Connect with us

media captionActivists celebrated the Senate legalisation in Buenos Aires

The legalisation of abortion up to the 14th week of pregnancy in Argentina on Wednesday triggered emotional scenes outside the Congress building in Buenos Aires.

Pro-choice activists embraced and cheered while waving the green handkerchiefs which have become symbolic of their decades-long fight for free and legal abortions to be made available to women across the country.

Anti-abortion demonstrators meanwhile watched dejected as the bill was passed in the Senate, the last step needed for it to become law.

Until now, abortions had only been permitted in cases of rape or when the mother’s health was at risk. Without access to legal abortions, tens of thousands of women had clandestine abortions each year often performed by people not medically qualified.

Journalist Jeevan Ravindran asked a selection of Argentine women to reflect on what the change in the law means to them.

Carmen Dolores Piñeiro: ‘Before legalisation, we were labelled criminals’

Metal craftswoman, 42 years old

image copyrightCourtesy of Carmen Dolores Piñeiro

image captionCarmen (right) attended a pro-choice march with her daughter and a Canadian friend

“Abortion should have been legalised a long time ago,” says Carmen Dolores Piñeiro, who had her first abortion when she was 16.

She says she was lucky that doctors agreed to perform the abortion clandestinely in a hospital, and it went well.

Read more:

  • The rape survivors facing an ‘impossible choice’ in Brazil

  • The women turned away by doctors in Chile
  • Chile abortion bill: ‘My pregnancy was torture’

Years later, she had a “backstreet abortion” which she describes as a “terrifying experience”. “I was unconscious, so I don’t really know what happened, I just know that when I woke up, I wasn’t pregnant anymore.”

She is confident that legalisation will improve things. “To have an abortion will never not be difficult, it’s always going to be a difficult decision to make,” she says. “But legalisation will make it much better.”

Carmen is aware that while the legislation may have changed, people’s attitudes may take longer to shift. “One thing is the law, another is society, which can be harsh and unsympathetic.”

Legalisation to her is a huge step forwards: “It’s very moving. Before, doctors [who carried out clandestine abortions] and women [who had them] were both labelled criminals.”

“Now for the rest of Latin America!”

Belu Lombardi: ‘We want abortion to become unthinkable’

Anti-abortion campaigner and church volunteer, 25 years old

image copyrightCourtesy of Belu Lombardi

image captionBelu Lombardi holds up a sign reading “Feminism didn’t set me free, Christ did”

For Belu Lombardi, one of the anti-abortion activists who demonstrated outside Congress on the night of the vote, the legalisation of abortion has come as a bitter disappointment which she promises to fight against.

“Yesterday I cried many tears. Legalising abortion is a crime, it’s disastrous and it’s unacceptable,” she argues.

“We want abortion to become unthinkable. And I know that we’ll get there some day. The truth is that good always triumphs over evil.”

Belu Lombardi says that even though as a teenager she rebelled against her Catholic parents and became pregnant by her then-boyfriend, abortion was never an option she had considered.

“I never thought about it, it never even occurred to me,” she recalls.

To her surprise, the Catholic Church she had been rebelling against supported her. “They dispelled the myths and prejudices I had towards the Catholic Church and helped me get through my pregnancy with much love and happiness.”

She argues that the legalisation of abortion masks and further deepens underlying problems society is not tackling such as domestic violence, sexual exploitation and paternal abandonment.

Belu says she is also worried about the effects on women. “Abortion not only kills a child, but also destroys the woman, because it has psychological, physical and emotional consequences.”

She says she is determined to continue campaigning against abortion: “No-one is giving up here!”

María: ‘I felt relieved’

Cleaner and student from Buenos Aires, 27 years old

image copyrightCourtesy of Maria
image captionMaría underwent a traumatic abortion procedure

“I felt relieved. Not only because there’s no need for clandestine abortions anymore but because it was a long struggle that finally produced a result,” María says of the grassroots feminist movement which campaigned for the change in the law.

