There is no law that expressly allows for a legal abortion

when the pregnant mother's life is endangered. The

provisions of the Revised Penal Code penalizing abortion do
not provide for any qualifications when the pregnant
mother's life is endangered. I've clicked on the UN profile
that says that abortion in such an instance is authorized,
but it does not cite the legal basis for such statement.

It can nonetheless be argued that that an abortion to save

the mother's life might fall under the justifying
circumstances in Article 11.4 of the Revised Penal Code,
which legally justifies the commision of a criminal act "in
order to avoid an evil or injury" (i.e., endangerment of the
life of the mother). Yet there is no Supreme Court decision
that validates or invalidates such a position. And while that
argument could undoubtedly exempt the mother from
criminal prosecution, it is not as certain whether persons
who aid in the abortion (such as the doctors) could
similarly avail of the justifying circumstance.

All told, I think it is extremely dangerous to assert without

qualification or explanation that abortions in order to save
the life of the mother are legal in the Philippines, especially
in a public forum as Wikipedia which might be relief by a
Filipina thinking about undergoing an abortion. I will
amend the article to reflect the above, though if it can be
established that there is a law or judicial precedent that
says otherwise, I would welcome the correction.

--Anyo Niminus 12:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

400,000 abortions a year? "One study estimated that,

despite legal restrictions, in 1994 there were 400,000
abortions performed illegally in the Philippines and
80,000 hospitalizations of women for abortion-related
complications. 12% of all maternal deaths in 1994 were
due to unsafe abortion according to the Department of
Health of the Philippines. Two-thirds of Filipino women
who have abortions attempt to self-induce or seek
solutions from those who practice folk medicine"

This "One study" is a politically motivated policy paper on a

website, not peer-reviewed scientific research in a journal.
These numbers make no sense in context (when even
countries with the most liberal abortion laws, like the UK,
struggle to get above 200,000 abortions a year, we are
expected to believe that in a country with only a 1/3
larger population where abortion is a crime it is almost
twice as popular? This is entire section is very suspect and I
have deleted it until some statistics from a neutral source
can be found to back up the claims made
above) —Preceding unsigned comment added
by 212.183.39.115 (talk) 08:43, 23 February 2011
(UTC)
Abortion[edit]

Article II of the 1987 Philippine Constitution says, in part,

"Section 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family life
and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic
autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the
life of the mother and the life of the unborn from
conception."

The act is criminalized by Philippine law. Articles 256,

258 and 259 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines
mandate imprisonment for women who undergo abortion,
as well as for any person who assists in the procedure.
Article 258 further imposes a higher prison term on the
woman or her parents if the abortion is undertaken "in
order to conceal [the woman's] dishonor".

There is no law in the Philippines that expressly authorizes

abortions in order to save the woman's life; and the
general provisions which do penalize abortion make no
qualifications if the woman's life is endangered. It may be
argued that an abortion to save the mother's life could be
classified as a justifying circumstance (duress as opposed
to self-defense) that would bar criminal prosecution under
the Revised Penal Code. However, this has yet to be
adjudicated by the Philippine Supreme Court.
Proposals to liberalize Philippine abortion laws have been
opposed by the Catholic Church, and its opposition has
considerable influence in the predominantly Catholic
country. However, the constitutionality of abortion
restrictions has yet to be challenged before the Philippine
Supreme Court.

The constitutional provision that "[The State] shall equally

protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn
from conception" was crafted by the Constitutional
Commission which drafted the charter with the intention
of providing for constitutional protection of the abortion
ban, although the enactment of a more definitive provision
sanctioning the ban was not successful. The provision is
enumerated among several state policies, which are
generally regarded in law as unenforceable in the absence
of implementing legislation. The 1987 Constitution also
contains several other provisions enumerating various state
policies.[note 1] Whether these provisions may, by
themselves, be the source of enforceable rights without
implementing legislation has been the subject of
considerable debate in the legal sphere and within the
Supreme Court.[note 2]

