China to limit abortions for ‘non-medical purposes’
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
China to limit abortions for ‘non-medical purposes’
Removed by modChina has already enacted strict measures aimed at preventing sex-selective abortions, and health authorities also warned in 2018 that the use of abortion to end unwanted pregnancies was harmful to women’s bodies and risked causing infertility.
The state council said the new guidelines, issued on Monday, would aim to improve women’s overall access to pre-pregnancy healthcare services.
You must log in or register to comment.
totally headline baiting from a shitty lib outlet as usual. sex-selective abortions are an issue, and this is part of a broader way to address socially conservatist sexism within China
Clickbate headline, seems like it's overall a positive thing if by "non-medical" purposes they mean addressing the issue with "sex-selective abortions".
Obviously there are other material conditions regarding gender equality that motivated that trend in the first place that also should be addressed but I don't see this as being problematic in any way.
Yeah. The headline is pretty misleading if that's the case. Maybe this should have been posted in the_dunk_tank.
Saw this on :reddit-logo: and felt compelled to read the article. It felt very light on detail and I came away wondering what the actual new rules are.
Is it literally just a ban on sex-selective abortions? Because the headline makes it sound like China is going full Texas with an exception on "health of the mother is threatened" abortions.
Yeah, there's another stormfront thread on worldnews with a Reuters article about this that is instead titled
China says will reduce the number of abortions for "non-medical purposes"
And someone in the comments stated that if you look at the actual document, the context of reducing non-medical abortions is that they're going to be improving sex education and access to medical care and contraceptives to reduce the number of people who need these abortions in the first place.
That's objectively and wholely good, but I'm sure we'll see a tidal wave of propaganda along the lines of this Guardian article.
EDIT: oughta just include the comment's text actually:
China isn't limiting abortion as a choice. China is promoting sex education to prevent unwanted pregnancy. It's literally the sentence right before the one quoted in the title, which is relevant to the topic but for some reason wasn't referenced in the article.
增强男女两性性道德、性健康、性安全意识，倡导共担避孕责任。将生殖健康服务融入妇女健康管理全过程，保障妇女享有避孕节育知情自主选择权。落实基本避孕服务项目，加强产后和流产后避孕节育服务，提高服务可及性，预防非意愿妊娠。
Google translate: Enhance the awareness of sexual ethics, sexual health, and safe sex in both men and women, and advocate shared responsibility for contraception. Integrate reproductive health services into the process of women’s health management to ensure women's right to be informed and independently choose contraception. Implement basic contraceptive service projects, improve postpartum and post-abortion contraception and birth control services, improve service accessibility, and prevent unwanted pregnancy.
What's fucked up is that the Reuters headline is already misleading propaganda.
If Oregon expanded sex ed for men and women, pre and post natal care, pre and post abortion care and contraceptive access for men and women, and stated that they expected it to reduce the number of abortions due to unwanted pregnancies, Reuters would never describe it as a "Oregon states it will reduce the number non-medical abortions."
The Guardian took a propagandized headline and further propagandized it.
Pretty wild how they can twist something that is pretty unambiguously good into something bad
Mainstream/establishment-linked western source on China = poopoo
Access to abortion shouldn’t be limited, need for abortion should be.
two parts of liberation from bourgeois dictatorship
Access to abortions being limited is really unfortunate, but sex-selective abortion is terrible and I understand the need to do something about it.
The article also has no details of what is meant by "limit", so I assume this is :lmayo: news doing what it usually does.
Edit: look at that, I was right. https://hexbear.net/post/142489/comment/1694483
Guess it's time to twist ourselves into knots to explain how restricting women's reproductive rights is suddenly a good thing :yea:
The drift towards more limits on abortion has been under way for several years. Jiangxi province issued guidelines in 2018 stipulating that women more than 14 weeks pregnant must have signed approval from three medical professionals before having a termination.
Guess we can just downplay and minimize the issue too, that works :yea:
China doing a bad thing is whatever, doesn't affect me, but internet leftists defending bad things because China's doing them makes me feel like my only options are uncritical support or uncritical opposition, at which point I will say, "Screw all y'all."
This isn't official policy but rather a statement of goals. It's perfectly reasonable to have concerns that further legal restrictions on abortion may be coming, and the recent implementation of restrictions in a province seems pretty fucking relevant in that context of understanding how the government will approach the issue.
happens previously
"Why are you bringing up something from three years ago?"
signs that it may be happening again
"I'm gonna wait until it actually happens before I criticize anything"
There is a five minute window immediately after China does something bad in which you are allowed to be critical of them.
There are pretty clear signs that more restrictions may be coming. China does have a history of meddling in the reproductive affairs of its people, so if they start talking about abortion being bad, it's reasonable to expect them to approach the issue with a heavy hand. You don't have to criticize them but I'd appreciate it if you didn't dismiss other people's concerns and criticism. If nothing else it's shitty optics.
I appreciate that you might have concerns,
boss level: Anti-China socialist Karen
I don't think that knee-jerk defense of everything China does is easing anyone's concerns. Or rather, it might be easing people's concerns but not in a healthy or realistic way.
