5 months after Roe v Wade was overruled: international highlights
Photo Courtesy: Unsplash
While the Supreme Court decision on June 24th had a massive impact on access to abortion for those in the US, this decision also impacted other parts of the world, sparking fears, debates and discussions.
In the immediate aftermath of the decision, demonstrations around the world proved how important the issue was, and how the historic overruling in the US could constitute a threat to abortion rights globally. International leaders such as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, or the Director-General of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, stated their disappointment with Bachelet, declaring that this decision represented “a major setback after five decades of protection for sexual and reproductive health and rights”. Many Western world leaders also condemned the ruling, with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau describing it as “horrific”.
In the following July, the European Parliament condemned the ruling with a large majority (324-155, and 38 abstentions). On the other hand, some members of far-right parties such as Beatrix von Storch (Alternativ für Deutschland) have voiced their approval of the decision. Jair Bolsonaro, then-president of Brazil, indirectly supported the decision, tweeting “May God continue to give strength and wisdom to those who protect the innocence and future of our children [...]”.
Reproductive rights expert Sarah Shaw warned that the US ruling could be used by anti-abortion associations around the world to increase their funding, with many anti-abortion organisations in Africa being already supported by US organizations and donors.
Paula Avila-Guilen, from the Women’s Equality Center, said that the ruling already boosted the confidence of anti-abortion groups in Latin America, where Colombia, Mexico and Argentina have recently legalised abortion. Shaw also expressed concern that countries receiving vital support from the US might “deprioritize maternal health care in general” from fear of receiving less funding if they were perceived as pro-choice.
Shaw further stated that the Supreme Court decision was a “massive curve ball”, as globally the trend has leaned towards increased access to abortion services, with around 60 countries expanding abortion rights in the last three decades, and only a few countries going in the other direction, such as Poland and Honduras.
In France, the government and several political parties supported a bill which would make France the first country to include abortion rights in the constitution. However, in October, the French Senate voted twice against the proposal amidst heated debates.
In the National Assembly, the parliament’s lower house, a similar proposal was accepted by a large majority on 24th November, it will nevertheless need to be accepted by the Senate to become a law.
US’ neighbour Canada, on the other hand, has no legal framework regarding abortion, and while some liberal politicians suggested that Canada was not immune to what happened in the US, abortion-rights advocates urged Prime Minister Justin Trudeau not to enshrine that right into law. Experts and advocacy groups fear that such a law would lead to unintended consequences such as more restrictive amendments from subsequent governments. Legislation on the federal level could also create a debate on the division of powers and lead to provinces regulating or restricting abortion differently. It is, however, worth noting that the current debate allows activists to highlight the concerning unequal access to abortion services in Canada and ask the government to act upon it.
To conclude, these previous examples have shown us that the Supreme Court decision may have consequences far beyond the United States borders, confirming the saying “When America sneezes, the world catches a cold”.