Category: Gender Equality

“My Body, My Rights”

In October 2018, the manifesto “My Body, My Rights”, published in “Le Nouvel Observateur”, called for equal sexual and reproductive rights for all women in Europe. Abortion legislations are currently regulated at the national level and no common framework exists in the European Union. This situation creates huge inequalities among European women. If some countries have known improvements over the past years, such as the abolition of the abortion ban in Ireland, some others, and sadly the majority of them, have known some alarming backlashes. The Polish government attempts to restrict even more the already narrow conditions under which abortion is legal; in Italy 70% of the doctors are using a conscience clause in order to refuse the practice of abortion, creating unrealistic waiting lists and delays in the public service and favouring the private practitioners. Other countries, not to mention Germany, do not officially restrict abortion per se, but reduce the access to information, leaving women in desperate situations, instead of guiding them toward the best options concerning their personal situations.

Sexual and Reproductive Health Rights (SRHR) are considered under the frame of gender equality and access to health, which provides the EU with limited competencies. Various official reports of Institutions highlight the lack of consensus among Member States on the topic. Yet, European legislative bodies seem more willing to implement a supranational framework on SRHR, especially regarding abortion rights. In 2001, the European Parliament encouraged greater access to SRHR among the Member States, including the existence of “legal, safe and accessible” abortion. More recently in 2013, the Council of Ministers signed a common declaration encouraging the implementation of the Beijing Platform of Action. This Platform represents the international legal argument to defend abortion rights, stating that “reproductive health […] implies that people […] have the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when and how often to do so” (para. 94). In fact, limiting access to abortion reduces peoples’ rights to have control over their own body and their rights to have a familly if, when and how they want it.

Moreover, restricted access to abortion does not eliminate the practice but creates an incentive for illegal procedures to happen, therefore increasing insecurity. For instance, in the case of Poland, every year, around 1 100 legal abortions are practiced, but between 80 000 and 150 000 are still made under illegal circumstances. Fortunately, scientific advancements give women more possibilities to (il)legally terminate their pregnancy other than the use of a cloth hanger. Abortive pills can either be ordered and shipped from abroad when is it still possible, or pregnant women have to travel in a foreign country, or find a doctor that practices it illegally, or in worst case scenarios, do it at home in dangerous and unhealthy conditions. As the statistics show, in Poland, restricting abortions rigths do not prevent its practice. It just makes it more dangerous and uncontrolled. Therefore, why does the legislation persevere to limit this right instead of helping the people in those situations and giving them access to safe and controlled healthcare ?

NO, women having recourse to abortion do not do it for pleasure. NO, abortion is not used as a contraceptive. And NO, abortion is not easy. Legalising abortion, and making it solely a woman’s choice, is offering women in desesperate situations an alternative to their unwanted pregancy. Abortion has to be made accessible by the state and accompanied by professionals. Yet, some European legislation are depriving women of their rights to information. This is the case of the paragraph 219a of the German Penal Code. The article states that no information related to abortion can to be made public. In 2016, the doctor Kristina Hänel was fined 6 000 € because she indicated on her website that she was practicing abortion for her patients. Her trial provoked a public debate over this article, dating back from 1933. A new version was passed in February 2019, allowing doctors to say on their website that they are practicing abortion. Yet, no further information can be provided and in June this year, two nurses were fined because they added that abortion was practiced “in a safe environment”. When women are finding themselves in a situation of unwanted pregnancy, they have to be able to find neutral and reliable information on their options, and information has to be easily and quickly accessible.

If it is important to provide women with reliable and available information, and it is equally important to guide them over the entire process. A report requested by the European Parliament Committee on Women’s rights and gender equality identified only two countries in Europe having legal dispositions supervising post-abortion care. Those consist in psychological and social support and councelling sessions before and after abortion. I do not say that every woman needs psychological support before and after abortion, yet, such an event is never painless and easy, therefore, women should be offered the possibility to be adequately and professionaly supported.

Another problem identified in Europe is the ineffective implementation of abortion rights. In most countries, doctors have the right to refuse the practice of abortion, using a conscience clause. So be it. Yet, such clauses, when they are used by the majority of doctors, create situations in which it becomes hard to access one’s rights. It is reported that in Italy, 70% of doctors are using this conscience clause, creating inadmissible delay to have an abortion once they found a doctor willing to deliver them a required certificate. In 2014, almost 15% of Italian women had to wait more than 21 days, and regular testimonies report that they almost missed the legal time limit due to these delays. This is why it is important to legalise abortion, it is equally important to ensure an effective access to it. 

