Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 May 10;22(1):936.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13247-0.

The impact of 'grounds' on abortion-related outcomes: a synthesis of legal and health evidence

Fiona de Londras  1 , Amanda Cleeve  2   3 , Maria I Rodriguez  4 , Antonella F Lavelanet  3
Affiliations
Review

The impact of 'grounds' on abortion-related outcomes: a synthesis of legal and health evidence

Fiona de Londras et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Where abortion is legal, it is often regulated through a grounds-based approach. A grounds-based approach to abortion provision occurs when law and policy provide that lawful abortion may be provided only where a person who wishes to have an abortion satisfies stipulated 'grounds', sometimes described as 'exceptions' or 'exceptional grounds'. Grounds-based approaches to abortion are, prima facie, restrictive as they limit access to abortion based on factors extraneous to the preferences of the pregnant person. International human rights law specifies that abortion must be available (and not 'merely' lawful) where the life or health of the pregnant woman or girl is at risk, or where carrying a pregnancy to term would cause her substantial pain or suffering, including but not limited to situations where the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest or the pregnancy is not viable. However, international human rights law does not specify a grounds-based approach as the way to give effect to this requirement. The aim of this review is to address knowledge gaps related to the health and non-health outcomes plausibly related to the effects of a grounds-based approach to abortion regulation. The evidence from this review shows that grounds have negative implications for access to quality abortion and for the human rights of pregnant people. Further, it shows that grounds-based approaches are insufficient to meet states' human rights obligations. The evidence presented in this review thus suggests that enabling access to abortion on request would be more rights-enhancing than grounds-based approaches to abortion regulation.

Keywords: Abortion; Abortion law; Abortion on request; Abortion regulation; Abortion: exceptional grounds; Abortion: grounds; Human rights.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Prisma Flow diagram [12]
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Lavelanet A, Johnson BR, Ganatra B. Global abortion policies database: a descriptive analysis of the regulatory and policy environment related to abortion. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;62:25–35. doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2019.06.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lavelanet A, Schlitt S, Jonson B, Ganatra B. Global abortion policies database: a descriptive analysis of the legal categories of lawful abortion. BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2018;18(44):1–10. doi: 10.1186/s12914-018-0183-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Human Rights Committee . General comment no.36; article 6 right to life. 2018.
    1. Human Rights Committee, General comment no. 28: Equality of rights between men and women) (article 3) (2000) (UN Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.10).
    1. Committee on the Rights of the Child . General comment no. 4: Adolescent health and development in the context of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. 2003.

Publication types