Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31885439›Full record

ArticleHealth and human rights2019

Eliminating Abortion from Criminal Law in Colombia: A Just Cause.

Ana Cristina González-Vélez, Carolina Melo-Arévalo, Juliana Martínez-Londoño

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health and human rights, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ana Cristina González-VélezCo-founder of La Mesa por la Vida y la Salud de las Mujeres, Bogotá, Colombia.
Carolina Melo-ArévaloMember of La Mesa por la Vida y la Salud de las Mujeres, Bogotá, Colombia.
Juliana Martínez-LondoñoMember of and coordinator at La Mesa por la Vida y la Salud de las Mujeres, Bogotá, Colombia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The two main legal models governing abortion provision, indications for abortion and time limits on the number of weeks of pregnancy, both limit recognition of women's reproductive autonomy. Each model restricts the circumstances under which women can access abortion. Yet, in most of the world these have been the main political goals for the feminist movement in the fight to make abortion legal and safe. Other strategies have also been incorporated into these goals. But in each case, abortion remains a crime, causing pervasive and profound damage for the providers and for women, and maintaining abortion as a part of an exceptionality regime suspended in its own illegality. This article discusses such limitations. It then focuses on Colombia and the experiences of feminist collective La Mesa por la Vida y la Salud de las Mujeres, which is campaigning to have abortion removed from the criminal law. In particular, this article examines a double standard in Colombian law: while abortion has been declared a fundamental right, it remains a crime in the penal code.

Indexed as

FeminismReproductive RightsAbortion, LegalColombiaCrimeCriminal LawFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID31885439
PMCPMC6927378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.