平行路径:美国和伊朗的堕胎限制。

IF 1.9 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Mohammad Haddadi, Fatemeh Hedayati, Sedigheh Hantoushzadeh
{"title":"平行路径:美国和伊朗的堕胎限制。","authors":"Mohammad Haddadi, Fatemeh Hedayati, Sedigheh Hantoushzadeh","doi":"10.1186/s40834-025-00382-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Reproductive rights, including access to abortion, contraception, and comprehensive healthcare, are critical for gender equality and public health. However, these rights remain contentious and heavily influenced by cultural, religious, and political ideologies, creating barriers to equitable care and justice globally. This narrative review examines and compares both abortion laws and policies in the United States and Iran, two ideologically distinct nations with striking parallels in their restrictive approaches. This narrative review identifies key similarities, including the politicization of abortion, the influence of cultural and religious doctrines, and the disproportionate burden of restrictive policies on marginalized populations, leading to unsafe abortions. It also explores major differences, such as the decentralized, state-specific legal variability in the United States versus Iran's centralized theocratic governance, where demographic goals drive restrictions. These findings highlight how geopolitical and ideological contexts shape reproductive governance and health outcomes. Despite ideological contrasts, the United States and Iran exhibit analogous restrictive trends, revealing global challenges in advancing reproductive justice. Addressing these barriers requires a dual approach: targeted legal and policy reforms within national contexts, particularly in the U.S. and Iran, and alignment with international advocacy efforts promoting reproductive autonomy and human rights. The findings provide critical insights for policymakers and healthcare providers aiming to reform reproductive health frameworks and ensure equitable, rights-based care.</p>","PeriodicalId":93956,"journal":{"name":"Contraception and reproductive medicine","volume":"10 1","pages":"44"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12291246/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parallel paths: abortion access restrictions in the USA and Iran.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammad Haddadi, Fatemeh Hedayati, Sedigheh Hantoushzadeh\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40834-025-00382-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Reproductive rights, including access to abortion, contraception, and comprehensive healthcare, are critical for gender equality and public health. However, these rights remain contentious and heavily influenced by cultural, religious, and political ideologies, creating barriers to equitable care and justice globally. This narrative review examines and compares both abortion laws and policies in the United States and Iran, two ideologically distinct nations with striking parallels in their restrictive approaches. This narrative review identifies key similarities, including the politicization of abortion, the influence of cultural and religious doctrines, and the disproportionate burden of restrictive policies on marginalized populations, leading to unsafe abortions. It also explores major differences, such as the decentralized, state-specific legal variability in the United States versus Iran's centralized theocratic governance, where demographic goals drive restrictions. These findings highlight how geopolitical and ideological contexts shape reproductive governance and health outcomes. Despite ideological contrasts, the United States and Iran exhibit analogous restrictive trends, revealing global challenges in advancing reproductive justice. Addressing these barriers requires a dual approach: targeted legal and policy reforms within national contexts, particularly in the U.S. and Iran, and alignment with international advocacy efforts promoting reproductive autonomy and human rights. The findings provide critical insights for policymakers and healthcare providers aiming to reform reproductive health frameworks and ensure equitable, rights-based care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93956,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contraception and reproductive medicine\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12291246/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contraception and reproductive medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40834-025-00382-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception and reproductive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40834-025-00382-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生殖权利,包括获得堕胎、避孕和全面保健的权利,对两性平等和公共卫生至关重要。然而,这些权利仍然存在争议,并受到文化、宗教和政治意识形态的严重影响,在全球范围内造成公平护理和正义的障碍。本文对美国和伊朗的堕胎法和政策进行了考察和比较,这两个意识形态截然不同的国家在限制性做法上有着惊人的相似之处。这一叙述性审查确定了关键的相似之处,包括堕胎政治化、文化和宗教教义的影响以及限制性政策对边缘化人口造成的不成比例的负担,导致不安全堕胎。它还探讨了主要的差异,例如美国的分散的,特定于国家的法律可变性与伊朗的集中的神权统治,在那里人口目标驱动限制。这些发现突出了地缘政治和意识形态背景如何影响生殖管理和健康结果。尽管意识形态存在差异,但美国和伊朗表现出类似的限制趋势,揭示了在推进生殖正义方面的全球挑战。解决这些障碍需要双管齐下:在国家背景下进行有针对性的法律和政策改革,特别是在美国和伊朗,并与促进生殖自主和人权的国际倡导努力保持一致。研究结果为旨在改革生殖健康框架和确保公平、基于权利的护理的决策者和保健提供者提供了重要见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Parallel paths: abortion access restrictions in the USA and Iran.

Parallel paths: abortion access restrictions in the USA and Iran.

Parallel paths: abortion access restrictions in the USA and Iran.

Reproductive rights, including access to abortion, contraception, and comprehensive healthcare, are critical for gender equality and public health. However, these rights remain contentious and heavily influenced by cultural, religious, and political ideologies, creating barriers to equitable care and justice globally. This narrative review examines and compares both abortion laws and policies in the United States and Iran, two ideologically distinct nations with striking parallels in their restrictive approaches. This narrative review identifies key similarities, including the politicization of abortion, the influence of cultural and religious doctrines, and the disproportionate burden of restrictive policies on marginalized populations, leading to unsafe abortions. It also explores major differences, such as the decentralized, state-specific legal variability in the United States versus Iran's centralized theocratic governance, where demographic goals drive restrictions. These findings highlight how geopolitical and ideological contexts shape reproductive governance and health outcomes. Despite ideological contrasts, the United States and Iran exhibit analogous restrictive trends, revealing global challenges in advancing reproductive justice. Addressing these barriers requires a dual approach: targeted legal and policy reforms within national contexts, particularly in the U.S. and Iran, and alignment with international advocacy efforts promoting reproductive autonomy and human rights. The findings provide critical insights for policymakers and healthcare providers aiming to reform reproductive health frameworks and ensure equitable, rights-based care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信