History of reproductive sexual rights

At the international level, since 1973, the policies of interruption of pregnancy have been increasingly restricted, as is the case in the United States policy that gives greater probability of exercising the right to termination of pregnancy for white women than for women of color. The relationship between reproductive rights, centered on the decriminalization of abortion and the freedom of choice over one’s own body, with respect to self-management and the administration of financial resources destined for the service of termination of pregnancy is demonstrated. ¹

Since the 1970s, rape as an aggravating circumstance of abortion was a probable cause in the decriminalization of those who requested assisted abortion; however, public health policies in general and reproductive health in particular did not allocate sufficient funds for equipment, promotion and medical care in the majority of the population until well into the 1980s. ²

The concept of reproductive autonomy is crystallized in 130,824 cases of assisted interruption, 7,653 in minors, 73% of cases were requested by residents of Mexico City, 24% of the State of Mexico and 3% of other entities. Regarding the cases in which the request was made, but they did not attend the assisted interruption session, they only represented 13.5%. 83% of requests and interruptions were made by people whose age ranges between 18 and 35 years and only 4% of cases have been made more than once. Regarding the levels of instruction, 8.3% finished only the primary, 32.9% finished high school, 17.2% studied a higher level, 0.4% a technical level and 1.7% did not mention any level of studies. ³

Theories of freedom of choice

The theory of happiness suggests that there is a close link between happiness and rationality. In this sense, the search for happiness through the calculation of its objectives, achievements and expectations are formed in a virtuous circle of continuous learning and knowledge, as well as a constant review of the scope and limits of the capacities of thinking, reasoning, planning and systematization. ⁴

However, the Aristotelian approach ignores the factors of necessity and motivation as drivers of human relations between the subjects that have the objectives and synchronizes the capacities to reach their expectations. The humanistic theory explains the objectives, objectives and tasks or collaborations between those who show a legitimate interest in mutual benefit. In this way, the humanist theory, unlike Aristotelian thought, raises the progress of the sum of the wills and the most significant efforts that has the high capacity of reasoning of an individual. ⁵ One aspect of humanism is found in the Maslow pyramid of the hierarchy of needs and motivations, which indicates that the basis of any personal relationship are the needs of scarcity or deficit, which are derived from lack of training and lack of motivation. ⁶

The physiological needs allude to the feeding and maintenance of the organisms and, consequently, the characteristics of prevention of diseases and accidents, performance enhancers and productivity. If good nutrition and maintenance of brain cells determine efficiency, performance and response, then safety needs allude to the perceptions of individuals. In this sense, risks and threats are expected before an immeasurable and unpredictable event in its consequences, a system of constant monitoring of strategies and styles for the prevention of risks.⁷

Therefore, security opens the expectation of belonging or categorization and identity towards a reference group or towards another group that wishes or belongs.

Once people come together and have interpersonal relationships, they will consider the need to encourage their emotions and emotions. This is the case of the relationship between governors and governors with respect to a security project. In this way, recognition emerges as a need of the first order. Transcendence, according to Maslow’s theory, is the objective of the needs and the maximum achievement of the capacities promoted by the motivational systems. ⁸

However, the freedom of choice to be present in each of the needs, at the time of carrying out the actions and implement the capabilities, seems to be determined by a social and ideological structure that would determine the hierarchy of these. Therefore, the freedom of choice seems to be rather transitory and applicable in the moments and circumstances in which a decision is made that is not entirely deliberate or completely convincing. ⁹

In the case of the full exercise of sexual and reproductive rights, the theories of freedom of choice only contextualize the possibilities based on the priorities of the individuals. The theory of rational choice considers that individuals behave as agents that compete in an economic system for resources, or they are actors that a political system defines action strategies with the intention of carrying out a social conflict such as decriminalization of abortion. ¹⁰

Reproductive rights are, in the first instance, represented by a sector of the population as a management tool for the termination of pregnancy. ¹¹ It is freedom of choice delimited by the rights of third parties. Freedom is the determinant of choice, but if it involves third parties, then it is the choice that affects freedom. In the opposite case, when freedom generates choices that inhibit the rights of third parties, progress is asymmetric. If there are more freedoms of consensus and elections, then freedom is divided into that of thought and action or instrumental. ¹² The freedom of choice supposes ethical principles in which it is tried to regulate the human relations, the establishment of its objectives and the instrumentation of its capacities.

Studies of freedom of choice

In this section we review the studies related to the freedom of choice regarding the process of choosing a partner that would end with the interruption of pregnancy and the intervention of the state in the area of financing, the main determinant of effective and safe abortion practice.

