Thursday, October 6, 2011
Cork Women's Right to Choose is now on Twitter!
Although we've been quiet here on the blog, Cork Women's Right to Choose is still going strong! We regularly update our Facebook page with news, upcoming events and information for pro-choice activists. We're also now on Twitter so be sure to follow us to get the most up-to-date info about our activities.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Our Letter to the Candidates
We sent this to candidates asking for them to pledge their support to women's right to choose. We will be collecting their responses and posting them shortly.
Dear Candidate,
This election is an important moment for candidates to show their commitment to women's health, well-being and human rights.
We call on candidates to pledge to:
Recognise that anti-choice groups' claims that past referendums demonstrate the position of the majority of the Irish people are erroneous because:
National and international Courts have recognised the importance of women's right to choose. Now it's your turn.
Sincerely,
Cork Women's Right to Choose Group
Email: cork.womens.right.to.choose@gmail.com
Dear Candidate,
This election is an important moment for candidates to show their commitment to women's health, well-being and human rights.
We call on candidates to pledge to:
Respect women’s right to choose abortion
Fulfil their obligations to protect women’s health and well being
Legislate in line with the December 2010 judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in The ABC cases. (As a signatory of the European Convention on Human Rights it is our responsibility to do so.)
Act quickly to ensure that no Irish woman has to go to court again to vindicate her right to choose to terminate her pregnancy.
Prioritise women's interests and resist threats from the well financed and politically connected rump of the anti-choice movement
Recognise that the majority of the Irish people have never voted to exclude abortion.
Recognise that anti-choice groups' claims that past referendums demonstrate the position of the majority of the Irish people are erroneous because:
In 1983, only 53.67 per cent of the electorate went to the polls. 66.9 per cent of these voted for the constitutional prohibition on abortion, but this means that the eighth amendment was put in place by only 35.9 per cent of the electorate.
In 1992, when the three referendums were held on the same day as a general election, the people voted to keep the threat to a woman’s life from suicide as a ground for abortion in Ireland. They also voted to protect women’s right to choose to travel to have an abortion and for access to information on abortion.
In 2002, just over two in five of those eligible to vote went to the polls. The views of the majority of the electorate were not registered.
National and international Courts have recognised the importance of women's right to choose. Now it's your turn.
Sincerely,
Cork Women's Right to Choose Group
Email: cork.womens.right.to.choose@gmail.com
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Cork Women's Right to Choose Welcomes European Court Decision on Abortion
PRESS RELEASE
16th December 2010
Cork Women's Right to Choose Group Welcomes Momentous European Court of Human Rights Decision on Abortion
Cork Women's Right to Choose Group (CWRCG) pays tribute to the courage of the three women, known only as A, B and C, who brought their cases to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), and welcomes today’s ruling on Ireland’s failure to implement the Constitutional right to abortion in cases where a woman's life is at risk.
The 17-judge Grand Chamber ruled this morning by oral hearing that the human rights of one of the three women who took the case challenging Ireland's restrictive abortion laws had been violated because she had no “effective or accessible procedure” to access a lawful abortion in Ireland. The woman – known as Applicant 'C' – had been in remission from a rare form of cancer, and was potentially at risk of a relapse as a result of the pregnancy. Because the lack of clarity in existing medical guidelines puts doctors at risk of possible prosecution, she was unable to find a doctor willing to tell her whether her life would be at risk if she continued with the pregnancy. According to the Court, Ireland's failure to legislate for the ruling in the 1992 X Case, which provides for the right to abortion in the case of a risk to the life of the mother, constituted a breach of C's right to respect for her private life (Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights). As a signatory to the Convention, the Irish Government is obliged to take measures to implement the decisions made by the Court.
CWRCG spokeswoman Dr Sandra McAvoy said, "Pro-choice organizations have been calling for legislation on access to safe and legal abortion in Ireland ever since the ruling in the 1992 X case that abortion was legal in certain circumstances. Today’s ECHR ruling is a step forward in that it should force the government to do something it has resisted for 18 years: introduce legislation and provide guidelines for medical professionals.”
In relation to the other two women involved in the case (A & B), a majority of judges ruled that there had been no human rights violations. Although the Court commented on the lack of sufficient medical guidelines in relation to abortion, noting that the Irish courts were not appropriate fora for deciding whether a woman qualified for an abortion, they made no other recommendations to the Irish government for the implementation of further legislation. The judges determined that it was not the role of the European Court to rule more substantially on the right to abortion in Ireland, despite a consensus existing among the majority of Council of Europe member states allowing broader access to abortion than under Irish law.
