The Politics of Abortion in Latin America

In light of the recent case of Beatriz, a 22-year-old Salvadoran woman and mother of a toddler, who, while suffering from lupus and kidney failure and carrying an anencephalic fetus, was denied the right to an abortion, it is relevant to discuss the restrictive abortion laws in Latin America and some of the reasons behind them.

Latin America is home to five of the seven countries in the world in which abortion is banned in all instances, even when the life of the woman is at risk: Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, and the Dominican Republic, with the Vatican City and Malta outside the region. Legal abortion upon request during the first trimester is only available in Cuba (as of 1965), Mexico City (as of 2007), and Uruguay (as of 2012). In the rest of the continent, abortion is criminalized in most circumstances, with few exceptions, the most common of which are when the life or health of the woman is at risk, rape, incest and/or fetus malformations. However, even in these cases the legal and practical hurdles a woman has to face to have an abortion are such that many times these exceptions are not available, or by the time they are authorized it is too late. The consequences of such criminalization are well known: high maternal mortality and morbidity rates due to unsafe back alley abortions that affect poor and young women disproportionately.

The current laws ruling abortion in the region have been inherited from colonial powers. They are a legacy of the Spanish and Portuguese empires. While European women have already gotten rid of these laws many decades ago, Latin American women still have to deal with them. Why is this so?

As both scholars and activists know by now, women’s rights, like other human rights, are only respected if a movement organizes around them and puts pressure on the state to change unfair laws and policies. While feminist movements swept Europe and North America during the 1960s and 70s, Latin American countries were busy fighting dictatorships and civil wars. It is not that women did not organize, but rather they did so to oppose the brutal regimes and to address the needs of poor populations hit by the recurrent economic crises. Reproductive rights just had to wait. When democracy finally arrived in the region—in the 1980s in South American and the 1990s in Central America—feminist movements gradually began to push for reproductive rights. For example, the September 28th Day of Action for Access to Safe and Legal Abortion was launched in 1990 in the context of the Fifth Latin American and Caribbean Feminist meeting held in San Bernardo, Argentina. Since then, most countries in the region have seen mobilizations and protests around this date. However, by the time the movements began to focus on reproductive rights, the global context had changed and the conservative right had also set up a strong opposition to any change to the status quo.

The strongholds of the opposition to decriminalization lie in two places: first, the Catholic Church, and second, the ascendance of the religious right in the United States. The Catholic Church has historically been a strong political actor in Latin America, ever since its large role in the conquest and colonization of the continent by the Spanish and Portuguese crowns in the 16th and 17th centuries. The church’s influence among both political and economic elites is still a reality in the whole region with only a variation of degree among the different countries. However, the church’s strong opposition to abortion has not been constant. While the church has always condemned abortion, it used to be considered a misdemeanor and not a murder of an innocent human life, as in the current discourse. In addition, it was not until the late 1800s that the church considered that life started at conception. Until 1869, a fetus was thought to receive its soul from 40 to 80 days after conception, abortion being a sin only after the ensoulment had taken place.

Even in the beginning of the 20th century, when many Latin American countries passed their current legislation that allowed legal abortion under certain circumstances, the Catholic Church did not pose a strong opposition to these reforms. As Mala Htun explains in her research on South American abortion laws, at the time abortion reforms were passed by a nucleus of male politicians, doctors, and jurists. In addition, these reforms legalized abortion only in very limited circumstances and required the authorization of a doctor and/or a judge, and therefore represented no real threat to the dominant discourse of abortion being morally wrong. The church only began organizing against abortion decriminalization when feminist movements came together to claim the autonomy of women’s bodies threatening this consensus.

When John Paul II became Pope in 1978, moral issues such as abortion were given a priority in the church’s mission as never before. Having lived through the Soviet conquest of his home country, Poland, and experienced the repression of Catholicism and the legalization of abortion there, the Pope felt very strongly about these issues. Once many of the European Catholic countries achieved the legalization of abortion in the 1970s and 80s, Latin America, being the largest Catholic region in the world, became the battleground in which abortion policy would be fought and decided.