The studies related to the process from unwanted pregnancy to post-mortem rituals of women or fetuses that went through unwanted pregnancies and high-risk abortions due to lack of funding. They found that the consulted literature identifies in the concept of “spiritual” right or obligation not to abort, thedetermining and justifying factor of state financing to promote and impose procreation, appealing to the distinction between freedom of choice and action proposed by Stuart Mill for explain the limits of the freedom of choice before the rights of third parties, even when they are fetuses, in Islamic contexts they are granted the status of spiritual soul with the right to life and in case of death carry out the ordinary rituals.¹³

That is, the freedom of choice is removed from its rational, aspirational and motivational process of achievement of personal well-being to conform to a cultural, social and religious norm relative to the spiritual, existential and sepulchral right that a fetus can achieve in a context defined by customs and habits. The initiatives and proposals, as well as the laws regarding abortion, to identify freedom of choice as opposed to the achievements of pro-life groups, such as the prohibition of public funds and the intervention of civil organizations in the interruption of pregnancy, delay the request for abortion, condition it by information about the process and the product, limit the abortion due to genetic cases, or the use of emergency contraception medications.The research is relevant because it reveals the limits to the freedom of choice in view of he fact that it is now considered freedom of action with effects to third parties that focus the debate on the status of the fetus as a depository of rights. It is a freedom adjusted to laws that assume the fetus agent of rights and therefore promote and impose procreation in a direct and indirect way. ¹⁴

In a direct sense, the prohibition of the use of public funds and indirectly the orientation of the decision of procreation from fetal images or data of deaths in clandestine abortions that would be a consequence of the absence of state financing and the low level of development of sectors marginalized, violated and excluded.

The State in two non-democratic countries (Poland and South Africa) implemented policies in favor of abortion, but once these nations were democratized they limited access to the service of termination of pregnancy. Even, clandestine abortions were dismantled when providers were efficient and otherwise permissive policies were applied. It is about the implementation of the process of hiding, risk and death due to the abortive practice to demonstrate the non-viability of the decision in low-income sectors. ¹⁵

The freedom of choice was again limited by political strategies prohibiting the service of interruption of pregnancy or limitations to the abortion system in marginalized, violated and excluded sectors. The freedom of choice transformed into freedom of action not only legitimizes the clandestinely and risk of abortions, but also the deaths of practitioners are used to reduce cases of pregnancy termination. ¹⁶

A review of the literature on social rights to the protection of the State for the woman in childbirth and by extension to the family of which she is head shows that the demands have focused on the demands of maternity and paternity leave, but not the interference of the State with respect to this right of protection has been discussed when abortions are carried out for economic reasons or low probabilities of maintenance by those requesting the interruption of pregnancy. The State would have the obligation to avoid abortions for economic reasons and to promote its non-clandestinely in order to guarantee the social protection it is obliged to carry out. ¹⁷

In these cases, freedom of choice is also disrupted by the guarantee of social rights and the protection of women and the family for their well-being, since it is reduced to a passive voice. That is, marginalized, excluded and violated sectors can choose the protection of the state, but limited to their decisions to terminate pregnancy for economic reasons. Even, the State should try to provide medications and devices to those who have an active sex life, but do not have enough income to carry out the abortion practice. The dilemma of freedom of choice versus protection rights and state welfare can initiate a debate about state intervention to regulate the population. That is to say, the social right of protection is instrumented as a mechanism of birth control coupled with the official propaganda of a small family for a better well-being. ¹⁸

Specification of the chosen reproduction model

The study of reproductive choice, defined as the balance of environmental requirements with respect to freedoms, needs, motivations and management capabilities and consensus, can be carried out following the logical trajectories of the relationships between the variables used in the theoretical framework and conceptual management.

In the model, the freedoms of choice are determinants of the reasons that each individual develops in his desire to establish differences with respect needs. The link between freedoms and happiness is in the capacities, but it is the needs that mediate the relationship between freedoms and choices.

Therefore, an election will be defined by the hierarchy of human needs, although the reasons are inherent to the needs, the freedoms of choice separate the needs of the motives to establish the limits of the individual process with respect to a process.

Consequently, capabilities are factors that define the rational choices of actors and agents instead of individuals or groups. It is assumed that the election process reflects a context of scarcity and competition for resources. Therefore, a greater capacity to process and assimilate liberties, supposes the hierarchy of needs and the delimitation of the reasons for carrying out an election.

However, the observation and anticipation of the reproductive choice is different from a rational choice based on costs and benefits or different from a consensual choice based on the availability of information, deliberation and agreements or co-responsibility. It is, above all, the result of the influence of liberties and their regulation on needs, motives and capabilities. That is, freedom of thought and freedom of action are two factors that can be integrated into the model to explain a choice of reproductive type.