abortion in democratic spain: the parliamentary political … · 2016-05-05 · 1 2 abortion in...

1

2

3

4

5678910111213

14

1516171819202122232425262728

2930

31

323334353637383940414243

Abortion in Democratic Spain: The Parliamentary Political

Agenda 1979–2004

Belen Cambronero-Saiz,a Marıa Teresa Ruiz Cantero,b Carmen Vives-Cases,c

Mercedes Carrasco Portinod

a PhD student, Gender Doctorate Programme, Department of Public Health,University of Alicante, Spain

b Professor, Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Department of Public Health.University of Alicante, Spain. E-mail: [email protected]

c Lecturer, Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Department of Public Health,University of Alicante, Spain

d PhD student, Public Health Programme, Department of Public Health, University ofAlicante, Spain

Abstract: Since Spain’s transition to democracy, abortion has been a public policy issue both insideand outside parliament. This paper describes the history of abortion law reform in Spain from 1979to 2004 and analyses the discourse on abortion of members of the Spanish parliament by sex andpolitical allegiance. The analysis is based on a retrospective study of the frequency of legislativeinitiatives and the prevalence of different arguments and positions in debates on abortion foundthrough a systematic search of the parliamentary database. Little time was given to abortion in theparliamentary agenda compared to other women’s issues such as violence against women. Therewere 229 bills and other parliamentary initiatives in that period, 60% initiated and led bypro-choice women. 143 female and 72 male parliamentarians took part in the debates. The inclusionof socio-economic grounds for legal abortion (64%), and making abortion on request legal in thefirst 12 weeks of pregnancy (60%) were the most frequent forms of law reform proposed, basedmost often on pro-women’s rights arguments. Male and female members of anti-choice parties andmost male members of other parties argued for fetal rights. Pro-choice parties tabled more bills thananti-choice parties but till now all reforms proposed since 1985 have been voted down.A2007 Reproductive Health Matters. All rights reserved.

Keywords: abortion law and policy, advocacy and political process, Spain

444546474849505152535455

SINCE Spain’s transition to democracy in1978, arguments for and against legalisa-tion of abortion and its provision by the

public health services have taken place bothinside and outside the Spanish Parliament.1 How-ever, analyses of the actual Parliamentary debateson the subject have been rare.

Research in the USA on Congressional debatesand votes on abortion laws revealed that themain arguments used in debates on abortion con-cerned both the ethics and morality of abortinga fetus on one hand, and the impact of unsafe

abortion on women’s health and existence ofsocial class inequalities in access to abortion onthe other. Women members of the US Congresshave been the ones to advocate for equal accessto federally funded abortions and introducedarguments supporting legal abortion to protectwomen’s health. Furthermore, it has been USCongresswomen who have modified the positionof their male colleagues over time, so that thenumber of men talking about women’s healthhas increased whereas the number talking aboutthe immorality of abortion has decreased.2–4

A 2007 Reproductive Health Matters.All rights reserved.

Reproductive Health Matters 2007;15(29):1–120968-8080/06 $ – see front matterPII: S0968-8080 (07 )29295-Xwww.rhm-elsevier.com www.rhmjournal.org.uk

1

5657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107

108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159

B Cambronero-Saiz et al / Reproductive Health Matters 2007;15(29):1–12

Legislation ensuring access to safe, legal abor-tion exists throughout most of Europe,5 withimportant exceptions. Legislation in most Euro-pean countries, passed primarily in the 1970sand 80s, includes the following grounds onwhich abortion is legal: risk to the woman’s life,risk to her physical, psychological and mentalhealth, in cases of rape, risk of fetal malformation,risk to existing children, social or socio-economiccircumstances and medical or socio-medical con-ditions.6 The grounds differ somewhat in eachcountry and the time limits, including for dif-ferent grounds, also differ.5–8 In many of thecountries, abortion is legal on request up to10,12,14 or 18 weeks and after that on morelimited grounds, with an upper time limit, usually22–24 weeks.9–13

There was no legislation on abortion in Spainuntil 1985, passed in the early years of the newdemocracy. The only exception was a decree inCatalonia during the civil war (1936–39), thatpermitted abortion on the grounds of the woman’shealth, when the pregnancy was unwanted orin cases of fetal abnormality. The implementa-tion of this decree was very limited, however,due to the disturbances of those difficult times.1

The Spanish feminist movement has workedfor the decriminalisation of abortion since the1970s. When the Spanish democratic Consti-tution was being prepared (1977–78), abortion,along with other issues such as education anddivorce, was the cause of deep divisions betweenright-wing and left-wing political parties. Poten-tial conflict was avoided when the parties agreednot to mention abortion in the Constitution at all.

