RESUMO
In September 2021, the Mexican Supreme Court issued a decision disallowing any federal or local judicial authority to indict someone for the offense of voluntary or consensual abortion. This decision also declared unconstitutional penalties imposed on medical personnel who facilitate or assist such procedures. Furthermore, the Court decided that limiting access to abortion in cases of rape to a specific time frame was disproportionate. Later on, in September 2023, the Supreme Court confirmed that absolute criminalization of abortion was unconstitutional and declared that the rule supporting criminalization in the Federal Penal Code was without effects. Consequently, healthcare providers who work in public federal health institutions cannot be criminalized for guaranteeing the right to abortion. This article reviews the reasons advanced by the Supreme Court to guarantee the right of reproductive self-determination, as well as the effects of both decisions beyond the decriminalization of abortion by Mexican federal and state legislatures. The paper also examines the scope and limitations of these rulings and identifies the remaining challenges regarding voluntary abortion procedures in Mexico.
Assuntos
Aborto Induzido , Estupro , Gravidez , Feminino , Humanos , Estados Unidos , México , Aborto Legal , ReproduçãoRESUMO
Resumo Partindo da premissa de que as pautas sobre direitos reprodutivos constituem uma gama de disputas políticas no campo da sexualidade e da reprodução, este artigo examina o debate travado na audiência pública sobre a Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental (ADPF) 442, ocorrida em agosto de 2018. A ação propõe a descriminalização do aborto induzido pela própria gestante ou com seu consentimento, até a 12ª. semana de gestação. Na audiência convocada pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal, 50 exposições de amici curiae foram realizadas, catalisando os atuais argumentos acionados no debate público sobre aborto no Brasil. O conteúdo da audiência pública (personagens, lugares, imagens, áudios, textos e vídeo) é tomado como material empírico desta pesquisa. Considerando a centralidade do argumento de defesa da vida/combate à morte, tanto nas exposições favoráveis quanto naquelas contrárias à ADPF, examinamos os distintos enquadramentos utilizados pelos atores políticos em cena, ao debater a problemática do aborto em termos de um embate entre morte e vida. Mais do que uma polissemia dos termos, trata-se de um embate que explicita hierarquias em relação à reprodução e à vida das mulheres.
Abstract Starting from the premise that the agenda on reproductive rights is home to political disputes in the field of sexuality and reproduction, this article reviews the debate held at the public hearing on the Argument of Noncompliance with a Fundamental Precept (Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental, ADPF) # 442 in August 2018. The lawsuit proposes the decriminalization of abortion induced by the pregnant woman herself or with her consent until the 12th week of gestation. At the hearing convened by the Supreme Court, 50 amicus curiae presentations were held, catalyzing the current arguments raised in the public debate on abortion in Brazil. The content of the public hearing (characters, places, images, audios, texts, and video) is taken as empirical material for this research. Considering the centrality of the defense of life/combating death argument, both in speeches for and against the ADPF, we examine the different frameworks used by political actors on the scene when debating the issue of abortion in terms of a clash between death and life. More than a polysemy, it is a clash that makes explicit hierarchies regarding reproduction and women's lives.
