Talk:Abortion law

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Abortion law article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 30 days

Abortion High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Abortion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Abortion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AbortionWikipedia:WikiProject AbortionTemplate:WikiProject AbortionAbortion articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Feminism High‑importance

	Feminism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Human rights High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sexology and sexuality High‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's Health High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's Health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HealthTemplate:WikiProject Women's Healthwomen's health articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Women's History High‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Ethics / Social and political Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics
	Social and political philosophy

Denmark liberalizing its law[edit]

It appears that Denmark is liberalizing its abortion law in multiple ways, including one which would require this article to be edited: It seems that the limit for on-request abortions is about to or has already been moved from 12 weeks to 18 weeks, which would require both the table and the map to be edited to reflect this change. 2600:100A:B1C9:E654:51F0:B875:EFAC:CE3B (talk) 10:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the news. The government only announced an agreement with the political parties, but the parliament will still have to pass a law, and it is expected to enter into force on June 1, 2025.[1] The article and map should be changed only at that time. Heitordp (talk) 16:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Australia[edit]

Australia should not be excluded for having not legalised abortion nationwide. This map claims that abortion is not legal in Northern Territory, which is also stated in the chart. However, this source, this source, this source, and this source all claim that it has been fully decriminalised in the territory, although they disagree on the date and which act fully decriminalised it. The article for Abortion in Australia also states that it has been fully decriminalised in all jurisdictions (although it erroneously said so before the 2023 law that made Western Australia the final state to do so), and this view is reinforced in this article which lists Canada and a few jurisdictions in Australia as the only places where abortion is not subject to criminal law. Although since then it has also become true in all of Australia, as well as New Zealand and Korea, and it left out the US states of Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Colorado, New Mexico, Minnesota, Michigan, New York, California, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Maryland, and Washington DC. Although Australia can't appear on the timeline, since abortion was never legalised nationally at a single time, but rather on a state by state basis over the course of years, it is still incorrect to state that abortion is not legal nationwide. 192.34.130.239 (talk) 20:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This issue has been discussed before here, here, here and here. The table in this article follows the UN classification, which makes a distinction between abortion allowed for social reasons and abortion allowed merely on request from the pregnant woman. The table and map in this article don't say that "abortion" is not legal in the Northern Territory, they say that abortion on request is not legal there, but that it's legal for social reasons. This assertion is based on the multiple sources cited in the table in the article, including one from an Australian state government, which explicitly say that the law of the Northern Territory does not allow abortion on request or on demand. Even after the changes in 2021, the law of the Northern Territory still requires that the medical professional agree that the abortion is appropriate considering "the woman's current and future physical, psychological and social circumstances". This is different from the law in other Australian subdivisions, which simply say that a doctor "may perform" an abortion up to a certain gestational limit, without listing any condition other than the woman's consent.

None of the sources that you cited say that the Northern Territory allows abortion on request or that it has been "fully decriminalised". On the contrary, the third and fourth sources that you cited clearly say that it's allowed if the medical professional agrees that it's appropriate in the circumstances listed.

The lead in the article Abortion in Australia is not entirely correct either. "Full decriminalisation" has not been enacted in all subdivisions of Australia, as some of them, including those that allow abortion on request, still have penalties in their criminal codes specifically for abortion not done by a medical professional. And decriminalisation doesn't necessarily mean allowing abortion on request; for example, Bahrain and Laos also don't have criminal penalties for abortion done by medical professionals, but their health regulations still impose professional sanctions, such as suspension or revocation of medical license, for abortion done other than in certain circumstances. Heitordp (talk) 02:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abortion Jalisco[edit]

Abortion was decriminalised in Jalisco two weeks ago via federal court ruling. The local Congress shall modify the local Penal Code, but it does not establish any time frame. Nevertheless, the Congress was notified today and local representatives could be punished if they don't harmonise the law soon. The decision can't be appealed and until this is done, abortion ban can't be enforced anymore (like in Coahuila and Aguascalientes). And just like in Coahuila and Aguascalientes, the gestational limit is unclear (until full legalisation).