In 1981, 11 women from a poor neighbour-hood near Bilbao were arrested for having illegalabortions, along with the woman who had donethe abortions and several others who wereinvolved. During the trial, due to hot weather,windows on both sides of the courtroom werewide open. Thousands of women surrounded thebuilding and chanted throughout the trial, whileothers filled the courtroom as observers and wit-nesses. The accused women had serious healthrisks that justified therapeutic abortion. Every-one was acquitted. This judgement put a stop,at least temporarily, to similar prosecutions andopened the way to legal reform (Marge Berer,personal communication, January 2007).14

In 1983, only four months after they hadtaken office, the Socialist Party presented a bill

2

in Parliament to amend the Penal Code in orderto fulfil an electoral promise.16 The bill madeabortion legal if it was performed for ethicalreasons (in the case of rape), on therapeuticgrounds (when the physical or mental health ofthe pregnant woman was at risk) or on eugenicgrounds (fetal malformation).15,16 It was passedby a large majority of 186 to 50.1,17

From 1974 to 1985, an estimated 240,000Spanish women terminated their pregnancies inthe UK and Netherlands (and an undocumentednumber in Portugal and North Africa). In con-trast, after the law was passed, from 1986 to1995 only 34,895 Spanish women had abortionsin other countries, while 340,214 were able tohave abortions in Spain.18

However, despite the Act being passed, manyprofessionals working in non-governmentalfamily planning clinics where abortions werebeing performed were harassed by anti-abortionactivists, and a number were prosecuted fordoing abortions. At the same time, the medicalcolleges and professionals in the public healthsystem failed to begin providing abortions ortraining for providers. In 1986, a regulationwas adopted regarding accreditation criteria forhealth care centres wanting to do abortions andthe data they had to report. This regulation alsorequired women to have the permission of twodoctors for abortion.16 While this regulationmarked the beginning of the end of prosecu-tions, it was only in 1999 that a parliamentarybill aimed at stopping prosecutions was tabled.17

Since 1986, the two major left-wing parties(the governing Socialist party and IzquierdaUnida) have tabled two major bills to furtherreform the abortion law. One was to legaliseabortion on request in the first 12 weeks of preg-nancy (proposed by Izquierda Unida); the otherwas to extend the grounds for abortion toinclude women’s socio-economic circumstances(proposed by the government). Only the latterwas voted on in the Congress of Deputies andpassed on 14 December 1995 by 180 favour,141 against and one abstention. However, thebill fell because its passage coincided with thechange to a conservative government, whichmade no effort to ensure that it reached theSenate for approval.1,18

Since then, political debate on abortion seemsto have been de-activated. This may be due tothe imbalance between the key players involved.

160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211

212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226

227

228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261


On one side, there are feminist groups, left-wingparties (mainly their women members) and thegovernmental Instituto de la Mujer (Women’sInstitute), who have unsuccessfully advocatedextending and reforming the law. On the otheris a stronger group that includes the Catholicchurch and some anti-abortion groups, whichare still very active. With them, through inac-tion, are also the conservative and right-wingparties who, however, have made few efforts toreverse or restrict the existing law.1,18

Unfortunately, the law as it stands, althoughperhaps liberal for its time, does not reflectwomen’s needs. The most common reasons forabortion in Spain are in fact socio-economic,but abortion on those grounds is not legal.1,19

Consequently, serious risk to the woman’s mentalhealth is usually the reason recorded, and it mustbe certified by a psychiatrist.15,18 This has beenthe case for 98% of the the abortions listed in theofficial abortion register from1992 to 2004, whichmakes a mockery of the validity of the data.19

To this day, neither abortion nor family plan-ning services are integrated into the publichealth system in Spain.19 In fact, from 1992 to2004, 97% of abortions in Spain were performedin private clinics.20 Moreover, given the vary-ing political and economic circumstances andextent of influence of the Catholic church indifferent parts of Spain, access to abortion ser-vices also differs. Thus, in 2004, the proportionof abortions provided in very Catholic provinceswas very low, e.g. in Navarra 5%, Catalonia 10%and greater Madrid 12%.20 Many women haveto travel to other parts of the country for abor-tions and some still go abroad.

EuropeanParliament recommendations empha-sise the importance of legalising abortion in orderto protect the rights and health of women. How-ever, the situation in Spain may be underminingwomen’s health in some cases.21,22 Having totravel for an abortion causes delays, and womenwhose abortions are in fact for socio-economicreasons have to accept and pay for their mentalhealth to be questioned in order to get a legalabortion. Moreover, some women, especiallyyoung women, may still be undergoing unsafeabortions because they cannot afford privateclinic fees.19

We thought it would be useful to analyse par-liamentary debates and voting patterns to iden-tify the positions of the political parties and

the agreements and disagreements within eachparty, and to examine the positions of the womenand men who are members of parliament. Thiswould help to identify key points for politicaldebate and ways to stimulate the promotion ofabortion legislation that meets women’s needs.We also think it would be valuable to do politicalepidemiological research on the health effectsof decisions made by political institutions.23

We report in this paper an analysis of the fre-quency of legislative initiatives related to abor-tion in democratic Spain from 1979 to 2004,and analyse the discourse on abortion of membersof the Spanish parliament by sex and politi-cal affiliation.

