Uruguay, a tiny country, mostly Catholic has done an amazing job of keeping women safe with regards to continuing a pregnancy or abortion.
This column must be sent to every Legislator in this country who would ban abortion or make it difficult to get safely.
This column must be sent to every Legislator in this country who would ban abortion or make it difficult to get safely.
23
Despite the number of catholics, in Uruguay, the separation of Church and State dates to the very early 1900s.The Catholic Church has no saying in any political or social issues.
4
Successful plan...provided women have access to misoprostol.
6
“when we say sex education, you say no. When we say contraceptives, you say no. When we say safe abortions, you say no.”
No, folks, this quote is not from Texas, but from Uganda. The Uruguay model won't fly with the anti-abortion crowd in this country. Nothing short of a complete ban on abortions will satisfy them. It seems that this crowd is also violating international human rights laws by mandating that doctors provide false information to women considering having an abortion, among other transgressions.
Comparing Texas HB2 with the Uruguay model, it's clear which of these two is truly designed for women's health and safety, and it's not the Texas law.
No, folks, this quote is not from Texas, but from Uganda. The Uruguay model won't fly with the anti-abortion crowd in this country. Nothing short of a complete ban on abortions will satisfy them. It seems that this crowd is also violating international human rights laws by mandating that doctors provide false information to women considering having an abortion, among other transgressions.
Comparing Texas HB2 with the Uruguay model, it's clear which of these two is truly designed for women's health and safety, and it's not the Texas law.
39
This caught my attention:..."this right obligates the state to “refrain from limiting access to” or “withholding or intentionally misrepresenting health-related information.”
Why are we in the U.S. not using this against the misleading pro-life groups? Under International Humanitarian Law, we have this right.
Spread the word!
Why are we in the U.S. not using this against the misleading pro-life groups? Under International Humanitarian Law, we have this right.
Spread the word!
45
" a tacit recognition that the right to health, as defined under international humanitarian law, “includes the right to seek, receive, and impart information” and, moreover, that this right obligates the state to “refrain from limiting access to” or “withholding or intentionally misrepresenting health-related information.”
Wow, many practices in the US seem to break this law, for instance, those clinics that masquerade as abortion information places but pressure the woman to have the baby.
Wow, many practices in the US seem to break this law, for instance, those clinics that masquerade as abortion information places but pressure the woman to have the baby.
29
Whatever was Texas thinking in desiring to lessen a woman's right to health services? No need for a backwards state to be part of the USA. Maybe it ought to secede.
9
In science, there is unfettered flow of information as up to date and as proven as the researchers can determine. Free discussion, sometimes heated, occurs, and there are times that dishonesty creeps in, but universally once discovered, the perpetrator is called out and little future exists in their trying to once again do trustworthy research.
On the other hand, having legislatures control what medical and scientific information can be given to women in order to reach the best decision, for them, has nothing but control and obfuscation written all over it. To force doctors to tell women that cancer of the breast is higher (when it is not) or to not be able to inform a woman of her legal choices because of state laws designed to intimidate is one of the most shameful things the misguided 'leaders' can do.
To let our country continue down this path, and continue to allow obstructions to be mandated should stop with this set of recent US decsions and the next election.
On the other hand, having legislatures control what medical and scientific information can be given to women in order to reach the best decision, for them, has nothing but control and obfuscation written all over it. To force doctors to tell women that cancer of the breast is higher (when it is not) or to not be able to inform a woman of her legal choices because of state laws designed to intimidate is one of the most shameful things the misguided 'leaders' can do.
To let our country continue down this path, and continue to allow obstructions to be mandated should stop with this set of recent US decsions and the next election.
18
It is no accident that Cuba and Uruguay are the only Latin American countries where safe, legal abortions are available in the first trimester. Cuba placed public health as a centerpiece of its revolution, along with education, and has developed one of the better public health systems in the world. (See the UN Human Development Index).
