Reproductive Rights Issues Research Articles

Проблемы определения правового статуса эмбриона в современном праве

The article analyzes the problems of determining the legal status of an embryo in Russian and international law. The main approaches to understanding the legal nature of the embryo are considered as a subject of law, an object of law or a part of the mother’s body. Particular attention is paid to issues of reproductive rights and the permissibility of artificial abortion. The practice of the US Supreme Court and the legislation of different countries regarding abortion are analyzed. The author's vision of the optimal legal regime is formulated from the point of view of maintaining a balance between the rights of a woman and the interests of the embryo.

Tubuhku Bukan Milikku: Pasal 463 KUHP Baru Ditinjau dari Perspektif Hukum Feminis

This article discusses abortion as perceived in Article 463 of the New Criminal Code as compared to Law No. 36 of 2009 concerning Health. This article is analyzed using the feminist legal perspective. To illustrate the state’s intervention on women’s reproductive health issues in terms of abortion, two cases obtained from the search results of the Supreme Court’s decision directory are included. Article 463 of the New Criminal Code does not provide access for abortion in the context of the health condition of pregnant women as stipulated in the Health Law. Then in the explanatory part of the article, it tends to narrow the concept of sexual violence where abortion is only allowed to be carried out by victims of sexual violence in the form of sexual exploitation/forced prostitution. The findings of this research is that the law does not accommodate women’s experience as a whole, and the fact that pregnancy can occur after a single case of rape. Furthermore, the law does not accommodate the necessity of abortion for pregnant women in emergency health condition. The government and the legislative should produce regulations which accomodate women’s unique experience, especially in terms of reproductive rights issues

Reproductive rights: gender principle

The article is devoted to clarifying the issue of reproductive rights and reproductive health of both women and men. It is noted that in society, ideas about the rights of men and women in the field of regulation of reproductive activity and reproductive health have not been properly formed, and in domestic legislation not all aspects in the sphere of realization of reproductive rights of men and women are regulated. It was stated that special attention in the field of regulation of reproductive rights and reproductive health is paid only to the procedure for applying programs of assisted reproductive technologies.
 The lack of definition of "reproductive right" and "right to reproductive health" contradicts the existing human rights and freedoms that are enshrined in both women and men. This statement, in turn, leads to discriminatory elements in society. In addition, it was stated that the lack of proper legal registration of the relevant definitions entails a logically related lack of guarantees for the implementation of the above-mentioned rights of men and women, as well as liability for their violation. According to the results of the analysis of existing norms in both national and international law, it was stated that the reproductive rights of men and women are based on fundamental human rights - the right to life, the right to health care, equality between men and women, the right to physical integrity, the right to privacy, the right to personal, family secrets, etc., are derived from fundamental human rights, detail and complement them.
 In addition, detailed regulation will be of positive importance both for legal science and for practice, since it will allow to more deeply and fully comprehend the rights of men and women in this area, as well as to acquire the status of independent subjective rights included in the legal status and the institution of fundamental rights and freedoms.

Status of Women’s Reproductive and Menstrual Health: A Socio-psychological Household Prognostication of Meena Tribal Community of Karauli, Rajasthan

The present study hovers around the socio-cultural factors among the women of Meena tribe which pose a grave threat to their reproductive health and also takes into account subjects like menstrual hygiene. Reproductive health and hygiene have always remained stigmatic and dogmatic topics of discussion. The significance of the proverb ‘Prevention is better than cure’ is a saying whose importance cannot be overemphasised. Hygiene then is the foremost requirement for a healthy and good life. The key issues of reproductive rights include the basic right to decide the birth timing space between successive births (or what is known as the pregnancy gap), and also the right to decide the number of offspring in marital life. Some other basic reproductive rights are access to methods of family planning and access to hygienic conditions, health services, education and information. Due to gross misinformation, ignorance and deep-seated taboos, the subject of reproductive health has eluded people for long. The most noticeable detriments are maternal mortality and unhygienic menstrual conditions, thereby leading to women’s lower status not just socially but also mentally and physically. This study reveals how the socio-cultural position of tribal Meena women affects them and adds to the misery and risks faced by them with respect to their health, menstrual hygiene and their selection of health services. This is established by conducting on-field surveys and interviews. The research also derives its findings from various primary and secondary data along with necessary sample collections.