Spokeswoman Dr. Sandra McAvoy continued, "We recognise the limitations of the Court, but are disappointed that it has not been able to clarify women’s rights in cases where states make a distinction between threats to life and those to health during pregnancy. We welcome the arguments set out in the dissenting position taken by six of the judges who pointed to the strong consensus among European countries for abortion to be permitted on broader grounds. Some 40 Council of Europe member states permit abortion to protect a woman’s health and well-being, and that failure to take account of this might mark a ‘dangerous new departure in the Court’s case law.’ We hope that, in considering legislation, Irish legislators will not close their eyes and minds to the idea that, in the twenty-first century, Irish women should have the same rights to bodily integrity, to health, and to well-being as their European sisters.”
The three women who took the case against Ireland – all of whom had been forced to go abroad to terminate their pregnancies – lodged their complaint saying that the current law in Ireland jeopardised their health and well-being. Their argument, heard in the Grand Chamber on 9th December 2009, was that Ireland's restrictive ban on abortion breached their human rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. The identities of the three women, known as A, B & C, has remained confidential, although the most intimate details of their private lives were discussed publicly during the hearing.
Abortion is illegal in Ireland under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. In addition, a 1983 amendment to the Irish Constitution provides an equal right to life for both the "unborn" and the pregnant woman. As a result of the X Case ruling in 1992, abortion may be performed in Ireland where a continuation of pregnancy poses a '"real and substantial" risk to the life (as distinct from the health) of the pregnant woman, which includes suicide. In reality this has neither been legislated for nor tested. The lack of legal clarity means that doctors often do not perform abortions in Ireland even in order to save a woman's life.
McAvoy notes, "The unfortunate women who are pregnant while severely ill, or as a result of sexual violence, or in cases of lethal fetal abnormalities, are forced to travel abroad if they can afford it and are able. Women who cannot travel for any variety of reasons experience extreme and possibly even life-threatening physical, financial and emotional hardship being forced to go through with an unwanted pregnancy."
Since the X Case judgment, the Irish people have consistently shown increased support for access to abortion in Ireland. The most recent Abortion Referendum, which threatened to roll back the X Case judgment, was voted down by the majority of the Irish population in 2002. In 2007, an Irish Times Behaviour and Attitudes Poll found that 54% of women believe the Government should act to permit abortion. Despite this growing support, the Government continues to stall, forcing women to publicly air their private lives in the courts to gain access to services that should be safely and legally available in Ireland.
Dr. McAvoy added, "Cork Women's Right to Choose Group calls on the public and elected representatives to support this landmark ruling. We also call on the Government to swiftly implement the decision, and legislate to provide access to safe and legal abortion in Ireland. This does not mean introducing something on the lines of another 2002 Referendum designed to roll back women's rights, but legislation that protects women's human rights – including those to life and health and well-being. We need to finally make a decision that we will not tolerate the continued violation of women's health and human rights in Ireland."
ENDS.
16th December 2010
Cork Women's Right to Choose Group Welcomes Momentous European Court of Human Rights Decision on Abortion
Cork Women's Right to Choose Group (CWRCG) pays tribute to the courage of the three women, known only as A, B and C, who brought their cases to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), and welcomes today’s ruling on Ireland’s failure to implement the Constitutional right to abortion in cases where a woman's life is at risk.
The 17-judge Grand Chamber ruled this morning by oral hearing that the human rights of one of the three women who took the case challenging Ireland's restrictive abortion laws had been violated because she had no “effective or accessible procedure” to access a lawful abortion in Ireland. The woman – known as Applicant 'C' – had been in remission from a rare form of cancer, and was potentially at risk of a relapse as a result of the pregnancy. Because the lack of clarity in existing medical guidelines puts doctors at risk of possible prosecution, she was unable to find a doctor willing to tell her whether her life would be at risk if she continued with the pregnancy. According to the Court, Ireland's failure to legislate for the ruling in the 1992 X Case, which provides for the right to abortion in the case of a risk to the life of the mother, constituted a breach of C's right to respect for her private life (Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights). As a signatory to the Convention, the Irish Government is obliged to take measures to implement the decisions made by the Court.
