Would it be feasible for European Union countries to implement Safe Access Zones for premises providing abortion services?

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Emily Ottley, Sam Rowlands
{"title":"Would it be feasible for European Union countries to implement Safe Access Zones for premises providing abortion services?","authors":"Emily Ottley, Sam Rowlands","doi":"10.1080/13625187.2025.2463431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Anti-abortion protestors situated near premises providing abortion services create barriers and hurdles to accessing abortion services, which violates the right of pregnant people to seek sexual and reproductive health services. There has been shown to be a need for Safe Access Zones (SAZs) to guarantee physical access to abortion services without obstruction. SAZs usually operate within a prescribed radius around premises providing abortion services and set out what behaviour is prohibited. The objective of this paper is to present a summary of the international experience of introducing and implementing SAZ laws, and to explain the lessons to be learned from this experience. SAZ legislation has been successfully enacted internationally in 22 jurisdictions (USA excluded). Countries with SAZ laws include Australia, New Zealand, the UK, and parts of Canada. Despite the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe calling for the introduction of SAZs in 2022, only two European Union (EU) countries have implemented this recommendation so far. On the basis of the medical and legal insights gained from the functioning of SAZs to date, it is the authors' opinion that it would be feasible for the 25 EU countries that do not yet have such zones to legislate for SAZs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50491,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2025.2463431","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Anti-abortion protestors situated near premises providing abortion services create barriers and hurdles to accessing abortion services, which violates the right of pregnant people to seek sexual and reproductive health services. There has been shown to be a need for Safe Access Zones (SAZs) to guarantee physical access to abortion services without obstruction. SAZs usually operate within a prescribed radius around premises providing abortion services and set out what behaviour is prohibited. The objective of this paper is to present a summary of the international experience of introducing and implementing SAZ laws, and to explain the lessons to be learned from this experience. SAZ legislation has been successfully enacted internationally in 22 jurisdictions (USA excluded). Countries with SAZ laws include Australia, New Zealand, the UK, and parts of Canada. Despite the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe calling for the introduction of SAZs in 2022, only two European Union (EU) countries have implemented this recommendation so far. On the basis of the medical and legal insights gained from the functioning of SAZs to date, it is the authors' opinion that it would be feasible for the 25 EU countries that do not yet have such zones to legislate for SAZs.

欧洲联盟国家在提供堕胎服务的场所实施安全进入区是否可行?
在提供堕胎服务场所附近的反堕胎抗议者为获得堕胎服务设置了障碍和障碍,这侵犯了孕妇寻求性健康和生殖健康服务的权利。事实证明,有必要设立安全准入区,以保证不受阻碍地获得堕胎服务。特别行政区通常在提供堕胎服务的场所周围的规定半径内运作,并规定禁止哪些行为。本文的目的是对引进和实施特别行政区法律的国际经验进行总结,并解释从这些经验中吸取的教训。SAZ立法已在国际上22个司法管辖区成功颁布(美国除外)。有SAZ法律的国家包括澳大利亚、新西兰、英国和加拿大部分地区。尽管欧洲理事会议会大会呼吁在2022年建立特别行政区,但迄今为止只有两个欧盟国家实施了这一建议。根据迄今为止从特别行政区的运作中获得的医学和法律见解,提交人认为,尚未设立特别行政区的25个欧盟国家为特别行政区立法是可行的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
11.80%
发文量
63
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Official Journal of the European Society of Contraception and Reproductive Health, The European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care publishes original peer-reviewed research papers as well as review papers and other appropriate educational material.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信