Data and methodsThe study was a longitudinal, retrospectivestudy. A systematic search with the keyword‘‘abortion’’ was carried out in the database of theSpanish Parliament for the years 1979–2004.17

The data collected and analysed covered thenumber and sex of the members of eight electedparliaments, frequency of initiatives on abor-tion, parliaments in which they were proposed,where they were debated (in Special Commis-sions or on the floor of parliament), number ofbills that passed their first reading and politicaloutcomes of those bills that reached debatestage. Finally, for the bills that were debated,data were collected on the sex and political partyof those participating in the debate.

Nudist Vivo software allowed us to perform asweep of the contents of the texts of parliamen-tary debates on abortion and identify 16 differentarguments or positions that were put forward.Given that each of these arguments was basedon an intention as regards the law, we identifiedthe variable – positions of women and men par-liamentarians on abortion legislation – in orderto establish mutually exclusive (in favour vs.against) categories. In order to validate these cate-gories as measurement tools and to ensure acommon meaning, the team produced operativedefinitions for each position. Subsequently, wecalculated the level of inter-observer agreement(authors BC and MC) by means of the Kappaindex and obtained a high agreement (Kappaindex = 82%).

Based on the positions taken by the differentpolitical parties on legalisation of abortion on

3

262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290

291

292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311

312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340


request up to the first 12 weeks of pregnancy,another variable was created – pro-choice andanti-choice parties. This variable divided thepolitical parties into those that favoured allow-ing women to make a free and responsible deci-sion whether to continue a pregnancy or not, whowere pro-choice parties: Partido Socialista,Izquierda Unida, Bloque Nacionalista Galego,Esquerra Republicana, Coalicion Canaria andGrupo Mixto, and those that defended fetalrights over women’s right to decide, who wereanti-choice parties: Partido Popular, Convergen-cia i Unio and Nacionalista Vasco. The Union deCentro Democratico was excluded because iteventually disappeared from the political arenaand because its members were equally dividedbetween pro-choice and anti-choice positions.

A descriptive study was also made of the fre-quencies and percentages of all the collectedvariables along with a comparative analysis ofthe arguments and positions by sex of mem-bers of Parliament and by pro-choice and anti-choice party grouping. The chi-square test wasperformed to compare the percentages of thearguments and positions in the abortion debatebetween women and men members of Parlia-ment and pro-choice and anti-choice parties.The statistical set SPSS-11.5 and EpiInfo 6 wereused for this analysis.

341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363

ResultsSubjects and frequency of debatesWe found a total of 229 legislative initiativesin which abortion was mentioned in the period1979–2004. These included bills to reform theexisting law, proposals of regulations governingimplementation of the existing law and ques-tions to the government about the abortion lawand its application. The bills and regulationswere also examined by specific parliamentarycommissions, to which key professionals wereinvited to give evidence.

Of the total initiatives, 104 (45.4%) weredebated, while 125 fell without debate. Onlyseven (2.6%) of the 104 debated initiatives werevoted on and passed, all of which were related tothe approval and sale of mifepristone and its usefor medical abortion. Another four initiativeswere voted on but fell. The other 93 were dis-cussed only in parliamentary commissions. Theseincluded 70 in the Justice Commission, ten in

4

the Health Commission, seven in the SocialAffairs Commission, two in the Education andCulture Commission, one in the Finance Com-mission, one in the Constitutional Commission,one in the Telecommunications Control Commis-sion and, surprisingly, only one in the Women’sRights Commission.

For example, in 1985, the same year as theabortion law was passed, an amendment wastabled by the opposition conservative PartidoPopular to recognise the right of doctors andhealth personnel to exercise conscientious objec-tion to abortion, even a legal abortion. This wasvoted on but not passed.15 Another example,under the conservative government in 1996,was a question tabled by the Socialist Party inopposition, which asked the government whatthey would do with women who were on trialfor having had an abortion outside the param-eters of the law, since they should not be sentto prison. Although the question was debated,nothing came of it.17 Deficiencies in the appli-cation of the abortion law were the subject ofappearances before the Justice Commission of thePresident of the Royal Academy of Political andSocial Sciences and Ethics, the Minister of Health,the Minister of Social Affairs, the Director of theInstituto de la Mujer, and the President of theGeneral Council of the Judicial Power in 1995.17

The frequency of the initiatives related toabortion is shown in Figure 1. Before 1985, therewere very few. From 1985–95 when the newabortion law was being put into effect, thefrequency of parliamentary debates remainedconstant, with an upturn in 1995 as a result ofthe new government bill to extend the groundsfor abortion. During that period, abortion wasraised most frequently in questions to thegovernment. Examples of such questions wereto do with what kind of information would begiven by Spanish public television about abor-tion in 1985, and what measures the govern-ment would take if all the physicians in a regionwere conscientious objectors. Others were aboutthe number of clinics in Catalonia accredited todo abortions (1986), the criteria used by theMinistry of Health to evaluate the surgical risksof abortion (1987), and measures to guaranteethat abortion would be provided by the publichealth care system (1992).