Here are some news in English about this (there aren't many sources in this language), and some others in Spanish from bigger media outlets:

https://www.vallartadaily.com/jalisco-advances-in-abortion-decriminalization-legal-victory-overturns-prohibition/ http://www.lawndalenews.com/2024/05/mexicos-jalisco-state-decriminalizes-abortion/ https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/jalisco-will-be-the-13th-mexican-state-to-decriminalize-abortion/

https://www.notisistema.com/noticias/llega-al-congreso-notificacion-judicial-para-despenalizar-aborto-en-jalisco/ https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/2024/04/26/jalisco-estado-numero-13-mexico-despenalizar-aborto-orix/ https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/estados/2024/04/25/jalisco-despenaliza-el-aborto-tribunal-declara-inconstitucional-su-prohibicion-tras-amparo/ Aleqc (talk) 00:51, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aleqc: Thanks for the news. I updated Jalisco in the article and map. But Aguascalientes is no longer unclear, its congress has already changed its penal code. Heitordp (talk) 03:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Make a suggestion[edit]

Hello, I want to congratulate the author of this article and those who edit it for doing such a good job on this very important topic. I would like to make a suggestion in addition to having a list of the year when the countries legalized abortion on demand. You can make one of the countries that they legalized it for social reasons, it would be very useful to have that information, thank you and sorry for my level of English. Mar9112 (talk) 14:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chihuahua[edit]

A federal court has just issued a ruling that require the local health authorities of the state to offer voluntary abortion services up to 12.6 weeks of gestation to any woman or pregnant person in the state. The decision can't be appealed, and the abortion ban can't be enforced any more. The Congress needs to harmonise the penal and health laws before this legislature ends, or local representatives could be punished. Unlike other cases in Mexico, if the state's health services refuse to practice the procedure, there will be sanctions ranging from fines to dismissal (including the health authorities of the state).

Here are the sources in Spanish

https://animalpolitico.com/genero-y-diversidad/secretaria-salud-chihuahua-servicio-aborto

https://www.milenio.com/estados/tribunal-ordena-ssa-chihuahua-garantizar-acceso-aborto

https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/estados/ordena-tribunal-colegiado-que-se-brinden-servicios-de-aborto-seguro-en-chihuahua/

https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/Tribunal-ordena-a-Secretaria-de-Salud-de-Chihuahua-que-brinde-servicios-de-aborto-seguro-20240527-0075.html

https://politica.expansion.mx/estados/2024/05/27/aborto-legal-en-chihuahua

https://aristeguinoticias.com/2705/mexico/tribunal-despenaliza-el-aborto-en-chihuahua-es-ley/ Aleqc (talk) 18:06, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aleqc: Thanks for the news. The court ordered the Secretary of Health of Chihuahua to offer abortion on request in its public health services, but it didn't actually declare the abortion restrictions in the penal code invalid and didn't order the legislature to change it.[2] The Secretary of Health responded that this situation isn't new and that it's still unable to comply with this court ruling fully because of the legal contradiction.[3][4] In addition, this ruling doesn't affect private health services. So I suggest adding a note to the table, but I don't think that Chihuahua should be shown as allowing abortion on request yet.

In addition, it seems that the repeatedly cited "12.6 weeks" is supposed to mean "12 weeks and 6 days",[5] and that both are incorrect interpretations of "12th week", which seems to be what the court actually said.[6] The 12th week ends at 12 complete weeks, not more than that.

This situation is different from Coahuila, for example, where the court declared specific parts of the penal code invalid and ordered the legislature to change it. Although the legislature hasn't done so yet, it already added a note about the ruling under those parts of the penal code.[7] Heitordp (talk) 00:05, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I don't know if this can help, but here is Ninde MolRe (the lawyer and director of AbortistasMx, one of the colectivas that pushed for these injuctions). She says that everyone can go from today to a public hospital, but the authorities are searching for loopholes to still refuse the service. Colectivas will be escorting people these days to supply with evidence to the judges and proceed.

https://x.com/ce_miquiztetl/status/1795607277548032071

Related to the obligation of change the law, you are right, it won't be necessary (the first news suggested it would be, but now the news and AbortistasMx are sating this:

A pesar de que la sentencia no obliga al Congreso de Chihuahua a reformar el Código Penal, el juzgado federal reconoció que las autoridades estatales violan actualmente la Constitución al no garantizar el acceso a servicios de aborto voluntario en hospitales y clínicas públicas. La negativa, argumentó el tribunal, infringe el artículo cuarto constitucional, que garantiza el derecho a la libre decisión sobre el propio cuerpo.

https://www.elimparcial.com/mexico/2024/05/28/tribunal-federal-garantiza-servicios-de-aborto-en-chihuahua/

https://x.com/AbortistasMx/status/1795130919793078417 Aleqc (talk) 01:14, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]