

The National Congress now has the duty to give the legislative discussion with responsibility that a public health problem of this magnitude deserves, in this new opportunity to enact the law and mark progress in the protection of the rights of women and individuals. pregnant women in our country.

We hope that those who legislate put aside their personal convictions and private morals when tackling this project. They are legislating on our future, on our health and on our lives. We demand that you do so responsibly, supporting this bill with your positive vote, because it is a bill that expands rights and saves lives.

This afternoon, we go for the half penalty. And before the end of 2020, for the conquest of the right to legal, safe and free abortion.

Legislative treatment of the law on Voluntary Termination of Pregnancy begins

The discussion will begin in the Chamber of Deputies, with informational meetings of the committees throughout the week. After the long weekend the voting would come in the enclosure. It will be discussed on the basis of the bill sent by the Executive Power two weeks ago, and the bill presented by the National Campaign for Safe and Free Legal Abortion in 2019. What does each bill say?

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

This Tuesday, December 1, the plenary of the Criminal Legislation, General Legislation, Women and Diversities and Health commissions will receive members of the Executive Power (from the Health, Social and Legal and Technical Development portfolio). Then there will be presentations by scientists, sanitarians, health professionals and jurists for and against the law, with the expectation of reaching an opinion next Friday.

After having announced it at the opening of the legislative sessions, on March 1, the Executive Power finally sent the bill for the Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy to the National Congress. It did so together with the bill that establishes the so-called “Thousand Days Plan”, which proposes State assistance to pregnant women in vulnerable situations during pregnancy and up to the first three years of the child’s life.

In this way, the debate on the legalization of abortion was once again enabled, one of the main points on the human rights agenda of our country since its discussion in Congress in 2018, which culminated in August with the rejection in the Senate. The Campaign for Legal, Safe and Free Abortion had presented its project in May 2019, which still has parliamentary status, so it is expected that during the debate in commissions both will be taken into consideration.

In this document we present a comparative analysis of both projects, contrasting them with the opinion that had been approved by the Chamber of Deputies in 2018. We consider that the National Congress has the duty to give the legislative discussion with the lessons learned at that time , and taking both projects as input.

Congress will again have the opportunity to enact a law that consolidates long-delayed human rights, respecting the international standards that regulate this matter to which the Argentine State is bound, marking an advance in the protection of the rights of women and pregnant persons in our country.

A law that guarantees the Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy will allow us to advance in the construction of a more just, egalitarian and respectful of human rights society.

Contact

 

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org
,

Voluntary Termination of Pregnancy (IVE) bills: comparative analysis

This document proposes a comparative analysis between the bill of Interruption Pregnancy Volunteer who was treated in the Chamber of Deputies in 2018 and obtained average sanction; the bill of the National Campaign for Legal, Safe and Free Abortion presented in 2019 in Congress and the project presented by the Executive Power in November 2020.

Descargar Documento / Download File
,

For the 8th time the IVE project to the Congress is presented

Today, May 28, on the International Day of Action for Women’s Health, Campaña Nacional por el Aborto Legal, Seguro y Gratuito, which brings together more than 500 feminist, social and political organizations, presents for the eighth time, the bill of legal interruption of pregnancy

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

May 28 is the International Day of Action for Women’s Health. It was proclaimed 32 years ago in Costa Rica, during the meeting of members of the World Network of Women for Reproductive Sexual Rights held at the end of the V International Meeting on Women’s Health. The purpose of this date is to reaffirm the right to health as a human right of women that they must access without restrictions or delays or exclusions of any kind, and throughout their lives.
In this context, the Campaña Nacional por el Aborto Legal, Seguro y Gratuito, Safe and Free, will present for the eighth consecutive time before the National Congress, the Law of Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy (IVE). Already in 2018, the bill achieved the average sanction in the Chamber of Deputies being rejected in the Senate. Since 1921, the Penal Code establishes in article 86 inc 1 and 2, that abortion is legal if the pregnancy represents a danger to the life or health of the person or if it is the product of a violation. However, there were always difficulties for the implementation of public policies that guarantee full access to legal abortion.
In 2012, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation issued the ruling F.A.L s / self-satisfying measure, where it instructed the State to end the practice of judicializing, obstructing and / or delaying access to legal abortions. Likewise, he urged the national, provincial and city authorities of Buenos Aires to implement the highest standards and through hospital protocols, to train in good practices and remove all barriers that limit access to health services. In this regard, in 2015 the Ministry of Health of the Nation published the “Protocol for the Comprehensive Care of Persons with the Right to Legal Interruption of Pregnancy”, which represented a major step forward in accessing abortion for women and people with the ability to gestate.
Even so, those who require access to a non-punishable abortion continue to face constant obstacles, such as the institutional violence exerted on them by health professionals, being conscientious objectors and not making the corresponding referrals. These actions and practices, naturalized in the health system, prevent access to safe abortions even in cases where they are protected by law. Particularly in our province, access to this type of abortion has been hampered since 2012 by the amparo filed by Portal de Belén. Even after the favorable ruling of the Superior Court of Justice in this case, the situation that prevents the application of the Provincial Guide for the care of non-punishable abortions has not changed.
In this regard, the World Health Organization states that the criminalization of abortion and restrictive measures, not only affect the exercise of a human right, but generate a serious public health problem because it leaves vulnerable and pushes clandestine and insecure practices that constitute one of the main causes of maternal mortality. The right to abortion is a matter of public health that impacts the lives of girls, adolescents, women and people with the ability to deliver. Sexual and (non) reproductive health are human rights, that is, they are for everyone without any discrimination.
Therefore, on Tuesday the streets will be filled with handkerchiefs, with interventions and rallies in all the cities of the country and various parts of the world. In Córdoba, the federal handkerchief will be at the Museum of Anthropology at 4:00 pm and there will be invited bands. In a collective cry for legal abortion, safe and free, the green wave, returns to the streets and Congress, to be able to decide on our bodies and lives.

Sex education to decide

Contraceptives not to abort

Legal abortion to not die.

¡QueSeaLey!

Author

Laura Villanueva

Contact

Cecilia Bustos Moreschi, cecilia.bustos.moreschi@fundeps.org