logo
Argentina used as a ‘testing ground' for eroding abortion rights, warns Amnesty

Argentina used as a ‘testing ground' for eroding abortion rights, warns Amnesty

The Guardian28-05-2025

Argentina is being used as a 'testing ground' for stripping back abortion rights internationally as it cuts funding for contraceptives and ends the distribution of abortion pills, Amnesty International warned on Wednesday.
Before the inauguration of President Javier Milei in December 2023, the state bought abortion pills, which were then distributed for free through the public health system.
In 2023, the state supplied more than 166,000 doses of misoprostol and a joint mifepristone-misoprostol therapy known as a combipack, according to data collected by Amnesty. But it delivered none last year, with responsibility quietly handed over to the country's 23 provinces.
Amnesty said the switch was 'hindering access to abortion services for women', and that more than half of the provinces reported a shortage of misoprostol, and almost all reported shortages of mifepristone and combipack.
According to the Argentine Network for Access to Safe Abortion, the change is having the biggest impact in provinces where politicians are anti-abortion or have fewer economic resources.
Project Mirar, an initiative that monitors implementation of the abortion law, said provinces had struggled to negotiate prices as effectively as the state, and that some did not have the budget to buy the drugs. One report found that in some cases women had been forced to buy the medication themselves, which it said could cost about $160 (£120).
Amnesty has warned that reproductive health policies being pushed by Argentina's far-right government are linked to Project 25, the ultra-conservative policy blueprint being championed by the Trump administration in the US.
Mariela Belski, director of Amnesty International Argentina, said she believed that 'Argentina has been used as a testing ground for several of the policies featured in the Heritage Foundation's 2025 plan', including restricting access to abortion and limiting broader sexual and reproductive rights.
'It is part of a global backlash that seeks to dismantle hard-won gains secured by women. It is also happening under Donald Trump's leadership in the United States and in countries such as Hungary,' said Belski.
Argentina legalised abortion in all cases up to 14 weeks of pregnancy in 2020, after sweeping protests known as the 'green wave' movement. Previously, the procedure was permitted only in cases of rape or if the woman's health was at risk.
The legalisation heralded a success for women's rights in Argentina and regionally. Between 2021 and 2023, 283,000 voluntary and legal abortions were provided by Argentina's public sector, while abortion-related deaths more than halved between 2020 and 2022.
But Milei has dismantled dozens of public policies relating to women's rights since taking power. He has closed the ministry of women, genders and diversity, slashed programmes aimed at combating gender violence, and drastically cut funding for contraceptives.
The Argentinian leader told an audience of high-school pupils that abortion should be considered 'aggravated murder', and declared to the World Economic Forum that feminists were 'promoters of the bloody, murderous abortion agenda'.
On the campaign trail, Milei said pro-choice Argentines were 'brainwashed by a homicidal policy' and vowed to launch a referendum to overturn the abortion law.
In February 2024, a small group of legislators from Milei's La Libertad Avanza party went further still, filing a bill in congress to repeal the landmark 2020 abortion law. The bill was quickly withdrawn, but in December a high-ranking member of the government said that a push to repeal or change the law could go ahead this year.
In Tucumán, a conservative province in north-west Argentina, healthcare providers say they are witnessing a rise in unsafe abortions amid supply delays and misinformation.
Adriana Alvarez, a gynaecologist who provides abortions at a public hospital in Tucumán, said supplies had repeatedly been disrupted over the past year.
'We're now seeing, as we saw many years ago, unsafe abortions. They are being driven underground,' she said. 'We've gone backwards.'
Amnesty said it had received 120 complaints from women requesting help and reporting being obstructed in trying to access abortions last year, up from 32 in 2023. Between January and April this year, Amnesty said it had received reports of 160 such cases.
Alvarez said women were arriving at the clinic with 'fear in their eyes'. 'They say they don't want their family to find out, or to go to certain hospitals because people work there that they know,' she said.
'We have women who come and ask if they are still allowed to have an abortion,' she said. 'They're scared of going to jail.'
Those most affected are the poorest and most vulnerable women in society, with some susceptible to misinformation on social media, healthcare professionals warned.
Soledad Deza, a lawyer and president of Fundación Mujeres x Mujeres, which helps women access abortions, said the shift in official policy had confused women about the legality of abortion.
'There has been so much discourse around thinking of abortion as homicide that women do not know if they are exercising a right or committing a crime,' she said.
Milei's anti-abortion rhetoric has also prompted growing numbers of doctors in Argentina to refuse to carry out terminations, according to medical professionals across the country.
Julieta Bazán, a doctor in Buenos Aires, said professionals – whether ultrasound staff, nurses or doctors – 'no longer want to guarantee' abortion rights due to discrimination and a lack of resources. The 'noticeable' abortion pill shortage was a 'violation of our law', she said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Gaza aid chief: 'Israel herding Palestinians into concentration camps'
Gaza aid chief: 'Israel herding Palestinians into concentration camps'

The National

time21 minutes ago

  • The National

Gaza aid chief: 'Israel herding Palestinians into concentration camps'