An analysis by the Population Division of the United

Nations Department of Economic and Social
Affairs concluded that although the Revised Penal Code
does not list specific exceptions to the general prohibition
on abortion, under the general criminal law principles of
necessity as set forth in article 11(4) of the Code, an
abortion may be legally performed to save the pregnant
woman’s life.[2]

Abortion incidence[edit]

One 1997 study estimated that, despite legal restrictions,

in 1994 there were 400,000 abortions performed
illegally in the Philippines and 80,000 hospitalizations of
women for abortion-related complications;[3] It was
reported in 2005 that official estimates then ranged from
400,000 to 500,000 and rising, and that the World
Health Organization estimate was 800,000. Seventy
percent of unwanted pregnancies in the Philippines end in
abortion, according to the WHO. Approximately 4 in 5
abortions in the Philippines are for economic reasons, often
where a woman already has several children and cannot
care for another.[4]

While some doctors secretly perform abortions in clinics,

the 2,000 to 5,000 peso (US$37 to US$93) fee is too high
for many Filipinos, so they instead buy abortifacients on
the black market, e.g. from vendors near churches,
sari-sari stores and bakeries.[4] Two-thirds of Filipino
women who have abortions attempt to self-induce or seek
solutions from those who practice folk medicine.[5] One
hundred thousand people end up in the hospital every year
due to unsafe abortions, according to the Department of
Health,[4] and 12% of all maternal deaths in 1994 were
due to unsafe abortion. Some hospitals refuse to treat
complications of unsafe abortion, or operate without
anesthesia, as punishment for the patients.[4] The
Department of Health has created a program to address
the complications of unsafe abortion: Prevention and
Management of Abortion and Its Complications.[6]

See also[edit]

 Abortion law
 Catholic Church and abortion

Notes[edit]

1. ^ These provisions include, e.g., the affirmation

of labor "as a primary social economic force" (Section

14, Article II); the equal protection of "the life of the
mother and the life of the unborn from conception"
(Section 12, Article II); the "Filipino family as the
foundation of the nation" (Article XV, Section 1); the
recognition of Filipino as "the national language of the
Philippines" (Section 6, Article XVI), and even a
requirement that "all educational institutions shall
undertake regular sports activities throughout the
 country in cooperation with athletic clubs and other
sectors" (Section 19.1, Article XIV).
2. ^ The Court, for example, has ruled that a provision

requiring that the State "guarantee equal access to

opportunities to public service" could not be enforced
without implementing legislation, and thus could not
bar the disallowance of so-called "nuisance
candidates" in presidential elections. However, in
another case the Court held that a provision requiring
that the State "protect and advance the right of the
people to a balanced and healthful ecology" did not
require implementing legislation to become the source
of operative rights. Any legal challenge to abortion
restrictions in the Philippines would necessarily have
to evaluate the legal force given to Section 12, Article
II of the Constitution.

References
Abortion law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

International status of abortion law. In some cases, this
map may not accurately depict the content of this
article.

Legal on request

Restricted to cases of
maternal life, mental
health, physical
health, rape, fetal
defects, and/or
socioeconomic factors

Restricted to cases of
maternal life, mental
health, physical
health, rape and/or fet
al defects

Restricted to cases of
maternal life, mental
health, physical
health and/or rape

Restricted to cases of
 maternal life, mental
healthand/or physical
health

Restricted to cases of
maternal life

Illegal with no exceptions

No information[needs
update]

Abortion law permits, prohibits, restricts, or otherwise

regulates the availability of abortion. Abortion has been
a controversial subject in many societies through history
on religious, moral, ethical, practical, and political grounds.
It has been banned frequently and otherwise limited by law.
However, abortions continue to be common in many areas,
even where they are illegal. According to the World Health
Organization (WHO), abortion rates are similar in
countries where the procedure is legal and in countries
where it is not,[1] due to unavailability of
modern contraceptives in areas where abortion is
illegal.[2]

