Are the restrictive provisions of sections 2(1)(c) and 5(5)(b) of the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act 92 of 1996 unconstitutional?
| dc.contributor.author | McQuoid-Mason, D. J. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2018-04-03T10:01:51Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2018-04-03T10:01:51Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2006 | |
| dc.description.abstract | English: Sections 2(1)(c) and 5(5)(b) of the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act 92 of 1996 only allow a termination after the 20th week of gestation on very limited grounds. No provision is made for terminations of pregnancies arising from rape or incest. Therefore women survivors of rape or incest who, for reasons beyond their control, postpone their decisions to terminate until the third trimester will not qualify for a legal abortion unless they fall under the existing grounds in the Choice Act. The provisions of the Choice Act regarding the third trimester are more restrictive than those in section 3(1) of the Abortion and Sterilization Act 2 of 1975. The latter did not adopt a trimester approach and allowed a termination on the grounds of rape or incest at any stage of the pregnancy — subject to certain conditions concerning the verification of the cause of the pregnancy. By excluding rape and incest as grounds for termination of pregnancy in the third trimester the Choice Act imposes an “undue burden” on women who are survivors of rape or incest and their exclusion is unconstitutional. | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | Afrikaans: Artikels 2(1)(c) en 5(5)(b) van die Wet op die Keuse vir die Beeïndiging van Swangerskap 92 van 1996 laat in beperkte gevalle beeïndiging van swangerskap na die 20ste week van die swangerskap toe. Geen voorsiening word gemaak vir die beeïndiging van ’n swangerskap wat onstaan as gevolg van verkragting of bloedskande nie. Vrouens wat slagoffers van verkragting of bloedskande is en wat, vir redes buite hul beheer, die besluit om die swangerskap te beeïndiging uitstel tot die derde trimester sal dus nie kwalifiseer vir ’n wettige beeïndiging van die swangerskap nie tensy haar geval gedek word deur die bestaande gronde waarvoor voorsiening gemaak word in die Wet op die Keuse vir die Beeïndiging van Swangerskap. Die bepalings van die Wet op die Keuse vir die Beeïndiging van Swangerskap wat handel oor die derde trimester is baie meer beperkend as die bepalings van artikel 3(1) van die Aborsie en Sterilisasie Wet 2 van 1975. Laasgenoemde wet het nie ’n trimester benadering gevolg nie, maar het wel op enige stadium van die swangerskap beeïndiging van swangerskap, wat onstaan het as gevolg van verkragting of bloedskande, toegelaat. Die beeïndiging van swangerskap in terme van die bepalings van 3(1) van die Aborsie en Sterilisasie Wet 2 van 1975 was wel onderworpe aan die voorwaarde dat die oorsaak van die swangerskap bewys moes word. Die uitsluiting van die beeïndiging van swangerskap gedurende die derde trimester waar die swangerskap deur verkragting or bloedskande veroorsaak is plaas ’n “onnodige las” op slagoffers van verkragting of bloedskande en die uitsluiting is onkonstitusioneel. | en_ZA |
| dc.description.version | Publisher's version | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.citation | McQuoid-Mason, D. J. (2006). Are the restrictive provisions of sections 2(1)(c) and 5(5)(b) of the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act 92 of 1996 unconstitutional? Journal for Juridical Science, 31(1), 121-133. | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0258-252X (print) | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 2415-0517 (online) | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11660/8082 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher | Faculty of Law, University of the Free State | en_ZA |
| dc.rights.holder | Faculty of Law, University of the Free State | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Pregnancies | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Terminations of pregnancies | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Rape | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Incest | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act 92 of 1996 | en_ZA |
| dc.title | Are the restrictive provisions of sections 2(1)(c) and 5(5)(b) of the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act 92 of 1996 unconstitutional? | en_ZA |
| dc.type | Article | en_ZA |