CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 73Reproductive Health and ContraceptionInternational Human Rights and Reproductive LawGlobal Maternal and Child Health

Evidence supporting broader access to safe legal abortion

Open access
Faúndes, Anibal, Shah, Iqbal H.·2015·International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
DOI 10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.03.018
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Unsafe abortion continues to be a major cause of maternal death; it accounts for 14.5% of all maternal deaths globally and almost all of these deaths occur in countries with restrictive abortion laws. A strong body of accumulated evidence shows that the simple means to drastically reduce unsafe abortion‐related maternal deaths and morbidity is to make abortion legal and institutional termination of pregnancy broadly accessible. Despite this evidence, abortion is denied even when the legal condition for abortion is met. The present article aims to contribute to a better understanding that one can be in favor of greater access to safe abortion services, while at the same time not be “in favor of abortion,” by reviewing the evidence that indicates that criminalization of abortion only increases mortality and morbidity without decreasing the incidence of induced abortion, and that decriminalization rapidly reduces abortion‐related mortality and does not increase abortion rates.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.03.018

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Among countries with more liberal abortion laws, abortion rates vary between 7 and 9 per 1000 women aged 15-44 years; in countries with restrictive abortion laws, rates vary between 29 and 46 per 1000 women of reproductive age.

    “Among countries with more liberal abortion laws, the abortion rates vary between 7 and 9 per 1000 women aged 15–44 years. While in countries where abortion law is restrictive the rates vary between 29 and 46 per 1000 women of reproductive age [8].”

    From Induced abortion: a cross-sectional study on knowledge of and attitudes toward the new abortion law in Maputo and Quelimane cities, Mozambique (2020) · cites this paper as [8]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Countries with enabling laws on abortion have less unsafe abortions and fewer complications linked to abortion.

    “Research shows that countries with enabling laws on abortion have less unsafe abortions and fewer complications linked to abortion [8].”

    From Induced abortion: a cross-sectional study on knowledge of and attitudes toward the new abortion law in Maputo and Quelimane cities, Mozambique (2020) · cites this paper as [8]

    The Introduction and section 2 say that legal abortion combined with accessible safe services can prevent unsafe-abortion complications and reduce morbidity. But section 2 also says unsafe abortion remains a major cause of maternal mortality where abortion is legally permitted but services are inaccessible. The claim omits that access qualification, so enabling laws alone do not establish the stated pattern. (LLM, conf=0.81)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Bhutta ZA, Black RE. Global maternal, newborn, and child health-so near and yet so far. N Engl J Med 2013;369(23):2226-35.
  2. Jewkes R, Gumede T, Westaway M, Dickson K, Brown H, Rees H. Why are women still aborting outside designated facilities in metropolitan South Africa? BJOG 2005;112(9):1236-42.
  3. Mayi-Tsonga S, Oksana L, Ndombi I, Diallo T, Souza MH, Faundes A. Delay in the provision of adequate care to women who died from abortion-related complications in the principal maternity hospital of Gabon. Reprod Health Matters 2009;17(34): 65-70.
  4. Fletcher H, Gordon-Strachan G, McFarlane S, Hamilton P, Frederick J. A survey of pro- viders' knowledge, opinions, and practices regarding induced abortion in Jamaica. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2011;113(3):183-6.
  5. Shah IH, Åhman E, Ortayli N. Access to safe abortion: progress and challenges since the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD). Contraception 2014;90(Suppl. 6):S39-48.
  6. Ahman E, Shah IH. New estimates and trends regarding unsafe abortion mortality. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2011;115(2):121-6.
  7. Singh S. Hospital admissions resulting from unsafe abortion: estimates from 13 developing countries. Lancet 2006;368(9550):1887-92.
  8. Murray CM, Vos T, Lozano R, Naghavi M, Flaxman AD, Michaud C, et al. Disability- adjusted life years (DALYs) for 291 diseases and injuries in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2012. Lancet 2012; 380(9859):2197-223.
  9. Adler AJ, Filippi V, Thomas SL, Ronsman C. Incidence of severe acute maternal mor- bidity associated with abortion: a systematic review. Trop Med Int Health 2012; 177(2):177-90.
  10. Izugbara C, Otsola KJ, Ezeh AC. Men, women, and abortion in Central Kenya: a study of lay narratives. Med Anthropol 2009;28(4):397-425.
  11. Richards A, Lachman E, Pitsoe SB, Moodley J. The incidence of major abdominal sur- gery after septic abortion-an indicator of complications due to illegal abortion. S Afr Med J 1985;68(11):799-800.
  12. Ladipo OA. Preventing and managing complications of induced abortion in Third World countries. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1989;3:21-8 (Suppl.).
  13. Stephenson P, Wagner M, Badea M, Serbanescu F. Commentary: the public health consequences of restricted induced abortion-lessons from Romania. Am J Public Health 1992;82(10):1328-31.
  14. Sedgh G, Singh S, Henshaw SK, Bankole A. Legal abortion worldwide in 2008: levels and recent trends. Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2011;37(2):84-94.
  15. Sathar Z, Singh S, Rashida G, Shah Z, Niazi R. Induced abortion and unintended pregnancies in Pakistan. Stud Fam Plann 2014;45(4):471-91.
  16. Jewkes R, Rees H. Dramatic decline in abortion mortality due to the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act. S Afr Med J 2005;95(4):250.
  17. Bombas T. Impacto da despenalização do aborto a pedido da mulher em Portugal (The impact of the new abortion law in Portugal). Acta Obstet Ginecol Port 2014; 8(2):108-9.
  18. Benagiano G, Pera A. Decreasing the need for abortion: challenges and constraints. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2000;70(1):35-48.
  19. Osis MJ, Hardy E, Faúndes A, Rodrigues T. Difficulties encountered in gathering information on illegal abortion in the population of women. [In Portugeuse] Rev Saude Publica 1996;30(5):444-51.
  20. Johnson BR, Ndhlovu S, Farr SL, Chipato T. Reducing unplanned pregnancy and abor- tion in Zimbabwe through postabortion contraception. Stud Fam Plann 2002;33(2): 195-202.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Faúndes, A., & Shah, I. H.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
ORCID
Shah, Iqbal H.
Venue
International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-09-30
Volume
131
Issue
S1
Pages
S56-9
ISSN
  • 0020-6695 (ISSN-L)
  • 0020-7292
  • 1879-3479
DOI
10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.03.018
OpenAlex
W1779532256
Cited by
73
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3
FWCI
3.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Human Rights and Reproductive Law
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Global Maternal and Child Health
Keywords
safe abortion, abortion access, unsafe abortion, maternal mortality, criminalization of abortion, decriminalization of abortion, abortion, abortion law
MeSH terms
Abortion, Induced, Abortion, Legal, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Maternal Mortality, Pregnancy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review