Abortion Laws: Legality And The Right To Choose

The legality of abortion has been a contentious issue for decades, with laws and public opinion varying significantly across different countries and jurisdictions. While some countries and states have laws prohibiting abortion at all stages of pregnancy, others permit it up to a certain point or throughout the entire pregnancy. The debate surrounding abortion often revolves around questions of women's rights, religious and moral beliefs, and the role of the state in regulating reproductive health.

In the United States, the legal status of abortion has been particularly dynamic, with federal and state-level laws and court rulings shaping the landscape of abortion access. The Supreme Court's rulings in Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) established federal protections for a pregnant woman's right to an abortion, preventing states from banning the procedure before fetal viability. However, these rulings were overturned by the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision in 2022, giving states the authority to impose their own regulations on abortion.

The impact of this shift has been significant, with states now having broad discretion to prohibit or regulate abortion as they see fit. As a result, abortion laws vary considerably across the country, with some states banning abortion entirely while others protect abortion rights in their state constitutions. This has led to a complex patchwork of abortion access, with residents of some states needing to travel across state lines to access abortion services.

The debate around abortion laws is deeply polarizing, with passionate arguments made on both sides. Pro-choice advocates emphasize the importance of a woman's right to make decisions about her own body and reproductive health, while those opposed to abortion often cite religious or moral beliefs and the sanctity of life. The issue has also become highly politicized, with anti-abortion politicians at the state and federal levels working to restrict or ban abortion access.

With the legal landscape of abortion in a state of flux and public opinion remaining divided, the question of whether anti-abortion laws are legal remains a complex and highly contested issue in the United States and beyond.

The Hyde Amendment

The impact of the Hyde Amendment is significant, especially for women with low incomes and women of color, who are major beneficiaries of Medicaid. The amendment limits their access to abortion services, often forcing them to pay out of pocket or rely on other sources of funding. This can create financial and logistical obstacles, making it challenging for them to access abortion, particularly in states with restrictive abortion policies or bans.

The amendment has faced criticism for being an intrusive and unfair restriction on insurance coverage, allowing politicians to interfere with access to safe and legal abortion. Despite this, legislators who oppose abortion and object to the use of taxpayer money for abortion services continue to sponsor and support it.

There have been efforts to codify the Hyde Amendment into permanent law, such as the Hyde Amendment Codification Act introduced in 2013, which aimed to prohibit the expenditure of federal funds for any abortion services. However, it is worth noting that the Hyde Amendment itself is not a standalone law but rather a temporary "rider" attached to the HHS appropriations bill.

State-level abortion bans

The issue of abortion laws in the United States has been a highly contested topic for decades. In June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, a decision that had protected the federal constitutional right to abortion since 1973. With this ruling, the power to legislate on abortion was returned to the individual states, and many have since moved to restrict or ban abortion outright. As of October 2024, more than a dozen states have banned abortions or no longer have facilities where women can receive abortions.

One example of a state with restrictive abortion laws is Florida, which currently bans abortion after roughly six weeks of pregnancy. This has led to women being denied medically necessary abortions, even in cases of ectopic pregnancy, which can be life-threatening if left untreated. The Florida health department has also attempted to censor news stations from airing advertisements in favour of abortion rights, demonstrating the lengths to which some states will go to restrict access to abortion information and services.

The impact of state-level abortion bans falls disproportionately on marginalized groups, including people facing systemic racism and other forms of oppression. Furthermore, the criminalization of abortion has led to an increase in prosecutions related to pregnancy, pregnancy loss, and abortion, with low-income individuals and people of colour bearing the brunt of these legal consequences.

The fight against state-level abortion bans continues, with organizations like Planned Parenthood committed to helping people avoid unintended pregnancies and ensuring access to safe, legal abortion when needed.

Criminalisation of self-managed abortions

Self-managed abortions (SMA) refer to actions taken by a pregnant individual to end a pregnancy outside of a clinical setting. SMA can include self-sourcing and self-administering abortion pills, consuming herbs or other drugs, or using physical methods. SMA is not a new phenomenon and occurs across various social and legal contexts. The use of medical abortion (MA) drugs, such as misoprostol and mifepristone, has enabled safer self-management and self-use, prioritising autonomy, privacy, and confidentiality. The advent of telehealth and the growing network of organisations supporting safe self-use have significantly altered the abortion landscape.

