FROM THE
UNITED STATES
TO ARGENTINA,
REPRODUCTIVE
RIGHTS ARE
IN FLUX—THE
RESULT OF
INTERNATIONAL
AND DOMESTIC
ADVOCACY
GROUPS
(ON BOTH
SIDES) AND
INTERNATIONAL
HUMAN RIGHTS.
JOAN CAIVANO AND
JANE MARCUS-DELGADO
A M E R I C AMONTOYA/REUTERS
S Q U A R T E R LY. O R G
BERNARDO
AQ0312_CAIV_LAY15.indd 106
7/9/12 9:09 AM
E
very day, women across Latin America
are terminating their pregnancies under illegal and unsafe circumstances.
The number of unsafe abortions—
which represent about 95 percent of
the total—grew from 3.9 million in 2003 to 4.2
million in 2008, with the annual abortion rate
holding steady during that period, at about 32
abortions per 1,000 women between the ages
15 to 44. That’s more than double the rate in
Western Europe (12 per 1,000)—where abortion is generally permitted without exception.
The high rate of unsafe abortions, which is
defined by the World Health Organization as
a termination of pregnancy performed by individuals without necessary skills, or under
conditions that are below minimum medical standards (or both), underlines the dismal
state of reproductive rights in the region. And
it has had chilling consequences for poor and
rural women in particular.
In Latin America and the Caribbean, 12 percent of all maternal deaths are estimated to
have been the result of unsafe abortion. Annually, about 1 million women in the region
are hospitalized for complications ranging
from excessive blood loss and infection to
septic shock arising from unsafe terminations of pregnancy.
Despite these dire statistics, and their dramatic effect on women’s health, the efforts to
address reproductive rights have been marked
SUMMER 2012
AQ0312_CAIV_LAY15.indd 107
Americas Quarterly
107
7/10/12 2:32 PM
The Public Debate Over Private Lives
JOAN CAIVANO AND JANE MARCUS-DELGADO
by divisive politics. While there is clear evidence that
criminalizing abortion does not reduce its incidence,
public opinion is resistant to change. Issues of morality, religion and tradition, combined with opposition
by powerful interest groups, create a potent obstacle
to expanding reproductive rights. Today, seven Latin
American countries outlaw the procedure completely,
and three permit unrestricted abortions. The remainder allow pregnancies to be terminated under a limited range of conditions. The stakes today could not be
higher. Restricting access to reproductive health services
has tragic consequences for economic growth as well as
public health, ranging from lost labor and steep financial burdens on state medical services, to crippling disabilities or death among women of child-bearing age.
To understand what has driven policymaking in this
controversial area, it is important to examine the interactions among abortion’s opponents and proponents at
the local, national and global levels.
One key to untangling these interactions is to recognize that the debate over abortion is not between two
absolutist points of view. Most stakeholders are neither
completely “pro-choice” (i.e., advocates of abortion on
demand under any circumstances); nor are they strictly
“pro-life” (i.e., opposed to abortion in all cases). The majority of those involved in reproductive rights discussions
fall somewhere along a spectrum that allows for the procedure under certain circumstances, but perhaps not in
every case. And the region’s abortion laws clearly reflect
the complexity and ambiguity surrounding the issue.
REPRODUCTIVE
RIGHTS TODAY
L
egislation regulating women’s access to reproductive health services in the Americas varies
widely, with no clear trend in one direction. In
Chile, El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, and
Nicaragua, for example, abortion is criminalized
in every case—even when the mother’s life is threatened,
or when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.
In contrast, in Cuba, Guyana and the Anglophone Caribbean, women tend to have broader legal access to the
procedure and—as a result—a lower rate of unsafe abortions (46 percent) and ensuing morbidity and mortality.
Latin American and Caribbean countries can be divided into six categories according to the extent of their
abortion rights restrictions. [see figure 1]
108
Americas Quarterly
AQ0312_CAIV_LAY15.indd 108
SUMMER 2012
INTERNATIONAL AND
LOCAL PRESSURE
A
bortion—a quintessentially private matter—
has become a topic of intense public debate,
argued in forums ranging from municipal
courtrooms to international institutions. As
domestic pro-choice advocates increasingly
face opposition from local or national leaders, they have
sought support from international non-governmental
organizations such as the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights; Ipas, a global advocacy group based
in North Carolina and working with partners in Mexico, Central America and Bolivia; and the UN Committee
on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW). Others work with local groups that participate
in pro-choice networks, such as Catholics for Choice,
which has offices throughout the region.