CWRCG spokeswoman Dr Sandra McAvoy said, "Pro-choice organizations have been calling for legislation on access to safe and legal abortion in Ireland ever since the ruling in the 1992 X case that abortion was legal in certain circumstances. Today’s ECHR ruling is a step forward in that it should force the government to do something it has resisted for 18 years: introduce legislation and provide guidelines for medical professionals.”
In relation to the other two women involved in the case (A & B), a majority of judges ruled that there had been no human rights violations. Although the Court commented on the lack of sufficient medical guidelines in relation to abortion, noting that the Irish courts were not appropriate fora for deciding whether a woman qualified for an abortion, they made no other recommendations to the Irish government for the implementation of further legislation. The judges determined that it was not the role of the European Court to rule more substantially on the right to abortion in Ireland, despite a consensus existing among the majority of Council of Europe member states allowing broader access to abortion than under Irish law.
Spokeswoman Dr. Sandra McAvoy continued, "We recognise the limitations of the Court, but are disappointed that it has not been able to clarify women’s rights in cases where states make a distinction between threats to life and those to health during pregnancy. We welcome the arguments set out in the dissenting position taken by six of the judges who pointed to the strong consensus among European countries for abortion to be permitted on broader grounds. Some 40 Council of Europe member states permit abortion to protect a woman’s health and well-being, and that failure to take account of this might mark a ‘dangerous new departure in the Court’s case law.’ We hope that, in considering legislation, Irish legislators will not close their eyes and minds to the idea that, in the twenty-first century, Irish women should have the same rights to bodily integrity, to health, and to well-being as their European sisters.”
The three women who took the case against Ireland – all of whom had been forced to go abroad to terminate their pregnancies – lodged their complaint saying that the current law in Ireland jeopardised their health and well-being. Their argument, heard in the Grand Chamber on 9th December 2009, was that Ireland's restrictive ban on abortion breached their human rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. The identities of the three women, known as A, B & C, has remained confidential, although the most intimate details of their private lives were discussed publicly during the hearing.
Abortion is illegal in Ireland under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. In addition, a 1983 amendment to the Irish Constitution provides an equal right to life for both the "unborn" and the pregnant woman. As a result of the X Case ruling in 1992, abortion may be performed in Ireland where a continuation of pregnancy poses a '"real and substantial" risk to the life (as distinct from the health) of the pregnant woman, which includes suicide. In reality this has neither been legislated for nor tested. The lack of legal clarity means that doctors often do not perform abortions in Ireland even in order to save a woman's life.
McAvoy notes, "The unfortunate women who are pregnant while severely ill, or as a result of sexual violence, or in cases of lethal fetal abnormalities, are forced to travel abroad if they can afford it and are able. Women who cannot travel for any variety of reasons experience extreme and possibly even life-threatening physical, financial and emotional hardship being forced to go through with an unwanted pregnancy."
Since the X Case judgment, the Irish people have consistently shown increased support for access to abortion in Ireland. The most recent Abortion Referendum, which threatened to roll back the X Case judgment, was voted down by the majority of the Irish population in 2002. In 2007, an Irish Times Behaviour and Attitudes Poll found that 54% of women believe the Government should act to permit abortion. Despite this growing support, the Government continues to stall, forcing women to publicly air their private lives in the courts to gain access to services that should be safely and legally available in Ireland.
Dr. McAvoy added, "Cork Women's Right to Choose Group calls on the public and elected representatives to support this landmark ruling. We also call on the Government to swiftly implement the decision, and legislate to provide access to safe and legal abortion in Ireland. This does not mean introducing something on the lines of another 2002 Referendum designed to roll back women's rights, but legislation that protects women's human rights – including those to life and health and well-being. We need to finally make a decision that we will not tolerate the continued violation of women's health and human rights in Ireland."
ENDS.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Medical Independent: IFPA calls for tougher stance on rogue crisis pregnancy agencies
September 30, 2010
Dawn O'Shea
The Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) is calling on the Government to introduce statutory regulations for all pregnancy advice services which set out minimum codes of practice and standards.
According to the IFPA’s recently released 2009 Annual Report: “Rogue crisis pregnancy agencies continue to operate unchecked in Ireland, causing considerable distress to women who unwittingly attend their services”.
Last year, 18 women attended the IFPA for counselling after a negative experience at the hands of “rogue agencies” and the Association says it is certain that these figures “represent just the tip of the iceberg”.
Women attending the IFPA described being “harassed, bullied and being given blatantly false information” by these agencies.