In some countries, individuals have been prosecuted and incarcerated for self-managing an abortion. People have been charged under laws that explicitly criminalise SMA or that criminalise harm to the fetus. Others have faced charges related to the disposal of pregnancy tissue or obtaining abortion-inducing medication. Data suggests that many individuals consider SMA, with over 200,000 Google searches for information on SMA in the US during a month-long period in 2017. A 2017 national study reported that 7% of women in the US attempted SMA in their lifetimes.

The reasons for attempting SMA are varied and include barriers to accessing clinic-based care, such as cost and distance, as well as personal preference for self-care. SMA attempts may become more common due to growing restrictions on abortion access and the closure of abortion-providing facilities. SMA is criminalised in most countries, and such criminalisation is often a legacy of colonial-era laws. Criminalisation results in poor-quality healthcare, lack of essential medicines, obstructs information and training related to abortion provision, and is associated with delayed and unsafe abortions.

Human rights bodies and public health scholars recommend decriminalisation, which is associated with reduced stigma, improved quality of care, and better access to safe abortions. Decriminalisation refers to the full removal of abortion and abortion-related offences from criminal law and the non-application of other offences, such as manslaughter, to those involved in SMA. Partial decriminalisation or depenalisation is insufficient, as it does not address the stigmatisation and negative impacts on health workers and healthcare facilities. Formal decriminalisation should be accompanied by government-facilitated provision of accurate and accessible information about abortion services.

The criminalisation of SMA has negative implications for health outcomes, health systems, and human rights. It interferes with the right to health by hindering access to safe abortion and contributing to unsafe abortion practices. Criminalisation also impacts the right to life, as it can result in violations of the right to life when women undergo unsafe abortions. Additionally, criminalisation can lead to violations of the right to privacy and the right to equality and non-discrimination.

The prosecution of SMA also has detrimental effects on the patient-clinician relationship. The threat of prosecution may deter individuals from seeking needed care, including care for complications after abortion. Mandated reporting of suspected SMA to law enforcement compromises patient confidentiality and disproportionately harms marginalised communities, who are more likely to be reported and criminalised for their pregnancy outcomes due to bias and discrimination. Obstetrician-gynaecologists and other clinicians should protect patient autonomy, confidentiality, and advocate against mandated reporting related to SMA.

Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP)

TRAP laws do not increase patient safety and are counter to evidence-based clinical guidelines. Leading medical associations, such as the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), have opposed TRAP laws, arguing that they jeopardize women's health by restricting access to abortion providers.

The impact of TRAP laws falls disproportionately on women of lower socioeconomic status and women of color, creating geographic barriers to abortion access and increasing patient costs. These laws have also resulted in the closure of multiple clinics and a decrease in the availability of second-trimester abortion services.

TRAP laws represent a backdoor attempt by politicians to end legal abortion access by making it increasingly difficult for abortion services to operate and for women to obtain them.

The Supreme Court's role in abortion law

In 1973, the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in Roe v. Wade, which recognised a constitutional "right to privacy" that protected a woman's decision to terminate her pregnancy. This ruling struck down many abortion laws and sparked an ongoing debate about the legality and extent of abortion rights. The Court's decision in Roe v. Wade was controversial and faced criticism from both sides of the abortion debate. Anti-abortion activists and politicians sought for decades to restrict abortion or overrule the decision.

In 2022, the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, ending the constitutional right to abortion. This decision opened the door for states to ban abortion outright, and 14 states have since made abortion illegal. The overruling of Roe v. Wade has been criticised for restricting access to safe and legal abortion and interfering in people's reproductive health care decisions.

The Supreme Court's rulings on abortion have had far-reaching consequences, shaping the abortion debate and influencing state-level abortion policies. The Court's decisions have impacted the lives of millions of people across the country, and the issue of abortion remains a highly divisive topic in the United States.

Frequently asked questions