Anti-abortion forces similarly seek out alliances beyond national borders. Local dioceses and parishes receive support from global institutions, most notably
the Roman Catholic Church. Its representatives, along
with increasingly influential Evangelical leaders, have
come to play a key role in the hemisphere’s politics. In
fact, few leaders in the region today can win elections
without the support of religious authorities.
While global institutions have declared that women’s rights are human rights, pro-choice advocates still
face staunch opposition to change when confronting
domestic actors and those who back them.
In the U.S., opponents and proponents of abortion
are exerting pressure at the national and state levels. Although the 1973 Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade guaranteed U.S. women the right to abortion, in recent years
there have been increasing legal challenges to the procedure. As is the case throughout the hemisphere, these
struggles are compounded by battles between states and
the federal government over jurisdiction—and they are
not exempt from influence by global institutions.
In 2011, the fight over this issue in the U.S. heated up
more than at any time since legalization. Some 83 laws
restricting access to abortions were passed by state legislatures, in sharp contrast to 23 laws passed in the previous year. The legislative initiatives range from requiring
an ultrasound prior to the procedure, to banning all
abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy and a prohibition on private insurance plan coverage in some states.
The fight over abortion has similarly escalated across
A M E R I C A S Q U A R T E R LY. O R G
7/3/12 6:18 AM
JOAN CAIVANO AND JANE MARCUS-DELGADO
The Public Debate Over Private Lives
FIGURE 1
REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: ON THE BOOKS, BY THE COUNTRY
Reason required for a legal abortion
Countries
PROHIBITED ALTOGETHER, NO LEGAL EXCEPTIONS
Chile, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras,
Nicaragua, Suriname
TO SAVE THE LIFE OF A WOMAN
Antigua and Barbuda, Brazil, Dominica, Guatemala, Mexico,
Panama, Paraguay, Venezuela
TO PRESERVE A WOMAN’S HEALTH (AND TO SAVE HER LIFE)
Argentina, Bahamas, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Grenada,
Peru, Uruguay
TO PRESERVE MENTAL HEALTH (AND ALL ABOVE REASONS)
Colombia, Jamaica, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Trinidad
and Tobago
SOCIOECONOMIC GROUNDS (AND ALL ABOVE REASONS)
Barbados, Belize, St. Vincent and the Grenadines
WITHOUT RESTRICTION AS TO REASON
Cuba, Guyana, Puerto Rico
Source: Guttmacher Institute, Facts on Abortion in Latin America and the Caribbean (New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2012),
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/IB_AWW-Latin-America.pdf, last accessed on June 18, 2012.
Latin America. Some jurisdictions and countries have
made notable legislative advances. In 2006, Colombia’s
Constitutional Court decriminalized abortion in limited
cases. In April 2007, Mexico City legalized abortion on
demand in the first trimester. However, fears that the
capital city’s law would spawn similar legislation elsewhere prompted a backlash: 17 of 31 states across Mexico
rewrote their constitutions to grant embryos the “right
to life.” These initiatives have been promoted by legislators from the conservative Partido Acción Nacional (National Action Party—PAN) and the Partido Revolucionario
Institucional (Revolutionary Institutional Party—PRI),
with strong support from the Catholic Church.
Argentina seems to have reached a tipping point as
well. Last November, the Commission on Penal Legislation of the Chamber of Deputies approved an initiative to decriminalize abortions in the first 12 weeks of
pregnancy by a 7–5 vote. Though the bill is still being
debated in Congress, it has been co-signed by more than
50 representatives from a wide cross-section of political parties and ideological persuasions. In March 2012,
this legislation was given a boost by the Argentine Supreme Court, which legalized abortions in cases of rape.
In other places, the status quo remains; in some cases
even more restrictive legislation than what existed in
the past has been passed. Countries that for many years
allowed therapeutic abortion when the mother’s life was
at risk or in the case of rape or incest have in recent years
A M E R I C A S Q U A R T E R LY. O R G
AQ0312_CAIV_LAY15.indd 109
passed measures to outlaw the procedure in all cases.