Assuntos
Justiça SocialRESUMO
O estudo teve como objetivo identificar os argumentos da estratégia de persuasão dos discursos apresentados na audiência pública sobre a Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental-ADPF 442, realizada em 2018, cujo propósito era discutir sobre a interrupção voluntária da gravidez até a 12ª semana. Para tal, foi realizada uma pesquisa de abordagem qualitativa, analítico-descritiva e documental. O objeto de análise foi o registro da audiência, apresentado em vídeo, disponibilizado na plataforma digital YouTube, e em ata lavrada pelo STF, ambos de acesso público. A partir de uma análise do discurso, identificou-se os argumentos utilizados na estratégia de persuasão, que foram sistematizados em quatro categorias de argumentos para cada um dos dois grupos identificados: o grupo pró e o grupo contra a descriminalização do aborto. As três primeiras categorias, Saúde mental, Direito e Saúde pública, mesmo com diferenças na forma de apresentar o argumento, se repetem nos dois grupos. Todavia, a quarta categoria, Pressupostos, se diferenciou. No grupo pró descriminalização do aborto, apresentou-se como Pressupostos filosóficos e científicos, e no grupo contra, como Pressupostos morais. Por fim, a defesa da saúde mental das mulheres foi o principal argumento numa forma de humanizar o sofrimento vivido pelas que desejam abortar e não encontram o suporte do Estado para assegurar sua dignidade, cidadania e efetiva igualdade, garantidas constitucionalmente.(AU)
The study aimed to identify the arguments of the persuasion strategy of the speeches presented at the public hearing on the Action Against the Violation of Constitutional Fundamental Rights -ADPF 442, held in 2018, whose purpose was to discuss the voluntary interruption of pregnancy until the 12th week. To this end, a qualitative, analytical-descriptive, and documentary research was carried out. The object of analysis was the video recording of the hearing available on the YouTube platform, and in minutes drawn up by the STF, both of which are public. Based on a discourse analysis, the arguments used in the persuasion strategy were identified, which were systematized into four categories of arguments for each of the two identified groups: the group for and the group against the decriminalization of abortion. The first three categories, Mental Health, Law and Public Health, even with differences in the way of presenting the argument, are repeated in both groups. However, the fourth category, Assumptions, differed. In the group for the decriminalization of abortion, it was presented as Philosophical and Scientific Assumptions, whereas the group against, as Moral Assumptions. Finally, the defense of women's mental health was the main argument in a way of humanizing the suffering experienced by those who wish to have an abortion and do not find the support of the State to guarantee their dignity, citizenship, and effective equality, constitutionally guaranteed.(AU)
El estudio tuvo como objetivo identificar los argumentos de la estrategia de persuasión de los discursos presentados en la audiencia pública sobre el Argumento por Incumplimiento de un Percepto Fundamental -ADPF 442, realizada en 2018, con el objetivo de discutir la interrupción voluntaria del embarazo hasta la 12.ª semana. Para ello, se llevó a cabo una investigación cualitativa, analítico-descriptiva y documental. El objeto de análisis fue la grabación de la audiencia, que está disponible en la plataforma digital YouTube, y actas levantadas por el Supremo Tribunal Federal -STF, ambas de acceso público. A partir de un análisis del discurso se identificaron los argumentos utilizados en la estrategia de persuasión, los cuales se sistematizaron en cuatro categorías de argumentos para cada uno de los dos grupos identificados: el grupo pro y el grupo en contra de la despenalización del aborto. Las tres primeras categorías ("salud mental", "derecho" y "salud pública") aún con diferencias en la forma de presentar el argumento se repiten en ambos grupos. Pero difiere la cuarta categoría "supuestos". En el grupo a favor de la despenalización del aborto se presentó como "supuestos filosóficos y científicos", y en el grupo en contra, como "supuestos morales". Finalmente, la defensa de la salud mental de las mujeres fue el principal argumento en un intento por humanizar el sufrimiento que viven aquellas que desean abortar y no encuentran el apoyo del Estado para garantizar su dignidad, ciudadanía e igualdad efectiva, preconizadas por la Constitución.(AU)
Assuntos
Humanos , Feminino , Gravidez , Aborto Criminoso , Saúde Mental , Aborto , Ansiedade , Dor , Paridade , Gravidez não Desejada , Preconceito , Psicologia , Política Pública , Estupro , Religião , Reprodução , Segurança , Recursos Audiovisuais , Sexo , Educação Sexual , Delitos Sexuais , Comportamento Social , Suicídio , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Obstétricos , Tortura , Violência , Administração Pública , Sistema Único de Saúde , Brasil , Gravidez , Luto , Preparações Farmacêuticas , Aborto Eugênico , Cristianismo , Saúde da Mulher , Cooperação do Paciente , Direitos Civis , Negociação , Aborto Induzido , Preservativos , Aborto Legal , Meios de Comunicação , Gravidez de Alto Risco , Redução de Gravidez Multifetal , Dispositivos Anticoncepcionais , Dispositivos Anticoncepcionais Masculinos , Feminismo , Vida , Publicidade , Crime , Autonomia Pessoal , Direitos do Paciente , Intervenção Legal , Morte , Disseminação de Informação , Fenômenos Fisiológicos da Nutrição Pré-Natal , Argumento Refutável , Início da Vida Humana , Sexologia , Depressão , Direitos Sexuais e Reprodutivos , Prevenção de Doenças , Planejamento Familiar , Saúde de Grupos Específicos , Violência contra a Mulher , Controle e Fiscalização de Equipamentos e Provisões , Cérebro , Serviços de Planejamento Familiar , Fertilização , Sofrimento Fetal , Comunicação em Saúde , Feto , Rede Social , Saúde Reprodutiva , Saúde Sexual , Sexismo , Discriminação Social , Comportamento de Busca de Ajuda , Anúncios de Utilidade Pública como Assunto , Ativismo Político , Liberdade , Tristeza , Angústia Psicológica , Uso da Internet , Equidade de Gênero , Cidadania , Análise Documental , Culpa , Direitos Humanos , Anencefalia , Amor , Transtornos Mentais , MoralRESUMO