The IFPA also voiced its concern surrounding the difficulty experienced by women with travel restrictions in accessing safe and legal abortion services abroad.
Women, such as those seeking asylum or migrant workers, seeking a termination abroad must apply for a visa from the country to which they will be travelling as well as a re-entry visa for Ireland.
According to the IFPA, the process of applying for these travel documents is “complex, expensive and can take several weeks”.
Combined with the financial cost of accessing a termination abroad, such situations may force women to parent against their will or to resort to illegal methods to terminate their pregnancies in Ireland, the Association said.
SOURCE
Dawn O'Shea
The Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) is calling on the Government to introduce statutory regulations for all pregnancy advice services which set out minimum codes of practice and standards.
According to the IFPA’s recently released 2009 Annual Report: “Rogue crisis pregnancy agencies continue to operate unchecked in Ireland, causing considerable distress to women who unwittingly attend their services”.
Last year, 18 women attended the IFPA for counselling after a negative experience at the hands of “rogue agencies” and the Association says it is certain that these figures “represent just the tip of the iceberg”.
Women attending the IFPA described being “harassed, bullied and being given blatantly false information” by these agencies.
The IFPA also voiced its concern surrounding the difficulty experienced by women with travel restrictions in accessing safe and legal abortion services abroad.
Women, such as those seeking asylum or migrant workers, seeking a termination abroad must apply for a visa from the country to which they will be travelling as well as a re-entry visa for Ireland.
According to the IFPA, the process of applying for these travel documents is “complex, expensive and can take several weeks”.
Combined with the financial cost of accessing a termination abroad, such situations may force women to parent against their will or to resort to illegal methods to terminate their pregnancies in Ireland, the Association said.
SOURCE
Inter Press Service: Activists File Writ of Habeas Corpus – for Legal Abortion
Date: September 28, 2010
Author: Marcela Valente
BUENOS AIRES, Sep 28 (IPS) - Heartened by the passage of a same-sex marriage law in Argentina, women's organisations in this South American country stepped up their demands for the legalisation of abortion, on the Day for the Decriminalisation of Abortion in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Some 1,000 members of the Juana Azurduy Women's Collective, better known as Las Juanas, filed a "collective and preventive" writ of habeas corpus at different courtrooms around the country, demanding that the criminalisation of abortion be declared unconstitutional.
They also asked the courts to press the legislature to bring the law that penalises abortion into line with international norms that recognise a woman's right to make decisions about her body.
"We chose the habeas corpus route because it protects people's freedom, and we are thus asking the courts, in a preventive manner, to protect us if we become pregnant and want to interrupt the pregnancy," Las Juanas activist Gabriela Sosa told IPS.
Sosa, who is head of the organisation in the eastern province of Santa Fe and is one of the women who signed the writ of habeas corpus, said the present political and social climate in the country lends itself to making progress towards a law that would decriminalise abortion.
"Not long ago we could not imagine that Argentina would have a same-sex marriage law, and this year it was achieved because there is social concern and interest in debating these issues, and the politicians are picking up on and reflecting that," she said.
But she admitted that the 2011 elections are an obstacle, because "no candidate is going to want to pick up the hot potato of abortion" in a campaign year.
In Argentina, abortion is a crime punishable by prison, except in cases where the pregnancy is the result of rape, the expectant mother's life is in danger or she is mentally ill or disabled.
But every year some 460,000 to 600,000 women resort to abortion in this country of 40 million people, according to the report "Estimate of the Extent of the Practice of Induced Abortion in Argentina", prepared by experts from the University of Buenos Aires and the Centre for Population Studies.
In Latin America, abortion is only legal in Cuba, Puerto Rico and Mexico City. With the exception of Chile, El Salvador and Nicaragua, where abortion is illegal under any circumstances, in the rest of the countries in the region "therapeutic" abortion is legal in certain cases, such as rape, incest, fetal malformation or risk to the mother's life.
Nevertheless, more than four million illegal abortions a year are practiced in the region, according to different sources, and 13 percent of maternal deaths are caused by abortion-related complications.
In Argentina, unsafe abortions are the main cause of maternal mortality, the Juana Azurduy Women's Collective reports.
Against that backdrop, Las Juanas presented their legal action on Tuesday Sept. 28, observed as the Day for the Decriminalisation of Abortion by the women's movement in Latin America and the Caribbean since 1990.
