A quotation from the document illustrates this break with the role of the WHO, which is content to repeat the more militant demands of the defenders of the right to unconditional abortion. Restrictive laws, policies and practices often make health care workers, health care facilities, committees, ethics boards, police, courts or others „gatekeepers” of access to high-quality abortion care, asking them to determine whether a person is „qualified” for a legal abortion [4]. The organization joins Irene Montero`s new draft amendment to Spain`s abortion law, which aims to eliminate the mandatory three-day cooling-off period for women, require public hospitals to have an abortion specialist, and allow children under the age of 16 and 17 to have an abortion without parental consent. Because, as he says, „just as they are responsible for working or having sex, they are responsible for deciding their bodies.” These recommendations are broad and now include, for example, an incentive to expand teleconsultations, but above all they are an opportunity for WHO to advocate for fewer restrictions on abortion. When there is a danger to the woman`s life: Almost all countries allow abortion to save the life of the pregnant woman. This is in line with the man`s right to life, which requires the protection of the law and includes cases where pregnancy poses a threat to the woman`s life or where the pregnant woman`s life is otherwise in danger. For example, for the medical treatment of intrauterine fetal death at gestational age between 14 and 28 weeks, WHO proposes that nurses and midwives be allowed to perform the procedures „although there is insufficient direct evidence of the safety and effectiveness of this option” (recommendation 33). In its Recommendation 39 for the initial treatment of non-life-threatening post-abortion infections, WHO recommends that assistant nurses and associated seconded physicians be able to do so „although no direct evidence has been found to treat post-abortion infections”. Infection with abortion by these health workers. WHO also recommends that people who undergo a medical abortion and who wish to use contraceptives in the future receive contraceptives as soon as the medical abortion is performed. The editors then remark: The quality of the evidence based on randomised controlled trials was very low. It is surprising that the WHO not only takes a stand, but also recommends this practice, as it essentially recognizes that it has no real scientific evidence. There is also the recommendation on „administration of injectable contraceptives”.
In this case, the WHO recommends that pharmacy preparers be able to perform these injections „although no evidence has been found for the safety, efficacy, acceptance or feasibility of this option”. Finally, telemedicine is promoted because it claims that it works as satisfactorily and comparablely as in the usual clinical service „on the basis of evidence with very little certainty [7]”. To understand how the WHO can officially produce such a document with the same recommendations from the abortion industry, we now need to show the influence of the abortion industry on these guidelines. Far from being neutral, the experts behind this article, the cost of developing this article, as well as the sources and studies used in this article are largely funded by the abortion industry. The WHO estimates that 25 million unsafe abortions occur each year, the vast majority of them in developing countries. „We recommend that women and young women have access to abortion and family planning services when needed,” Craig Lissner, head of WHO`s Sexual and Reproductive Health Division, said in a statement. The guideline contains recommendations on many simple primary care interventions that improve the quality of abortion care for women and girls. This includes the division of labour by more health professionals; ensuring access to abortion pills for medical purposes, which means that more women can access safe abortion services; and ensuring that all women and girls have access to accurate information about the care they need. In addition to recommendations for the provision of clinical and service services, the guidelines recommend removing medically unnecessary regulatory barriers to safe abortion, such as criminalization, mandatory waiting periods, requiring others (e.g., Partners or family members) or institutions give their consent and limit the time of pregnancy at which an abortion can be performed. These barriers can lead to critical delays in access to treatment and put women and girls at increased risk of unsafe abortions, stigma and health complications, while further disrupting their education and ability to work. It is difficult to explain why the World Health Organization, the international organization of reference in the definition of policies for the maintenance and promotion of public health, unequivocally defends the eradication of the most vulnerable population – the unborn child – through abortion without borders.
It defends and promotes them by subordinating the granting of subsidies to the acceptance of its postulates against life. But while the need for abortion is common, access to legal and safe abortion services is far from guaranteed for those who need them. In fact, access to abortion is one of the most controversial issues in the world, and the heated debate it sparks is clouded by misinformation about the true impact of restricting access to this basic health care. If there is fetal damage: here he does not talk about the instriosity of the fetus as the cause itself, but includes it in this category and does not judge it. More and more countries with restrictive abortion laws allow abortion when there is a diagnosis of fetal damage or abnormalities due to genetic or other causes. Many countries specify the types of harms, such as those considered incompatible with life or independent living, while others provide harm lists. In short, the issue of abortion and its legislation is the subject of wide debate and has even more advantages than those mentioned here. However, the most important thing is to be able to discuss the issue with a high degree of vision and to respect the positions that exist around the discussion.
If the practitioner is against abortion, the document claims to recognize the fundamental right to conscientious objection, but this objection is simply tolerated as long as it does not impede access to abortion. The conscientious objector must immediately refer his patient to a non-adversarial doctor under penalty of punishment. Suddenly, the WHO believes that the regulation and removal of conscientious objection must be strict. States should also clearly define who can object and what medical action, that non-reprehensible doctors are properly distributed throughout the national territory, that procedures for referring patients to another health professional are prompt and effective. The right to institutional conscientious objection and personal conscientious objection in cases of emergency is rejected. Like a sword of Damocles on conscientious objectors, the drafters specify: If it is determined that it is impossible to regulate conscientious objection in such a way that the rights of abortion seekers are respected, protected and respected, such provisions that allow conscientious objection to abortion could become unjustifiable [6]. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines unsafe abortion as „a procedure to terminate an unwanted pregnancy performed by people who do not have the necessary capacity or that is performed in an environment where a minimum medical standard, or both, is lacking.” Abortion is a medical procedure that ends the pregnancy. This is a basic health need for millions of women, girls and others who may become pregnant. It is estimated that one in four pregnancies worldwide ends in an abortion every year. According to what has been said, this is not an international convention that guarantees rights, or a resolution for States to comply with procedures, but medical recommendations for performing abortion in „safe” conditions.
Therefore, these guidelines include the exact doses recommended for medical abortion depending on the stage of pregnancy, medical abortion techniques after the stage of pregnancy, reactions to difficulties that arise in the case of a late-term abortion, or the treatment of abortions in hospital or at home.
Najnowsze komentarze