Also according to the WHO, the number of abortions

worldwide is declining due to increased access
to contraception.[1]Almost two-thirds of the world's
women currently reside in countries where abortion may
be obtained on request for a broad range
of social, economic, or personal reasons. Abortion laws
 vary widely by country. Three countries in Latin America
(Dominican Republic, El Salvador, and Nicaragua) and two
in Europe (Malta[3] and the Vatican City) ban the
procedure entirely.[4]

Contents

 1History
 2International law
 3National laws
 3.1Europe
 3.1.1European Union
 3.2United States
 3.3Countries with very restrictive laws
 3.4Beginning of pregnancy controversy
 4Exceptions in abortion law
 5Other related laws
 6Case law
 7See also
 8Notes
 9References
 10External links

History[edit]
Main article: History of abortion

This section needs additional citations

for verification. Please help improve
 this article by adding citations to
reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (July
2017) (Learn how and when to remove this
template message)

Abortion has existed since ancient times, with

natural abortifacients being found amongst a wide variety
of tribal people and in most written sources. Early texts
contain no mention of abortion or abortion law. When it
does appear, it is entailed in concerns about male property
rights, preservation of social order, and the duty to
produce fit citizens for the state or community. The
harshest penalties were generally reserved for a woman
who procured an abortion against her husband's wishes,
and for slaves who produced abortion in a woman of high
status. Religious texts often contained severe
condemnations of abortion, recommending penance but
seldom enforcing secular punishment. As a matter
of common law in England and the United States,
abortion was illegal anytime after quickening—when the
movements of the fetus could first be felt by the woman.
Under the born alive rule, the fetus was not considered a
"reasonable being" in Rerum Natura; and abortion was not
treated as murder in English law.

In the 20th century, many Western countries began to

codify abortion law or place further restrictions on the
practice. Anti-abortion groups were led by a combination
of groups opposed to abortion on moral grounds, and by
medical professionals who were concerned about the
danger presented by the procedure and the regular
involvement of non-medical personnel in performing
abortions. Nevertheless, it became clear that illegal
abortions continued to take place in large numbers even
where abortions were rigorously restricted. It was difficult
to obtain sufficient evidence to prosecute the women and
abortion doctors, and judges and juries were often
reluctant to convict. For example, Henry Morgentaler,
a Canadian pro-choice advocate, was never convicted by a
jury. He was acquitted by a jury in the 1973 court case,
but the acquittal was overturned by five judges on
the Quebec Court of Appeal in 1974. He went to prison,
appealed, and was again acquitted. In total, he served 10
months, suffering a heart attack while in solitary
confinement. Many were also outraged at the invasion of
privacy and the medical problems resulting from abortions
taking place illegally in medically dangerous circumstances.
Political movements soon coalesced around the legalization
of abortion and liberalization of existing laws.

By the mid 20th century, many countries had begun to

liberalize abortion laws, at least when performed to
protect the life of the woman, and in some cases on
woman's request. Under Vladimir Lenin, the Soviet
Union legalized abortions on request in
1920.[5][6][7][8][9] The Bolsheviks saw abortion as a
social evil created by the capitalist system, which left
women without the economic means to raise children,
forcing them to perform abortions. The Soviet state
initially preserved the tsarists ban on abortion, which
treated the practice as premeditated murder. However,
abortion had been practiced by Russian women for decades
and its incidence skyrocketed further as a result of
the Russian Civil War, which had left the country
economically devastated and made it extremely difficult
for many people to have children. The Soviet state
recognized that banning abortion would not stop the
practice because women would continue using the services
of private abortionists. In rural areas, these were often old
women who had no medical training, which made their
services very dangerous to the women's health. In
November 1920 the Soviet regime legalized abortion in
state hospitals. The state considered abortion as a
temporary necessary evil, which would disappear in the
future communist society, which would be able to provide
for all the children conceived.[10] In 1936 Joseph
Stalin placed prohibitions on abortions, which restricted
them to medically recommended cases only, in order to
increase population growth after the enormous loss of life
in World War 1 and the Russian Civil War.[11][12][13] In
the 1930's, several countries
(Poland, Turkey, Denmark, Sweden, Iceland, Mexico)
legalized abortion in some special cases (pregnancy from
rape, threat to mother's health, fetal malformation). In
1948 abortion was legalized in Japan, 1952
in Yugoslavia (on a limited basis), and 1955 in the Soviet
Union (on demand). Some Soviet allies (Poland, Hungary,
Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Romania) legalized abortion in
the late 1950's under pressure from the
Soviets.[14] Abortion has remained legal on demand in
Russia up to the present day, although that may soon
change. Citing demographic, economic, and moral
concerns, the pro-life parties of Russia, with some
measured sympathy from president Vladimir Putin, have
been pressuring the government to ban abortion outright,
or at least restrict its availability. In particular, the Russian
Duma has been debating a bill since 2015 to remove
financial coverage for abortion from the national
healthcare system. [15]

