Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC International Health and Human Rights
Published in: BMC International Health and Human Rights 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Database

Global Abortion Policies Database: a new approach to strengthening knowledge on laws, policies, and human rights standards

Authors: Brooke Ronald Johnson Jr, Antonella Francheska Lavelanet, Stephanie Schlitt

Published in: BMC International Health and Human Rights | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The Global Abortion Policies Database (GAPD), launched in June 2017, provides a verifiable, comprehensive, nuanced approach to information and data sources on abortion law and policy. Abortion laws, policies, and guidelines from United Nations (UN) and World Health Organization (WHO) Member States are juxtaposed to information and recommendations from WHO safe abortion guidance, national sexual and reproductive health indicators, and relevant UN human rights bodies’ concluding observations to countries.

Main body

The Global Abortion Policies Database aims to increase transparency of information and accountability of states for the protection of individuals’ health and human rights. The database presents current information on abortion laws and policies that goes beyond categories of lawful abortion to include information on additional access requirements, service provision, conscientious objection, and penalties. Wide-ranging variations among countries’ legal requirements and criminal penalties raise questions about the evidentiary and human rights basis for abortion laws and policies. Source documents found in the database highlight that in many jurisdictions legal and policy guidance is either non-existent, not clear, or conflicting. By juxtaposing a jurisdiction’s abortion laws and policies to relevant WHO guidance and by facilitating comparisons of countries’ sexual and reproductive health indicators, the database can enable deep policy analysis of states’ obligations to meet the health needs and human rights of individuals in the context of abortion. Policy analysis in the context of authoritative guidance on human rights standards can enable health and rights advocates to hold governments accountable for respecting, protecting, and fulfilling individuals’ human rights.

Conclusion

The GAPD is a comprehensive tool that can be used to strengthen knowledge, inform law and policy research to generate evidence on the impact of laws and policies in practice, and facilitate greater awareness of the many challenges to creating enabling policy environments for safe abortion.
Footnotes
1
Currently the GAPD contains no data for Equatorial Guinea, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Federated States of Micronesia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Niue, and St Vincent and the Grenadines.
 
2
Source documents in the GAPD are categorised under: reproductive health acts; general medical acts; constitutions; criminal/penal codes; ministerial orders/decrees; case law; health regulations/clinical guidelines; essential medicine lists (EML)/registered lists; medical ethics codes; documents relating to funding; abortion specific laws; laws on medical practitioners; laws on health care services; and other.
 
3
Surgical operations clauses exempting a woman from criminal liability are found in a number of countries in Africa and Oceania, including: Kenya, Malawi, Uganda, Kiribati, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Tuvalu.
 
4
Bahamas and Grenada are examples of countries that refer to ‘justification’ of abortion rather than exoneration from ‘criminal liability’ and do not refer to the aim of ‘preserving the mother's life’.
 
5
Subnational jurisdictions included in the GAPD: Australia – Australia Capitol Territory, New South Wales, Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, and Western Australia; Bosnia and Herzegovina – Republika Srpska, Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina; China – China (without Hong Kong), China-Hong Kong; Nigeria – Southern Nigeria, Northern Nigeria; Mexico – Mexico Distrito Federal; United Kingdom – (England, Scotland, Wales), Northern Ireland. Dependency jurisdictions include: United Kingdom – Guernsey, Isle of Man, Jersey.
 
6
In addition to the challenges of identifying, retrieving, and monitoring changes in subnational and dependency laws, collecting subnational (i.e., state-level) data from the United States of America presents a unique challenge associated with continuously changing state laws.
 
7
Currently, notable missing jurisdictions include 31 states in Mexico, 50 states in the United States of America, and a number of dependent territories, special administrative regions, and autonomous collectivities of Australia, China, Denmark, Finland, France, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, and perhaps other countries that have not yet been identified.
 
8
The 1938 ruling R v Bourne permitted abortion to prevent harm to a woman’s life and health.
 
Literature
1.
2.
Johnson BR Jr, Mishra V, Lavelanet AF, Khosla R, Ganatra B. A global database of abortion laws, policies, health standards and guidelines. Bull World Health Organ. 2017;95:542–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
World Health Organization. Safe abortion: technical and policy guidance for health systems. 2nd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012.
4.
5.
6.
Law and Population Programme Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy Tufts University. Legal handbook on contraception, voluntary sterilization and abortion. Washington DC: Agency for International Development; 1976.
7.
Tietze C. Induced abortion: a world review, 1983. New York: The Population Council; 1983.
8.
9.
United Nations Department of Economic and. Social Affairs. Abortion policies: a global review, Volumes 1-3. New York: United Nations; 2001-2002.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Metadata
Title
Global Abortion Policies Database: a new approach to strengthening knowledge on laws, policies, and human rights standards
Authors
Brooke Ronald Johnson Jr
Antonella Francheska Lavelanet
Stephanie Schlitt
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC International Health and Human Rights / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1472-698X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12914-018-0174-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC International Health and Human Rights 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research article

Realization of the right to adequate food and the nutritional status of land evictees: a case for mothers/caregivers and their children in rural Central Uganda

Technical advance

Combining survey data, GIS and qualitative interviews in the analysis of health service access for persons with disabilities

Research article

Small scale migration along the interoceanic highway in Madre de Dios, Peru: an exploration of community perceptions and dynamics due to migration

Research article

Factors shaping political priorities for violence against women-mitigation policies in Sri Lanka

Research article

Socioeconomic and environmental determinants of under-five mortality in Gamo Gofa Zone, Southern Ethiopia: a matched case control study

Research article

Persons with disabilities as experts-by experience: using personal narratives to affect community attitudes in Kilifi, Kenya