By: Samuel Pimping
Abortion has been one of society’s greatest moral conundrums until today—having divided the world into adversaries and advocates. If we were to do away with its legal and theological aspects, how would we define the acceptability of the procedure in terms of ethical value?
Abortion in the Past
Abortion had been common in ancient times. Egyptian women would empty out the conceived using a mix of herbal drinks and tools, and the Greeks would consult midwives on which method to perform. Hippocrates himself (the Greek physician to whom the Hippocratic Oath is attributed) recommended several abortion methods such as purgatives, direct pressure on the uterus, and severe physical strain.
Romans shared the same perspective with Greeks, and having children was feasible for as long as the time, attitude, and resources allowed it. They primarily used over 200 forms of abortifacients, which are drugs or devices that induce abortion upon consumption or use. When abortion was desired, it had generally been because some of the wealthy might view child-raising as a social burden while the poor are likely to see it as a financial hurdle. Prostitutes, on the other hand, feared losing their livelihood as
pregnancy had been commonly regarded as the antithesis of youth.
The Greeks and Romans held an interesting theory that provided for their justification of abortion. They granted the unborn fetus neither life nor soul. The fetus is described as “a part of the woman,” which is no different from any other internal organ she possesses. Abiding by this perspective would mean that the conceived is not yet seen as a real person and is hence perceived similar to an appendage. Based on
documentation, abortion usually took place between the third and seventh month.
If it had been such a common practice in the past, then what changed the norm?
Christianity and Abortion
It is not new that religion currently holds the opinion of condemning the practice as an immoral and barbaric means of murder. In fact, before the third century, anyone who has been found guilty of committing abortion were to be exiled for life by the church.
However, inaccuracies in historical interpretation have negatively influenced many opinions today through misinformation. While many individuals hold the notion that the church had always been staunch in its denunciation of abortion, Christian women and physicians in the Middle Ages actually advocated and engaged in contraceptives and abortion practices. This is contrary to the popular view that abortion had always been deemed an iniquitous act by the church.
Abortion was especially regarded when the woman’s life had been evidently in danger. It has been shown that even a late-term abortion undertaken for the preservation of a mother’s life had never been a taboo tainted by shame and immorality in the past. In addition, the early Roman Catholic Church apparently permitted early male and female abortions in the first 40 days and 80 to 90 days of carriage, respectively. This is evidence that the church has made exceptions and has never completely forbidden the long standing practice all throughout history.
It was only until 1588 when Pope Sixtus V decreed that all forms of abortion be deemed murder with excommunication as punishment. Despite this significant change, the new pope overturned the decision and once again allowed the practice of early abortions only three years after. The standard had remained favored upon for another three centuries before Pius IX again declared all abortion murder in 1869. Since then, this has been the stance of the Catholic Church. These abrupt changes in crucial belief systems demonstrate the ever-volatile views and norms that society categorizes as either acceptable or not.
The Criminalization of Abortion
Laws that absolutely prohibit abortion are a relatively recent development. How and when did abortion become a criminal act in the Philippines? It was criminalized in 1870 after the imposition of the Spanish penal code, and after that, these criminal provisions were incorporated into the Revised Penal Code in 1930. Given our deep-rooted Catholicroots and highly conservative nature as Filipinos, the separation of church and state had already been a blurred line back then.
The final legal act that truly led to the downfall of abortion was the drafting of the 1987 Constitution. The Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines exercised its power over the government, and the first-ever Philippine Constitution in which it is the state’s mandate to protect “the life of the unborn from conception” was passed. Given the highest authority of a constitutional provision, multiple laws and regulations prohibiting abortion and providing sanctions were then imposed such as the Medical Act, the
Midwifery Act, and the Pharmaceutical Act.
Abortifacients were forbidden, and any related procedures were deemed illegal. Professional doctors, physicians, and midwives are unable to safely administer abortion in fear of six-year imprisonment and the revocation of their license. Women who undergo abortion will also be punished from two to six years in prison.
The criminalization of abortion had a clear purpose—to prevent women from getting abortions and preserve “the life of the unborn.” Alas, the exact opposite occurred instead.
A Failure of Life and of Law
The disincentive of law on safe abortions led to the inadvertent incentivization of underground abortions. Put simply, the criminalization of abortion left millions of women no other choice but to turn to riskier, unsafe methods in fear of stigma and legal punishment. In 2020, 1.26 million abortions were conducted in the Philippines according to a study conducted by the Philippine Safe Abortion Advocacy Network (PINSAN).
These perilous procedures were often carried out by unlicensed doctors, midwives, and traditional healers with makeshift tools and clinics.
Women in marginalized communities especially fell victim to the illegality of abortion. Any individual who has therefore been afflicted with life-threatening pregnancies only has two options: to engage in unsafe practices or to endure the pregnancy despite the dangerous risks. Furthermore, criminalization has acted as a catalyst for the further stigmatization of abortion. Women seeking legitimate post-abortion care will have a difficult time as not everyone is sympathetic to their situation.
What is even more unfortunate is that there are no exemptions under the law that allow abortion in exceptionally severe cases. These cases include unwanted pregnancies that result from rape and incest and those that pose a threat to both the fetus and its bearer. The absence of any provision in this regard demonstrates the failure of law in accommodating empathy and understanding for the women who are victims of these extraordinary cases and heinous acts.
Allowing access to abortion is necessary pursuant to every woman’s right to health, life, and choice. If need be, abortion laws can be decriminalized and reformed to make it so that the procedure is permissible only before the point when the life of an unborn child is deemed to have begun. The matter of when life starts within the womb is a debate that is different for every country. For instance, Argentina has legalized abortion in 2021 for the first 14 weeks of pregnancy—the 15th week being the point at which life has legally started.
In a country plagued with poverty such as the Philippines, a child’s future quality of life must also be highly considered. The purpose of criminalizing abortion was to “protect the life of the unborn.” Nonetheless, it can be argued that the lives of those born should be given greater weight, for a life without the most basic of needs may not even be much of a life at all in the first place. Abortion is simply one of the many means alongside contraception that gives women the chance to decide their future.
Having some of the most restrictive laws in the world surrounding abortion has resulted in millions of women suffering in stigmatized silence. They should not be imprisoned after going through desperation and helplessness. Rather, they should be allowed the means to engage in safe procedures as a matter of choice. For the first time, in 2022, the Philippine Commission on Human Rights (PCHR) expressly advocated the decriminalization of abortion in the country. The same has also been shown support by Senator Hontiveros and the current administration.
As Hippocrates stated in “Of the Epidemics,” first, do no harm. While many believe that the criminalization of abortion abides by this maxim, it must also be considered whether our very laws do more harm than good.