Indeed for years, Uruguay and Cuba have led the region in its scores for Human Development. Uruguay has long been considered the New Zealand of Latin America in terms of general social welfare and income equality. Following the US-supported military dictatorship from 1973-85 (see one of the great political films of all time "State of Siege" by Costa-Gavras), Uruguay emerged as one of the region's most vibrant and successful democracies.
That the "harm reduction approach" to the problem of maternal deaths due to abortions was pioneered, despite the strong presence of the Catholic Church, in Uruguay is a remarkable tribute to a post-authoritarian society where left and right, church and secular, have found common ground. Uruguay has also taken the lead in the region on marijuana legalization.
The US should take note of Uruguay's progress. If progress is blocked in the US at the federal level, than local and state jurisdictions should seize the initiative, as some did with both needle exchange programs and marijuana legalization. The Uruguay model could be adapted in a city such as Newark, NJ or Oakland, California.
Indeed for years, Uruguay and Cuba have led the region in its scores for Human Development. Uruguay has long been considered the New Zealand of Latin America in terms of general social welfare and income equality. Following the US-supported military dictatorship from 1973-85 (see one of the great political films of all time "State of Siege" by Costa-Gavras), Uruguay emerged as one of the region's most vibrant and successful democracies.
That the "harm reduction approach" to the problem of maternal deaths due to abortions was pioneered, despite the strong presence of the Catholic Church, in Uruguay is a remarkable tribute to a post-authoritarian society where left and right, church and secular, have found common ground. Uruguay has also taken the lead in the region on marijuana legalization.
The US should take note of Uruguay's progress. If progress is blocked in the US at the federal level, than local and state jurisdictions should seize the initiative, as some did with both needle exchange programs and marijuana legalization. The Uruguay model could be adapted in a city such as Newark, NJ or Oakland, California.
16
Uruguay is known as the Switzerland of Latin America (not New Zealand). mainly for its form of government and banking laws. About the Catholic Church: URUGUAY has been a secular country since the beginning of the 1900s. Despite half its population being catholic, and unlike Argentina and Brazil, there was no censorship of books, movies etc. (except during the military dictatorship) and the Churck has no saying in political or social affairs. Also, Prostitution is legal in Uruguay in houses of prostitutions, not in the streets. Given all this, it is a little absurd that Uruguay is compared to Switzerland, a very conservative country.
1
You seem to know very little about Switzerland. Uruguay has a strong president who has both legislative and executive powers. In Switzerland the executive power is in the hands of a seven member Federal Council which has no legislative power - its presidency is a largely ceremonial function, so I cannot imagine why its governments would be considered similar - I know nothing about the banking laws. While Switzerland can probably be considered conservative: the Church(es) have no saying in political and social affairs either, there is certainly no censorship, abortion has been legal for much longer than in Uruguay and prostitution is legal, too, if you want to consider that as a positive achievement.
Sorry, my post had nothing to do with the subject at hand - I think that the Uruguayan model sounds absolutely brilliant and I hope it will be helpful to many other countries.
Sorry, my post had nothing to do with the subject at hand - I think that the Uruguayan model sounds absolutely brilliant and I hope it will be helpful to many other countries.
2
URUGUAY Is way ahead of the US, especially the GOP in its humane support of women's rights. It also stands as a clear example of what happens when safe legal abortions are completely blocked by law. Plainly put, expectant mothers die at the hands of those performing unsafe abortions. So do the unborn most of the time. Uruguay, a highly democratic country, treated abortion as a public health problem, not a religious sacrament, despite it's being largely Roman Catholic country. For the protection of women's health and the health of the unborn afflicted possibly by HIV earlier and by the Zika virus now, Uruguay adopted a humane policy making access to abortions easy, thereby establishing a clear separation between secular government and religious practices. We have been fighting a civil war since the 70s about the separation between church and state. The Founders of the US fled Europe to escape religious persecution. That religious persecution be legalized in the US over 200 years after its founding is proof of change of a catastrophic magnitude. We in the US need urgently to return to our founding principles of a strong and clear separation between church and state. Otherwise those who wrongly impose their religious beliefs on others will be responsible for an epidemic of children born severely handicapped by the Zika virus. Those opposing abortion will call it the divine will. They're entitled to their false beliefs. But not to impose their religion on the nation.