If that's all it takes for you to default to western chauvinism then it sounds like your mind is already made up
Yep, I am a "Western chauvinist," because I hold values like "restricting abortion is bad" or "banning femboys is bad" even when China does it. In order to not be a "Western chauvinist" I would have to hold no actual values or principles and just let my beliefs sway with the wind depending on whatever China does.
Of course, the fact that I support China does not have any bearing on this.
The drift towards more limits on abortion has been under way for several years. Jiangxi province issued guidelines in 2018 stipulating that women more than 14 weeks pregnant must have signed approval from three medical professionals before having a termination.
Jiangxi is one of the good provinces, though. Coastal, developed. The New York State of China. If it were one of the hick Alabama provinces that would be another thing, but it's not.
No like I said I get that your mind is already made up, i don't care enough to struggle session with you about this.
Frankly you're right that your opinion of the internal affairs of a sovereign country is mostly irrelevant and definitely not germane to anything substantial, what really matters is whether or not you're contributing to the intentional campaign to demonize and isolate that country.
I.e. what narratives you're helping to propagate, among the social context you're surrounded with.
Anyway buddy, you do you :yea:
Love to wait until after the article is already debunked in the comments to make my anti-China post. :big-cool:
Ok and? There's literally nothing in that comment debunking any part of the article.
All the replies show is that the article included biased language and framing, not factual inaccuracies.
And someone in the comments stated that if you look at the actual document, the context of reducing non-medical abortions is that they’re going to be improving sex education and access to medical care and contraceptives to reduce the number of people who need these abortions in the first place.
So it's not a limit on abortions. Didn't need to go past the headline to find the lie.
Edit: also, lol at "it's not a lie, only the language and framing are dishonest".
It's unclear what measures are actually going to be taken. It is reasonable to speculate that the government may implement more restrictions, given that it's happened before.
Edit: also, lol at “it’s not a lie, only the language and framing are dishonest”.
The fact that it's framing things about China in a negative way doesn't mean that what China's doing isn't bad.
OK, so there's no evidence as of now that what China is doing is bad, but you assume that they will do bad things in the future. Even if you end up being right, that's ridiculous. I think I'm done here.
Guess it's time to twist ourselves into knots to explain how restricting women's reproductive rights is suddenly a good thing :yea:
This is the opposite of "not assuming".
It's not assuming anything, China already has some restrictions on women's reproductive rights.
I simply would not conflate a specific law in one region of China with potential national policy on the comments of a dishonest article that contains little to no evidence.
Seems like you're reaching for reasons to criticize China and getting angry at everyone else who isn't. As seen in this thread, it's reasonable and good to be skeptical of these articles.
In any case, I have family to spend time with so I won't reply further. Have a good day.
People seem incapable of recognizing that China is at the end of the day just a country and not a perfect paradise. There's lots of things they do much better and lots of things they'll do worse, that's how humans are.
Sure maybe this is just an intentional misreading of Chinese policy, US Media tends to be dishonest about it but even if it isn't that doesn't make "china bad" suddenly, it just confirms "China is place like everywhere else"
However I do agree at this point we should probably wait and see what this leads to, since right now it's mostly just a stated intent.
Uncritical support and it's consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
It's to increase the number of babies born. China's one child policy worked exactly as it was supposed to and now there's not enough young people to pay for all the old people's pensions. In a few decades something like 1/3 of China will be elderly. This is a disaster for an economy. You need lots of young people who spend, spend, spend. Old people collect retirement pay and do nothing for the economy.
It isn't, but some people have idealized pictures of China, and if they ever admit that something China does is bad then it might shatter the illusion. If you have a more grounded view then it's no problem to defend them overall while criticizing specific policies.
I disagree, even the most feminist country wouldn't find abortions in the name of eugenics as an acceptable thing, and sex selective abortions are basically that but in misogyny terms instead of race and genetics.
There are plenty of reasons why people get abortions that are completely valid, but that doesn't make every single possible case good.
How exactly can you tell if someone who wants an abortion is getting it for sex-selective reasons?
This is the same question we ask of many laws dealing with motives and intent. Yes some will slip by and I think that's perfectly fine we should lean on the side of allowing abortions over not, but there's also going to be plenty of cases where people make it clear exactly what they're doing it for.
You can also mitigate this through regulations that say block telling the patient about the gender or genetic makeup of a child and so after a certain period for instance.
The reason sex-selective abortions are an issue in the first place is because of the government interfering with reproductive freedom. I don't think the government needs to take an active role in making sure women are only having abortions for the "right" reasons.
The reason sex-selective abortions are an issue in the first place is because of the government interfering with reproductive freedom
That's not why at all, it's because China, like every country in the entire world, still struggles with huge misogyny issues both traditionally and in modern culture. Having a girl is just culturally less worth it, especially for families who stand even more by their traditional values.