María, who has three children and lost a fourth who was born prematurely, has had personal experience of the difficulties which have until now faced women getting an abortion in Argentina.

Two months ago, she decided to have an abortion after getting out of a violent relationship with the father of her children, with whom she had spent 12 years.

“Those years were honestly really difficult, years of being beaten, of chasing after an addict. It was a very complicated situation.”

Before the new law was passed, abortions were only allowed in Argentina in certain restricted cases, including rape or when the mother’s life was in danger. María’s situation – based on her emotional and physical health, as well as her financial instability – was deemed precarious and she was allowed to proceed with an abortion.

She says that the medical team at the health centre she first attended was a huge help. But when her medical abortion was unsuccessful, she was referred to a hospital for a surgical abortion.

“When I arrived at the hospital, the situation changed completely,” she recalls. She describes her treatment there as “mistreatment”.

“They put me in a room next to the labour ward. For around 12 hours I was listening to the sounds of labour.”

María alleges that she was put in the room on purpose by doctors who did not want to take her to the operating theatre, instead insisting on trying to induce a medical abortion.

“There are no words to describe how it feels to be going through such a process whilst being right next to the delivery room, listening to everything.

“It’s very, very painful to not only go through a process which is physically and psychologically damaging, but to also suffer marginalisation, discrimination and mistreatment at the hands of doctors,” she says.

She says she hopes the new law will also result in a wider change of attitude. “My biggest hope is that no more women will have to die [as a result of clandestine abortions], that sex education is taught in every last corner of the country so that women don’t have to resort to abortions, and that women will no longer be judged or mistreated by health workers.”

Related Topics

  • Argentina

  • Abortion

Source link

Continue Reading


Pelosi to move forward with impeachment if Pence doesn’t act to remove Trump

210108 pelosi ap 773

“In protecting our Constitution and our Democracy, we will act with urgency, because this President represents an imminent threat to both,” Pelosi said in the letter to Democrats on Sunday night laying out next steps.

The House will try to pass a measure on Monday imploring Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment, through which he and the Cabinet declare Trump “incapable of executing the duties of his office, after which the Vice President would immediately exercise powers as acting president.” If Republicans object, as is virtually certain, Democrats will pass the bill via a roll call vote on Tuesday.

“We are calling on the Vice President to respond within 24 hours,” Pelosi wrote. “Next, we will proceed with bringing impeachment legislation to the Floor.”

But it’s not clear when exactly the Senate will take up the House’s measure. The Senate isn’t scheduled to return until Jan. 19, but will hold pro forma sessions on Tuesday and Friday. In theory, a senator could try to pass the House resolution by unanimous consent, but as of now it appears unlikely that it would pass.

On Monday, multiple House Democrats plan to introduce impeachment resolutions that would become the basis of any impeachment article considered by the House later this week.

Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), who will introduce an article of impeachment against Trump on Monday, said on Sunday that roughly 200 Democrats have co-sponsored the measure.

Currently, 211 voting members (plus three nonvoting members) support Cicilline’s legislation, and they are hoping to reach 217 voting members by Monday morning, enough for the House to impeach Trump, one Democratic source familiar with the matter told POLITICO.

A small number of Democrats have opted not to co-sign the bill, but privately say they will vote to support the resolution on the floor, the source added.

The impeachment effort in the House is likely to be bipartisan, with Democrats expecting at least one GOP lawmaker — Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois — to sign on. A handful of other House Republicans are seriously weighing it, according to several sources, though those lawmakers are waiting to see how Democrats proceed, and some are concerned about dividing the country even further.

Among the GOP members whom Democrats are keeping an eye on are Reps. John Katko of New York, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Fred Upton of Michigan, Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington.

Across the Capitol, at least two Republicans — Sens. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — have called on Trump to resign. On Saturday, Toomey told Fox News, “I do think the president committed impeachable offenses,” but told CNN the next day that he does not believe there is enough time to impeach.