25
Very troubling that a small but vocal minority control the reproductive rights of grown women, who are quite capable of making their own decisions. It was hard for me to really get beyond that.
35
Well said, "We're the pro-life movement".
Congratulations to all involved and especially understanding the needs and humanitarian rights of women.
Congratulations to all involved and especially understanding the needs and humanitarian rights of women.
35
This is a good example of unwarranted gov interference into the private sphere.
Let adult people take any drugs they want. Why would I want gov telling me what I cannot do, short of crime against others? (No, a fetus is not an other.)
I am a board-certified psychiatrist.
Think for yourself?
Let adult people take any drugs they want. Why would I want gov telling me what I cannot do, short of crime against others? (No, a fetus is not an other.)
I am a board-certified psychiatrist.
Think for yourself?
11
Great idea for Uruguay!
Won't work in America since Doctors are no longer in charge of patient care in America.
Will need to approach insurance, pharma, med mal, medical records and publishing industries in order to make any procedure available and safe in the country. They will telll the doctors what to do
Won't work in America since Doctors are no longer in charge of patient care in America.
Will need to approach insurance, pharma, med mal, medical records and publishing industries in order to make any procedure available and safe in the country. They will telll the doctors what to do
14
All of the abive, but you can add political pressure brought by religious groups against womens reproductive rights.
9
This model is exactly what the American Right to Life movement fears most: women making their own decisions and taking a pill at home, off anyone's radar. They gain power through maintaining fear and ignorance. I wish we had a stronger Public Health Service, it would actually make health services a human right and not a consumer good.
65
Hooray for Dr. Briozzo and his colleagues!
All of the misogynists who claim that they are "protecting" women's health by limiting or outlawing abortion are the very people that women need to protect themselves from. Women do not need men to decide when and how to "protect" them.
Nobody could say it better than Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: "The decision of whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman's life, well-being and dignity. When the government makes that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a full adult human responsible for her own choices."
All of the misogynists who claim that they are "protecting" women's health by limiting or outlawing abortion are the very people that women need to protect themselves from. Women do not need men to decide when and how to "protect" them.
Nobody could say it better than Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: "The decision of whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman's life, well-being and dignity. When the government makes that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a full adult human responsible for her own choices."
64
Another commenter made this point and it bears repeating:
You can't care about babies if you don't care about mothers.
You can't care about babies if you don't care about mothers.
46
The hypocrites don't care about babies once they're born. They vote against all manner of post natal care including SNAPS.
17
How is it that in such an "advanced" nation as ours, (especially compared with tiny Uruguay, where physicians, care givers and public officials can come together with a common sense solution to a serious public health issue), can't even get past first base on abortion? Virulent partisanship clearly is more important to our political leaders than fostering a solution that actually helps people.
34
This is how you do it.
"Evidence-based overview." The fact that that even has to be specifically called out is horrifying.
"Evidence-based overview." The fact that that even has to be specifically called out is horrifying.
21
It is good that sharing accurate information is saving lives and seems to be having a positive effect on abortion policy in Latin American countries, but I find it extremely annoying that a crazed minority of religious fanatics are able to continue even at this late date to torment women whose personal lives and health care decisions are no one's business but their own.
90
The Greasy Odiferous Popinjays prefer to be able to parade poor families with too many children in front of their supporters as proof that the wages of poverty should be children that parents cannot care for because they couldn't get abortions and had sex anyway. Nowhere do they ever mention that it is their attitudes on providing both sexes with timely and accurate information about reproduction/contraception and access to contraception that might make the difference for them. Oh no, it's much easier to tell someone to "close their legs" or not to have children they can't afford. The taxes we pay are nothing compared to the tax that poor people pay when they have children they cannot support, when unwanted children are born and neglected, or what society pays when these families come to the unwelcome attention from our inadequate social services. It's as if the Greedy Oligarchic Popinjays want to be able to shame people rather than prevent as much abortion, child abuse and neglect as possible.