Objective: This systematic review aims to summarize the findings of studies that investigated the risk, precocity and intensity of psychosis in cannabis users, taking into account the status of legalization and/or decriminalization of cannabis use in different countries. Methodology: Articles published up to May 2018 were included, in English, Portuguese and Spanish, all extracted from the PubMed and SciELO databases, respecting the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results: 19 studies from 18 countries were included. The relationship of cannabis use and the onset of psychotic symptoms was sufficiently substantiated. However, there was no data that supported an increase in the risk, precocity or intensity of psychosis in cannabis users from countries with higher levels of legalization/decriminalization of cannabis use to the date of the present study. Conclusion: The use of cannabis is associated with the development of psychosis. So far, there is no data pointing to an increase in the precocity, risk or intensity of psychosis in cannabis users, due to the legalization or decriminalization of the use of cannabis. However, the absence of data to date does not exclude these possibilities, since none of the studies analyzed in this review specifically assessed the effects of legalization/decriminalization policies on those outcomes. Therefore, prospective studies focused on the effects of legalization or decriminalization policies should be conducted in countries such as Canada, Spain, the United States of America (some states), the Netherlands, and Uruguay.
Objetivo: esta revisión sistemática pretende resumir los hallazgos de los estudios que investigaron el riesgo, la precocidad y la intensidad de la psicosis en los consumidores de cannabis, teniendo en cuenta el estado de legalización y/o despenalización del consumo de cannabis en diferentes países. Metodología: fueron incluidos artículos publicados hasta mayo de 2018, en lengua inglesa, portuguesa y española, todos extraídos de las bases de datos PubMed y SciELO, respetando los criterios de inclusión y exclusión. Resultados: se incluyeron 19 estudios de 18 países. La relación entre el consumo de cannabis y el inicio de síntomas psicóticos estuvo suficientemente fundamentada. Sin embargo, no hubo datos que respaldaran un aumento en el riesgo, la precocidad o la intensidad de la psicosis en los consumidores de cannabis de países con niveles más altos de legalización/despenalización del uso de cannabis hasta la fecha del presente estudio. Conclusión: el consumo de cannabis está asociado con el desarrollo de psicosis. Hasta el momento, no hay datos que indiquen un aumento en la precocidad, el riesgo o la intensidad de la psicosis en usuarios de cannabis, debido a la legalización o despenalización del uso de cannabis. Sin embargo, la ausencia de datos hasta la fecha no excluye estas posibilidades, ya que ninguno de los estudios analizados en esta revisión evaluó específicamente los efectos de las políticas de legalización/despenalización en esos resultados. Por ello, los estudios prospectivos centrados en los efectos de las políticas de legalización o despenalización deben llevarse a cabo en países como Canadá, España, los Estados Unidos de América (algunos estados), los Países Bajos y Uruguay.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Cannabis is probably the most commonly used illicit drug. It is often regarded as a relatively nonharmful experience, even though evidence indicates otherwise. Legalization of non-medical cannabis, which has already taken place in several countries, is currently a controversial issue. OBJECTIVE: To provide an up-to-date overview of current models and policies and their outcomes that can inform future political decisions regarding non-medical cannabis use. METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar scientific databases were searched for articles written in English, Spanish, and Portuguese published between 1990 and December 2020. The reference lists of these articles were similarly used as bibliography sources. Gray literature was also included. RESULTS: While non-medical cannabis has been decriminalized in many countries, it has only been legalized in Uruguay, Canada, and some U.S. states. Several benefits of legalization were identified: decreases in cannabis-related crimes, law-enforcement and judicial costs; reduction in synthetic cannabis supply; decline in black economies and possible diminution of other illegal drug buying; and tax revenue increases. Reported legalization problems included: increases in cannabis use; cannabis-related disorders; and cannabis-related accidents and hospitalizations. Harm-reduction strategies are available in the scientific literature. CONCLUSION: Growing, although incomplete, evidence exists to guide policy makers, minimize cannabis-related harm, and positively contribute to public health, if the legalization path is to be followed. Dialogue between legislators and science should be encouraged. There are more than a few legalization pathways, with diverse economic, social and health wellbeing effects. Public health-driven, instead of profit-driven models, seem to offer the most benefits regarding non-medical cannabis legalization. Most of the true public health effects of cannabis legalization are still unknown, for we are still in the early stages of these policies and their implications. Future studies should address the medium-to-long-term social, economic, and health consequences of legalization policies.