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) has also said he would consider articles of impeachment.

Another option has emerged among some Republican and moderate Democratic circles — censuring Trump — though it remains highly unlikely to advance.

A censure resolution would gain far more support in the GOP than impeachment. Some Republicans have privately been pushing for that route and are trying to get Biden on board, according to GOP sources. That group of Republicans is also warning that impeachment could destroy Biden’s reputation with Republicans.

But censure is considered a nonstarter in an incensed House Democratic Caucus, where members see it as a slap on the wrist that gives Republicans an easy out.

The Democrats’ enormous step toward impeachment on Sunday comes after Pelosi and other top Democrats held a private call on Saturday night in which they discussed the potential ramifications that a lengthy impeachment trial could have on Biden’s presidency.

Democratic leaders discussed several options to limit the political effects on Biden’s first 100 days, with one option — floated by House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) — for the House to delay the start of an impeachment trial in the Senate by holding on to the article of impeachment.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has sent out a memo to senators explaining that the Senate could not take up impeachment until Jan. 19 at the earliest, absent unanimous consent.

A final decision has not been made, and House Democrats will discuss the matter on a 2 p.m. caucus call on Monday.

Lawmakers are already privately expressing concerns about returning to the Capitol for multiple days this week, worried about both a potential coronavirus outbreak and whether the building is secure, given how easily an armed pro-Trump mob invaded on Wednesday.

The Capitol physician urged House lawmakers and staff to get tested in a memo Sunday, saying they might have been exposed to someone who had the virus while huddling for safety in a large committee room for hours on Wednesday. During the hourslong lockdown, several Republican members refused to wear masks despite being offered them by Democrats worried about the spread of the deadly virus.

Melanie Zanona, Olivia Beavers and Marianne LeVine contributed to this report.

Source link

Continue Reading


Matt Hancock Scraps “Unnecessary Training Modules” Blamed For Slowing Vaccine Rollout

PA 57409526 mk3qwz

Matt Hancock has agreed to remove some of the training modules required for volunteers to sign up to deliver the Covid-19 vaccine (PA)

5 min read

Matt Hancock said people will no longer need to undertake training including an anti-terrorism course to give the coronavirus jab after MPs said “bureaucratic rubbish” was delaying mass vaccination.

It comes as MPs called for the government to produce targets for the number of people given immunity before lockdown can be lifted.

The health secretary said a series of “unnecessary training modules” are being scrapped to speed up the process of getting people qualified to deliver the jab.

Speaking in the Commons, Sir Edward Leigh said he was shown by his fellow the Tory MP, a qualified GP, the “ridiculous form” he had filled out to start delivering the vaccine.

“When he’s inoculating an old lady, he’s not going to ask her if she’s come into contact with Jihadis or whatever, so the Secretary has got to cut through all this bureaucratic rubbish,” he said.

In response Mr Hancock said: “I am a man after Sir Edward’s heart and I can tell the House that we have removed a series of the unnecessary training modules that had been put in place, including fire safety, terrorism and others.

“I’ll write to him with the full panoply of the training that is not required and we have been able to remove, and we made this change as of this morning and I am glad to say it is enforced.

“I am a fan of busting bureaucracy and in this case I agree with him that it is not necessary to undertake anti-terrorism training in order to inject vaccines.”

Dr Fox had earlier challenged Boris Johnson to drop the “bureaucracy” and “political correctness” of the forms vaccine volunteers must fill out.

He told MPs: “As a qualified but non-practising doctor, I volunteered to help with the scheme and would urge others to do the same. 

“But, can I ask the Prime Minister why I’ve been required to complete courses on conflict resolution, equality, diversity and human rights, moving and handling loads and preventing radicalisation in order to give a simple Covid jab?”

