Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42565626›Full record

ArticleSexual and reproductive health matters2025

Between protection and autonomy: a comparative analysis of legal approaches to abortion access for young people.

Rebecca Reingold, Paulina Macías Ortega, Guillermina Pappier, Laura Dragnic Tohá, Sarah Wetter

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Sexual and reproductive health matters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Rebecca ReingoldAssociate Director, O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC, USA.
Paulina Macías OrtegaFormer Research Assistant, O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0955-4408
Guillermina PappierFormer Fellow, O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC, USA.
Laura Dragnic ToháFormer Research Assistant,  O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC, USA.
Sarah WetterSenior Associate, O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown Law, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article analyses national legal frameworks that regulate young people's access to abortion, focusing on how different approaches to decision-making authority can either facilitate or obstruct access to care. It explores how countries that have recently liberalised their abortion laws, namely Colombia, Argentina, and Mexico, have acknowledged the need to lower the ages of consent below 18 and integrate the principles of the "evolving capacities of the child" or "progressive autonomy" into their legislation. Each country's approach, whether lowering the age of consent in specific circumstances (Mexico), establishing differentiated age brackets with varying degrees of autonomy (Argentina), or removing age-based restrictions altogether (Colombia), offers a different mechanism for increasing young people's autonomy in decision-making involving abortion. The article also considers how a country that has experienced a recent regression in abortion rights, namely the United States, has also rolled back young people's ability to autonomously consent to abortion care and increased parental involvement in such decisions. Through a comparative analysis of these four countries' legal frameworks, the article concludes that sweeping changes to abortion law and policy - whether progressive or regressive in nature - can fundamentally alter young people's ability to consent to and access such care. It also issues a series of recommendations for the regulation of young people's abortion decision-making, including grounding relevant laws and policies in international human rights principles and linking them to laws and policies geared towards protecting young people's rights in general.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedAbortion, LegalDecision MakingHealth Services AccessibilityPersonal AutonomyAdolescentArgentinaColombiaFemaleHumansMexicoPregnancyUnited Statesabortionautonomyevolving capacitiesparental involvementprogressive autonomyreproductive rights

Identifiers

PMID42565626
PMCPMC13600281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.