Human Rights In Childbearing 2. Reproductive Justice

In this article, I give an overview of the reproductive justice movement, defining and clarifying its meaning and differentiating it from the issue of reproductive rights. The main principles will be explored and consideration given to this framework within the UK context.

Disability and Reproductive Justice

Since at least the 1960s, public debate over abortion rights has frequently turned to issues of disability. Those who argue for liberalization of abortion laws have often been successful by raising the specter of fetal disability — whether caused by Thalidomide, or rubella, or otherwise. Those who agitate for restricting or banning abortion, by contrast, have often argued that pro-choice advocates devalue the lives of people with disabilities. In the spring of 2019, disability and abortion rights collided at the Supreme Court. Indiana had adopted a law “barring the knowing provision of sex-, race-, or disability-selective abortions by abortion providers.” The Seventh Circuit invalidated that law. In Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana & Kentucky, the Supreme Court denied certiorari (though it summarily reversed the Seventh Circuit’s invalidation of a separate Indiana law regulating the disposal of fetal remains). Justice Thomas concurred in the denial of certiorari, but he filed a lengthy separate opinion arguing that the ban on selective abortions was constitutional. He argued that “this law and other laws like it promote a State’s compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics.” Just a few months earlier, disability and reproductive rights issues had intersected in a very different way in the debate over the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Disability rights advocates drew attention to an opinion then-Judge Kavanaugh had written in a case in which individuals with developmental disabilities challenged a District of Columbia policy that denied them the right to make decisions about their medical care. The case was Doe ex rel. Tarlow v. District of Columbia. The D.C. Circuit reversed a district court decision enjoining that policy. Judge Kavanaugh’s opinion did not say anything specifically about reproductive rights. He treated the case entirely as one about the (lack of a) right of incompetent persons to consent to medical treatment. But the case itself was very much a reproductive rights case. Two of the three plaintiffs had been forced to have abortions without their consent; they sued precisely to challenge the policy that had taken away their power to choose. Although Kavanaugh had a reputation as a strong “pro-life” judge, here he voted to uphold government decisions to require individuals with intellectual disabilities to have abortions. Debate over disability and reproductive rights has typically focused on the issues raised by Justice Thomas’s opinion in Box — whether fetal disability is an acceptable reason for terminating a pregnancy, and what the law should do about it. Those are important questions. But any full assessment of the intersection between disability and reproductive rights must also address the issues raised by then-Judge Kavanaugh’s opinion in Doe. Disabled people are frequently denied their own rights to conceive, bear, and parent children, whether through forced sterilization or abortion, the denial of assisted reproduction, or the denial of parental rights once their children are born. Some of these practices — notably forced sterilization — are emblematic of the Eugenics Era. But they are not at all confined to the past. Indeed, the practices that prevent people with disabilities from having and raising children — practices like the law Kavanaugh upheld in Doe — are in many ways the disability analogues of the race-based eugenic practices that Justice Thomas himself decried in his Box opinion. This essay offers a fuller consideration of the intersection of disability and reproductive rights. It does so by considering the legal and societal treatment of fetuses and children with disabilities alongside the legal and societal treatment of parents with disabilities. And it does so by bringing to bear insights drawn from two distinct social movements: the disability rights movement, and the reproductive justice movement. The piece argues that, taken together, the disability rights and reproductive justice perspectives offer substantial purchase on the questions raised by Justice Thomas in his Box concurrence. Those perspectives suggest that the questions are serious indeed but that Thomas gave the wrong answer to them. They also suggest that any effort to address the intersection of disability and reproductive rights needs to address the questions raised by then-Judge Kavanaugh’s Doe opinion — and that Kavanaugh, too, gave the wrong answer.