The one child policy worsened this issue, but without the misogyny behind it, the abortions wouldn't have been targeted towards female children.
you can’t screen every women to know if they’re doing it to for the wrong reasons. so you just outlaw abortions? it’s a personal choice only the mother can make and any restriction of that is nothing but violating human rights
No of course not, I think we should lean on the side of allowing them but there are things you can put into place to mitigate it. Regulations against revealing a child's gender or genetic makeup to the parents before X date would be one useful step for example. Also motives and intent are often considered in the law, it's not always some unknowable thing.
Meaning that in cases where intent for eugenics isn't clear, they should be allowed. But like let's say a person had posted before on social media "I won't ever want an autistic child" and then suddenly decides to not have a child right after it's revealed there's a high chance of their child being autistic. The intent there is pretty clear. To allow that would be to allow eugenics.
Of course the proper option is what I said already and it shouldn't even be revealed until after they've made their choice
Oh yeah I agree but I would assume in Feminist Land that there's better supports for parents that help to prevent abuse and more monitoring/resources for helping children in need too.
Obviously a situation like this is one that needs a lot done on multiple different factors.
:cia: really kicking the pseudowoke propaganda into high gear.
Sex selective abortions are basically just a form of eugenics anyway, but I really hope this doesn't mean to trying to cut down on abortions as a whole.
Here is a Chinese article: https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1712041052753238902
"State Council: Improve women's reproductive health and reduce non-medical abortions "
according to the Chinese government website, the State Council issued the "Outline for the Development of Chinese Women and Outline for the Development of Children in China", which requires the improvement of laws, regulations and policies related to population fertility, and promotes the matching of fertility policies with economic and social policies. Research promotes the inclusion of care services for infants and children under the age of 3 into the special additional deductions for personal income tax, housing and other supporting policies to reduce the burden of family birth, parenting, and education; improve women’s reproductive health and reduce non-medical abortions; online games, Webcast and other functions should be set up for minors.
The pursuit of equality between men and women is great. Women are the pioneers of human civilization, the promoters of social progress, and an important force in building a modern socialist country in an all-round way. The equality of men and women and the overall development of women are important indicators for measuring the progress of social civilization. The party and the state attach great importance to the development of women's cause, and have successively formulated and implemented a three-cycle program for the development of women in China, which has provided important guarantees for optimizing the development environment for women and guaranteeing women's legal rights and interests.
BUT ITS JUST LIKE TEXAS... :cope:
Improve women's reproductive health. Popularize knowledge on the prevention and control of diseases such as reproductive tract infections and sexually transmitted diseases. Carry out scientific and practical health education in various forms at different stages of school education to promote students to master the knowledge of reproductive health and improve their self-protection ability. Enhance the awareness of sexual ethics, sexual health, and safety of both men and women, and advocate shared responsibility for contraception. Integrate reproductive health services into the whole process of women’s health management to ensure that women enjoy the informed and independent right to choose contraception and birth control. Implement basic contraceptive service projects, strengthen postpartum and post-abortion contraception and birth control services, improve service accessibility, and prevent unwanted pregnancy. The promotion of pre-marital medical examinations, pre-pregnancy health check-ups, and supplementation of folic acid, such as pre-marital pre-pregnancy health care services, will be more fair and accessible. Reduce non-medical abortion. Strengthen the quality assurance of women's health and safety products. Standardize infertility diagnosis and treatment services. Standardize the application of human assisted reproductive technology.
i don't know if they are doing that, the text doesn't suggest they are "clamping" down on abortions, "Reduce non-medical abortion" doesn't mean "clamping" down, it likely means to promote contraceptives and birth control over abortions to prevent unwanted pregnancies. I don't think women are going to be denied abortions due to these guidelines.
Yeah, of course, it depends on how reliable the grauniad even is. There might be zero clamp down as you said and is just a capricious translation.
https://maps.reproductiverights.org/worldabortionlaws?country=CHN
Of the 59 countries permitting elective abortion
9 countries limit elective abortion before the 12th week of gestation
36 countries limit elective abortion at 12 weeks gestation
6 countries limit elective abortion between 12 and 20 weeks gestation
7 countries permit elective abortion past 20 weeks or have no gestational limit.
https://lozierinstitute.org/internationalabortionnorms/ (2014)
14 weeks elective, requiring medical reason above that seems pretty above average in the grand scheme of thing. Plus you don't have all the insane hand maiden's tale laws like the US.
In the US states often have random types of bans ranging from 6-24 weeks (averaging probably closer to 18): https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-policies-later-abortions
not a good look for China.
:lets-fucking-go: :lets-fucking-go: :lets-fucking-go: NEW STRUGGLE SESSION :lets-fucking-go: :lets-fucking-go: :lets-fucking-go:
health authorities also warned in 2018 that the use of abortion to end unwanted pregnancies was harmful to women’s bodies and risked causing infertility.
Abortion is the safest medical procedure on the planet. Really surprised to see this coming from a government of scientists and engineers.
Abortions have more serious repercussions if they're performed illegally though. I mean, provided the grauniad is running an accurate piece that is
