On 22 May 1978 the law 194 was approved, which from that moment made legal to Italy the possibility for women to access the voluntary termination of pregnancy. But abortion in our country is still an obstacle course. Based on the available data, the conscientious objectors in Italy are 7 out of 10: Objective gynecologists are 63.4 percent, anesthesiologists 40.5 percent, and 32.8 percent non -medical staff.
In addition, as the Coscioni Association underlines in its report with which the campaign “abortion without hospitalization” launches the campaign, there are only two regions, Lazio and Emilia Romagna, which after 5 years apply the ministerial circular of 2020 which provides for the pharmacological abortion (through the intake of two drugs, the Ru486 pill and the Misoprostolo) in the clinic or in the consultation, with the possibility of taking the second compressed at home. In all the others, hospital hospitalization is planned.
If on the one hand the right has been conquered, thanks to the commitment and battle first of all of the feminist movement, on the other we have a law that needs to be questioned, widely. How? We asked him to Federica Di Martino, Activist and founder of the digital platform IVG, I have aborted and I’m finewhich for years has promoted self -determination practices with respect to health issues by spreading correct communication on voluntary termination of pregnancy. Will be among the speakers present at the meeting Rethink the law 194, which will be held on May 23 at 3 pm in the refectory room of the San Macuto Palace of the Chamber of Deputies.
We have a law, the 194, which is overcome on one side and on the other, we still try to protect it and make it apply.
«Yes, let’s say that the slogan that has accompanied these years, which has been repeated and that still continues to be repeated, is” nobody touches the 194 “,” Hands off from 194 “. It should certainly be reviewed in a key to reading that instead questions the much more than 194 because in fact we talk about a 1978 law resulting from a historical compromise, not only of the feminist movement, but also between Catholic associations and movements, so much so that it was approved, let’s say, during the Andreotti government. We mainly speak of a law that has never been modified over the years and which in fact makes abortion a right only on paper, while in fact it continues to be a concession “.
How?
«We are talking about a law that guarantees the right of abortion, however, assuming maternity as a fundamental social value of this country. It is a law that should guarantee the right of abortion which, however, starts from the point that our society is based on motherhood, somewhere already gives us the measure of the value that is negatively attributed to abortion. Then there are some themes that must necessarily be questioned ».
Which?
“First of all, the question that affects self -determination, that is, the fact that according to Law 194, but more generally what is also the culture that is carrying out the current government, is that women cannot become mothers, therefore there is no element of self -determination. In fact, within 194 there is talk of all those measures that would prevent women from carrying out a pregnancy, which is of a social, psychological nature, linked to economic conditions. Therefore the element of desire, will and free choice compared to maternity, in fact it is not contained within this law. Moreover, there is the obligation of the week of reflection: we are talking about one of the most secure practices in the world at a global international level, as confirmed by the World Health Organization but it is the only practice that provides for the obligation to reflection of 7 days. What should we reflect on? “
Then there is the theme of conscientious objection.
«Since today everyone is when they enroll in the faculty of medicine and the specialization in gynecology, do they know that abortions could be done, what is the sense of conscientious objection compared to these practices? This obviously becomes the greater deterrent than access and compared to the fact that despite being continued to say that in the structures there are non -objective doctors, the waiting lists continue to continue so much that women are forced to intra and extra regional migrations and above all to not be able to access pharmacological abortion. Finally, there is the great question of the certificate for the IVG, which attests to the woman’s will to stop pregnancy, as if we were to have someone who certifies that we are capable of understanding and wanting, and also on this in Law 194, which is a law with wide plots, there is talk of a doctor of trusted, which includes any type of doctor, not just gynecologist. So technically the general practitioner is required to issue the certificate for the IVG. Many people don’t know because there is a great disinformation on abortion. “
Disinformation plays a broad role in accessing abortion, how much is the stigma related to this too?
«They are two absolutely interconnected themes. IGV, I have aborted and I’m fine It was born precisely to try to destigmatize what is the rhetoric that invests the abortion translated solely as a fault, as trauma, as pain, which makes abortion a taboo. This means that people experiences in those places of public health are silenced, because people are ashamed to tell their abortion experience, because they know that they will be judged for this. So there is a large bias on a social and cultural level in claiming their self -determination choices and also the liberation experience that is many times linked to abortion. I am one of those who have aborted, who speaks and who claims as a political interlocutor within a context in which the others are thinking of having to decide for me ».
This year we saw the rooms for listening to the fetus beat, pro-vita organizations in the consultors. Politics is launching clear messages.
“This happens in the right as regards the deterrence policies we have seen, therefore the allocation of public funds to anti -abortic groups and movements, as happens, for example, in the Piedmont region regarding the nascent life fund, but for many other practices. However, it also happens on the side of a certain type of left that continues to speak of abortion not even by appointing it, or continuing to ask for rights as if they were pitistic donations, because in Italy we have an idea that the rights are paid in duties of pain. Rights are always rights, therefore that I abort, happy, unhappy. The state must guarantee me dignified access. As I access this tool and what concerns my emotional sphere is not a problem of others, because the body is mine and it is not those who think they have to decide also on my emotion ».
You founded the platform IVG, I have aborted and I’m fine In 2018. In recent years, how the experience of women has changed regarding abortion.
“Certainly today also through the work of our platform and more generally of all that the networks of mutualism from below are that continue to exist because there is an absent state, because if the state and institutions did their job, we probably should not voluntarily do this, we assume that when people feel supported, not judged and accompanied, they manage to live their abortion experience with greater awareness, tranquility and safety. Just yesterday he wrote me a person telling me that he was always ashamed of the two abortions he had had and had not spoken and also thanks to the work of the page today he managed to claim his abortive experiences. To be traumatic is not abortion, it is all that surrounds the abortion that is traumatic and this is a problem ».
How difficult is it to carry on the information and activism work you do every day?
«I had to learn in the field to interface with institutions, to attack me on the phone to ask for information that were not found elsewhere and spend the whole days on the phone waiting for someone to answer me. It was not easy and it continues not to be. However, I want to emphasize that the work we carry on is a voluntary work and this weighs because all this happens in the cut of time. The platform is a political platform that I manage in the clippings of time because I do something else as a work. So part of our freedom and this free time that we could dedicate to our affections, to a hobby, to anything else, often and willingly we commit it to do what the state does not deal with. This weighs ».
How?
“There is a mental load that is very important, which I believe should be underlined a little more and compared to which the state and institutions should have answers, because instead we are opposed. We never come to us, we are always taken for granted, perhaps it would be time to reverse the course and that politics took on a responsibility ».
In this perspective, the meeting in the Chamber of Deputies on May 23 dedicated to abortion is significant.
«Yes, I always thank the honorable Gilda Sportiello for the work he is also carrying out within the institutions to carry out our requests and for having publicly talked about abortion. Those places are also our home, we are not guests, those places belong to us, politics needs to listen to what our work is. We wait for politicians in the squares and claim the need to occupy those places and those institutional spaces because they are ours ».
Source: Vanity Fair
I’m Susan Karen, a professional writer and editor at World Stock Market. I specialize in Entertainment news, writing stories that keep readers informed on all the latest developments in the industry. With over five years of experience in creating engaging content and copywriting for various media outlets, I have grown to become an invaluable asset to any team.