THE RIGHTS TO SURROGATE MOTHERHOOD FOR SAME-SEX PARTNERSHIPS

The growing populist sentiment in society and, as a consequence, the reactive adoption of new restrictive legal acts that discriminate and unjustifiably restrict citizens' rights, is a major challenge for the scientific community and human rights in Ukraine. The issue of reproductive rights is one of the most important elements of common discriminatory and often unscientific narratives both in the EU and in Ukraine. Therefore, the scientific community has to take up this challenge and, by examining and exploring the various aspects of the right to reproduce, uphold the rule of science and the rights of Ukrainans, especially in this domain. Surrogate motherhood is always used in combination with other methods of assisted reproductive technology. Thus, surrogate motherhood, as a method of treatment, is burdened not only with legal uncertainty, but also with additional necessary steps (taking donor material, instrumental insemination, etc.) that precede assisted gestation.It is believed that all assisted reproductive technologies, including surrogacy, are treatment methods; therefore, their use cannot in any way depend on a person's social status, including gender self-identification, the fact of marriage or same-sex partnership.The list of medical grounds for surrogate motherhood is defined in the Order of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine On Approval of the Procedure for the Use of Assisted Reproductive Technologies in Ukraine. However, we emphasize that the list should be expanded to include diagnoses of transsexuality and other gender identity disorders according to the International Classification of Diseases. Thus, according to item 10 ofthe Unified Clinical Protocol of Primary, Secondary (Specialized) and Tertiary (Highly Specialized) Medical Care: Gender Dysphoria, reproduction opportunities for FtM patients may include freezing of oocytes (eggs) or embryos. Frozen gametes and embryos can later be used for delivery by a surrogate mother. The question stands whythis possibility is not considered in the protocol for the MtF transition with the subsequent possibility of delivery by a surrogate mother. Obviously, with the MtF transition, even with gender reassignment surgery, including the operation the genitals, the woman is not capable of independent childbearing. Such a woman can thus exerciseher right to reproduction only by fertilizing a donor egg with her sperm and then having the embryo that is genetically hers carried to term by a surrogate mother. The issue of male identity for the origin of the donor material (sperm) also needs separate legal regulation. However, in our opinion, this social group should not be discriminated against in access to surrogate motherhood as an assisted reproductive technology.

Awareness and attitude towards reproductive and sexual health rights and practices among college students: An empirical study

Objectives: To assess the knowledge, awareness and attitudes among college going students towards reproductive and sexual health rights, issues and practices. Methods/Statistical analysis: A cross-sectional study was conducted across colleges of Guwahati city among the first year students over the months of January and February 2020. The method of systematic random sampling was used. Sample size amounted to 306 students. Age group of the sample ranged between 18-19 years. The basic inclusion criteria was that the target population needs to be first year students enrolled in either science or arts stream. Self-administered questionnaires were the primary method of data collection. Analysis of data was done using Microsoft excel and open EPI software. Chi square test of independence was performed to test linkages between crucial variables. Findings : A total of 306 students were enrolled for the study. With respect to knowledge about legal statutes relating to reproductive rights issues like abortion, duration of maternity leave, 52% of the respondents had correct knowledge and information. 49% of the students were aware about the legality of homosexuality in India. Knowledge questions on sexual health and menstrual hygiene generated correct responses from 44% of students. 87% of the students favoured inclusion of sex education in at the institutional levels and free supply of implements for maintenance of menstrual hygiene at schools and colleges. Application: The findings of this study can supplement and assist further health policy research in the field of adolescent sexual health rights and needs especially, in the Northeastern Indian region. Keywords: Sexual health; reproductive rights; homosexuality; menstrual hygiene; sex education

Z V. State of Bihar: Reproductive Autonomy and State Liability

In this case note, I analyse the judgement of the Supreme Court of India in Z v. State of Bihar. I focus on the important contribution that the case makes in the context of reproductive health rights of women, and in particular, victims of rape. I argue that the case provides a foundation for further development of the law on various issues of reproductive rights and compensation jurisprudence for state failures in guaranteeing statutory and constitutional rights of women, including victims of rape. I further argue that the case also provides a framework for adjudication of cases in the criminal justice system, which involve pregnant women.