From 1996 to 2004, when the conservativePartido Popular took control of the government,

364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389

390

391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415


there was a downward trend in the frequencyof abortion-related initiatives (Figure 1), thoughquestions to the government about abortionremained important.

The support of the conservative and right-wing parties in the Spanish Parliament for phy-sicians’ right to conscientious objection wasoften debated. Yet, the lack of access to abortionin the public health services and the resultinginequity for women of different social classeswas surprisingly seldom discussed.

There were between 350 and 416 sitting par-liamentarians in each of the eight parliamentsfrom 1979 to 2004. The total number of par-liamentarians who intervened in relation to abor-tion over the whole period was 215 (143 women,72 men). Most legislative initiatives were intro-duced by the pro-choice parties (65%). Eventhough women were a minority in all eight par-liaments, they dominated debate on the abortionquestion (Figure 2) and introduced most of thelegislative initiatives (60%). Most of these womenbelonged to Izquierda Unida and the SocialistParty. On the other hand, most of the men whointroduced anti-choice initiatives belonged tothe conservative Partido Popular (72%).

Issues raised in debates on abortionThe main topics related to abortion and the pro-portion of the total number of times abortionwas raised on the floor of the parliament or inone of the commissions, in descending order,were as follows:

� Extension of the grounds for legalised abor-tion to include socio-economic grounds (64%),

� Reform of the current law by legalising abor-tion on request during the first 12 weeks ofpregnancy (60%),

� Women’s rights (47%),� Existence of social demand for legislative

reform (34%),� Fetal rights (25%),� The need for physicians’ approval and provi-

sion of abortion (22%),� Conscientious objection by physicians (20%),� Pre-abortion counselling by a physician to

ensure a woman’s informed decision (20%),� Physicians’ right to practise legal abortion (18%),� Barriers to accessing abortion in private and

public clinics (14%),� Women’s health problems (morbidity and

mortality) (14%),

5

416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433

434435

436437438439440441442443444445446447448

449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466


� Beijing agreements (9%),� Men’s right to agree to abortion (6%),� Concern that abortion may be used as a

family planning method (6%),� European Parliament recommendations (4%),� Cairo agreements (2%).

Figure 3 shows how many times the aboveissues were raised, according to the sex of thoseraising the issue and whether they belonged toan anti-choice or a pro-choice party.Womenmem-bers and members of pro-choice parties domi-nated the floor on the abortion question. The onlyexceptions were fetal rights, men’s rights andpre-abortion counselling, which were most oftenraised by members of anti-choice parties, and theissue of men’s rights, which was raised equally byboth women and men.

467468469470471472473474475476477478479480481482483

Stance of parliamentarians according tosex and political affiliationParliamentary debates were polarised regardingwhether and how the abortion law should bereformed. There were also differences in thepositions of the men and the women within thepro-choice and anti-choice parties. Men andwomen in the left-wing parties disagreed witheach other more than the men and women in theright-wing parties, where a greater homogeneityof opinion existed between the sexes. Thus, fetalrights were defended by the majority of parlia-mentarians, including both men and women inthe right-wing parties and some of the malemembers of the left-wing parties.

6

Of a total of 130 parliamentarians making aspeech about reform of the current law, womenspoke more frequently (71%) than men (29%)(p=0.03). Table 1 shows three cases of signifi-cant differences by sex in positions in favourand against abortion of the members of parlia-ment who participated in debates. Women par-liamentarians not only spoke more often, theyalso advocated pro-choice reform of the currentlaw significantly more often than men (p=0.001).They were also more often against doctors’ pro-vision and approval of abortion, as a conditionfor abortion than men (p=0.05). In contrast,their male colleagues supported fetal rights sig-nificantly more often (p=0.001).

Table 2 illustrates the significant differencesbetween the positions of anti-choice and pro-choice parties. On one hand, support for women’srights was expressed significantly more often bypro-choice parties than anti-choice parties (80%vs. 20%) (p=0.001). Arguments about women’shealth (76%) and the right of physicians to pro-vide legal abortions (89%) were also raised moreoften by pro-choice parties than anti-choice par-ties (p=0.01 and p=0.001, respectively). In addi-tion, the right of conscientious objection forphysicians was rejected more often by pro-choiceparties (68%) than anti-choice parties (p=0.001).Moreover, pre-abortion counselling to ensurewomen’s informed decisions was advocated bypro-choice parties but strongly rejected by anti-choice parties (p=0.001). Similarly, pro-choiceparties advocated extending the grounds forabortion while anti-choice parties were againstsuch a reform (p=0.001). On the other hand,

484485486

487

488489

490491492


anti-choice parties more often referred to fetalrights (74%) and supported them significantlymore often than pro-choice parties (p=0.001).