These countries include Chile (1989), El Salvador (1997)
and Nicaragua (2006). El Salvador, in 1999, also passed
a constitutional amendment recognizing personhood
from the moment of conception.
Regardless of whether reproductive rights have been
expanded or curtailed, the outcome has turned on two
factors: the mobilization of domestic and international
actors (including churches and NGOs), and judicial and
legislative action. Supporters of reproductive rights in
particular have found that documentation of the detrimental effects of illegal abortions isn’t enough to sway
the results in their favor. The decisive drivers of policy
change are horrific individual stories—often involving
minors who are victims of rape and/or incest.
THE POWER OF ONE
T
hese personal stories have the effect of humanizing the debate. In the past decade, global
abortion rights advocates have brought suits
on behalf of heinous cases to judiciaries at the
local, national and international levels. This
phenomenon has had a two-fold impact. First, international courts can appeal to global human rights norms
without the distracting influence of domestic political
pressures. And at the local level, bringing international
attention to cases based on compelling personal stories
SUMMER 2012
Americas Quarterly
109
7/3/12 6:18 AM
The Public Debate Over Private Lives
JOAN CAIVANO AND JANE MARCUS-DELGADO
helps stimulate popular interest and support for reform
from the ground.
As a rule, given that abortion remains socially stigmatized and politically unpalatable in many places in
the hemisphere, domestic politicians and even special
interest groups often avoid discussing the topic—and
rarely support its legalization. At the same time, the
general public may become somewhat numb when confronted with statistical data about the harmful effects
of unsafe abortions. Yet riveting individual stories have
the power to move people to action. They help win over
the hearts and minds of citizens, thus providing cover
for politicians to sponsor legislative reform on the issue. The convergence of the international court cases
with dramatic personal stories has proven to be a heady
mix for abortion rights advocates. Figure 2 presents examples of such cases.
RECENT CHANGES AND
CHALLENGES
A
long with, or subsequent to, the decisions in
these judicial cases have been strong social
and civil society movements—especially from
within the Catholic Church and the domestic
and transnational NGO community—advocating for the expansion or curtailment of reproductive
rights, as well as landmark legislative changes.
For example, the passage of Mexico City’s 2007 legislation built on the momentum from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights’ 2006 decision in
the case of Paula Ramírez v. Mexico, which ordered the
Mexican government to pay reparations to a 13-year-old
rape victim who was denied an abortion, and to issue
guidelines providing clear regulations on the access to
abortion in the case of rape. Mexico City’s law, which
permits abortion in all cases in the first trimester, was
also largely a result of reproductive rights advocates
coordinating strategies on the local, national, regional,
and international levels, and among a matrix of interests, groups, social classes, and media.
Building on a women’s movement that had existed
for decades, these groups included Grupo de Información
en Reproducción Elegida (Information Group on Reproductive Choice—GIRE), Catholics for Choice, MARIA
Abortion Fund for Social Justice, and FUNDAR Center
for Analysis and Research. They divided up their tasks
according to skills: activists worked with grassroots or110
Americas Quarterly
AQ0312_CAIV_LAY15.indd 110
SUMMER 2012
ganizations; academics developed studies and gathered
data; and lawyers lobbied government officials.
Key factors in their success were maintaining communication and staying on message. Collectively, these
advocates built a campaign around social justice, arguing that women from all socioeconomic classes have the
right to safe, affordable health care. They used a message that was palatable to Mexico’s overwhelmingly
Catholic majority, even as they reminded legislators that
Mexico had a longstanding tradition separating church
and state. Their cause was bolstered by having sympathetic interlocutors in the city government. The leftist
Partido de la Revolución Democrática (Party of the Democratic Revolution—PRD) controlled both the mayor’s
office and the Mexico City legislature, which eventually passed the law.
Even as pro-choice advocates were able to campaign
successfully for expanded abortion rights in Mexico
City, anti-choice supporters led a successful backlash
in the rest of the country, with 17 of Mexico’s 31 states
passing constitutional amendments to protect the fetus. (Mexico’s government is a decentralized federation,
with the legality of abortions decided at the state level.)
