Suppr超能文献

为什么人道主义组织不提供安全堕胎服务?

Why don't humanitarian organizations provide safe abortion services?

作者信息

McGinn Therese, Casey Sara E

机构信息

Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 60 Haven Ave, New York, NY 10032 USA.

出版信息

Confl Health. 2016 Mar 24;10:8. doi: 10.1186/s13031-016-0075-8. eCollection 2016.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although sexual and reproductive health services have become more available in humanitarian settings over the last decade, safe abortion services are still rarely provided. The authors' observations suggest that four reasons are typically given for this gap: 'There's no need'; 'Abortion is too complicated to provide in crises'; 'Donors don't fund abortion services'; and 'Abortion is illegal'.

DISCUSSION

However, each of these reasons is based on false premises. Unsafe abortion is a major cause of maternal mortality globally, and the collapse of health systems in crises suggests it likely increases in humanitarian settings. Abortion procedures can be safely performed in health centers by mid-level providers without sophisticated equipment or supplies. Although US government aid does not fund abortion-related activities, other donors, including many European governments, do fund abortion services. In most countries, covering 99 % of the world's population, abortion is permitted under some circumstances; it is illegal without exception in only six countries. International law supports improved access to safe abortion.

SUMMARY

As none of the reasons often cited for not providing these services is valid, it is the responsibility of humanitarian NGOs to decide where they stand regarding their commitment to humanitarian standards and women's right to high quality and non-discriminatory health services. Providing safe abortion to women who become pregnant as a result of rape in war may be a more comfortable place for organizations to begin the discussion. Making safe abortion available will improve women's health and human rights and save lives.

摘要

背景

尽管在过去十年里,性与生殖健康服务在人道主义环境中变得更加普及,但安全堕胎服务仍然很少提供。作者的观察表明,造成这种差距通常有四个原因:“没有需求”;“在危机中提供堕胎过于复杂”;“捐助者不资助堕胎服务”;以及“堕胎是非法的”。

讨论

然而,这些原因中的每一个都基于错误的前提。不安全堕胎是全球孕产妇死亡的主要原因,危机中卫生系统的崩溃表明在人道主义环境中不安全堕胎情况可能会增加。堕胎手术可由中级医疗人员在没有复杂设备或物资的健康中心安全进行。虽然美国政府援助不资助与堕胎相关的活动,但其他捐助者,包括许多欧洲国家政府,确实资助堕胎服务。在占世界人口99%的大多数国家,在某些情况下堕胎是允许的;只有六个国家完全禁止堕胎。国际法支持增加获得安全堕胎服务的机会。

总结

由于经常被提及的不提供这些服务的原因都不成立,人道主义非政府组织有责任决定他们在遵守人道主义标准以及妇女获得高质量和非歧视性卫生服务权利方面的立场。为战争中因强奸而怀孕的妇女提供安全堕胎服务可能是各组织开始讨论的一个更容易接受的切入点。提供安全堕胎服务将改善妇女的健康和人权并挽救生命。

相似文献

2
Abortion policy and women's health in developing countries.发展中国家的堕胎政策与妇女健康
Int J Health Serv. 1990;20(2):297-314. doi: 10.2190/V08N-UE7N-TNBH-RA4P.
8
Abortion service provision in South Asia: A comparative study of four countries.南亚的堕胎服务提供情况:四个国家的比较研究。
Contraception. 2020 Sep;102(3):210-219. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2020.05.015. Epub 2020 May 29.
9
A cross-cultural history of abortion.堕胎的跨文化史。
Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1986 Mar;13(1):1-17.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

2
Progress and gaps in reproductive health services in three humanitarian settings: mixed-methods case studies.在三个人道主义环境中生殖健康服务的进展和差距:混合方法案例研究。
Confl Health. 2015 Feb 2;9(Suppl 1 Taking Stock of Reproductive Health in Humanitarian):S3. doi: 10.1186/1752-1505-9-S1-S3. eCollection 2015.
7
Induced abortion: incidence and trends worldwide from 1995 to 2008.人工流产:1995 年至 2008 年全球发生率和趋势。
Lancet. 2012 Feb 18;379(9816):625-32. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61786-8. Epub 2012 Jan 19.
10
Incidence of severe acute maternal morbidity associated with abortion: a systematic review.流产相关严重急性产妇发病率:系统评价。
Trop Med Int Health. 2012 Feb;17(2):177-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2011.02896.x. Epub 2011 Oct 31.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验