Together with this shift within the Catholic Church, a second stronghold of the opposition has come from the United States. Long past the days of Roe v. Wade, since the 1980s the increasing influence of the religious right within the Republican Party has implied that U.S. reproductive rights policies have been increasingly anti-abortion when this party was in office. How has this affected Latin America? Both directly, by banning federal funding for international NGOs involved with providing, advising, or even advocating for abortion decriminalization (known as the Mexico City Policy or the Global Gag Rule), and also indirectly, through the legitimacy and strength given to anti-abortion discourses, particularly during the George W. Bush administration.

Latin American politicians have not been indifferent to these trends and have thus sought the support of the Catholic Church and/or U.S. Republicans and anti-abortion groups to strengthen their chances of winning office. Unfortunately, in this context the future of Beatriz and many other poor and young women in the region remains politically uncertain.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact

  • Valde

    Some of the posters here believe that pregnancy for an 11
    year old Chilean girl is just dandy, and they have no problem with whatever
    disabilities she may suffer as a result of the pregnancy. Here is a bit
    more info:

    “The main risks are associated with
    immaturity of the female urogenital system,” Dr. Elena Rosciani, a
    gynecologist with the Instituto de la Mujer in Argentina explained to
    BBC World. “And this immaturity can lead to abnormalities in the growth
    of the fetus, which can cause premature birth and other complications.”

    This immaturity of the reproductive system
    means that the uterus has not reached its maximum development. In fact, a
    girl of eleven who is beginning menarche (the first menstrual bleeding)
    is at the beginning of the development of her reproductive organs. “At
    the beginning of development, the uterus is smaller; it may measure some
    five or six centimeters. The developed uterus reaches some seven or
    eight centimeters and this development is completed between the ages of
    19 and 21,” the gynecologist says. And that small a uterus can result in
    complications for the development of the fetus and can result in a
    premature birth.

    Doctor Jorge Parra, a gynecologist and
    representative in Ecuador of the United Nations Population Fund,
    explained to BBC World that pregnancy at such a young age can cause
    other problems as well. “The most frequent complications in a pregnancy
    of a 15-year-old minor are pre-eclampsia and eclampsia — hypertension in
    gestation,” the expert states. “It is a condition that occurs only in
    pregnancy and it is an important cause of death in pregnancy. It is
    known that girls younger than 15 have a greater possibility of
    developing it and the only way to cure it is to terminate the
    pregnancy,” the expert adds.

    “But there are also nutritional factors for
    a girl who is in a stage of growth and from whom, when she becomes
    pregnant, the fetus can take away required nutrients. So there is a high
    incidence of anemia in this group.”

    Pregnancy at such an early age, the
    gynecologist adds, not only causes problems in gestation. There are also
    complications during delivery. “Due to the fact that an adolescent’s
    pelvis is still in development, obstructed deliveries are common,
    because the small pelvis blocks the passage of the fetus. The percentage
    of girls of 15 who require caesareans is very high, almost 70% compared
    to other births,” Dr. Jorge Parra states.

    And according to Dr. Rosciani of the
    Instituto de la Mujer in Argentina, “There are also psychological
    alterations that giving birth brings about: a lot of stress, a lot of
    effort and, above all, a lot of pain. So it is dangerous to subject so
    small a girl to the job of giving birth.”

    • LittleMissMellaril

      Yes, but the Pro-Liars think that an 11 year old child should be HAPPY to have a rape baybee!

  • Luís Pereira

    As a portuguese I find myself profoundly offended by the arrogant cultural neocolonialsm of the writer. The writer has no right to dictate to the Latin-American society what it should believe or think !

    I also would like to ear what the author has to say about the reasons behind the restrictive abortion laws. After all, this should be an intelectual debate not propaganda warfare. So… can the author show why life does not begin at conception and why is ethically correct to kill and unborn child and stop its natural development ? Is the mother more than the daughter ?
    What is the antropoligaical basis for the anwsers ?

    Two more things… first wave feminism (sufragettes) was part of classical liberalism and only demanded that women were equal than men to the law. the second and third wave feminism was basically the hijaking by the bra-burning loon-left that are profoundly determined to make women an eternal second-class male.

    BTW, abortion makes women completely defenseless against sexual abuse, because if the girl gets pregnant the problem is hers. So much for sexual liberation !