The London-based Amnesty International joined its voice to the campaign. The deputy director of the rights watchdog's Americas Programme, Guadalupe Marengo, called for the repeal of all laws that penalise or provide for the imprisonment of women or girls who undergo an abortion under any circumstances.
Amnesty said the restrictions on safe, legal abortion put the human rights of women in the region in "grave danger."
For years, women's groups in Argentina have been campaigning for the decriminalisation of abortion, but have continually run up against the fierce resistance of the powerful Catholic Church and other conservative sectors of society.
However, this year the situation looks more favourable. Since March, the lower house of Congress has been studying a draft law that would decriminalise abortion, which has the backing of around 50 lawmakers from different parties.
The bill, which may be debated in October, was introduced by Cecilia Merchán, a legislator with the left-wing movement Libres del Sur, and would legalise first-trimester abortion on demand, similar to the law in effect in the Federal District of Mexico City.
None of the nearly 20 earlier bills on abortion introduced in the Argentine legislature over the years progressed. But the current draft law has already made it through several committees and is on its way to a full session debate in the lower house.
Merchán told IPS that the bill she sponsored is in response to the large number of abortions practiced in this country, and especially to the fact that more than 70,000 -- mainly low-income -- women are hospitalised annually for complications from unsafe abortions.
"Last year, 120 of the women admitted to public hospitals with abortion-related complications died: in other words, every other day, a woman dies in Argentina due to this cause," she said.
The lawmaker said "the present climate is favourable" to moving forward on the issue because "society has raised the need for Congress to address a question that has severe consequences for the lives of so many women.
"Just like in the case of the debate on same-sex marriage, society as a whole, even those who are opposed, don't want to keep hiding a reality that involves so many people," she said.
"For us, this is not a new issue, but we see that society's demands are now forcing legislators to discuss it," she added. There have also been declarations on the issue by sectors that in the past have been reluctant to take a public stance, like public universities. The deans of the University of Buenos Aires, for instance, backed the decriminalisation of abortion by 23 votes against one, in August.
In addition, there have been statements in favour by members of the Supreme Court, like magistrate Carmen Argibay, who said this month that the time to debate changes in the country's abortion law "is now."
However, while the legislators are preparing their offensive in the lower house, another bill has been presented in the Senate, which would merely expand the circumstances under which therapeutic abortion is legal.
The idea underlying the initiative by several women senators is that legal abortion would also be made available to women facing risks to their health, a concept that would be broadly defined as physical and mental health.
The women's organisations do not have the support of President Cristina Fernández, who has spoken out against the legalisation of abortion. But Merchán is confident that the president's position will not impose itself in the legislative debate.
(END/2010)
SOURCE
Author: Marcela Valente
BUENOS AIRES, Sep 28 (IPS) - Heartened by the passage of a same-sex marriage law in Argentina, women's organisations in this South American country stepped up their demands for the legalisation of abortion, on the Day for the Decriminalisation of Abortion in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Some 1,000 members of the Juana Azurduy Women's Collective, better known as Las Juanas, filed a "collective and preventive" writ of habeas corpus at different courtrooms around the country, demanding that the criminalisation of abortion be declared unconstitutional.
They also asked the courts to press the legislature to bring the law that penalises abortion into line with international norms that recognise a woman's right to make decisions about her body.
"We chose the habeas corpus route because it protects people's freedom, and we are thus asking the courts, in a preventive manner, to protect us if we become pregnant and want to interrupt the pregnancy," Las Juanas activist Gabriela Sosa told IPS.
Sosa, who is head of the organisation in the eastern province of Santa Fe and is one of the women who signed the writ of habeas corpus, said the present political and social climate in the country lends itself to making progress towards a law that would decriminalise abortion.
"Not long ago we could not imagine that Argentina would have a same-sex marriage law, and this year it was achieved because there is social concern and interest in debating these issues, and the politicians are picking up on and reflecting that," she said.
But she admitted that the 2011 elections are an obstacle, because "no candidate is going to want to pick up the hot potato of abortion" in a campaign year.
In Argentina, abortion is a crime punishable by prison, except in cases where the pregnancy is the result of rape, the expectant mother's life is in danger or she is mentally ill or disabled.
But every year some 460,000 to 600,000 women resort to abortion in this country of 40 million people, according to the report "Estimate of the Extent of the Practice of Induced Abortion in Argentina", prepared by experts from the University of Buenos Aires and the Centre for Population Studies.
