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 Jun 21;22(1):1232.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13620-z.

The impact of mandatory waiting periods on abortion-related outcomes: a synthesis of legal and health evidence

Affiliations
Review

The impact of mandatory waiting periods on abortion-related outcomes: a synthesis of legal and health evidence

Fiona de Londras et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

This review follows an established methodology for integrating human rights to address knowledge gaps related to the health and non-health outcomes of mandatory waiting periods (MWPs) for access to abortion. MWP is a requirement imposed by law, policy, or practice, to wait a specified amount of time between requesting and receiving abortion care. Recognizing that MWPs "demean[] women as competent decision-makers", the World Health Organization recommends against MWPs. International human rights bodies have similarly encouraged states to repeal and not to introduce MWPs, which they recognize as operating as barriers to accessing sexual and reproductive healthcare. This review of 34 studies published between 2010 and 2021, together with international human rights law, establishes the health and non-health harms of MWPs for people seeking abortion, including delayed abortion, opportunity costs, and disproportionate impact. Impacts on abortion providers include increased workloads and system costs.

Keywords: Abortion; Cooling off periods; Mandatory waiting periods; Reflection periods; Reproductive rights; Sexual and reproductive health.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors confirm there are no applicable competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Prisma Flow diagram. *Consider, if feasible to do so, reporting the number of records identified from each database or register searched (rather than the total number across all databases/registers). **If automation tools were used, indicate how many records were excluded by a human and how many were excluded by automation tools

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. The World Health Organization, “Abortion Care Guideline” (2022). - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization, Global abortion policies database (2018) https://abortion-policies.srhr.org/ accessed [29 Oct 2021].
    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. - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization, “Safe Abortion: Technical and Policy Guidance for Health Systems” 2nd (2012). - PubMed
    1. CEDAW, General recommendation No. 34 on the rights of rural women (2016) (UN Doc. CEDAW/C/GC/34).

Publication types