Reproductive human rights: General legal support and implementation in the field of criminal justice

The unsatisfactory demographic situation in European countries, in particular the reduction of fertility, actualizes the issue of reproductive rights. Reproductive rights include the human ability to make free and independent decisions about their reproductive health, including the birth of children, the time and intervals between their birth, the right to decide on procreation without discrimination, threats and violence, as well as recognition of the right to receive relevant information. The article is devoted to the analysis of some problematic general theoretic, criminal law and criminal procedure aspects in the field of reproductive rights. In particular, issues of assisted reproductive technologies application, their regulation at the international and national levels, as well as in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter – ECHR) are considered in the article. Special attention is paid to the specificity of the legal and practical factors of surrogacy.

Filling a Federal Void: Promises and Perils of State Law in Addressing Women's Health Disparities.

Federal law often avoids setting minimum standards for women's health and reproductive rights issues, leaving legislative and regulatory gaps for the states to fill as they see fit. This has mixed results. It can lead to state innovation that improves state-level health outcomes, informs federal health reform, and provides data on best practices for other states. On the other hand, some states may use the absence of a federal floor to impose draconian policies that pose risks to women's and maternal health. Health reforms at the federal level must trod carefully to enable state innovation, while imposing foundational safeguards for promoting women's health nationwide.

Reproductive Rights Issues in Popular Media: International Perspectives ed. by Waltraud Maierhofer and Beth Widmaier Capo

Reproductive Rights Issues in Popular Media: International Perspectives ed. by Waltraud Maierhofer and Beth Widmaier Capo

Derechos reproductivos y libertad de las mujeres. Observaciones sobre el debate feminista

Este artículo busca contribuir a la reflexión sobre el tema de los derechos reproductivos, asumiendo como perspectiva de análisis el debate feminista occidental contemporáneo. No obstante la variedad de enfoques y posiciones que caracterizan ese debate, se enfatizará el interés convergente de la discusión bioética feminista más reciente en el tema de la regulación jurídica que los Estados prevén, tanto en relación con el uso de determinadas tecnologías reproductivas como respecto del ejercicio de otros derechos reproductivos, al igual que las premisas de valor que sostienen estas políticas del derecho y sus efectos en la vida de las mujeres. Finalmente, también a la luz de las transformaciones recientes de las modalidades de control público sobre las elecciones reproductivas, se individualizarán algunos retos que siguen interrogando a los feminismos contemporáneos.

Reproductive Rights of a Woman – Myth or Reality?

Feminist studies accord great importance to the issue of reproductive rights, because the control over her body is the first step that a woman takes towards liberation and freedom from the oppression by patriarchy. Adele Clarke in her essay ‘Subtle Forms of Sterilization Abuse’ comments: Reproduction is a fundamental human right: neither the state nor the actions of others should deny any person autonomy over their reproductive processes […] Reproductive freedom is the prerequisite for any kind of liberation for women. The right to decide whether and when to bear children is fundamental to a woman’s control of her own body, her sexuality, her life choices. (Clarke 1984: 189-190) This paper examines two stories which deal with the right of a woman to birth control and family planning, ‘Daktaramma’s Room’ (2004) by R. Chudamani and ‘Giribala’ (2004) by Mahashwta Devi.

Reproductive Inequalities

In the last decade of the twentieth century, the international community shifted its focus to the issue of reproductive rights from a previous emphasis on population control and demographic targets...