Catholic Lawyers, an opposition group, had collected
36,000 signatures on a petition calling for a referendum
on legalizing abortion before the Mexico City legislature
approved the bill. Opponents argued the Mexican Constitution’s prohibition against the death penalty should
be applied to unborn children. The federal Attorney
General’s Office and the National Human Rights Commission, both controlled by the ruling PAN party, challenged the law in the Supreme Court on the grounds that
the Federal Constitution protects life from conception.
Although the court disagreed, upholding Mexico City’s
law by an 8–3 vote, the conservative PAN party, along
with anti-abortion groups like Provida, continued to
wage a potent media campaign against the bill. Meanwhile, Roman Catholic bishops threatened legislators
who voted for the bill with automatic excommunication,
effective as of the first procedure performed under law.
In Chile, El Salvador and Nicaragua, the Catholic
Church has played a significant role in curtailing abortion rights. For example, in a concession to the Catholic
Church, General Augusto Pinochet made abortion illegal under all circumstances in 1989, even though abortion for specific health reasons had been permitted in
Chile since 1931. Repeated efforts to liberalize the law
(in 1991, 2001, 2006, and 2012) have been unsuccessful.
A coalition of political and social actors from the right,
A M E R I C A S Q U A R T E R LY. O R G
7/3/12 6:18 AM
JOAN CAIVANO AND JANE MARCUS-DELGADO
The Public Debate Over Private Lives
FIGURE 2
THE CASES THAT CHANGED THE LAW
Case/Country
Paulina, a 13 year-old
rape victim denied a
legally permitted abortion.
(Mexico)
When and By Whom Filed
Center for Reproductive Rights and
Grupo de Información en Reproducción
Elegida (GIRE), a Mexican NGO. (2002)
Where Taken/Resolved
Outcome/Related Legislation
2006: Mexican government agrees to
pay reparations, health care and education costs for Paulina and her son and issues a decree regulating guidelines for
rape victims’ access to abortion.
INTER-AMERICAN
COMMISSION ON
HUMAN RIGHTS
The case helps build momentum for Mexico City’s legalization of abortion on demand in 2007.
“K.L.,” a 17-year-old pregnant
girl with an anencephalic fetus, denied an abortion, despite danger to her health—at
the time considered legal
grounds for abortion. (Peru)
Center for Reproductive Rights, regional
NGO Comité de América Latina y el Caribe para la Defensa de los Derechos de
la Mujer (CLADEM), and Peru’s Estudio
por la Defensa y los Derechos de la Mujer
(DEMUS). (2002)
UN HUMAN RIGHTS
COMMITTEE (UNHRC)
2005: UNHRC decides that denying access to a legal abortion constitutes a violation of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights—specifically,
the right to be free from cruel, inhumane
and degrading treatment; the right to privacy; and special protection of the rights
of a minor.
“L.C.,” a 13-year-old victim
of repeated rape who, upon
discovering she was pregnant, threw herself off a roof
and broke her spine. Paralysis could have been avoided,
but doctors refused to operate because she was pregnant. (Peru)
Center for Reproductive Rights and
Lima-based Centro de Promoción y Defensa de los Derechos Sexuales y Reproductivos (PROMSEX). (2009)
UN COMMITTEE ON
THE ELIMINATION
OF DISCRIMINATION
AGAINST WOMEN
(CEDAW)
2011: CEDAW rules that Peru must
amend its law to allow women to obtain
an abortion in cases of rape and sexual
assault; establish a mechanism to ensure availability of those abortion services; and guarantee access to abortion
services when a woman’s life or health
is in danger. Ruling is the first time the
UN has called the denial of legal abortion
discrimination.
“A.G.,” a 15-year-old, had
been raped and impregnated
by her stepfather. She was
first denied, then obtained
approval for an abortion from
the Chubut superior justice
court. (Argentina)
Chubut province public defender appealed the case to the Argentine National
Supreme Court on behalf of the fetus after the abortion had taken place. (2010)
Over 250 NGOs from the Campaña Nacional por el Derecho Legal, Seguro y
Gratuito, an umbrella group for abortion
rights, advocated for the court to uphold
the ruling.
