HomeColumnShould 'selective artificial pregnancy termination' be legally regulated?
Should 'selective artificial pregnancy termination' be legally regulated?
Should "selective artificial pregnancy termination" be legally regulated? Although abortion is not strictly illegal in Japan, it is treated as a gray area in practice. This article examines "selective artificial pregnancy termination" in the context of both Japan and overseas circumstances.
Conditions for "Selective Artificial Pregnancy Termination" in Japan
In Japan, the conditions under which selective artificial pregnancy termination can be performed are defined by the Maternal Health Protection Law. Article 2 of Chapter 1 states, "Artificial pregnancy termination refers to the artificial expulsion of the fetus and its appendages from the maternal body at a time when the fetus cannot sustain life outside the maternal body."
Additionally, the Maternal Health Protection Law stipulates the conditions under which artificial pregnancy termination can be performed as follows:
①When the continuation of the pregnancy or delivery poses a significant risk to the mother's health due to physical or economic reasons.
②When the pregnancy is the result of rape or intercourse during which the woman could not resist or refuse due to assault or threats.
In addition to these conditions, certification by a doctor, the husband's consent (not required for unmarried women), and termination within 22 weeks of pregnancy are stipulated, though in practice, only the pregnancy duration condition is effectively enforced.
It is also noteworthy that Japan established the "Abortion Crime" law in 1907, which remains in effect. However, due to the aforementioned Maternal Health Protection Law, it is rarely applied in practice.
Debates on Selective Artificial Pregnancy Termination in Japan
At the beginning, I mentioned that prenatal testing has brought changes to the issues surrounding abortion.
The advent of prenatal testing has made it possible to meet the condition stipulated in the Maternal Health Protection Law that there is "a significant risk to the mother's health due to physical or economic reasons" if the fetus has a disease.
As a result, the Abortion Crime law has become a practically non-functional law.
In addition, it is also a problem that the Maternal Health Protection Law contains provisions regarding the condition of the pregnant woman but no wording regarding the fetus.
It is worth noting that the discussion of adding provisions regarding the condition of the fetus in Japan took place during the era of the Eugenic Protection Law, the predecessor of the Maternal Health Protection Law.
At that time, there was an attempt to add the wording "a significant risk that the fetus has a disease or defect that causes severe mental or physical disability" to the Eugenic Protection Law. However, after various discussions in political and civilian circles, the debate on the fetus was left unresolved.
Thus, although abortion is not strictly illegal in Japan, it remains a gray area in practice. With the Abortion Crime law being practically obsolete, awareness and debate on the issue remain limited.
Debates and Regulations on "Abortion" Overseas
To gain a different perspective, let's look at an example of the debates and regulations surrounding "abortion" overseas.
This map color-codes the levels of abortion regulation in various countries, with each color representing the following:
Dark Red: Completely prohibited
Red: Abortion is allowed if the woman's life is in danger
Yellow: Abortion is allowed if the mother's health is at risk
Green: Abortion is allowed considering social and economic circumstances (this includes Japan)
Blue: Abortion is available on request (varies by region)
From this map, it is apparent that strict abortion laws are more common in economically developing countries.
However, the issues surrounding abortion worldwide are constantly changing. In the following sections, we will introduce some of the ongoing debates in various countries.
Abortion Issues in the United States
In the United States, anti-abortion movements have been active for over 50 years. However, due to changes in the political landscape, several states enacted abortion bans in 2019.
One of the strictest abortion bans in the U.S. was enacted in Alabama, where abortion is illegal except when the mother's life is at serious risk.
This law also applies in cases where the mother becomes pregnant due to rape, which has led to significant criticism.
In this way, various religious and political agendas have converged, leading to increased activism around abortion in the United States.
Abortion Issues in Europe
In Europe, legal regulations on abortion are generally not very strict.
While some countries, such as Northern Ireland and Poland, still have relatively strict conditions, there are almost no countries that completely ban abortion across the continent.
However, Malta is an exception where abortion is completely prohibited, and doctors who perform abortions can face sentences ranging from 18 months to four years.
Additionally, cultural debates on abortion frequently arise. In 2018, Pope Francis sparked controversy by stating that "abortion is like hiring a hitman."
Abortion Issues in Iran
In Iran, artificial pregnancy termination had long been prohibited except when the mother's life was at risk. However, in 2005, the "Therapeutic Abortion Act" was enacted, allowing abortions based on the health conditions of the fetus and mother.
Approximately 90% of Iran's population adheres to Shia Islam, and its bioethics are based on Islamic law.
While Islamic law does not strictly prohibit abortion, the sanctity of life and the principle that parents should not kill their children, as indicated in the Quran, have led to the interpretation that "abortion is prohibited."
However, due to the increasing harm to women's health caused by illegal abortions, the aforementioned law was enacted. This decision was based on medical evidence and the interpretation of Islamic law that maternal suffering should be avoided.
What We Should Consider Before Debating Abortion Regulations
One perspective on abortion in cases where the child has a disease comes from American legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin. He argues that abortion due to disability should be permitted.
To summarize his view: "If it is discovered that the baby to be born will have a severe disability, abortion should be recommended because the lives of both the baby and the mother are destined to face significant setbacks. Furthermore, this does not infringe upon the rights of already living disabled individuals."
In contrast, critics argue that "even if the baby to be born has a disability, it cannot be conclusively said that their life or the lives of their family will be full of setbacks" and that "Dworkin has no right to claim that regulating the abortion of disabled fetuses is not an insult to already living disabled people."
Both opinions have valid points, but regardless of which side one takes, the mother is likely to bear mental or economic burdens. In the context of Japan, it is not difficult to imagine that more comprehensive social support would be necessary.
Conclusion
Based on the information introduced so far, one thing that can be said about the various issues surrounding abortion in Japan is that the Maternal Health Protection Law should include provisions concerning the fetus.
Of course, it should not be a blanket rule that "abortion is allowed in all cases where a specific disease is detected." The criteria for this should be thoroughly debated, and there should be a push for more comprehensive social support systems.
I hope this article serves as a starting point for further reflection and discussion among readers.