Additionally, it is also crucial to provide adequate training to gynecologists. Taking the case of Italy once again, only 15% of the doctors are using the conscience clause for religious reasons. Most of them report a lack a knowledge and training. They have to declare if they will be conscientious objectors at the beginning of their studies, and if so do not learn how to practice it. In Germany this is not taught at university. The 1 200 doctors still practicing it today have learned it 40 years ago, creating a worrying situation for the years to come. The least that could be done, would be to teach medicine students that can after decide if they want or not to practice it.

As a reminder, the UN Human Rights Committee ruled that any lack of access to abortion was considered as a cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. AND IT IS. It denies the right to women to have full control over their own body, shaming them and, forcing them to find unwanted alternatives, and therefore creating dangerous situations, instead of providing them with optimal care. All these reasons should be sufficient to justify a common European framework legalising abortion, making it effectively accessible, safe, and free.

By Mélanie Véron-Fougas – A 1st year Master student in European Governance at the Universities of Konstanz and Utrecht.

Structural and cultural aspects of gender equality in Europe

In 1949, Simone de Beauvoir made a famous observation about the assumed role of women in society. In that time, she argued that “One is not born but becomes a woman” through the fixed traditional roles of the female sex. Fortunately, in Europe gender equality has improved; women living now are more free in becoming what they want, instead of who they are supposed to be.

In my previous blog, I shortly mentioned the principle of gender equality, founded in the European Treaty of 1957. This principle ensures legal grounds for equality between men and women when it comes to salaries. Through the years, more legislative measures have followed, making Europe one of the best continents to live in as a woman. Gender equality in Europe however, should not be taken for granted. In some fields, for instance regarding the male/female ratio across European political institutions, one can ask if the balance could not be improved. In this article, I will therefore start by looking at the current structural gender equality in the European political space. Furthermore, as some of the current popular right-wing European parties seem to adhere to the traditional unequal gender culture, I will discuss potential cultural pressures on gender equality in Europe.


© Tim Draijer, 2019

When it comes to the European political space, there are still large structural differences in gender ratios in favour of men. Among member states of the European Union, the average percentage of female ministers is 29,5%. Inside the European Parliament the percentage of female MEP’s is currently at 36,2%. In the national European parliaments average percentages of female representatives are even lower. Of course, unequal gender ratios do not have to indicate gender discrimination. The difference could also be explained by a gender based preference for political professions. However, when looking at the share of women in the EU population, which is at 51%, one can hardly argue that the current European Parliament is a good representation of its citizens. Setting a gender quota as a solution for such a gender in-balance is often criticized for being inefficient and unfair. In my view, this argument is flawed, as the opposite is also true. The process of assigning a new person to a certain position, whether it is a new politician or CEO, is not always done by choosing the most efficient candidate. This process could also be influenced by a certain tunnel-vision or gender-bias: a men-led firm is likely to remain men-led. Ensuring an equal gender ratio therefore, can be seen as a counterforce to these biases. In Sweden, the national parliament currently uses a voluntary quota system, where political parties can decide themselves whether they want to strive for gender balance or not. Several parties have adopted this voluntary quota, making the Swedish parliament among the most gender balanced in Europe, with a percentage of 46% female representatives.

Moving from the structural approach of gender equality in European politics, I now want to discuss if a changing political culture could influence gender equality. As mentioned, European countries are currently among the best of the world when it comes to gender equality. When looking at the increased popularity of right-wing movements and their ideas, one can ask if these achievements are currently under pressure. In Germany for instance, the main populist party ‘Alternative für Deutschland’ actively protests against gender equality and promotes the traditional role of women in society. One of the founders of AfD, Alexander Gauland, argued that “modern family structures in our country are too colourful” and that female employment is a “misconceived view of feminism”. In the Netherlands, ‘Forum voor Democratie’ (FvD) has had a big victory in the last elections. The party is led by Thierry Baudet, a man who is also difficult to describe as being a feminist. As both of the parties are doing particularly well among male voters (for FvD the percentage of male voters was 64%), I think Europe should be alert of potential changes to our current culture of gender equality.

In the coming year, the new president of the European Commission will be chosen. Until now, all European Commissions have been led solely by men. Margrethe Vestager, currently the European Commissioner for Competition, will be one of the candidates for the new position. Now seems to be a good time for a stand for gender equality; the appointment of the first female president of the Commission would be an important step. 

By Tim Draijer – A 1st year Master student in European Governance at the Universities of Konstanz and Utrecht.