In the United Kingdom, the Abortion Act of 1967 clarified

and prescribed abortions as legal up to 24 weeks. Other
countries soon followed, including Canada (1969), the
United States (1973 in most states, pursuant to Roe v.
Wade, the federal Supreme Court decision which legalized
abortion nationwide), Tunisia (1973), Austria (1974),
France (1975), Sweden (1975), New Zealand (1977),
Italy (1978), the Netherlands (1980), and Belgium
(1990). However, these countries vary greatly in the
circumstances under which abortion was to be permitted.
In 1975 the West German Supreme Court struck down a
law legalizing abortion, holding that they contradict
the constitution's human rights guarantees. In 1976 a law
was adopted which enabled abortions up to 12 weeks.
After Germany's reunification, despite the legal status of
abortion in the former East Germany, a compromise was
reached which deemed most abortions up to 12 weeks
legal. In jurisdictions governed under sharia law, abortion
after 120th day from conception (19 weeks from LMP) is
illegal, especially for those who follow the
recommendations of the Hanafi legal school, while most
jurists of the Maliki legal school "believe that ensoulment
occurs at the moment of conception, and they tend to
forbid abortion at any point [similar to the Roman
Catholic Church]. The other schools hold intermediate
positions. [..] The penalty prescribed for an illegal abortion
varies according to particular circumstances involved.
According to sharia, it should be limited to a fine that is
paid to the father or heirs of the fetus".[16] See also: Islam
and abortion.

International law[edit]

There are no international or multinational treaties that

deal directly with abortion, but human rights law touches
on the issues.

The American Convention on Human Rights, which in

2013 had 23 Latin American parties, declares human life
as commencing with conception. In Latin America,
abortion is only legal in Cuba (1965)
and Uruguay (2012)[17] It is also legal in Mexico
City (the law on abortion in Mexico varies by state[18]).

In the 2010 case of A, B and C v Ireland, the European

Court of Human Rights found that the European
Convention on Human Rights did not include a right to an
abortion.

In 2005 the United Nations Human Rights

Committee ordered Peru to compensate a woman (known
as K.L.) for denying her a medically indicated abortion; this
was the first time a United Nations Committee had held
any country accountable for not ensuring access to safe,
legal abortion, and the first time the committee affirmed
that abortion is a human right.[19] K.L. received the
compensation in 2016.[19] In the 2016 case of Mellet v
Ireland, the UN HRC found Ireland's abortion
laws violated International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights because Irish law banned abortion in cases of fatal
foetal abnormalities.

National laws[edit]

Supporter of legalized abortion at a rally in Paraná,

Argentina

While abortions are legal under certain conditions in most

countries, these conditions vary widely. According to
the United Nations publication World Abortion Policies
2013,[20] abortion is allowed in most countries (97
percent) in order to save a woman's life. Other
commonly-accepted reasons are preserving physical (68
percent) or mental health (65 percent). In about half of
countries abortion is accepted in the case of rape or incest
(51 percent), and in case of foetal impairment (50
percent). Performing an abortion because of economic or
social reasons is accepted in 35 percent of countries.
Performing abortion only on the basis of a woman's request
is allowed in 30 percent of countries, including in the US,
Canada, most European countries, and China, with 42
percent of the world's population living in such countries.

