Abortion, Family Planning, and Population Policy: Prospects for the Common‐Ground Approach

Abstract

For the past several decades those engaged in shaping the Program of Action documents at international conferences on population have muted their voices when the topic of abortion has been raised. In a desire to side-step entanglement in a bitter debate over the morality of abortion, great care has been taken to define "family planning" in ways that explicitly exclude abortion. The "common-ground" approach to treating abortion can be summarized in two directives found in all contemporary international population documents: "in no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning"; and all governments should work "to reduce the recourse to abortion through expanded and improved family-planning services." This article has three goals: first, to examine the appropriateness of these directives with respect to what is currently known about the relationship between abortion, family planning, and population policy; second, to trace how this "contraception-only" definition of family planning became de rigueur at international population conferences; and third, to discuss the prospects for the emergence of a more appropriate "common-ground" approach to abortion and population policy. Copyright (c) 2009 The Population Council, Inc..

Reductions in abortion-related mortality following policy reform: evidence from Romania, South Africa and Bangladesh

“…Restrictive abortion policies can also have reverberating social and economic effects on women, their children and larger communities. By 2007, 67 countries had legislation explicitly permitting legal termination on the grounds of economic or social hardship, recognizing the potential impact of unwanted pregnancy and unsafe abortion on women's socio-economic outcomes [ 6 ]. Studies also suggest that children born under abortion bans experience substantial socio-economic adversity such as lower rates of education, poor labor market outcomes, higher incidence of mental health problems and higher dependence on welfare [ 7 , 8 ].…”

Role of Induced Abortion in Attaining Reproductive Goals in Kyrgyzstan: A Study Based on KRDHS-1997

“…The health policy and system should address the contraceptive needs of women from difficult geographical terrains and less developed regions, especially the south and the east of the country. While developing family planning programme strategies to reduce unwanted births, the system must also be equipped to treat women in emergency situations along with making provision for safe abortion services (Jones et al, 2002;Brookman-Amissah, 2004;Juarez et al, 2005;Hodgson, 2009).…”

Reproductive Politics in Twentieth-Century France and Britain

“…42 In 1920, the French state, aided by national population experts, enacted a 'strongly pronatalist population policy that sought to encourage fertility through a combination of positive programs that enhanced couples' ability to care for children' and 'repressive programs that limited couples' access to contraception and abortion'. 43 The 1920 law explicitly forbade the sale, distribution and advertising of contraceptive devices, punishable by fines and imprisonment, as well as the inducement to abortion. At the same time, the government created a Conseil supérieur de la natalité (Birthrate committee), and tasked it with taking any measures necessary to increase national fecundity and support large families.…”