493494495496497

DiscussionAbortion has been present only infrequently onthe Spanish parliamentary agenda since 1979.

Its presence increased under the Socialist gov-ernments (1982–96), but fell sharply under theConservative governments (1996–2003). Themost debated issues were the need to reformthe current law to allow abortion on request,the legalisation of socio-economic grounds forabortion and the importance of women’s rights.Morbidity related to adolescent pregnancy, the

7

498499500501502503504

505506507508509510511


consequences of unsafe abortion and inter-national agreements (i.e. Cairo and Beijing)received scant attention.

Debates on abortion were led mainly bywomen parliamentarians, mainly from the left-wing parties, which have the most women intheir ranks. Nonetheless, attempts since 1985 to

8

reform the law have failed and there have beenfew political changes under any government.This may be because more male parliamentar-ians from all parties and all the anti-choiceparties support fetal rights, which means theycontrol parliamentary power on this topic. Giventheir numbers, their arguments get a higher

512513514515516517518519520521522523524525526527528529530531532533534535536537538539540541542543544545546547548549550551552553554555556557558559560561562563

564565566567568569570571572573574575576577578579580581582583584585586587588589590591592593594595596597598599600601602603604605606607608609610611612613614615


standing than those regarding equity in accessto services, women’s rights or women’s health.

Our method of exploring the Parliamentaryagenda on abortion may be of interest in othercountries where abortion legislation does notmeetwomen’s needs. It may also be of interest in coun-tries where there is a Catholic majority, sincethese countries support the institutionalised rightof conscientious objection by physicians.9,12,24

The limited number of debates over the yearsand further limitations resulting from the strat-ification by sex among the members of parlia-ment and by the political parties has allowed usonly to perform a transversal analysis. This hasprevented us from reaching conclusions as towhether an increase in the number of womenparliamentarians would modify men’s discourseand votes. Nevertheless, the consistent lack oflegislative reform suggests that the influence ofpro-choice women parliamentarians who sup-port the legalisation of abortion has not beensufficient to achieve the intended reforms, orthat women are required to submit to party dis-cipline over and above gender imperatives, orsimply that there are not enough women in theSpanish parliament.

Although the selection of most often repeatedpositions for analysis has ruled out some minor-ity positions, the most frequent positions wereincluded and have also been found in similarstudies.3 However, even though we studied allthe abortion debates and found them to be polit-ically relevant, from a research standpoint thereis a problem with the statistical power of thesample since it is unable to detect more signif-icant associations in the arguments and posi-tions according to sex and to pro-choice vs.anti-choice political party.

Although this study covers only the years upto 2004, there have been no legislative changesof note on abortion since then. The governingSocialist Party programme still includes extend-ing the legal grounds for abortion, but anyattempt to implement this proposition has beenpostponed until after the next election in 2008 –if they win.

The rate of abortions remained stable in Spainbetween 1979 and 2004, including after the cur-rent legislation was passed. The small increasethat occurred in the few years after the lawwas passed was probably due to a fall in thenumber of Spanish women having abortions in

the UK, Netherlands and other countries, andalso more complete data collection. Moreover,since most abortions are sought for socio-economic reasons,1 even though they arerecorded as therapeutic, it is unlikely that therate of abortions would rise if socio-economicgrounds were legalised, or even if abortion onrequest were legalised.

That there were so few initiatives on abortionin the last two parliaments may reflect the factthat the governing Conservative Party did notrecognise any real social demand for reform. Inany case, regardless of the political affinity ofthe party in government, legislative initiativeson abortion have been rare in comparison tothose on other women’s issues, such as violenceagainst women. During the same period as westudied, there were twice as many initiatives onviolence against women as there were on abor-tion.25 It may be concluded that in a relativelyyoung democracy and a traditionally Catholiccountry such as Spain, the private values andbeliefs of male legislators have so far prevailedover public policies supporting women andtheir civil rights. Moreover, given that manyfeminists have become professionally involvedin state feminism in Spain, their work on thisissue may have been replaced by the priori-ties and the agenda set by the governingSocialist Party.1

Perhaps abortion is not considered a realsocial problem in Spain compared to other socialproblems. A social problem exists when it is con-sidered as such by the community, but especiallywhen the problem undermines the values andinterests of those in power who influence publicopinion and have enough authority to takeaction to control it.1,26

It has been shown that a greater number ofwomen in a parliament can more effectivelyrepresent women’s interests.2–4 In Spain, womenmembers of the left-wing parties have domi-nated the debates on abortion and introducedmost of the proposals for change in the cur-rent legislation. Nevertheless, despite a gradualincrease in the number of women parliamentar-ians, as in most other European countries, menstill have a higher number of votes and retaingreater power of decision-making. Perhaps thisis another reason why the bills that did reachdebate stage did not result in legislative reformsbeing passed.27–30

9

616617

618619620621622623624625626627628629630631632633634635636637638639640641642643644645646647648649650651652653654655656657658659660661662663664