Assuntos
Cannabis , Humanos , Legislação de Medicamentos , Portugal , Saúde Pública , Política PúblicaRESUMO
Abstract Introduction Cannabis is probably the most commonly used illicit drug. It is often regarded as a relatively nonharmful experience, even though evidence indicates otherwise. Legalization of non-medical cannabis, which has already taken place in several countries, is currently a controversial issue. Objective To provide an up-to-date overview of current models and policies and their outcomes that can inform future political decisions regarding non-medical cannabis use. Methods PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar scientific databases were searched for articles written in English, Spanish, and Portuguese published between 1990 and December 2020. The reference lists of these articles were similarly used as bibliography sources. Gray literature was also included. Results While non-medical cannabis has been decriminalized in many countries, it has only been legalized in Uruguay, Canada, and some U.S. states. Several benefits of legalization were identified: decreases in cannabis-related crimes, law-enforcement and judicial costs; reduction in synthetic cannabis supply; decline in black economies and possible diminution of other illegal drug buying; and tax revenue increases. Reported legalization problems included: increases in cannabis use; cannabis-related disorders; and cannabis-related accidents and hospitalizations. Harm-reduction strategies are available in the scientific literature. Conclusion Growing, although incomplete, evidence exists to guide policy makers, minimize cannabis-related harm, and positively contribute to public health, if the legalization path is to be followed. Dialogue between legislators and science should be encouraged. There are more than a few legalization pathways, with diverse economic, social and health wellbeing effects. Public health-driven, instead of profit-driven models, seem to offer the most benefits regarding non-medical cannabis legalization. Most of the true public health effects of cannabis legalization are still unknown, for we are still in the early stages of these policies and their implications. Future studies should address the medium-to-long-term social, economic, and health consequences of legalization policies.
RESUMO
In Brazil, abortion is considered a crime under the Criminal Code since 1940. After the Zika virus epidemic (2015-2017) and the consequent appearance of microcephaly in newborns struck South America, the debate on the decriminalization of abortion in the Brazilian society was reignited. Using data obtained from focus groups comprising women of reproductive age across different socioeconomic strata and two Brazilian cities, we investigated the perceptions of the participants on abortion, especially its use during the Zika epidemic. Although legally criminalized, abortion is prevalent among women, as a way to fulfill their reproductive desire. Criminalization puts the health and lives of women at risk, particularly those with less economic and cultural capital. We also discover the role of friends in women's decision to utilize the procedure. The strong asymmetry of power between men and women contributes to the greater vulnerability of women. The results suggest an urgent need to review the legislation on abortion concerning its criminalization and the option of safer abortion within the scope of the public health service.
La epidemia del virus del Zika (20152017) y la consecuente aparición de microcefalia en recién nacidos que azotaron la América del Sur, en particular Brasil, reavivó el debate sobre la despenalización del aborto en la sociedad brasileña, donde un crimen bajo el Código Penal vigente desde 1940. Utilizando datos de grupos focales realizados con mujeres en edad reproductiva, de diferentes estratos socioeconómicos y dos ciudades brasileñas, investigamos las percepciones de los participantes sobre el aborto, especialmente su uso durante la epidemia de Zika. Aunque legalmente criminalizado, mujeres siguen practicando el aborto como una forma de hacer efectivo el deseo reproductivo. La criminalización genera riesgos para la salud y la vida de las mujeres, particularmente aquellas con menos capital económico y cultural. También encontramos el papel de los amigos en la indicación del procedimiento y la fuerte asimetría de poder entre hombres y mujeres que contribuyen a la mayor vulnerabilidad de estos últimos. Los resultados analizados apuntan a la urgente necesidad de revisar la legislación que aborda el aborto con respecto a su criminalización y la oferta de un aborto seguro dentro del alcance del servicio de salud pública.