In Latin America, abortion is only legal in Cuba, Puerto Rico and Mexico City. With the exception of Chile, El Salvador and Nicaragua, where abortion is illegal under any circumstances, in the rest of the countries in the region "therapeutic" abortion is legal in certain cases, such as rape, incest, fetal malformation or risk to the mother's life.
Nevertheless, more than four million illegal abortions a year are practiced in the region, according to different sources, and 13 percent of maternal deaths are caused by abortion-related complications.
In Argentina, unsafe abortions are the main cause of maternal mortality, the Juana Azurduy Women's Collective reports.
Against that backdrop, Las Juanas presented their legal action on Tuesday Sept. 28, observed as the Day for the Decriminalisation of Abortion by the women's movement in Latin America and the Caribbean since 1990.
The London-based Amnesty International joined its voice to the campaign. The deputy director of the rights watchdog's Americas Programme, Guadalupe Marengo, called for the repeal of all laws that penalise or provide for the imprisonment of women or girls who undergo an abortion under any circumstances.
Amnesty said the restrictions on safe, legal abortion put the human rights of women in the region in "grave danger."
For years, women's groups in Argentina have been campaigning for the decriminalisation of abortion, but have continually run up against the fierce resistance of the powerful Catholic Church and other conservative sectors of society.
However, this year the situation looks more favourable. Since March, the lower house of Congress has been studying a draft law that would decriminalise abortion, which has the backing of around 50 lawmakers from different parties.
The bill, which may be debated in October, was introduced by Cecilia Merchán, a legislator with the left-wing movement Libres del Sur, and would legalise first-trimester abortion on demand, similar to the law in effect in the Federal District of Mexico City.
None of the nearly 20 earlier bills on abortion introduced in the Argentine legislature over the years progressed. But the current draft law has already made it through several committees and is on its way to a full session debate in the lower house.
Merchán told IPS that the bill she sponsored is in response to the large number of abortions practiced in this country, and especially to the fact that more than 70,000 -- mainly low-income -- women are hospitalised annually for complications from unsafe abortions.
"Last year, 120 of the women admitted to public hospitals with abortion-related complications died: in other words, every other day, a woman dies in Argentina due to this cause," she said.
The lawmaker said "the present climate is favourable" to moving forward on the issue because "society has raised the need for Congress to address a question that has severe consequences for the lives of so many women.
"Just like in the case of the debate on same-sex marriage, society as a whole, even those who are opposed, don't want to keep hiding a reality that involves so many people," she said.
"For us, this is not a new issue, but we see that society's demands are now forcing legislators to discuss it," she added. There have also been declarations on the issue by sectors that in the past have been reluctant to take a public stance, like public universities. The deans of the University of Buenos Aires, for instance, backed the decriminalisation of abortion by 23 votes against one, in August.
In addition, there have been statements in favour by members of the Supreme Court, like magistrate Carmen Argibay, who said this month that the time to debate changes in the country's abortion law "is now."
However, while the legislators are preparing their offensive in the lower house, another bill has been presented in the Senate, which would merely expand the circumstances under which therapeutic abortion is legal.
The idea underlying the initiative by several women senators is that legal abortion would also be made available to women facing risks to their health, a concept that would be broadly defined as physical and mental health.
The women's organisations do not have the support of President Cristina Fernández, who has spoken out against the legalisation of abortion. But Merchán is confident that the president's position will not impose itself in the legislative debate.
(END/2010)
SOURCE
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Irish Medical Times: Research needed on illegal abortion in Ireland
September 29, 2010
Dear Editor,
I’d like to echo Dr Ruairi Hanley’s call for a referendum on the introduction of abortion facilities in Ireland, broadly similar to those in the UK (‘Addressing the great taboo’, IMT, September 10).
This would make a big difference to the rising problem of illegal abortion in Ireland. It would also make a huge difference to Irish obstetricians who have to cope with the extraordinary difficulty of not being able to provide termination on clinical and social grounds here in our own hospitals.
I hope that the medical community will continue to provide a strong voice to advocate for a modernisation of our reproductive laws in Ireland.
I also feel that research into the growing problem of illegal abortion would be a useful tool in assessing this need for legal change from a clinical point of view, because until now illegal abortion in Ireland has not been well documented and it remains a secret and covered-up problem with severe clinical consequences.
The maternity and emergency departments should be encouraged and provided with adequate funding to explore this cause of maternal morbidity and mortality as a matter of urgency.