665666667668669670671672673674675676677678679680681682683684685686687688689690691692693694695696697698699700701702703704705706

707708709710711712713


Key points for political debate andpublic campaignsThe parliamentary commissions, especially forHealth and for Justice and Social Affairs, haveplayed an active role in processing bills on abor-tion. These commissions consist of with exper-tise in the field but they can only debate andreflect on the subject at hand, not make policyor laws.31 In a matter where radically differingideologies exist, these commissions must workout how to overcome existing barriers before abill can be sent for debate on the floor. Forinstance, they would have to disprove the claimby anti-choice groups, conservative parties andmedia that the number of abortions wouldincrease if more legal grounds were added orif abortion on request were permitted. Thisclaim, which first appeared in 1985–86 whenthe legalisation of abortion became a focus ofpublic debate, is erroneous;32 however, it con-tinues to be asserted by the anti-choice move-ment and is one reason why abortion is stilltreated as controversial.

The commissions are not only supposed to beactive in examining bills but also in monitor-ing implementation of the laws in their remit.They can summon key informants, for exam-ple, to provide evidence that a proposal toreform the abortion law should be supportedin order to meet Spanish women’s needs, suchas addressing regional inequalities in accessto abortion and the need for the public healthservices to provide abortions. It would also bebeneficial if the commissions were to debate thehealth and ethical problems created by consci-entious objection.

The lack of debate on abortion as a women’shealth issue in Spain may be due to the fact thatthe Justice Commission has been the one incharge of abortion law in the Spanish parlia-ment. As a result, discussions on this issue havemainly focused on juridical and legal points. Thehealth and women’s rights issues should beaddressed by those commissions but have notbeen. If they were, synergies might be developedbetween the Health, Women’s Rights, Justiceand Social Affairs Commissions so that abortion-related issues were managed in a more compre-hensive and interdisciplinary manner.

10

Sexual and reproductive health and rights,including abortion, have been a focus of interestand international agreements for governmentsand international institutions and organisationsin many countries, particularly in Europe.22,33,34

This study has shown the key role played bywomen members of left-wing parties in the Span-ish parliament as leaders in supporting abor-tion rights. Parliamentary and public debatescould be initiated by the left-wing political par-ties, especially by their women members, as wellas by feminist groups and the Instituto de laMujer during election campaigns. They couldtake steps to encourage members of the mediawho support progressive abortion law reformto place the issues in the public eye too.26 Astarting point for initiating a debate might bethe arguments which pro-choice parties are infavour of and which anti-choice parties are notopposed to – such as issues related to women’shealth. To date, these issues have rarely beenmentioned in Spanish debates on abortion. Suc-cess in taking such efforts forward to achievelaw and policy reform should depend not onlyon left-wing women leaders, but also on womenin right-wing parties and all the men in theparliament, as well as the wider community,especially of women.

Most pro-choice activity on abortion inEurope today is in countries where abortion isstill illegal and for many women unsafe –Ireland, Poland and until March 2007 Portugal.In Spain, where abortion is off the agenda, it isunclear what is needed, in the absence of adirect threat to the law or the clinics providingabortions, to make the situation of abortion beperceived as a social problem worthy of mean-ingful parliamentary attention. However, know-ing what the issues have been and where thesupport does and does not lie, it may be easier toplan further action in the near future if the left-wing continues to control the legislature.

AcknowledgementsWe are grateful to Prof Carlos Alvarez-Dardetand Vicente Clemente Gomez for their helpfulcomments and technical support. The study wassupported by the Spanish Research Network onHealth and Gender, Institute of Health Carlos III,Ministry of Health, Spain. CIBERESP.

11

r1 Referencesr2r3

1. McBride Stetson D. Abortionr4 Politics, Women’s Movements,r5 and the Democratic State.r6 New York7 Oxford Universityr7 Press, 2001.r8 2. Berkman M, O’Connor R. Dor9 women legislators matter?r10 female legislators and stater11 abortion policy. Americanr12 Politics Quarterly 1993;21:r13 102–24.r14 3. Levy L, Tien C, Aved R. Dor15 differences matter? Womenr16 members of Congress and ther17 Hyde Amendment. Women andr18 Politics 2001;23:105–27.r19 4. Goldstein L. Examining abortionr20 funding policy arguments: anr21 attempt to recast the debate.r22 Women and Politics 1986;5:r23 41–63.r24 5. Pinter B, Aubeny E, Bartfai G,r25 et al. Accessibility andr26 availability of abortion in sixr27 European countries. Europeanr28 Journal of Contraception andr29 Reproductive Health Carer30 2005;10:51–58.r31 6. Rogers A. Women’s health issuesr32 cause controversy in Europeanr33 Union. Lancet 1998;352:631.r34 7. Pinter B. Medico-legal aspects ofr35 abortion in Europe. Europeanr36 Journal of Contraception andr37 Reproductive Health Carer38 2002;7:15.r39 8. Ahmad K. UN study expressedr40 concern over nationalr41 antiabortion policies. Lancetr42 2002;360:64.r43 9. IPPF European Network.r44 Abortion legislation in Europe.r45 At: bwww.ippfen.com/files/r46 105.pdf N. Accessedr47 25 January 2007.r48 10. Vilar D. The Portuguese case.r49 Reproductive Health Mattersr50 2002;10:156–61.r51 11. Karcher ML. New Germanr52 abortion law agreed. Britishr53 Medical Journal 1995;311:149.r54 12. Keates T. Debate over abortionr55 law in Italy. Lancet 1994;344:592.r56 13. Arisi E. Changing attitudesr57 toward abortion in Europe.r58 European Journal of

