El Salvador rightwing opposition leaders are pushing for an extension of the penalties related to abortion from a range of two to eight years to a new range that will see women face a minimum of 30 years and a maximum of 50 years. That will be through a reform of the penal code article that gives guidelines on the penalties related to abortion. The leaders are hinging their demands on the Constitution of El Salvador that gives a right to live, then extrapolate that life begins at conception. Since 1998, all forms of abortion have been banned in El Salvador, and women with pregnancy complications that cause bleeding are handcuffed to their beds. The country does not permit life-saving abortions, and in some cases, the life of the mother is threatened by the complications. An example is the case of Beatriz, a 22-year old who almost died when she was forced to carry to maturity a foetus that was missing important parts of the brain and the skull. The move by El Salvador has attracted the wrath of human rights activists and civil leaders who claim that the proposed legislation is scandalous. So far, the country has the some of the most draconian abortion laws in the world, lagging behind in a world that has moved ahead in matters of reproduction health. In most countries, abortion is approved in situations where the life of the mother is in danger, and some countries have even legalized safe abortions to willing mothers.
Conflict
The proposed law raises concerns about the treatment of pregnancy situations whereby the lives of the mothers are threatened by draconian laws that illegalize all forms of abortion. First, the mother is not given autonomy over her life, and the definition of life as starting from conception inhibits the chances that doctors can undertake pregnancy evaluations to determine the status of the foetus. The procedures proposed by the law are not scientific because the lack of exceptions removes the importance of keen medical checkup during pregnancy. Ideally, any legal proposition must have clauses that describe the treatment of situations that are outside the norm, and propose solutions for them in a manner that helps the people to identify with those requirements. The lack of alternatives in the El Salvador scenario limits women, and infringes their rights for life, ironically. Probably, an approach that would ensure that women are educated on reproduction health and the dangers of unsafe abortion would be more beneficial to the country as compared to outright legislations that have little regard for common sense and welfare of the mother.
Secondly, by banning all forms of abortions, the law endangers the lives of the mothers. A complicated pregnancy is a health hazard to the mother, and hence, by trying to protect the lives of the unborn babies, the law endangers the lives of the mothers. That lack of freedom to make decisions about pregnancies on the part of the doctors and the patients opens the way for illegal abortions, which are mostly unsafe and expensive. In countries where abortion is provided with alternatives within the law, mothers are educated on the necessity of learning about reproductive health, and they use that information to make decisions that save them from such complications and threats that come from having a pregnancy.
The risks of abortion versus the risks that accrue to the mothers are not considered in the proposed reform of the penal code, exposing the mothers to possible harm from complicated pregnancies. This lack of beneficence and nonmaleficence is against the principles of principlism that advocates for a moral consideration of all facets of a situation to ensure that human beings are not harmed by a scenario. That means that El Salvador needs to carry out more research on the abortion to determine the best way to frame the law so as to offer adequate protection to unborn babies while protecting the lives of the mothers. Failure to consider the two sides of the coin leads to skewed enforcements that may injure the future of women.
Take for example a pregnancy that was caught through rape. The mother should have the discretion to decide on whether she will carry the baby to full term or she prefers that the pregnancy is terminated. In such a scenario, the main interest is the mother because she is the one who is undergoing the trauma of rape, and carrying the pregnancy and bringing forth the baby might be a constant reminder of the awful rape ordeal. Human rights should have a regard to fundamental freedoms of choice and decision making, and getting a baby is one of the most important decisions to any woman. Therefore, threatening to jail a mother for thirty years if they procure an abortion is punitive on the side of the mother because it does not consider the circumstances of the pregnancy regarding the health of the baby and the way the baby was conceived.
In some situations, the mother wants to have the baby, badly. But the medical situation makes it impossible to carry the pregnancy to term, stressing the parents and inflicting stress and depression on their lives. An example is that of a case of a woman living in Brooklyn who had to undergo an abortion in Colorado because it was not allowed in New York, despite her need for a baby. She fought to have the baby, and the doctor broke the worst news after 32 weeks, making it inevitable that abortion was necessary as the baby had failed to develop properly. The opinion of a physician should be keenly considered in making decisions on the health of the baby and the mother, and justice is only served when each of them is given a good chance (Tolentino, 2016). That means the El Salvador legislation would be an abuse of justice because the mother is not given the same space to have a voice and her interests served compared to the foetus. The principle of justice is not upheld, and the procedures necessary for the extension of justice are not in place.
Comparing El Salvador stand on abortion with other countries like Latin America or Europe, and even some countries like Kenya in Africa, one gets the idea that the politicians in El Salvador have little understanding of the importance of liberal abortion laws. The subjectivity of the legislation and its enforcement overlooks the basic human rights of expression and fair listening to the concerns of both parties. In the situation where a lady gets handcuffed on the hospital bed when she turns up bleeding contravenes the right to fair treatment. Incidentally, it means that doctors or physicians fail in their duty to offer an educated opinion of the situation. Medical research and experience show that pregnancies can develop complications, and the bleeding may not be the mother’s fault and that it is the doctors who should provide an opinion on the cause of the bleeding to prevent the mothers from getting charged of abortion while they were innocent.
Solution
While recognizing the importance of protecting the life of the unborn child, it would be very necessary to consider the effect it has on the mother and the control she has on her pregnancy. That means it is important to evaluate the whole pregnancy journey from inception to delivery. At inception, the law should consider the means through which the mother became pregnant, and in situations when the pregnancy came through rape, it would be important to give the mother a chance to decide if she will carry it to full term or she will terminate it. The law should give a mother the freedom to choose on what to do with a pregnancy resulting from nonconsensual sex.
Secondly, when the choice comes down to the life of the mother versus that of the unborn child, the safety of the mother should take priority. Some pregnancy complications threaten the wellness of the mother and in extreme cases, the mother risks death. On top of giving some legislative space for the exercising the right to terminate an unsafe pregnancy, the law should provide that a qualified physician does a series of tests before determining whether the pregnancy is safe or not. After the certification, the law should recommend the completion of the procedure by a specialist with a keen consideration of the safety of the mother.
Lastly, women should be given the opportunity to decide on what happens with their lives. Unplanned pregnancies contribute to poverty and a low quality of life. Therefore, if a mother feels that she is not ready to get a baby, she deserves the right to request for a termination. Having that allowance on the law reduces the fatalities that result from unsafe abortions through traditional methods and unqualified physicians. Insisting on the safety of abortion procedures is important because it ensures that parents only bring forth children they can take care of and that a pregnancy does not result in a poor quality of life to the mother and the child.
Philosophical argument
According to me, life starts at conception, but at that stage, the life is embroidered on another life. Therefore, the life of the foetus should not be considered separately from the life of the mother, because both of the beings are synced by a biological elongation. It means that an unborn child is a subject of the mother’s life, and consideration of the safety of the mother and the stability of her mental status is necessary. Having a baby whose father raped the mother is a traumatic lifelong experience which a mother should be protected from, and giving birth to a child from an unplanned pregnancy should have its controls.
References
Tolentino, J. (2016, June 15). Interview with a woman who recently had an abortion at 32 weeks. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://jezebel.com/interview-with-a-woman-who-recently- had-an-abortion-at- 1781972395?utm_campaign=socialfow_jezebel_twitter&utm_source=jezebel_twitter&ut m_medium=socialflow
Watts, J. (2016, July 14). El Salvador abortion law change could leave women facing 50 years in jail. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/global- development/2016/jul/14/el-salvador-abortion-law-change-women-facing-50-years-jail
