BACKGROUND: Induced abortion is a medical practice that has always been much discussed all over the world. Abortion is allowed in most European countries at the request of the woman with limitations that are imposed mainly by the gestational age. However, there are legislative differences between European countries which impose stringent limits on the use of induced abortion. OBJECTIVE: This article analyzes the European legislation on abortion, with a particular focus on countries in which there have been recent legislative changes in recent years, and the possible consequent risk of inequality among European women. METHODS: Government and ministerial websites of the countries analyzed have been consulted to investigate abortion laws in Europe. In addition, the Global Abortion Policies Database of the World Health Organization was also consulted for a regulatory comparison. RESULTS: The differences between the various European countries are considerable. Although guaranteed by most legislation, abortion remains a fragile right in some European countries. CONCLUSION: Different legislation in the various countries of Europe causes difficulties for women who want to have an abortion but who reside in states where there are strict limits to abortion. In addressing the issue of induced abortion, we must not forget that the center of this practice is the woman. For this reason, it is essential to apply a reasoning based on respect for women’s rights: freedom, health, and self-determination.
BACKGROUND: According to the World Health Organization (WHO), any woman in childbearing age who have decided not to take permanently an oral contraceptive but who are sexually active has the right to access emergency contraception (EC). Despite this, in many European countries there are no specific laws governing the criteria for access to emergency oral contraceptives (EOCs) for girls under 18, especially about the need for third party consent. This normative vacuum is dangerous as it risks creating confusion and entrusting the management of the fundamental right of self-determination to the discretion of others. Moreover, in European Union (EU) countries, there is an inequality in terms of access to contraceptive supplies, reimbursement criteria and the availability of information online. OBJECTIVE: Our article compares the criteria for access to EOCs (Ulipristal Acetate-UPA and Levonorgestrel-LNG) in the various EU countries to highlight possible disparities and consequent inequalities. METHODS: Government and ministerial websites, European agencies websites, and Contraceptive Use by Method 2019 (WHO) have been consulted. RESULTS: There are some differences between the various European countries that could configure inequality in EU countries. CONCLUSIONS: It would be appropriate a definitive levelling of the legislation of the European Union on emergency contraception associated with massive information and awareness campaigns.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.