RESUMO
Latin America hosts the most restrictive abortion legislation globally. In 2007, Mexico, the second largest Catholic country in the world, decriminalized elective abortion within the first twelve weeks of pregnancy in the capital: Mexico City (also known as Federal District of Mexico). Following the reform, the Mexico City Ministry of Health (MX-MOH) implemented safe and legal services. Free services are provided to Mexico City residents and a sliding fee of up to $100 is applied to women from other Mexican states. Conscientious objection (CO) was addressed and included in service provision guidelines. Since 2007, 18 of 32 states amended their penal codes to restrict abortion. The road toward increasing access to abortion services at the MX-MOH included a shift from dilation and curettage (D&C) to medical abortion (MA), first with the misoprostol-alone regimen, followed by the combined mifepristone-misoprostol regimen. Manual vacuum aspiration is offered to out-of-state-women or to those beyond the gestational age where MA is less effective. Contraceptive uptake among abortion seekers is high (up to 95% of them prefer a free method of their choice). The Legal Interruption of Pregnancy program at the MX-MOH continues to provide effective, safe, reliable, and free services. However, women from indigenous groups residing in rural areas, those with low schooling, and adolescents with an unintended pregnancy who live in rural, urban, peri-urban districts, and at the state level are underserved despite being legally eligible to receive abortion services. Therefore, information and services for the disadvantaged groups need to be strengthened.
Assuntos
Aborto Induzido/legislação & jurisprudência , Aborto Legal/legislação & jurisprudência , Anticoncepção Pós-Coito , Política de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Direitos Sexuais e Reprodutivos/legislação & jurisprudência , Direitos da Mulher/legislação & jurisprudência , Adolescente , Feminino , Humanos , México , Mifepristona , Misoprostol , Gravidez , Curetagem a VácuoRESUMO
We examine whether marijuana decriminalization in Jamaica, a country that historically has had relatively widespread use of the drug, has led to an increase in its use, the frequency of use and the money spent on it. To this end, we use a national drug survey dataset with extensive information on people's use of, attitudes towards, access to marijuana. Our econometric analysis shows that awareness of the legislation has a positive correlation with the use of the substance. Worryingly, decriminalization positively correlates with the likelihood of first time and general use for youths. There is also some evidence that the legislation results in a substitution away from alcohol towards marijuana consumption for youths. From a policy perspective, a marijuana monitoring system can be implemented to follow the consumption patterns of youths. This should involve establishing school-level programmes that monitor students, and where potential drug users are identified, school officials should intervene to curb students' drug appetite before an escalated use of marijuana.
Assuntos
Consumo de Bebidas Alcoólicas , Fumar Maconha , Estudantes , Adolescente , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Jamaica , Masculino , Fumar Maconha/legislação & jurisprudência , Fumar Maconha/tendências , Modelos Econométricos , Instituições Acadêmicas , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The abortion law in Uruguay changed in 2012 to allow first trimester abortion on request. Implementation of the law in Uruguay has been lauded, but barriers to care, including abortion stigma, remain. This study aimed to assess women's experiences seeking abortion services and related attitudes and knowledge following implementation of the law in Uruguay. METHODS: We interviewed 207 eligible women seeking abortion services at a high-volume public hospital in Montevideo in 2014. We generated univariate frequencies to describe women's experiences in care. We conducted regression analysis to examine variations in experiences of stigma by women's age and number of abortions. RESULTS: Most of the women felt that abortion was a right, were satisfied with the services they received, and agreed with the abortion law. However, 70% found the five-day waiting period unnecessary. Women experienced greater self-judgement than worries about being judged by others. Younger women in the sample (ages 18-21) reported being more worried about judgment than women 22 years or older (1.02 vs. 0.71 on the ILAS sub-scale). One quarter of participants reported feeling judged while obtaining services. Women with more than one abortion had nearly three times the odds of reporting feeling judged. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the need to address abortion stigma even after the law is changed. Some considerations from Uruguay that may be relevant to other jurisdictions reforming abortion laws include: the need for strategies to reduce judgmental behavior from staff and clinicians towards women seeking abortions, including training in counseling skills and empathic communication; addressing stigmatizing attitudes about abortion through community outreach or communications campaigns; mitigating the potential stigma that may be perpetuated through policies to prevent "repeat" abortions; ensuring that younger women and those with more than one abortion feel welcome and are not mistreated during care; and assessing the necessity of a waiting period. The rapid implementation of legal, voluntary abortion services in Uruguay can serve in many ways as an exemplar, and these findings may inform the process of abortion law reform in other countries.