Amjad Al-Shawa, the head of the Palestinian Network of NGOs, said that Israel was trying to lure Gazans in the north to the south of the territory with its 'Gaza Humanitarian Foundation' – then imprison them. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) is an American organisation which has been at the centre of an international scandal where Palestinians trying to reach food at its sites have been shot at and killed. It is backed by both the US and Israeli governments as a way of getting around the United Nations as the main distributor of food in the territory – and has been condemned by a number of humanitarian organisations, including Christian Aid and Amnesty International. Speaking from Gaza via a video link to a press conference in London on Thursday, said that Israel planned to 'starve' Palestinians in the north in a bid to move them to the south, consistent with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu's (below) plans to colonise the region. He said: 'They starve Palestinians under the famine they went to catch up some aid which was distributed in these military sites, mainly in Rafah, south of Netzarim, they were shot and killed' Al-Shawa added: 'This mechanism is to serve the Israeli plan, to force displacement for the Palestinians from Gaza's north – and this was clearly declared by Netanyahu himself. READ MORE: BBC issues statement after staff 'held at gunpoint and strip searched ' by IDF 'The first step of that is displacement and the second to have concentration camps on the south for the Palestinians under the security measures of the Israeli occupation forces.' The Gazan humanitarian worker hit out at Israel for replacing a 'humanitarian structure' with 'military companies'. The GHF announced on Thursday it would reopen two distribution centres – despite the Israeli military previously declaring that the routes leading to them were 'considered combat zones'. An open letter signed by 11 charities in May called the GHF a 'sham', while UN humanitarian chief Tom Fletcher described it as a 'cynical sideshow'. The letter, published before people were killed trying to access GHF centres, said: 'Despite branding itself as 'independent' and 'transparent', the GHF would be wholly dependent on Israeli coordination and operates via Israeli-controlled entry points, primarily the Port of Ashdod and the Kerem Shalom/Karem Abu Salem crossing. 'This entrenches and legitimises the very structures of control that are responsible for cutting Gaza off from food, fuel, and medicine.' Amnesty International has accused the organisation of 'inhumane and politically motivated methods of aid delivery'. The US and Israeli governments were approached for comment.

Supreme Court makes it easier to claim 'reverse discrimination' in employment, in a case from Ohio
Supreme Court makes it easier to claim 'reverse discrimination' in employment, in a case from Ohio

The Independent

time2 hours ago

  • The Independent

Supreme Court makes it easier to claim 'reverse discrimination' in employment, in a case from Ohio

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.

Fact check: Amendment would stop prosecutions of women for getting abortions
Fact check: Amendment would stop prosecutions of women for getting abortions

The Independent

time3 hours ago

  • The Independent

Fact check: Amendment would stop prosecutions of women for getting abortions

A widely shared post on social media claimed MPs 'are voting to legalise abortion up to BIRTH. No limits. No safeguards.' The poster also said: 'On 4 July, Parliament will vote on a law that would: Remove ALL criminal penalties for abortion.' They added: 'Under MP Diana Johnson's amendment: No time limits. No gestational protections. No punishment for abortions at 7, 8, even 9 months.' Evaluation The proposal being discussed was not tabled by Diana Johnson, nor is there any evidence Parliament will be voting on it on July 4. It also does not remove all criminal penalties for abortion and maintains most of the limits that are currently in place. If the amendment is made into law it will still be illegal for a woman to terminate her pregnancy outside of the current rules – which among other things limit abortions after 24 weeks into a pregnancy – but her actions would be decriminalised, meaning she would not be punished. However doctors who perform abortions which are not permissible under current laws could still be punished. The facts Who has tabled the amendment? The poster initially said that the changes could come under an amendment from Diana Johnson MP. Ms Johnson did table an amendment to the last Government's criminal justice bill, however that bill – and therefore the amendment – was abandoned when the election was called. In a reply to another user, the original poster instead said they were referring to an amendment which 'has been tabled by Tonia Antoniazzi to the government's Crime & Policing Bill.' Ms Antoniazzi has indeed filed an amendment to the current crime and policing bill which is making its way through Parliament. The two amendments are very similar in their wording, although not identical. What does the amendment say? Ms Antoniazzi's amendment is called NC1 and reads: 'Removal of women from the criminal law related to abortion. For the purposes of the law related to abortion, including sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, no offence is committed by a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy.' Ms Antoniazzi's explanatory note which accompanies the amendment states that the change would 'disapply existing criminal law' on abortion from 'women acting in relation to her own pregnancy.' This is at any point in the pregnancy, the note states. It adds: 'It would not change any law regarding the provision of abortion services within a healthcare setting, including but not limited to the time limit, telemedicine, the grounds for abortion, or the requirement for two doctors' approval.' What does the current law on abortion say? The 1967 Abortion Act made abortion legal in some circumstances. In its current form the act allows an abortion if the pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner, and as long as the woman is not more than 24 weeks pregnant. The act also sets other restrictions on when an abortion can be legally carried out, including the need for sign-off by two registered medical practitioners. Outside of the parameters in which the 1967 act made abortion legal in certain circumstances, the practice is still governed by acts passed in 1929 and 1861 which can punish abortion with life imprisonment. When will the amendment be voted on? The Crime and Policing Bill, which this amendment has been attached to, has passed its first and second reading in the House of Commons. It is currently in the so-called report stage and a third reading in the Commons is due to happen 'on a date to be confirmed'. In a first reading the bill is presented to the Commons and not debated. The bill's general principles are debated at the second reading, then amendments come at committee and report stage. At the third reading MPs decide on whether to pass the bill. If they do it then goes onto the House of Lords. At the time of writing there was no sign of the crime and policing bill on the House of Commons schedule for July 4. In fact that day is a Friday and the House of Commons normally only sits on Mondays to Thursdays, sometimes sitting on Fridays to consider private member's bills. The crime and policing bill is not a private member's bill. Would this legalise abortion up to birth? No, the bill would decriminalise abortion up to birth for the pregnant woman, not legalise it. Decriminalising something means that while it is still illegal, breaking that law does not carry any penalty. The suggested amendment would only deal with 'a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy'. Therefore the amendment does not change the current law on whether doctors can provide an abortion after 24 weeks. Other safeguards around legally provided abortions remain unchanged. Doctors and others who provided an abortion outside of the legally defined parameters could still be punished. It is just the pregnant woman who would escape punishment in such a scenario. UK Parliament – What's on: Friday 4 July 2025 (archived)

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store