ARGENTINE
NATIONAL SUPREME
COURT
2012: Argentina’s Supreme Court upholds lower court ruling that abortion is
legal in all cases of rape, under Article 86
of the Argentine Penal Code.
“A.A.,” a 12-year old, attempted suicide after she
learned she was pregnant.
She was denied an abortion
that was actually permissible
under law. (Colombia)
La Mesa por la Vida y la Salud de las Mujeres, a collection of organizations working to uphold reproductive rights. (2011)
COLOMBIAN
CONSTITUTIONAL
COURT
2011: Court protects victim’s rights and
orders compensation and health care
coverage.
A M E R I C A S Q U A R T E R LY. O R G
AQ0312_CAIV_LAY15.indd 111
This case relies on historical precedent
set in 2006 case brought by attorney
Mónica Roa on behalf of Spanish NGO
Women’s Link Worldwide, resulting in decriminalization of abortion in Colombia.
SUMMER 2012
Americas Quarterly
111
7/3/12 6:18 AM
JOAN CAIVANO AND JANE MARCUS-DELGADO
A statue of the Virgin of Panecillo in Quito,
Ecuador, wrapped in a pro-choice banner by the
Dutch pro-choice group Women on Waves.
meanwhile, has advanced a number of anti-choice initiatives, including constitutional and penal and health
code amendments. Opposition to abortion in the Chilean legislature is led by the right-wing Renovación Nacional (National Renovation—RN) party in tandem with
the Unión Demócrata Independiente (Independent Democratic Union—UDI) party.
Their efforts are buoyed by elements of the center-left
Concertación de Partidos por la Democracia (Coalition of
Parties for Democracy). Disagreement on reproductive
rights had divided the coalition during its 20 years of
governing, with the Partido Demócrata Cristiano (Christian Democrat Party—PDC) remaining staunchly opposed to any loosening of Chile’s total prohibition of
abortion. Conservative groups with ties to the Catholic Church worldwide, such as Opus Dei and the Legionnaires of Christ, joined forces with these legislators to
fight against any efforts to liberalize Chile’s strict anti112
Americas Quarterly
AQ0312_CAIV_LAY15.indd 112
SUMMER 2012
abortion regime, including the ultimately unsuccessful
effort to thwart moves to legalize the free distribution
of emergency contraception—the “morning after” pill—
in public health clinics to girls over 14 years old.
Similarly, when the Catholic Church introduced legislation to ban abortions in Nicaragua in 2006, Daniel Ortega, who supported abortion rights in the 1980s,
backed the legislation to earn the support of powerful
religious interests and court the votes of churchgoers
during his campaign. (Ortega was later handily elected
president.) And in El Salvador, the Catholic Church’s
1999 campaign for a constitutional amendment to recognize personhood from conception has inspired similar amendments by the religious right in the U.S. and
a majority of states in Mexico.
In other places, such as Peru, despite judicial rulings by UN bodies in the cases of K.L. v. Peru and L.C. v.
Peru—both of which involved pregnant teenagers who
had been victims of rape and were denied abortions and
other medical attention—mandating the adoption of
legal protections and safe access to abortion under international conventions, implementation is slow and
the incidence of unsafe abortion high. Peru still has
the second highest rate of maternal mortality in the region, and unsafe abortions account for about one-quarter of these deaths. Currently 350,000 illegal abortions
are performed annually, with nearly 65,000 resulting
in hospitalization due to complications. A network of
local and international advocacy groups, from the International Women’s Health Coalition to Amnesty International, continues to support Peruvian pro-choice
organizations, such as the Lima-based Centro de Promoción y Defensa de los Derechos Sexuales y Reproductivos
(Center for the Promotion and Defense of Sexual and
Reproductive Rights—PROMSEX), Estudio por la Defensa de los Derechos de la Mujer (Study for the Defense
of Women’s Rights—DEMUS) and Comité de América Latina y el Caribe para la Defensa de los Derechos de la Mujer
(Latin American Committee for the Defense of Women’s
Rights—CLADEM). Thousands of activists, from grassroots movements to professional lobbying firms, have
worked for decades to advance reproductive rights for
the nation’s women. They now represent the interests
of the Indigenous rural population, the urban poor and
the many sectors of Peru’s diverse population.
