MEDIA KITS
An Overview of Abortion in the United States
NEWS RELEASES
Review Finds No Evidence to Support Funding of Rigid Abstinence-Only Programs
(09/16/2008)
Ambivalence Toward Pregnancy Undermines Couples' Consistent Use of Contraceptives
(09/08/2008)
Higher Abortion Rates Among Women Of Color Reflect Higher Rates Of Unintended Pregnancy
(08/13/2008)
EVIDENCE CHECK
Review of Key Findings of "Emerging Answers 2007" (November 2007)
Review of an authoritative report on the effectiveness of sex education programs concluding that there is not sufficient evidence to justify the widespread dissemination of abstinence-only-until-marriage programs.
Advisory on Zogby Poll Commissioned by NAEA (July 2007)
Review of a biased survey conducted by Zogby International on behalf of the National Abstinence Education Association (NAEA) in May 2007 that purports to show broad public support for abstinence-only education.
Advisory on ACF Review of Comprehensive Sex Ed Curricula (July 2007)
Review of a poorly conducted analysis on the content and effectiveness of nine comprehensive sex education curricula released by the federal Administration for Children and Families (ACF) in June 2007.
NEWS IN CONTEXT
Legal abortion upheld in Mexico City
State Legislative Trends at Midyear 2008
Advancing an Integration Agenda
Legal abortion upheld in Mexico City
By a vote of 8 to 3, the Supreme Court of Mexico recently affirmed the federal district of Mexico City’s right to legalize abortion, confirming that the legal status of the procedure can be determined at the state level. In effect since April 2007, the Mexico City law allows providers to offer first-trimester abortions without restriction. Outside of the capital city, abortion is permitted only in particular cases, such as rape or to save the life of the mother, as determined by state. Mexico City’s law is one of the most liberal in Latin America.
Abortion rates have little to do with the legal status of abortion, according to evidence from the Guttmacher Institute and the World Health Organization. In 2003, abortion rates were roughly equal in developed regions (26 abortions for every 1,000 women of childbearing age) and developing regions (29 abortions per 1,000 women), despite abortion being largely illegal in developing regions.
Health consequences, however, vary greatly depending on the legal status of the procedure: Abortion is generally safe where it is broadly legal and mostly unsafe where restricted. Legalizing abortion is a necessary, but not sufficient, first step for making abortion safer; the procedure must also be performed by trained providers at appropriate facilities.
Click here for more information on:
Declining abortion rates worldwide
Putting worldwide abortion into context
The facts on abortion worldwide
State Legislative Trends at Midyear 2008
Through the first half of the year, there has only been moderate activity around reproductive health issues in state legislatures. In this as in other election years, legislators have been reluctant to address potentially divisive social issues; furthermore, the economic downturn has required legislators to focus on state budgetary issues. With most legislatures already adjourned, it appears that the most significant developments of the year still lie ahead, in the form of ballot initiatives that will come before voters in three states in November. Advocates in two states (South Dakota and Colorado) have secured sufficient signatures to force a vote on measures that take different approaches toward the long-term goal of banning abortion. In California, meanwhile, the electorate will vote for the third time in four years on an initiative to require parental notification prior to a minor’s abortion.
The South Dakota measure would ban most abortions outright. This is the second attempt to ban abortion in South Dakota in the past two years. In 2006, voters defeated an initiative that would have prohibited abortion except in cases of life endangerment. In contrast, the measure before voters this year seeks to ban abortion except in cases of life endangerment, rape and incest and if “there is serious risk of a substantial and irreversible impairment of the functioning of a major bodily organ or system.” As was the case with the 2006 initiative, the purpose of this year’s attempt is to bring a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Abortion opponents in Colorado are taking a more indirect approach to the same long-term goal of banning abortion: A proposed amendment to the state constitution on the ballot this November would define a person throughout Colorado law as a “human being from the moment of fertilization.” By declaring that legal personhood begins at fertilization, the initiative could pave the way for banning common methods of birth control, including oral contraceptives, which may sometimes act postfertilization (although their primary mode of action is to block ovulation).
The third initiative related to reproductive health issues will be yet another attempt to secure approval for a measure to require parental notification when a teen in California seeks an abortion. Similar proposals were presented and soundly defeated in 2005 and 2006. Passage of the California measure would bring to 36 the number of states requiring parental involvement for minors seeking an abortion.
Click here for more information on:
Major state legislative actions so far this year
State legislation enacted in 2008
The status of state law and policy on key reproductive health and rights issues
Advancing an Integration Agenda
The XVII International AIDS Conference in Mexico City opened on Sunday, August 3, bringing together 25,000 scientists, activists, program implementers and people living with HIV to discuss the state of the epidemic. Featured at a number of conference sessions and events is the integration of HIV prevention and sexual and reproductive health services—an issue that the Guttmacher Institute itself highlighted in a satellite session it organized for Sunday afternoon.
Guttmacher’s Heather Boonstra opened the session with a discussion of the broad global consensus on the need for—and the broad benefits of—linking HIV prevention and sexual and reproductive health services. However, the United States remains a notable exception to this consensus. Driven in large part by ideological opposition from social conservatives in the U.S. Congress and the Bush administration, the U.S. government has failed to acknowledge these benefits in its own global AIDS program, PEPFAR.
Boonstra was joined by a panel of experts with backgrounds in advocacy, policy, research and on-the-ground programs to discuss how sexual and reproductive health services, including family planning, can strengthen and complement HIV prevention efforts.
Morolake Odetoyinbo provided a powerful and passionate perspective from the vantage point of a person living with HIV in Nigeria. Speaking on behalf of the Global Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS (GNP+), she described a situation in which health care workers, society and even family members of people living with HIV often assume that sexual and reproductive life stops with an HIV diagnosis. She drew on her personal experience to highlight many of the daily challenges HIV-positive women face, including laws that prohibit adoption by HIV-positive people, to make the case for policies that acknowledge the needs of people living with HIV and support greater integration of HIV care and comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services.
The second panelist, Rose Wilcher of Family Health International, provided a compelling overview of the evidence showing that meeting the contraceptive needs of HIV-positive women is essential to global HIV prevention efforts, calling contraception “the best kept secret in HIV prevention.” She stressed that effective contraception for HIV-positive women who do not wish to become pregnant not only prevents the infection of infants, it decreases the number of future orphans and helps women achieve their own childbearing goals.
Anna Miller of the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation followed with a hands-on perspective on current efforts to integrate sexual and reproductive health services into programs to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV. Like the other panelists, she described the need for ensuring that women have healthy pregnancies and access to a wide range of services, from syphilis and cervical screening to postnatal contraceptive services. Miller stressed that the distinctions between HIV and sexual and reproductive health policies and programs are often artificial and that the global community must recognize the common cause and the common areas of work between the two program areas.
Wrapping up the panel discussion, Boonstra reviewed the recent Congressional debate over integration in talks on reauthorizing PEPFAR. Using PEPFAR as an example, she highlighted the many challenges in the policy arena, from taboos around sex, contraception and abortion to a fundamental lack of understanding of the benefits of integration for the lives of HIV-positive individuals.
Boonstra closed by noting that much work remains to be done on integration, even though the world — if not the United States government — is moving in the right direction. Not only is integration the right thing to do for people living with HIV, it is also an integral step toward stemming the global AIDS epidemic.
RSS