this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2024
255 points (97.4% liked)

World News

39004 readers
2588 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
quinten@lemmy.world
NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
lemmyAtom@lemmy.world
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world
255
Abortions in first 12 weeks should be legalised in Germany, commission says (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world
40 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Most cases of abortion are illegal in Germany, which report says is not compatible with international standards

Abortions in Germany should be legalised within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, a government-appointed commission has recommended.

While abortion is rarely punished, it remains illegal in Germany, except for specific circumstances including when a woman’s life is in danger, or she is a victim of rape, while the prerequisite for any termination is a consultation with a state-recognised body.

Advocates of a law change have welcomed the investigation into the country’s legal framework, calling the law outdated and detrimental to women. Even in the cases not considered illegal, the procedure must take place within the first three months, except when there is a compelling reason to carry it out later.

The all-female expert commission on reproductive self-determination and reproductive medicine was set up by Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s three-party government after the desire to change the 153-year-old law was anchored in its coalition agreement.

top 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] griD@feddit.de 61 points 7 months ago (4 children)

We're on a run.
Cannabis decriminialized, now abortion legalization (shoutout to our french neighbours for setting the pace!), Deutschlandticket, energy gets decarbonized (yes, former governments made some mistakes there...) and the list goes on.

All that to be killed off because the fucking boomers will vote "conservative" next year, the country is moving too fast for them or some BS, LMAO.

[–] volvoxvsmarla@lemm.ee 22 points 7 months ago

I agree so much. The current government isn't perfect by any means but Jesus cut them some slack. They are at power after 16 years of consecutive conservative rule. You can't change everything within one year. Moreover, they've taken over a country in the middle of a pandemic, then the biggest European war since WWII started and now there's that whole mess in the middle east. Like, I am also not 100% on board with everything but for a coalition of 3 vastly different parties who rule for the first time, and under all the conditions inherited and newly acquired, they are really doing a decent job.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago

Germany moving too fast? What are they? Snails?

[–] rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 7 months ago

It's still way too slow, FDP does their best to slow us down.

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And the Selbstbestimmungsgesetz! Finally you don't have to answer F U N questions about e.g. ypur sexual preferences in order to be allowed to change your name and gender entry.

[–] griD@feddit.de 2 points 7 months ago

Right, I knew I had forgotten something :)

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 20 points 7 months ago (4 children)

As an American I’m shocked how many European countries have stronger restrictions than the United states.

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 14 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

*than the less restrictive states in the US.

What sets the US apart is how wildly the laws vary by state, with 10 states currently allowing no exceptions for rape, incest, or life of the mother, i.e total, or near-total, bans.

In contrast, while many countries in Europe limit abortions to a point between 12 and 20 weeks, there are almost always exceptions and circumstances where an abortion can be granted medical approval.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I’m not against stays putting restrictions on abortion but I think several states have effectively banned it which I’m not ok with. Personally i think it’s an overly religious argument in America rather than a logical one.

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

In that case, you are well within the majority of Americans. What's odd is why Republicans appear hellbent on pushing extreme religious views into law when much of the country is against it.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -2 points 7 months ago

Their platform is pro-life. They need to catchup to the times that most Americans while they claim publicly they are pro-life are really pro-choice. Also you have to think at a state level. That’s where most the action is coming from. Several red states pushed for abortion bans in the state constitution and were shot down with means even the republicans voted against it.

I feel this party is drifting out of alignment with their constituents.

[–] breckenedge@lemmy.world -4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Which 10 states would those be? I don’t know of any state that prohibits an abortion when the life of the mother is at risk.

https://abc7ny.com/amp/abortion-ban-map-where-banned-restricted-protected/13299140/

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Here's a more recent breakdown.

https://www.cnn.com/us/abortion-access-restrictions-bans-us-dg/index.html

You're right in that many of the states where abortion is banned supposedly allow exceptions when the life of the mother is at risk, but in real terms that often translates to healthcare providers being too scared to carry out the procedure, or leaving it too late, for fear of legal repercussions.