Política Religiosa e Religião Política: Os Evangélicos e o Uso Político do Sexo

The evangelicals' presence in the Brazilian political scenario increased in the eighties, during the constitutional movement. There are political, economic, and religious reasons for this late awakening, or for this recent visibility. Although recent, their more visible and aggressive participation in the political world has generated considerable debate in Brazilian society and placed new (or old?) questions to the secular State. Evangelicals have increasingly joined the political field, reaching a growing representation in government and effectively participating in the definition of the political agenda at all levels. Their performance in Brazilian party politics is marked by strong corporatism, and their political stances are predominantly conservative and traditionalist. Undoubtedly, one cannot run the risk of understanding the evangelical congressmen as a cohesive group, with a uniform movement and equal political actions. However, when it comes to issues more directly related to sexuality, there is a noticeable inclination to moral conservatism, and this is also the electorate's tendency. In this paper we will dwell particularly on the political stance of evangelicals regarding issues of reproductive rights and homosexuality, seeking to understand the tension between the political affirmation of a religious sexual morality and the proposition of a secular State, focused on the interests of its citizens regardless of their religious affiliation.

Reproduction, Politics, and John Irving’s The Cider House Rules: Women’s Rights or "Fetal Rights"?

While hotly debated in political contexts, abortion has seldom figured in explicit terms in either literature or film in the United States. An exception is John Irving’s 1985 novel The Cider House Rules, which treats abortion insistently and explicitly. Although soon thirty years old, The Cider House Rules still functions as an important voice in the ongoing discussion about reproductive rights, responsibilities, and politics. Irving represents abortion as primarily a women’s health issue and a political issue, but also stresses the power and responsibility of men in abortion policy and debate. The novel rejects a “prolife” stance in favor of a women’s rights perspective, and clearly illustrates that abortion does not preclude or negate motherhood. This article discusses Irving’s novel in order to address abortion as a political issue, the gender politics of fictional representations of abortion, and the uses of such representations in critical practice. A brief introduction to the abortion issue in American cultural representation and in recent US history offers context to the abortion issue in Irving’s novel. The analysis focuses on abortion as it figures in the novel, and on how abortion figures in the criticism of the novel that explicitly focuses on this issue. The article argues that twentyfirst century criticism of Irving’s text, by feminist scholars as well as explicitly anti-feminist pro-life advocates, demonstrate the pervasive influence of antiabortion discourses illustrates, since these readings of Irving’s novel include, or reactively respond to, the fetal rights discourse and the “awfulization of abortion.” The article further proposes that the novel’s representations of reproductive rights issues – especially abortion – are still relevant today, and that critical readings of fictional and nonfictional representations of reproductive rights issues are central to feminist poli-tics.

From Refusing Stigmatization toward Celebration: New Directions for Reproductive Justice Activism