In America the only thing more important than money according to the "pro life" movement is the uterus with a fetus in it. The woman surrounding the uterus counts for nothing. The infant that comes out of that uterus becomes another "mouth to feed" and a symbol of the woman's inability to accomplish anything in life other than having a baby. There's nothing pro life about this. It's cruel, punitive, and disgraceful.
In America the only thing more important than money according to the "pro life" movement is the uterus with a fetus in it. The woman surrounding the uterus counts for nothing. The infant that comes out of that uterus becomes another "mouth to feed" and a symbol of the woman's inability to accomplish anything in life other than having a baby. There's nothing pro life about this. It's cruel, punitive, and disgraceful.
74
Please take what is successful when it is reviewed by logical and moral methods. And please, do not pollute this result with ideas on how countries "are". Countries "are" in many ways. And the distance always distorts perception, both located in the vicinity and from afar.
The approach from risk and harm reduction is generally more useful and efficient. It is not an automatic recipe, but helps a lot to find things to do together.
The approach from risk and harm reduction is generally more useful and efficient. It is not an automatic recipe, but helps a lot to find things to do together.
5
I am sure the party that claims to be pro "get the government off our back" and the first amendment would quickly use government power to muzzle doctors from informing their patients with facts. Remember, "W" censored scientific research fact from being reported in government (NOAA) reports on climate.
49
As part of the anti-abortion laws, doctors who perform abortions are not only muzzled, but forced to give their patients completely false information about the health consequences of having an abortion.
13
Don't forget how the NRA and their Congressional stoogies voted to make sure public health information relating to guns could also not be collected. And don't forget who voted for this -- Bernie Sanders
6
There are many heroes in this story and we know the names of a few of them: Briozzo, Kiggundu, Carino.
Women know the reasons women have abortions, and it isn't because babies are not important. In fact, the opposite. Why do you think supporters of safe abortion include most of the people on the forefront of maternal and child care and child advocacy? You can't care about babies if you don't care about mothers.
Thank you to Patrick Adams for this story.
Women know the reasons women have abortions, and it isn't because babies are not important. In fact, the opposite. Why do you think supporters of safe abortion include most of the people on the forefront of maternal and child care and child advocacy? You can't care about babies if you don't care about mothers.
Thank you to Patrick Adams for this story.
117
Healthcare professionals coming together to change public policy in Uruguay to assist women to make choices that make them healthy, happy, and productive people and without stigma -- amazing!
42
What do you say, Republistan, can you catch up to Uruguay ?
'Harder to quantify, though perhaps more important, was the extent to which the program altered public perceptions.
Before the program began, abortion had been written about only “in the crime section of the newspaper,.” said Dr. Leonel Briozzo, Uruguay’s vice minister of public health.
But afterward, “the articles were about health and human rights.”
With harm reduction, “you make it possible to change how people think about the problem,” he said. “The potential of this model is the potential to change public policy in the country.”'
Perhaps it's all a little too complicated, nuanced and thoughtful for America's Salem Witch Trial Caucus.
'Harder to quantify, though perhaps more important, was the extent to which the program altered public perceptions.
Before the program began, abortion had been written about only “in the crime section of the newspaper,.” said Dr. Leonel Briozzo, Uruguay’s vice minister of public health.
But afterward, “the articles were about health and human rights.”
With harm reduction, “you make it possible to change how people think about the problem,” he said. “The potential of this model is the potential to change public policy in the country.”'
Perhaps it's all a little too complicated, nuanced and thoughtful for America's Salem Witch Trial Caucus.
97
As long as America has the religious zealots and the politicians that pander to them involved in the process, as far as actually dealing with womens health, nothing meaningful will change.