In some countries, additional procedures must be followed

before the abortion can be carried out even if the basic
grounds for it are met. For example, in Finland, where
abortions are not granted based merely on a woman's
request, approval for each abortion must be obtained from
two doctors (or one in special circumstances).[21][22] The
majority, 90% of abortions in Finland are performed for
socio-economical reasons.[23] How strictly all of the
procedures dictated in the legislature are followed in
practice is another matter. For example, in the United
Kingdom Care Quality Commission's report in 2012 found
that several NHS clinics were circumventing the law, using
forms pre-signed by one doctor, thus allowing abortions to
patients who only met with one doctor.[24]
The effect of national laws as of 2013 for each of the 193
member states of the United Nations and two
non-member States (Vatican City and Niue) is listed in the
UN World Abortion Policies 2013[25] report, and
summarized in the following table. The publication includes
information on national estimates of abortion rate,
fertility rate, maternal mortality ratio, levels of
contraceptive use, unmet need for family planning, and
government support for family planning, as well as
regional estimates of unsafe abortion.
Introduction

Abortion is a painful topic for couples facing a dilemma ©

The abortion debate deals with the rights and wrongs of deliberately
ending a pregnancy before normal childbirth, killing the foetus in the
process.
Abortion is a very painful topic for women and men who find themselves
facing the moral dilemma of whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. It's
one of the most polarising moral issues - most people are on one side or
the other, very few are undecided.

The primary questions

The moral debate about abortion deals with two separate questions:
1. Is abortion morally wrong?
2. Should abortion be legal or illegal?

The secondary questions

But those two questions don't end the debate.
 If we conclude that abortion is not morally wrong, that doesn't mean that
it's right to have an abortion; we need to ask whether having an abortion
is the best thing (or least bad thing) to do in each particular case.
If we conclude that abortion is morally wrong, that doesn't mean that it's
always impermissible to have an abortion; we need to ask whether having
an abortion is less wrong than the alternatives.

The two sides

On one side are those who call themselves 'pro-life'. They say that
intentionally caused abortion is always wrong (although it may on very
rare occasions be the best thing to do).
On the other side are those who call themselves 'pro-choice' or 'supporters
of abortion rights', and who regard intentional abortion as acceptable in
some circumstances.

The silent 'victim'

People feel particularly strongly about abortion because there is no way
of getting any opinion from the foetus - the potential 'victim' - about the
issue (as there is when considering euthanasia), and because the foetus
can easily be portrayed as an entirely innocent and defenceless being.

Top

The issues

The non-religious argument about abortion covers several

issues, such as:

 what gives a being the right to life?

 is a foetus a human being?
 is a foetus the sort of being that has a right to life?
 is a foetus a separate being from its mother?
 if the foetus has a right to life, does that right take
priority over the mother's right to control her own body?
The problems can be restated in terms of the sort of
decisions that pregnant women and their doctors have to
face:

 Does the foetus have a right to be carried in the

woman's womb until it's ready to be born?
 Under what circumstances, if ever, can we take an
'innocent' human life?
 Is any other right more important than the right to life
- for example, a woman's right to decide what to do with
her own body?
 If the woman's life is in danger because of the
pregnancy, how do we decide whose rights should prevail?
The case against abortion
The most common form of the case for banning abortion
goes like this:

 deliberately killing innocent human beings is wrong

 a foetus is an innocent human being
 abortion is the deliberate killing of a foetus
 therefore abortion is the deliberate killing of an
innocent human being
 therefore, abortion is wrong
If we follow this argument and accept that a foetus has a
right to live, then we face part two of the problem:

 abortion is wrong unless it serves some right of the

mother that is as morally important as the foetus' right to
life
 the right to life outweighs another person's right to
control her own body
 therefore abortion is wrong unless it serves some
greater right of the mother than the right to control her
own body
 the only such right is the mother's right to live
 therefore abortion is wrong unless it is to save the life
of the mother
Beware of the hidden issues
Wrapped up in the ideas above are some issues that need to
be dealt with separately...

 it's only wrong to kill if death is a bad thing... but is

death a bad thing?
 what do we mean by a 'human being'?
 when, if ever, does a human foetus become a
'human being'?