[–] volvoxvsmarla@lemm.ee 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The headline really is misleading. Abortion is allowed and performed regularly before 12 weeks pc/14 weeks pm. It is more of a formal change because an outdated paragraph makes it a crime, yet it is decriminalized and not prosecuted.

The more problematic part of that paragraph was that "advertising abortion" is illegal, i.e. mentioning that you perform abortions in your office on a website etc was illegal and could still be criminalized. That put people in a position when they had to call office after office to ask whether they perform abortions instead of just googling it. That was a hassle and impractical and punishing women when they are in a vulnerable place to begin with. (Hell I can't even make a phone call to make a regular doctor's appointment.)

But the first part is mostly about language. Abortion being a crime that is not punished implies that women, despite having legal access to abortion, still do something wrong (and de facto illegal) in the eyes of the state and the law.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 3 points 7 months ago

The more problematic part of that paragraph was that “advertising abortion” is illegal,

Noone cared about doctors having a quick paragraph about in on their webpage before an US evangelical went to court over it and courts found no way to interpret the language but to consider it advertisement, so they changed the law. AFAIU it was always intended to mean "don't have billboards" but apparently the courts disagreed. IIRC they also added a register thing so that places offering counselling can give women a list of providers near them.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's really just social safety nets that Europe is more liberal about. Many things are fairly conservative. The protected designation of origin laws are a pretty good example.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I’ve never thought much about the origination laws. Why do you consider them conservative? Seems more about keeping labeling honest. I only know a few instance such as parm cheese and champagne

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago (3 children)

There's nothing special about the champagne region that makes it better for sparkling wine than some other region. Similar for parmesan or kobe beef. It's absolutely a conservative view to say only things from the original area can use the name.

[–] eyvind@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Yeah, but it’s a brand. There’s nothing special about the Coca-Cola company that makes it impossible for other soda manufacturers to make brown sweet drinks either, but they have exclusive rights to the name.

Why would you even want to name your sparkling wine after the Champagne region unless you’re making it there? It’s because the name has a value, and the origin laws are there to protect that value.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

And you're free to make your region famous for its sparkling wine, out-shining the Champagne.

DOP products always have a very long cultural history, and also cannot be properly replicated outside of the region -- you can make good products that might even be similar, but you can't make the thing because the product depends on the local microclimate or whatnot.

There's another label for things that can be reproduced outside of the region. Say, Kabanosy staropolskie: You can make Kabanosi all you want with any recipe, if you want to make "Old Polish Kabanosi" you have to use the actual original time-honoured recipe. If you don't want to then don't call it that.

All this stuff is essentially trademarks that are given to regions, or even recipes, instead of individual producers.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -1 points 7 months ago

I have never seen it better, but the name defines the location.

[–] lolpostslol@kbin.social 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Yeah at least in theory lol, some of those countries aren’t even very religious, would expect looser rules on this

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Germany is quite big on not having too easy answers to ethical questions. Roe vs. Wade pretty much said "fetuses aren't even people who cares", while the German position is "fetuses develop as, not to, humans", thus there's a rights conflict which has to be addressed in some way or the other.

I don't think anything much will change in practice, this will end with some definition changes (decriminalised vs. legal) and some reforms around pregnancy counselling as well as making sure that counselling and abortion are actually properly available (looking at you, Bavaria), maybe reforms around costs for abortions (at-will are not considered medically necessary thus health insurance doesn't cover it, but if you're poor the state will cover it, aftercare in any case is medically necessary thus paid by insurance). The overall tenor will still be "the state has a duty to minimise the number of abortions, primarily by social and welfare means", the constitutional court would void any law that implies otherwise very quickly.

On the flip-side a total ban would be completely unthinkable: Abortions for medical or criminological reasons count as self-defence, no questions asked, no arguments to be had. Evaluation in either case is up to the medical profession, no need for a guilty verdict or any such stuff.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I’m pro-choice. I just always assumed much of Europe was pro-choice as that’s what I had been told. Just interesting when it pops up in the news that’s it’s not.

