Recent legal challenges to state abortion laws argue that abortion is necessary to protect women’s mental health. This paper reviews the relevant research literature on the relationship between abortion and various mental health outcomes. Despite multiple studies hypothesizing that abortion may be therapeutic for pregnant women with mental health conditions, there are no empirically established mental health benefits of abortion. There is, however, substantial empirical evidence that abortion worsens mental health outcomes for at least some women, particularly those with pre- existing mental health conditions. While the nature and degree of mental health risks from abortion remains a disputed question, we offer some conclusions that find strong support in the existing research literature.

The relevance of the study lies in the contrasting perspectives on the legalisation and decriminalisation of soft drugs beyond their medical applications. Although there is ongoing public discussion over the benefits of legalizing soft drugs, Ukraine’s current legal system does not represent a cohesive strategy. The study aims to conduct a substantiated study of the disadvantages and advantages of the legalisation of soft drugs at the state level, with a forecast of risks associated with the introduction of permissive mechanisms for their use for recreational purposes, and to compare national peculiarities with the positions of legislators of other countries and existing experience in this area. To achieve this goal, the method of analysing approaches and instruments for regulating drug trafficking at the supranational and local levels of different countries. The results of the research on this topic are as follows: content and peculiarities of the concepts of “legalisation” and “decriminalisation” for use in the context of the study of soft drugs were determined; generalised provisions on classification of soft drugs as a separate type of drugs were reflected; the positive and negative impact of legalisation of these substances was assessed with due regard to the existing world experience; possible risks and recommendations for introducing soft drugs into free circulation through their legalisation in Ukraine were formulated. The results obtained during the study constitute a substantial theoretical basis and can be used for further study of the problematic issues of soft drugs’ authorisation at the state level in Ukraine or abroad.

Each of us began our existence as a human embryo, and from our embryonic beginnings, we experience continuous development and differentiation throughout life.2 As medical professionals who live out the Hippocratic Oath3, we have a compelling responsibility to the human beings under our care. As medical professionals in Obstetrics and Gynecology, we have a long history of recognizing that both the pregnant mother and the human being in her womb are our patients. “Through quality perinatal care, the specialty promotes the health and well-being of the pregnant woman and her fetus.”4 We have the privilege and responsibility to care for both of them. Our responsibility to care for our youngest patients begins when a new human organism begins.

This article critically examines the ethical dimensions of utilizing Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)-based First Person Authorization (FPA) for organ donation. While ostensibly designed to uphold patient autonomy, DMV-based FPA raises significant ethical concerns due to its lack of informed consent and limited impact on organ donation rates. Drawing on principles of autonomy, informed consent, and medical ethics, this article argues for a reevaluation of current practices and proposes alternative approaches that prioritize genuine informed decision-making.