The WHO abortion care guideline: Law and policy—Past, present, and future

In the 2022 Abortion Care Guideline, the World Health Organization (WHO) undertook systematic evidence reviews of seven law and policy interventions to assess their health and social impacts. Distinct recommendations were formulated for each. The present article highlights how the Guideline reconceptualizes abortion regulation as a complex structural intervention that shapes clinical care and service delivery and distributes risks and resources within these systems and in the care relations that define them. It then presents the Guideline recommendations and summarizes their evidence base, drawing on recent legal and policy developments to emphasize their real‐world significance. The article concludes by anticipating the future of abortion law and policy, focusing on service delivery innovations and diverse care models, drug regulation and the supply of abortion pills, and protective interventions crafted in the context of political crisis and immediate need that serve policy objectives and take regulatory forms different from the past.

[1]  O. Dyer.  Protests flare up across Poland as another pregnant woman’s death is blamed on abortion law , 2023, BMJ.

[2]  Ainoa Biurrun-Garrido,et al.  Reforma de la ley del aborto, Ley Orgánica 1/2023; Implicaciones para la práctica profesional , 2023, MUSAS. Revista de Investigación en Mujer, Salud y Sociedad.

[3]  M. Rodríguez,et al.  The Impact of 'conscientious objection' on abortion-related outcomes: A synthesis of legal and health evidence. , 2023, Health policy.

[4]  A. Lavelanet,et al.  A global review of penalties for abortion-related offences in 182 countries , 2023, BMJ Global Health.

[5]  Md. Mahmudur Rahman,et al.  Availability of medical abortion medicines in eight countries: a descriptive analysis of key findings and opportunities , 2023, Reproductive Health.

[6]  S. Suh,et al.  Subversive Epidemiology in Abortion Care: Reproductive Governance from the Global to the Local in Argentina and Senegal , 2023, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society.

[7]  Maria I. Rodriguez,et al.  The impact of criminalisation on abortion-related outcomes: a synthesis of legal and health evidence , 2022, BMJ Global Health.

[8]  A. Boing,et al.  How does the regulation of abortion provision for pregnancies resulting from rape affect its supply in the municipalities? , 2022, Ciencia & saude coletiva.

[9]  Maria I. Rodriguez,et al.  The impact of mandatory waiting periods on abortion-related outcomes: a synthesis of legal and health evidence , 2022, BMC Public Health.

[10]  C. Gerdts,et al.  Beyond safety: the 2022 WHO abortion guidelines and the future of abortion safety measurement , 2022, BMJ Global Health.

[11]  Maria I. Rodriguez,et al.  The impact of ‘grounds’ on abortion-related outcomes: a synthesis of legal and health evidence , 2022, BMC Public Health.

[12]  Maria I. Rodriguez,et al.  The impact of provider restrictions on abortion-related outcomes: a synthesis of legal and health evidence , 2022, Reproductive Health.

[13]  O. Dyer.  Demonstrations erupt in Poland after new abortion law is blamed in woman’s death , 2021, BMJ.

[14]  S. Burris,et al.  Identifying data for the empirical assessment of law (IDEAL): a realist approach to research gaps on the health effects of abortion law , 2021, BMJ Global Health.

[15]  Maria I. Rodriguez,et al.  Integrating rights and evidence: a technical advance in abortion guideline development , 2021, BMJ Global Health.

[16]  J. Erdman,et al.  In the name of public health: misoprostol and the new criminalization of abortion in Brazil , 2021, Journal of law and the biosciences.

[17]  Jane Noyes,et al.  Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making , 2019, BMJ Global Health.

[18]  B. R. Johnson,et al.  Global Abortion Policies Database: a descriptive analysis of the legal categories of lawful abortion , 2018, BMC International Health and Human Rights.

[19]  E. Coast,et al.  Trajectories of women's abortion-related care: A conceptual framework. , 2018, Social science & medicine.

[20]  L. Alkema,et al.  Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model , 2017, The Lancet.

[21]  M. Casado.  Consecuencias para las mujeres y su salud de la posible reforma de la ley del aborto , 2014 .

[22]  Alan Shiell,et al.  Theorising Interventions as Events in Systems , 2009, American journal of community psychology.

[23]  Alan Shiell,et al.  Complex interventions or complex systems? Implications for health economic evaluation , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[24]  K. Blankenship,et al.  Structural Interventions: Concepts, Challenges and Opportunities for Research , 2006, Journal of Urban Health.

[25]  Richard Whitecross,et al.  ARGENTINA , 1978, The Lancet.

[26]  B. Ganatra,et al.  Global Abortion Policies Database: A descriptive analysis of the regulatory and policy environment related to abortion. , 2019, Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology.

[27]  The selection and use of essential medicines. , 2011, World Health Organization technical report series.

[28]  O. D. Onu.  Programme of Action of the United Nations International Conference on Population and Development , 1994 .