Dr Juliet Bressan,
Amiens St,
Dublin 1
SOURCE
Dear Editor,
I’d like to echo Dr Ruairi Hanley’s call for a referendum on the introduction of abortion facilities in Ireland, broadly similar to those in the UK (‘Addressing the great taboo’, IMT, September 10).
This would make a big difference to the rising problem of illegal abortion in Ireland. It would also make a huge difference to Irish obstetricians who have to cope with the extraordinary difficulty of not being able to provide termination on clinical and social grounds here in our own hospitals.
I hope that the medical community will continue to provide a strong voice to advocate for a modernisation of our reproductive laws in Ireland.
I also feel that research into the growing problem of illegal abortion would be a useful tool in assessing this need for legal change from a clinical point of view, because until now illegal abortion in Ireland has not been well documented and it remains a secret and covered-up problem with severe clinical consequences.
The maternity and emergency departments should be encouraged and provided with adequate funding to explore this cause of maternal morbidity and mortality as a matter of urgency.
Dr Juliet Bressan,
Amiens St,
Dublin 1
SOURCE
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Huffington Post: New Global Maternal Mortality Data Offers Hope
Anika Rahman
President, Americans for UNFPA
Posted: September 15, 2010 10:04 AM
Today, along with advocates and women around the world, I feel a moment of triumph at the news that maternal death has declined by one-third globally.
According to a new report, Trends in Maternal Mortality released by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the World Bank, "the number of women dying due to complications during pregnancy and childbirth has decreased by 34% from an estimated 546,000 in 1990 to 358,000 in 2008."
For the last few years, I've relied on the staggering statistic that every minute a women dies in pregnancy and childbirth to draw attention to the dire struggle endured by women around the globe. The number has always stopped people dead in their tracks. For the first time in a long time, I can look down at my watch when the minute hand turns and think of something other than a woman needlessly losing her life.
While this progress is notable, the reality is that the current annual rate of decline in maternal death is less than half of what is needed to achieve the Millennium Development Goal - a gold standard for our collective global development objectives - target of 75% reduction in maternal death by 2015. Still, the new data shows that progress and maternal health is achievable, and it fuels my desire to increase U.S. efforts and involvement to improve maternal health globally.
In Africa and South Asia, complications during pregnancy and childbirth are one of the leading causes of death for women of childbearing age. I wonder how many people are aware of the frequency and pervasiveness of maternal mortality throughout the world.
So many articles come across my desk in a given week, but when I saw an article in the Hindustan Times I was particularly moved by the headline which read, "She gave birth, died. Delhi walked by." This article reveals the tragic story of a woman who gave birth on the side of a busy road in Delhi, India. The unnamed, unaided woman died shortly after giving birth because of lack of medical care. The article narrates how thousands of people on foot, on bicycles and in cars must have passed this woman as she gave birth. Sadly, no one noticed because this is the norm in regions throughout the world where reproductive healthcare is a privilege and not a right. Just four days later the new mother died on the side of the busy road, in the same location where she gave life.
The void that is created when women die during or after childbirth is inescapable. Children are left motherless, husbands are left without their wives, and communities are left without matriarchs. This tragedy is not limited to Delhi, India. There are countless women throughout the world who are left to face the reality of no access to reproductive healthcare.
I am reminded of women like Veronica Komba from Tanzania, whose story was recently featured in UNFPA's Mothers Saved. At the age of 14, Veronica was left homeless, hungry and pregnant. She came very close to death after collapsing in her village from high blood pressure, but her life was spared, primarily because she was able to access transportation to a hospital. A local women's group paid for the vehicle that transported Veronica 60 km to the nearest hospital for the C-Section that saved her life.
Giving birth is especially risky in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, where most women deliver without any access to skilled care. It doesn't have to be this way. With greater access to perinatal care, most maternal deaths could be avoided. We can live in a world where no woman dies in childbirth.
By endorsing the Millennium Development Goals ten years ago the U.S., together with 187 other countries worldwide, made a joint promise to women worldwide to reduce maternal mortality and ensure universal access to reproductive healthcare by 2015. On September 20-22, the Millennium Development Goals Summit will be held in New York to examine the progress being made on each of the goals to date. While progress is being made overall, the goal of improving maternal health lags behind others. As we draw nearer to 2015, it is evident that there is still work to be done.
