As a human group, it is tremendously easier for us to notice what we disagree on than to visualize the issues on which we converge. This has to do with personality and identification issues. Identity is intrinsically related to beliefs and therefore there is no option except even aggressive defense against any attempt at deterrence or even to complement beliefs.
Few things are deeper than conviction about the beginning of life. Sometimes with religious arguments, other times philosophical and biological, each of us has an installed and perfectly valid idea of when an embryo/fetus/child acquires the dignity (and thereby rights) of a human being. We cannot long to reach agreements on this item, because the arguments that are relevant to one do not have to be relevant to another. By simple deduction, any discussion regarding abortion is going to be equally irreconcilable. Despite this, I am convinced that we can reach a fundamental convergence: for all it is desirable to minimize the number of unplanned pregnancies that are likely to be interrupted…
Arguments may vary; those who consider the rights to be unborn fundamental are logically contrary to the elimination of an embryo or fetus, and those who consider the decision to interrupt an ongoing gestation to be valid often consider it to be a complex event and possibly a biographical crisis for women.
The question of how to avoid unwanted pregnancies has two answers: adequate sex education and access to contraception. Despite this, every day we see multiple barriers to the exercise of these rights that are, moreover, guaranteed in our legal framework…
We see groups hindering children and adolescents’ access to adequate and timely sexuality education, condemning them years of silence and seeking their own sometimes dangerous road answers. The argument is usually that the first priority is the right of parents to educate their children, thus putting- our right as an adult over the child’s right to receive tools that will be of use to him in his present and future life. Ironically, in the argument of protecting them, these parents are preventing their children from accessing their right.
While the law states that anyone has the right to choose the method of contraception of their choice in the context of confidential care, as sexual and reproductive health professionals we learn day by day of unnecessary barriers that prevent people from exercising their rights. Medical centers (public and private) that require minors to be accompanied to be cared for. Matrons and doctors who refuse to give a private and confidential space to teenagers. Gynecologists and gynecologists who refuse to sterilize a woman who asks for it as – arbitrarily – too young.
There is an old and current phrase that says: Education to choose from… Contraception not to abort… Legal abortion so as not to die… I understand and welcome that the third sentence confronts us and conflicts us. Let’s work on the first two. Please.
The content poured into this opinion column is the sole responsibility of its author, and does not necessarily reflect the editorial line or position of El Mostrador.