Women's rights arguments against abortion

Not all who support women's rights support abortion, and many of them
are active in trying to promote practical solutions to the causes that drive
women to abortion.
Some join other pro-life advocates and say that the right to lifeshould
always outweigh the right of an individual to equality or to control their
own body.
But others raise arguments that are specifically related to women's rights:

Abortion does not free women

Some argue that abortion does not liberate women, but allows society not
to cater to women's needs.
They say that what women need for equality is not free access to abortion
but to be given what they need to survivefinancially and socially as
mothers:
 inexpensive, readily available childcare
 a workplace or school that acknowledges the needs of mothers,
 e.g. providing flexible scheduling and maternity leave,
 state support that helps to reintegrate a woman into the
workforce
They say that if women couldn't have abortions so easily, governments
would have to invest more money in supporting mothers.

Abortion sidesteps oppression of women

Others oppose abortion because it provides a way of side-stepping other
real issues that should be addressed. One writer put it like this:

There are women who are raped and become pregnant;

the problem is that they were raped, not that they
are pregnant.

There are women who are starving who become pregnant;

the problem is that they are starving, not that they
are pregnant.
 There are women in abusive relationships who become
pregnant; the problem is that they are in abusive
relationships, not that they are pregnant.

Megan Clancy
Abortion damages women
Some people oppose abortion because it can damage the long-term
physical and emotional health of women who have an abortion.

Top

Abortion violates feminist principles

Some feminists oppose all forms of violence, including

abortion, because they are inconsistent with the core
feminist principles of justice, non-violence and
non-discrimination.

We believe in a woman's right to control her body,

and she deserves this right no matter where she lives,
even if she's still living inside her mother's womb.

Feminists for Life

Abortion is a male plot
Yet another group object to abortion because they see it as
a male plot. (In fact many of this group don't object to
abortion; they want people to be aware that men often
support abortion for a thoroughly bad reason.)

They argue that men see the risk of pregnancy as

something that stops men having sex when they want it. If
men are to achieve full sexual freedom (i.e. the freedom to
have sex without responsibility) it is essential that abortion
be freely available to backup contraception.

So abortion on demand is vital if men are to be able to have

women on demand, and thus men are arguing for abortion
so that they can continue to exploit women.

This was one of the reasons that 19th century feminists

opposed abortion: they regarded it as a way for men to
have sex with women without having to take responsibility
for any resulting children by getting the women to risk their
lives in what were then dangerous operations in order to
prevent the child being born.

This point of view is cogently argued in chapter 3 of Right

Wing Women by Andrea Dworkin, the relevant part of
which is online.

Warning: this article includes strong sexual

language.

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external

websites.

It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the
unborn from conception." The act is criminalized by Philippine
law. Articles 256, 258 and 259 of the Revised Penal Code of
the Philippines mandate imprisonment for women who
undergo abortion, as well as for any person who assists in the
Abortion[edit]

Article II of the 1987 Philippine Constitution says, in part,

"Section 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family life
and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic
autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the
life of the mother and the life of the unborn from
conception."

The act is criminalized by Philippine law. Articles 256,

258 and 259 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines
mandate imprisonment for women who undergo abortion,
as well as for any person who assists in the procedure.
Article 258 further imposes a higher prison term on the
woman or her parents if the abortion is undertaken "in
order to conceal [the woman's] dishonor".