r59 Contraception and Reproductiver60 Health Care 2003;8:109–21.r61 14. Aznarez M. Del perejil a lar62 pıldora del dıa despues. Porr63 abortar podıan caer 12 anos der64 carcel. 300.000 espanolas lor65 hacıan cada ano. De ellas, unasr66 3.000 morıan. El Paıs Semanal,r67 No.1, 3 October 1976. At:r68 bwww.elpais.com/especiales/r69 2001/25aniversario/especial/03/r70 repor5/p1.htmlN. Accessedr71 February 2007.r72 15. Ley Organica 9/1985 der73 Reforma del Artıculo 417 bis delr74 Codigo Penal. L. No.166r75 (Jul. 12, 1985).r76 16. Real Decreto 2409/1986r77 referente a la Ley Organica 9/r78 1985 de Reforma del Artıculor79 417 bis de Codigo Penal.r80 (Nov. 21, 1986).r81 17. Congreso de los Diputados.r82 At: bwww.congreso.esN.r83 Accessed 25 January 2007.r84 18. Peiro R, Colomer C,r85 Alvarez-Dardet C, et al. Doesr86 the liberalisation of abortionr87 laws increase the number ofr88 abortions? The case of Spain.r89 European Journal of Publicr90 Health 2001;11:190–94.r91 19. Lete I, Martinez-Etayo M.r92 Reproductive health: some datar93 and reflections. Gaceta Sanitariar94 2004;18:170–74.r95 20. Instituto Nacional der96 Estadıstica. Inebase Sociedad:r97 Seccion Salud. At: bwww.ine.es/r98 inebase/cgi/axi?AXIS_PATH=/r99 inebase/temas/t15/a044/a1998/r100 e01/l0/&FILE_AXIS=01002.r101 px&CGI_DEFAULT=/inebase/r102 temas/cgi.opt&COMANDO=r103 SELECCION&CGI_URL=/r104 inebase/cgi/N. Accessedr105 25 January 2007.r106 21. Faundes A, Hardy E. Illegalr107 abortion: consequences forr108 women’s health and the healthr109 care system. International Journalr110 of Gynecology and Obstetricsr111 1997;58:77–83.r112 22. Van Lancker A. Report onr113 Sexual and Reproductiver114 Health and Rights. European

r115Parliament. At: bwww.europarl.r116europa.eu/meetdocs/committees/r117femm/20020417/463603EN.r118pdfN. Accessed 25 January 2007.r11923. Franco A, Alvarez-Dardet C,r120Ruiz MT. Effect of democracy onr121health: ecological study. BMJr1222004;329:1421–23.r12324. De Marquiegui A. Terminationr124of pregnancy: past, present andr125future. British Journal of Familyr126Planning 2000;26:17–18.r12725. Vives-Cases C, Gil-Gonzalez D,r128Carrasco-Portino M, et al.r129Gender-based violence in ther130Spanish parliamentary agendar131(1979�2004). Gaceta Sanitariar1322006;20:142–48.r13326. Berer M. National laws andr134unsafe abortion: ther135paramenters of change.r136Reproductive Health Mattersr1372004;12:1–8.r13827. Diario de Sesiones de las Cortesr139Generales, Proyecto de Leyr140Organica sobre la regulacion der141la Interrupcion Voluntaria delr142Embarazo, 25 de julio 1995, n8r143125-1, Sesion. At:r144bwww.congreso.esN. Accessedr14525 January 2007.r14628. Congreso de los Diputados.r147Boletın Oficial de las Cortesr148Generales: Proposicion de Leyr149para la modificacion de lar150disposicion derogatoria unica der151la Ley Organica 10/1995, de 23r152de noviembre, del Codigo Penal.r153Presentada por el Grupor154Parlamentario de Esquerrar155Republicana. 2004;r156122/000023(37-1):1–3. At:r157bwww.congreso.esN.r158Accessed 25 January 2007.r15929. Congreso de los Diputados.r160Boletın Oficial de las Cortesr161Generales: Proposicion de Leyr162Organica para la regulacion der163la interrupcion voluntaria delr164embarazo. Presentada por elr165Grupo Parlamentario Mixto.r1662004;122/000042(53-1):1–4.r167At: bwww.congreso.esN.r168Accessed 25 January 2007.r16930. Congreso de los Diputados.r170Boletın Oficial de las Cortes