In Colombia, international actors and a strong judiciary came together to advance reproductive rights, despite strong opposition from the Catholic Church and
political leaders. In 2005, attorney and women’s rights
IVETTE MROVA (COURTESY OF WOMEN ON WAVES)
The Public Debate Over Private Lives
A M E R I C A S Q U A R T E R LY. O R G
7/3/12 6:18 AM
equality
advocate Mónica Roa filed a complaint with the Colombian Constitutional Court on behalf of Women’s Link
Worldwide. The complaint petitioned the constitutional
review of Article 122 of Colombia’s penal code, which
criminalized abortion in all cases. The Constitutional
Court, known for its neutrality and judicial independence, had already begun to use international human
rights arguments in constitutional challenges. With an
increasingly strong international legal framework to defend abortion, the time was ripe for Roa’s suit.
It is possible that the international legal framework
similarly influenced the Argentine Supreme Court’s
decision (A.G. v. Argentina) earlier this year to interpret
Article 86 of the country’s penal code as permitting abortion in all rape cases.
In Colombia, another factor crucial to sustained
change in reproductive rights was an effective strategy
to shift public opinion. Members of the coalition supporting Roa’s lawsuit were able to accomplish this by
leading a widespread initiative to increase awareness,
casting unsafe abortion as a public health concern and
encouraging the media to cover the impact of the abortion ban on women and girls in the country.
Roa and her team at Women’s Link put together a
broad coalition of activist groups, think tanks and individual experts on reproductive and women’s rights.
The network received international support from Yale
and Harvard Law Schools, Human Rights Watch and
several other groups abroad. In addition to pulling together supporting briefs for her court case, this temporary grouping worked to mobilize public opinion to
focus on the issue of abortion from the perspective of
women’s health and social justice and away from religious dogmatism. An important element of their strategy was to involve health professionals (e.g., Physicians
for Human Rights) in the debate. This helped fuel an
ambitious media campaign, winning the support of
Colombia’s largest newspaper, El Tiempo, among many
other media outlets. Together, these strategies succeeded
in shifting public opinion. In May 2005, just after Roa
filed her suit, 85 percent of Colombians opposed abortion in all circumstances. But by the time the decision
came out a year later, more than 60 percent supported
the partial liberalization of abortion.
In the U.S., the abortion debate was thought to be
effectively settled by Roe v. Wade. But the anti-choice
movement continued to work behind the scenes, building coalitions across the religious and socially conservative right. In recent years, a coalition of anti-choice
A M E R I C A S Q U A R T E R LY. O R G
AQ0312_CAIV_LAY15.indd 113
GENDER EQUALITY
IN CUBA
BY MATTHEW AHO
W
hen it comes to
cess to anti-retroviral
women’s reptreatment for patients
resentation in
with HIV/AIDS.
politics, Cuba
Still, many people take
is the Western Hemiissue with the accolades
sphere’s most egalitargiven to Cuba for its perian country. Cuba ranks
formance on gender
third in the world in the
equality, citing the counpercentage of women in try’s overall lack of civil
the national legislature
and political liberties
(after Rwanda and Anand the rubber-stamp
dorra). Women make up nature of its National
41 percent of members
Assembly. Women
of Cuba’s Communist
within the system “arParty and 45.2 percent
gue strongly for what reof its National Assemmains to be done,” says
bly. That’s double the
Stephens. “[They] speak
22.6 percent average for to us about a ‘gender
the Americas as a whole, paradox’ in Cuba—a nasquarely ahead of the
tion legally committed to
U.S.’ 16.8 percent, and
equality but harnessed
slightly ahead of hemito a historic structure of
spheric runner-up Nicapatriarchy,” which beragua’s 40.2 percent.
gins at the top of Cuban
The increased pargovernment and runs all
ticipation of women in
the way down.