There is no law in the Philippines that expressly authorizes

abortions in order to save the woman's life; and the
general provisions which do penalize abortion make no
qualifications if the woman's life is endangered. It may be
argued that an abortion to save the mother's life could be
classified as a justifying circumstance (duress as opposed
to self-defense) that would bar criminal prosecution under
the Revised Penal Code. However, this has yet to be
adjudicated by the Philippine Supreme Court.

Proposals to liberalize Philippine abortion laws have been

opposed by the Catholic Church, and its opposition has
considerable influence in the predominantly Catholic
country. However, the constitutionality of abortion
restrictions has yet to be challenged before the Philippine
Supreme Court.

The constitutional provision that "[The State] shall equally

protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn
from conception" was crafted by the Constitutional
Commission which drafted the charter with the intention
of providing for constitutional protection of the abortion
ban, although the enactment of a more definitive provision
sanctioning the ban was not successful. The provision is
enumerated among several state policies, which are
generally regarded in law as unenforceable in the absence
of implementing legislation. The 1987 Constitution also
contains several other provisions enumerating various state
policies.[note 1] Whether these provisions may, by
themselves, be the source of enforceable rights without
implementing legislation has been the subject of
considerable debate in the legal sphere and within the
Supreme Court.[note 2]

An analysis by the Population Division of the United

Nations Department of Economic and Social
Affairs concluded that although the Revised Penal Code
does not list specific exceptions to the general prohibition
on abortion, under the general criminal law principles of
necessity as set forth in article 11(4) of the Code, an
abortion may be legally performed to save the pregnant
woman’s life.[2]

Abortion incidence[edit]

One 1997 study estimated that, despite legal restrictions,

in 1994 there were 400,000 abortions performed
illegally in the Philippines and 80,000 hospitalizations of
women for abortion-related complications;[3] It was
reported in 2005 that official estimates then ranged from
400,000 to 500,000 and rising, and that the World
Health Organization estimate was 800,000. Seventy
percent of unwanted pregnancies in the Philippines end in
abortion, according to the WHO. Approximately 4 in 5
abortions in the Philippines are for economic reasons, often
where a woman already has several children and cannot
care for another.[4]

While some doctors secretly perform abortions in clinics,

the 2,000 to 5,000 peso (US$37 to US$93) fee is too high
for many Filipinos, so they instead buy abortifacients on
the black market, e.g. from vendors near churches,
sari-sari stores and bakeries.[4] Two-thirds of Filipino
women who have abortions attempt to self-induce or seek
solutions from those who practice folk medicine.[5] One
hundred thousand people end up in the hospital every year
due to unsafe abortions, according to the Department of
Health,[4] and 12% of all maternal deaths in 1994 were
due to unsafe abortion. Some hospitals refuse to treat
complications of unsafe abortion, or operate without
anesthesia, as punishment for the patients.[4] The
Department of Health has created a program to address
the complications of unsafe abortion: Prevention and
Management of Abortion and Its Complications.[6]

See also[edit]

 Abortion law
 Catholic Church and abortion

Notes[edit]
1. ^ These provisions include, e.g., the affirmation

of labor "as a primary social economic force" (Section

14, Article II); the equal protection of "the life of the
mother and the life of the unborn from conception"
(Section 12, Article II); the "Filipino family as the
foundation of the nation" (Article XV, Section 1); the
recognition of Filipino as "the national language of the
Philippines" (Section 6, Article XVI), and even a
requirement that "all educational institutions shall
undertake regular sports activities throughout the
country in cooperation with athletic clubs and other
sectors" (Section 19.1, Article XIV).
2. ^ The Court, for example, has ruled that a provision

requiring that the State "guarantee equal access to

opportunities to public service" could not be enforced
without implementing legislation, and thus could not
bar the disallowance of so-called "nuisance
candidates" in presidential elections. However, in
another case the Court held that a provision requiring
that the State "protect and advance the right of the
people to a balanced and healthful ecology" did not
require implementing legislation to become the source
of operative rights. Any legal challenge to abortion
restrictions in the Philippines would necessarily have
to evaluate the legal force given to Section 12, Article
II of the Constitution.