Mr Johnson said he had been “assured by the Health Secretary that all such obstacles, all such pointless pettifoggery has been removed”.

The government has been attempting to recruit thousands of volunteers to help with a mass vaccination programme, and with the recent approval of the more easily deliverable Oxford/AstraZeneca version has today revealed the location of seven mass vaccination centres set to open next week.

The Prime Minister’s official spokesman told journalists at a briefing they would be at Robertson House in Stevenage, the ExCel Centre in London, the Centre for Life in Newcastle, the Etihad Tennis Centre in Manchester, Epsom Downs Racecourse in Surrey, Ashton Gate Stadium in Bristol and Millennium Point in Birmingham, and it is expected they will be run with a combination of NHS staff and volunteers.

But so far the government has not said how many people need to be inoculated before it has an impact on the coronavirus restrictions.

Mr Hancock was asked by a number of MPs if the measures could be eased once the top few tiers in the vaccine priority list had been clear.

Former Conservative chief whip Mark Harper said once the top four groups, which includes care home residents and staff, frontline NHS workers, the clinically extremely vulnerable and everyone over 70 “we’ve taken care therefore of 80% of the risk of death”.

Adding: “What possible reason is there at that point for not rapidly relaxing the restrictions that are in place on the rest of our country?”

The health secretary replied: “We have to see the impact of that vaccination on the reduction in the number of deaths, which I very much hope that we will see at that point, and so that is why we will take this – an evidence-led move down through the tiers, when we’ve broken the link, I hope, between cases and hospitalisations and deaths.”

The ex-Tory minister and another doctor, Andrew Murrison, said: “The logic of anticipating what is going to happen in two or three or four weeks’ time from the number of cases we are getting at the moment is that we can do the same in reverse.

“That is to say, when we have a sufficient number of people vaccinated up we can anticipate in two or three or four weeks’ time how many deaths have been avoided. 

“That means, since it cuts both ways he will be able to make a decision on when we should end these restrictions.”

Mr Hancock replied: “The logic of the case that Dr Murrison makes is the right logic and we want to see that happen in empirical evidence on the ground.

“This hope for the weeks ahead doesn’t take away, though, from the serious and immediate threat posed now.”

The Cabinet minister said the challenge for the government is to increase the amount of doses available, claiming “the current rate-limiting factor on the vaccine rollout is the supply of approved, tested, safe vaccine”.

He added: ”We are working with both AstraZeneca and Pfizer to increase that supply as fast as possible and they’re doing a brilliant job.”

But Labour’s shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth called for the government to ramp up its vaccination programme to six million doses a week.

He told the Commons: “The Prime Minister has promised almost 14 million will be offered the vaccine by mid-Feb. That depends on around two million doses a week on average.

“Both [Mr Hancock] and the Prime Minister have reassured us in recent days that it’s doable based on orders.

“But in the past ministers have told us that they had agreements for 30 million AstraZeneca doses by September 2020 and 10 million of Pfizer doses by the end of 2020.

“So, I think people just want to understand the figures and want clarity. Can ministers tell us how many of the ordered doses have been manufactured?”

Mr Ashworth added: “Two million a week would be fantastic but it should be the limit of our ambitions, we should be aiming to scale up to three, then five, then six million jabs a week over the coming months.”

Source link

Continue Reading


How South African police are tackling pangolin smugglers


Quiet, solitary and nocturnal, the pangolin has few natural enemies, but researchers believe it is the most trafficked mammal in the world. The tough scales covering its body are sought after for use in Chinese medicine, in the erroneous belief that they have healing properties.

The animal has also been of interest to researchers during the coronavirus pandemic. Related viruses have been found in trafficked pangolins, though there is continued uncertainty around early theories that pangolins were involved in the transmission of the virus from animals to humans.

After South African police seized a pangolin from suspected smugglers, BBC Africa correspondent Andrew Harding witnessed how vets tried to save the animal’s life.

Source link

Continue Reading