1,000 women are dying every day and 20 times as many become ill or injured because of a lack of access to healthcare during their pregnancies and childbirth. Continuing to shed light on this issue is imperative. We at Americans for UNFPA urge you to join our Call to Action by signing on to our petition requesting that the U.S. honors its commitment to improving maternal health and implementing universal access to reproductive healthcare by 2015. Don't let another woman die giving life.
Join me in calling for the Obama Administration to put women's health and MDG 5 at the heart of U.S. government's global priorities over the next 5 years.
Join Americans for UNFPA for a tweet chat on MDG 5 from 3-4pm EST on Tuesday September 21st, using hash tag #mdg5.
SOURCE
President, Americans for UNFPA
Posted: September 15, 2010 10:04 AM
Today, along with advocates and women around the world, I feel a moment of triumph at the news that maternal death has declined by one-third globally.
According to a new report, Trends in Maternal Mortality released by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the World Bank, "the number of women dying due to complications during pregnancy and childbirth has decreased by 34% from an estimated 546,000 in 1990 to 358,000 in 2008."
For the last few years, I've relied on the staggering statistic that every minute a women dies in pregnancy and childbirth to draw attention to the dire struggle endured by women around the globe. The number has always stopped people dead in their tracks. For the first time in a long time, I can look down at my watch when the minute hand turns and think of something other than a woman needlessly losing her life.
While this progress is notable, the reality is that the current annual rate of decline in maternal death is less than half of what is needed to achieve the Millennium Development Goal - a gold standard for our collective global development objectives - target of 75% reduction in maternal death by 2015. Still, the new data shows that progress and maternal health is achievable, and it fuels my desire to increase U.S. efforts and involvement to improve maternal health globally.
In Africa and South Asia, complications during pregnancy and childbirth are one of the leading causes of death for women of childbearing age. I wonder how many people are aware of the frequency and pervasiveness of maternal mortality throughout the world.
So many articles come across my desk in a given week, but when I saw an article in the Hindustan Times I was particularly moved by the headline which read, "She gave birth, died. Delhi walked by." This article reveals the tragic story of a woman who gave birth on the side of a busy road in Delhi, India. The unnamed, unaided woman died shortly after giving birth because of lack of medical care. The article narrates how thousands of people on foot, on bicycles and in cars must have passed this woman as she gave birth. Sadly, no one noticed because this is the norm in regions throughout the world where reproductive healthcare is a privilege and not a right. Just four days later the new mother died on the side of the busy road, in the same location where she gave life.
The void that is created when women die during or after childbirth is inescapable. Children are left motherless, husbands are left without their wives, and communities are left without matriarchs. This tragedy is not limited to Delhi, India. There are countless women throughout the world who are left to face the reality of no access to reproductive healthcare.
I am reminded of women like Veronica Komba from Tanzania, whose story was recently featured in UNFPA's Mothers Saved. At the age of 14, Veronica was left homeless, hungry and pregnant. She came very close to death after collapsing in her village from high blood pressure, but her life was spared, primarily because she was able to access transportation to a hospital. A local women's group paid for the vehicle that transported Veronica 60 km to the nearest hospital for the C-Section that saved her life.
Giving birth is especially risky in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, where most women deliver without any access to skilled care. It doesn't have to be this way. With greater access to perinatal care, most maternal deaths could be avoided. We can live in a world where no woman dies in childbirth.
By endorsing the Millennium Development Goals ten years ago the U.S., together with 187 other countries worldwide, made a joint promise to women worldwide to reduce maternal mortality and ensure universal access to reproductive healthcare by 2015. On September 20-22, the Millennium Development Goals Summit will be held in New York to examine the progress being made on each of the goals to date. While progress is being made overall, the goal of improving maternal health lags behind others. As we draw nearer to 2015, it is evident that there is still work to be done.
1,000 women are dying every day and 20 times as many become ill or injured because of a lack of access to healthcare during their pregnancies and childbirth. Continuing to shed light on this issue is imperative. We at Americans for UNFPA urge you to join our Call to Action by signing on to our petition requesting that the U.S. honors its commitment to improving maternal health and implementing universal access to reproductive healthcare by 2015. Don't let another woman die giving life.
Join me in calling for the Obama Administration to put women's health and MDG 5 at the heart of U.S. government's global priorities over the next 5 years.
Join Americans for UNFPA for a tweet chat on MDG 5 from 3-4pm EST on Tuesday September 21st, using hash tag #mdg5.
SOURCE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