FromRefusingStigmatizationtowardCelebration: New Directionsfor Reproductive JusticeActivism Carly Thomsen For the last two decades, scholars and activists have discussed the relationship between reproductive justice and reproductive rights frameworks and movements primarily in terms of the differences between them. With the wide adoption of discourses of reproductive justice — even by those mainstream feminist groups doing the type of work this concept intended to disrupt—it has become difficult to pin point the ways in which differences between the reproductive rights and justice models manifest. In this brief commentary, I highlight an unfortunate similarity between the two approaches today: a fear of celebrating abortion. This problem has multiple roots. Reproductive justice advocates, who have often directed their critiques at mainstream reproductive rights organizations, have worked to push mainstream feminists beyond understanding abortion as the single most important wom en's issue, citing both the impact of the eugenicist history of abor tion and contraception on women of color and women with disabili ties, as well as the many reproductive rights issues that have garnered less attention including forced sterilization, environmental toxins in breast milk, mandatory drug testing of women on public assistance, and the lack of social support for poor women to have and raise the number of children they want.1 At the same time, reproductive rights FeministStudies39, no. 1. © 2013 by Feminist Studies, Inc. 149 150 Carly Thomsen organizations have attempted to garner mass support for their issues through framing reproductive rights in relation to privacy, govern ment intrusion, and health, distancing themselves from issues of lib eration, rights, and justice.2 The combined result is a pervasive nega tivity toward abortion that transcends our movements and impacts broader cultural understandings of the practice. I draw from two examples of reproductive justice activism —Native women acting in response to South Dakota's abortion ban and a University of Califor nia student organization working against crisis pregnancy centers — to suggest new visions for refusing stigmatization and moving toward celebrating abortion. Abortion: Beyond Difficulty and Trauma "Pro-choice" politicians and reproductive rights activists alike often describe abortion as "one of the most difficult and complex deci sions a woman will ever make."3 A Planned Parenthood state affiliate claims that "reducing the need for abortion is a goal we can all sup port."4 When the largest and best known abortion rights organiza tions and their pro-choice political allies frame abortion in this way, abortion rights movements have a serious problem. The 40th anni versary of the Roe v. Wade decision is an apt time to call reproductive rights advocates to move away from an apologist framework through which abortion is described as negative, harmful, and regrettable.5 It is certainly worth questioning the notion that reducing abortion rep resents progress and that abortion is always a difficult decision. One in every three US women will have an abortion in her life time. For many of these women, abortion is a simple, easily made decision. It is one component of women's healthcare, and it is not any more physically or emotionally damaging than a Pap smear for the vast majority of women who opt to undergo the procedure. As repro ductive rights advocates are fond of pointing out, abortion is actually safer than childbirth. And the vast majority of women report feeling relief after abortion; according to the American Psychological Associ ation, significant negative responses to abortion are rare.6 At the same time, feminist advocates for reproductive justice rec ognize that this narrative does not speak to all women's experiences. It was, after all, the lack of recognition of diverse needs and experi ences that led to the development of reproductive justice frameworks, Carly Thomsen 151 scholarship, and activism. In our attempts to account for the het erogeneity of women's lives and concerns, we acknowledge that not all women experience abortion in the same way, that it can be lib eratory and painful, devastating and empowering, all at the same time. Some women find it entirely liberating while others describe being traumatized by the experience. In our attempts to recognize the complexity of women's experiences, we find ourselves respond ing to and perpetuating the false claims of antiabortion...

The Politics of Female Reproductive Rights in Democratic Transitions: Advances and Setbacks in the Pursuit of Female Reproductive Rights in Mexico

Democratizing processes in Latin America are giving way to new citizen demands. As the political process opens, more actors find access to the public sphere. This paper analyzes the growing demands for female reproductive rights in Mexico, a pending issue in policy processes. Through a comparative analysis, the paper takes on the issue of reproductive rights across states in the federal entity. The case of Mexico stands out in Latin America as there is wide variation in policymaking around this issue. Despite social demands and liberalized international standards, there is an uneven outcome in the regulation of female reproductive rights across states, resulting in varying degrees of liberalization and enforcement of policies. The lack of uniformity in moral policy leads to a detriment in the lives of many women and has important implications for the redefinition of citizenship and gender across Latin America. The varying degrees of enforcement also have important implications for expressions and the exercise of sexuality rights. This paper explores the policy process asking: Why is there such a variation in policymaking? What are some of the conditions present in liberalization contexts that are lacking in those with more stringent policies? Could enhancing representation alleviate some of the problems women face in more closed environments? This paper explores the new challenges for women in democratizing contexts, as a new set of policies affect the social construction of gender roles.

Women's Reproductive Rights: A literary perspective

This paper examines the development of the concept of women’s reproductive rights in human rights treaties and conventions since the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, revealing how traditional human rights formulations are often male-centered and lack a gender-sensitive approach. Since feminist speculative fiction has anticipated many of the reproductive rights issues that we are facing today, the author claims that literary texts such as Ursula Le Guin’s The Left Hand of Darkness (1969), Marge Piercy’s Woman on the Edge of Time (1976), Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale (1985), P. D. James’s The Children of Men (1992) and Sarah Hall’s The Carhullan Army (2007) can enlighten contemporary debates on reproductive rights and contribute to the development of a universal ethics of human rights that takes into account the specificity of women’s rights.