16
Thoughtful, nonjudgmental, objective information, provided upon request. Follow-up care in every case. No deaths. Contraception provided as a matter of course to prevent the need for future abortions. Zika or not, this is indeed a model. When will we in America begin to move toward this enlightened, respectful approach?
160
Not in my lifetime.
8
"There, nearly half of all maternal deaths were because of unsafe abortions..."
First, I thank all members of the "Uruguay Model".
Your work is, indeed, "pro-life".
Second, to all of the "conservative" groups and individuals whose only purpose in this is to rule over those that you deem 'inferiors' that occupy a lower rung on that imaginary ladder-construct that you carry around in your head: I find you foul. I find you despicable.
Catholic Church: you bejeweled and gold-thread robed men who think you occupy the highest rung of your self-constructed ladder, here is your warning:
Ladders are a lousy ruling concept. They are unstable. They fall over all the time. More importantly to you, in real life when a ladder falls over, it doesn't impact those on the bottom rungs much... but those up on the top rung? Oh, my! They get pitched to the sidewalk and break their noggin every time!
True, the deaths of poor women in impoverished countries has never bothered much the likes of Donald Rumsfeld, Big Pharma, 'conservatives', the Catholic Church or military juntas, that's all just a snicker and a tale over an after-dinner port, if even that, but with every death and every forced breeding, you take another swipe with that saw that you lugged up to that top rung with you.
You keep sawing at that rung that you occupy and we'll see which comes first: That you saw through that rung first, or, that the whole ladder comes crashing over.
Thank you, "Uruguay Model".
You are amazing.
First, I thank all members of the "Uruguay Model".
Your work is, indeed, "pro-life".
Second, to all of the "conservative" groups and individuals whose only purpose in this is to rule over those that you deem 'inferiors' that occupy a lower rung on that imaginary ladder-construct that you carry around in your head: I find you foul. I find you despicable.
Catholic Church: you bejeweled and gold-thread robed men who think you occupy the highest rung of your self-constructed ladder, here is your warning:
Ladders are a lousy ruling concept. They are unstable. They fall over all the time. More importantly to you, in real life when a ladder falls over, it doesn't impact those on the bottom rungs much... but those up on the top rung? Oh, my! They get pitched to the sidewalk and break their noggin every time!
True, the deaths of poor women in impoverished countries has never bothered much the likes of Donald Rumsfeld, Big Pharma, 'conservatives', the Catholic Church or military juntas, that's all just a snicker and a tale over an after-dinner port, if even that, but with every death and every forced breeding, you take another swipe with that saw that you lugged up to that top rung with you.
You keep sawing at that rung that you occupy and we'll see which comes first: That you saw through that rung first, or, that the whole ladder comes crashing over.
Thank you, "Uruguay Model".
You are amazing.
89
Uruguay is not "one of the most democratic countries in Latin America". Like Cuba it is a socialist dystopia. It might be good for backpacking hippies or progressives, but please stay away if you are a respectable American. I worked there for two years for an American mining company and witnessed unbelievable atrocities.
4
"For an American [fill in commodity here] company" pretty much tells the story of Central and South America.
17
Well, I lived there for several decades, and the only confirmed unbelievable atrocities were the work of a military dictatorship that ended in 1984.
40
Lol, pretty hilarious comment. Progressives don't like democracy? It might look like a 'socialist dystopia' to an extranjero from Oklahoma bent on extracting their resources, but you since you are already reading the Times, you should check out this article from several months ago:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/10/opinion/uruguays-quiet-democratic-mira...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/10/opinion/uruguays-quiet-democratic-mira...
24
Amazing! This is on the path of better solutions for all including planning contraception legal economic and safety for women that will reduce the need for abortions and health care for women and children
28
Wouldn't it be nice if we had that in the USA, instead of gag rules that forbid doctors from giving information or bureaucrat-authored laws that force them to recite lies to women considering abortion?