[–] accideath@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It’s a bit more complicated than that. Here in Germany, while abortions are illegal (since fetuses are considered humans by law), it is decriminalized. It’s more about technicalities. You do have the choice though. It’s not as easy as going to an abortion clinic and half an hour later you’re done but if you got pregnant on accident (or by force) or have a medical need for abortion, there’s always a way. If it was just an accident, however, you do have to pay for the abortion yourself, unless you can’t afford it. Also, there is a mandatory counseling session.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Ah. So there is an option to just pay for it? So the title is a little misleading since it’s not illegal in the sense it’s criminal.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Nono it's illegal it's just that, quoth:

(1) The elements of the offence under section 218 are not deemed fulfilled if

  1. the pregnant woman requests the termination of pregnancy and demonstrates to the physician by producing the certificate referred to in section 219 (2) sentence 2 that she obtained counselling at least three days prior to the procedure,
  1. the termination is performed by a physician and
  1. no more than 12 weeks have elapsed since conception.

TBH I don't think anyone really understands the legal-philosophical meaning of it. The constitutional court said something along the lines of "you can't just call it legal" and then someone came up with this. I guess you could call it a legal fiction, comparable to this gem:

(1) Only a person who is alive at the time of the devolution of an inheritance may be an heir.

(2) A person who is not yet alive at the time of the devolution of an inheritance, but has already been conceived, is deemed to have been born before the devolution of an inheritance.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -5 points 7 months ago

That last one is a brain twister. I get it. Just is an odd way to phrase it.

[–] Dulusa@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

I went in to read the German law itself and it's basically only illegal if certain conditions aren't met and that is getting a counseling beforehand.

I think that's a bit of a far stretch and misleading to say it's illegal but rarely punished etc.

Also the headline is completely wrong, as it is already allowed to get an abortion up to week 12.

Here is the part of the legal text defining the requirements.

Section 218a Exemption from punishment for abortion

(1) The elements of the offence under section 218 are not deemed fulfilled if

1.  the pregnant woman requests the termination of pregnancy and demonstrates to the physician by producing the certificate referred to in section 219 (2) sentence 2 that she obtained counselling at least three days prior to the procedure,

2.  the termination is performed by a physician and

3.  no more than 12 weeks have elapsed since conception.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 7 points 7 months ago

I think that’s a bit of a far stretch and misleading to say it’s illegal but rarely punished etc.

It's illegal but not punished if those conditions are met. It's a legal detail due to the constitutional court saying, more or less, that you can't just legalise the killing of a human if it's not self-defence and at-will abortions can't count as self-defence as noone infringed on the woman's rights.

The state is required to combat abortions, but social and welfare means have precedence over criminal punishment. Germany has a very low abortion rate (5.4/1000 women), that's about half that of Poland (which is Catholic) and 1/3rd to 1/4th (depending on the numbers you look at) of the US rates, and that's with abortion being illegal in a lot of US states and probably getting undercounted. 1/10th of Cuba.

[–] Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 7 months ago

It is illegal but decriminalized under those conditions. Still have a lot of pre conditions to fullfill

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 7 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

While abortion is rarely punished, it remains illegal in Germany, except for specific circumstances including when a woman’s life is in danger, or she is a victim of rape, while the prerequisite for any termination is a consultation with a state-recognised body.

However, opposition lawmakers, in particular from the conservative Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union alliance and the far-right Alternative für Deutschland, say as it stands the existing law enjoys broad acceptance and offers necessary protection to the unborn.

Leaked to some German media last week, the report included the recommendation that by effectively criminalising any woman who goes ahead with an abortion, the law is untenable.

Those pushing for a change to the law say the fact that abortion in the early stages of pregnancy is included as paragraph 218 of the penal code means a future government could instigate punishments for terminations relatively easily.

On Friday, the Center for Reproductive Rights in Europe welcomed the news that lawmakers in Poland under the new liberal government of Donald Tusk had taken the first step in relaxing the country’s strict abortion rules, including seeking to decriminalise the act.

In 2022, a Nazi-era law in Germany that forbade doctors from advertising abortion services was abolished after attempts by anti-abortion activists to push for the prosecution of some gynaecologists.

The original article contains 640 words, the summary contains 217 words. Saved 66%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!