12

r171 Generales: Proposicion de Leyr172 Organica para la regulacion der173 la interrupcion voluntaria delr174 embarazo. Presentada por elr175 Grupo Parlamentario der176 Izquierda Verde-Izquierdar177 Unida-Iniciativa per Catalunya.r178 2004;122/000037(48-1):1–5.r179 At: bwww.congreso.esN.r180 Accessed 25 January 2007.r181 31. Indice de Comisiones en

r182 Funcionamiento, VIIIr183 Legislatura. Congreso de losr184 Diputados, Espana. At:r185 bwww.congreso.esN. Accessedr186 25 January 2007.r187 32. Reicher S, Hopkins N. Seekingr188 influence through characterizingr189 self categories: an analysis ofr190 anti-abortionist rhetoric. Britishr191 Journal of Social Psychologyr192 1996;35:297–311.

r19333. United Nations. Internationalr194Conference on Population andr195Development, Cairo 1994. At:r196bwww.iisd.ca/cairo.htmlN.r197Accessed 25 January 2007.r19834. United Nations. Fourth Worldr199Conference on Women, Beijingr2001995. At: bwww.un.org/r201womenwatch/daw/beijing/r202platform/index.htmlN.r203Accessed 25 January 2007.

714 Resume

715 Depuis la transition de l’Espagne vers la democratie,

716 l’avortement est une question politique a l’interieur

717 et a l’exterieur du Parlement. Cet article retrace

718 l’histoire de la reforme de la legislation sur

719 l’avortement en Espagne de 1979 a 2004 et

720 analyse le discours des deputes espagnols, par

721 sexe et appartenance politique. L’analyse est

722 fondee sur une etude de la frequence des

723 initiatives legislatives et de la prevalence des

724 differents arguments dans les debats sur

725 l’avortement, effectuee a l’aide d’une recherche

726 systematique dans la base de donne es

727 parlementaire. Les travaux parlementaires ont

728 consacre peu de temps a l’avortement par

729 comparaison a d’autres questions interessant les

730 femmes, comme les violences conjugales. On a

731 recense 229 propositions de lois et autres initiatives

732 parlementaires pendant cette periode, dont 60%

733 lancees et dirigees par des femmes favorables a

734 l’avortement. Parmi les deputes ayant participe

735 au debat, il y avait 143 femmes et 72 hommes.

736 L’inclusion de motifs socio-economiques pour

737 l’avortement legal (64%) et la legalisation de

738 l’avortement pendant les 12 premieres semaines

739 de grossesse (60%) etaient les propositions les

740 plus frequentes, basees le plus souvent sur le

741 droit des femmes a choisir. Les membres masculins

742 et feminins de partis opposes a l’avortement

743 et la plupart des membres masculins d’autres

744 partis militaient pour les droits du fKtus. Les

745 partis pour le libre choix ont presente davantage

746 de propositions de loi que les partis contre

747 l’avortement, mais, depuis 1985, toutes les reformes

748 ont ete refusees.

749

749Resumen

750Desde la transicion de Espana a la democracia, el

751aborto ha sido asunto de polıticas publicas dentro

752y fuera del parlamento. En este artıculo se describe

753la historia de la reforma de la ley de aborto en

754Espana desde 1979 hasta 2004, y se analiza el

755discurso sobre el aborto por parte de los

756parlamentarios espanoles, por sexo y afiliacion

757polıtica. El analisis se basa en un estudio

758retrospectivo de la frecuencia de iniciativas

759legislativas y la prevalencia de diferentes

760argumentos y posiciones en debates sobre

761aborto, encontradas mediante una busqueda

762sistematica en la base de datos parlamentaria.

763No se dedico mucho tiempo al aborto en la agenda

764parlamentaria, comparado con otros asuntos

765relacionados con las mujeres, como la violencia

766contra estas. Hubo 229 iniciativas parlamentarias

767en ese perıodo, el 60% iniciadas y dirigidas por

768mujeres por el derecho a decidir; 143 diputadas y

76972 diputados participaron en los debates. La

770aceptacion de motivos socioeconomicos para

771tener un aborto legal (64%) y la legalizacion de

772la practica de abortos a peticion en el primer

773trimestre del embarazo (60%) fueron las formas

774mas frecuentes propuestas para reformar la ley,

775principalmente a raız de argumentos referentes a

776los derechos de las mujeres. Hombres y mujeres

777afiliados a partidos contra el derecho a decidir, y la

778mayorıa de los hombres afiliados a otros partidos

779abogaron por los derechos del feto. Los partidos

780por el derecho a decidir presentaronmas proyectos

781de ley que aquellos en contra, pero hasta ahora,

782se ha votado en contra de todas las reformas

783propuestas desde 1985.


abortion in democratic spain: the parliamentary political … · 2016-05-05 · 1 2 abortion in...

Documents