Cuba’s national legislaMoreover, while Cuture is largely a result
ban women have enof mandatory gender
joyed relative parity in
quotas. But according
the country’s formal
to Sarah Stephens, dilabor force, they are
rector of the Washingconcerned about how
ton-based Center for
Cuba’s economic reDemocracy in the Amer- forms will affect them.
icas, the key drivers of
For example, recent rechange were “a politiforms that allow pubcal commitment that inlic-sector employees to
corporated women’s
seek private-sector emrights into the broader
ployment do not yet apCuban Revolution, and
ply to workers in health
investments in literservices, education or
acy and public health.”
research—fields largely
Since 1959, women have populated by women.
gained greater access
“Cuban women are conto higher education and
cerned about falling
health services. Recent
back, as they did durUN progress reports on
ing the Special Period
the Millennium Develop- of the 1990s,” Stephens
ment Goals found that
says. “Women fear laygender disparity in eduoffs and worry that state
cation in Cuba has been
employers will discrimeliminated and health
inate against them in
coverage is exceptional,
choosing who will lose
including universal actheir jobs.”
SUMMER 2012
Americas Quarterly
113
7/3/12 6:18 AM
The Public Debate Over Private Lives
leaders, including Catholic bishops, Tea Party politicians, social
conservatives, Evangelicals, and
politicians at the state and local
levels, have been the public face
of the anti-choice movement,
pushing, for example, to defund
Planned Parenthood, pass personhood amendments, require
pre-abortion ultrasounds, and
enact stringent regulations on
clinics and doctors with the intention of effectively preventing the procedure. Though these
dramatic changes are largely a
result of actors collaborating at
the local, national and international levels, increasing ideological polarization within the U.S.
Congress has played a major role.
ADVOCACY,
ORGANIZATION
AND STRATEGY
W
JOAN CAIVANO AND JANE MARCUS-DELGADO
RELIGIOUS
GROUPS, NGOs,
LOBBYISTS, AND
THE MEDIA ALL
HAVE A ROLE TO
PLAY IN AFFECTING
THE OUTCOME
OF LEGISLATIVE
AND JUDICIAL
ACTIONS.
hat lesson can advocates of expanded reproductive rights draw from the experiences of
countries discussed here? For one, humanizing the debate around abortion through
individual stories—as in the cases of Paulina, L.C., A.G., and others —can be a powerful driver
of change, demonstrating the harmful and often fatal
consequences of bans on abortion and shifting public
opinion. Bringing these cases to high courts and international forums for decisions has in many instances
been the catalyst for securing reproductive rights. But as
we saw in the Colombia case, broad civil society movements coupled with a targeted media strategy are keys
to bringing public opinion along.
A second lesson is the importance of international
human rights norms and conventions in reinforcing
the decisions of independent judiciaries. In Colombia
in 2005, for example, the legislature was extremely politicized. Pro-choice advocates could only secure an impartial, thorough review of existing laws and a possible
opening for change by going to the Constitutional Court,
which was noted for its neutrality and independence.
114
Americas Quarterly
AQ0312_CAIV_LAY15.indd 114
SUMMER 2012
The court issued its ruling to
decriminalize abortion based
on Colombia’s participation in
international conventions, including the CEDAW, the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights, and
the definition of reproductive
health recognized at the 1994 UN
Conference on Population and
Development and reaffirmed in
the 1995 Declaration of the UN
Fourth World Conference on
Women in Beijing.
In the U.S. today, with legislatures at the state and national
levels similarly polarized, the
pro-choice movement will likely
have to depend on the rulings of
federal lower and higher courts
to uphold both U. S. precedent
and international conventions.
None of this is to say, of
course, that social and civil society actors remain at the margins of the debate. Religious groups, NGOs, lobbyists,
and the media all have a role to play in shaping public
perceptions and affecting the outcome of legislative
and even judicial actions. Moreover, horizontal and vertical linkages among these groups, taking place within
and across countries, and facilitated by developments
in technology and communication, have made them
stronger than ever today.
The efforts of the Madrid-based Women’s Link to
pull together a network of groups and individuals in Colombia with intellectual and other support from U.S.based organizations and academic institutions is the
most illustrative example of the power of globalizing
the movement for reform on these issues. These linkages lend momentum to the pro-choice movement, as
the struggle for access to reproductive rights expands
across geographic, political and cultural borders, and
draws all women into its ranks.
Joan Caivano is deputy to the president and director
of special projects at the Inter-American Dialogue.
Jane Marcus-Delgado is associate professor and
director of the international studies program at the
College of Staten Island, City University of New York.
A M E R I C A S Q U A R T E R LY. O R G
7/3/12 6:19 AM