Jump to content

Talk:Abortion in Chile

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Very interesting piece on Chile. I used to work in Chile, and so I find this interesting. Ectopic pregnancies can be very dangerous to the woman - that is disturbing that medical intervention is illegal. WOW. Jance 06:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Therapeutical abortion is still performed in Chile, the doctors just call it a tumour operation. --ArcaneMountain (talk) 13:56, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Classification

[edit]
Perhaps this article could use some clarification on how abortion is classified in Chile. Is is classified as "Murder", or as some other crime?

Junulo (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV

[edit]

This entire article is extremely POV, and reads like a pamplet for Planned Parenthood rather than a neautral entrance. 216.255.40.188 (talk) 02:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Somebody removed the POV tag, but the article is anything but neutral. It heavily cites a publication by a prochoice organization, titled "Woman Behind Bars". (Not Planned Parenthood, but the same). 89.220.225.128 14 Oct 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.220.225.128 (talk) 18:26, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree as well. This article is very POV. It seems as a 110% pro-abortion bigoted nut case wrote it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.87.105 (talk) 19:43, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whar is it exactly that's is being disputed here? Please single out what paragraph, sentence or otherwise section of the article that seems POV. I see a lot of accusations of POV but not especific examples. Likeminas (talk) 15:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Abortion when the life of the mother is at risk, such as in cases of ectopic pregnancy and eclampsia, is widely practiced in hospitals, even though it is illegal." NOT TRUE. This statement was cited from a radio interview. In Chile, by medical consensus, termination of pregnancy is warranted in cases of maternal risk, like eclampsia. Whether that action ends on a dead fetus, abortion or a viable preterm newborn, what you seek is ending pregnancy, not killing the fetus. Though it is a thin line between both intentions, that action is not penalized by chilean law —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raimundov (talk • contribs) 00:06, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Legal restriction is absolute, and abortion is technically defined like "All interruption of pregnancy before 12th week, or 500 gr or fetal viability". Then, when a physician interrupts an ectopic pregnancy could be (teorically) submited to legal prosecution. Also, its really dangerous (for physician) interrupt a partial mola or incomplete abortion. Obviouslly, almost all judges and polices apply something like common sense, and not apply the current law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.9.182.55 (talk) 02:39, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The present article is seriously biased and extremely POV. Recent peer-reviewed studies in Chile confirm null abortion mortality (Elard Koch et al.). Moreover, after abortion ban, maternal mortality and deaths from abortion continued to decrease. All the sources are verifiable and reliable. Accordingly, the complete article should be updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.20.65.128 (talk) 19:08, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, we've already established that the Koch source is an activist paper from an unreliable publisher. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 07:30, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article contains serious (an harmful) misinformation regarding abortion law in Chile, i.e. what really is against the law and what is not. I respectfully request the article to be completely re-written from a scientific and law accurate standpoint. Paracena (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC) Dr. Paula Aracena[reply]

Therapeutic abortion was permitted by the Health Code in 1931[1] but abolished by the military dictatorship on September 15, 1989,[2] arguing that due to advances in medicine it was "no longer justifiable."[3] Before the ban, any woman whose life was in danger could ask to get an abortion, if she had the approval of two doctors.[1] This whole passage is severely misleading and inaccurate. The Spanish article on the same topic has somewhat different information, including that therapeutic abortion was still allowed under article 119 revision from 1989. I have replaced this passage with the content of the Spanish article including the references. ArcaneMountain (talk) 14:53, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Elard Koch

[edit]

Fails WP:MEDRS for so many reasons.

  • Is it a general or systematic review published in a reputable medical journal? No.
    • Was it published in a reputable medical journal at all? No.
  • Is it an academic or professional book written by an expert in the field and from a respected publisher? No.
  • Is it a medical guideline or position statement from a nationally or internationally recognised expert body? No.

Moreover, the so-called "International Working Group for Global Women's Health Research" at which he presented it appears to be a scientific-sounding name for an anti-abortion conference.

-- Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 07:20, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All the information related to the articles by Koch et al. is valid and verifiable Koch E, Thorp J, Bravo M, Gatica S, Romero CX, et al. (2012) Women's Education Level, Maternal Health Facilities, Abortion Legislation and Maternal Deaths: A Natural Experiment in Chile from 1957 to 2007. PLoS ONE 7(5): e36613. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036613 Available http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0036613 Koch E, Bravo M, Gatica S, Stecher JF, Aracena P, et al. Sobrestimación del aborto inducido en Colombia y otros países latinoamericanos. Ginecol Obstet Mex 2012;80(5):360-372. Available http://www.nietoeditores.com.mx/ginecologia-y-obstetricia-de-mexico/5/4883-sobrestimacion-del-aborto-inducido-en-colombia-y-otros-paises-latinoamericanos.html {{subst:Unsigned|

No, this is not a reliable journal by our WP:RS or WP:MEDRS standards. Do not edit my comments to change my position again. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 07:30, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I stronlgy disagree with you. Your comment must be updated (change your "no" by "yes"). It is a reputable journal according WP:RS or WP:MEDRS standards. On the contrary you appear seriously biased by a "pro-abortion/pro-choice" subjective ideology, the contrary to "anti-abortion" groups. PLoS One and Ginecol Obstet Mex are reputed peer reviewed medical journals. PLoS One has a very good impact factor. Ginecol Obstet Mex is the official journal of FAMEGO affiliated to International Federation of Obstetric and Gynecology. After a careful reading of the article (and two appendix) published by Koch et al in PLoS One, it is the more complete study on maternal and abortion mortality conducted in Chile based in actual official data. The present wiki article should be updated using the new information provided by this very complete study (I suggest read the entire thing)

After a revision in PubMed, clearly authors are reputed academic researchers with several other publications in medical journals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.20.114.20 (talk) 22:55, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Definitively Roscelese is misleading this article. I confirmed on Internet that Koch is a reputed scientist with a number of honors and awards in research (e.g. Henri Nestle Award). Koch appears as external reviewer by several reputed medical journals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.225.207.26 (talk) 07:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable source

[edit]

This passage However, in 2011 Chile was awarded the International Protect Life Award for being the country with the lowest maternal mortality rate in Latin America.

is being supported by none other than the Catholic news agency.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/chile-legalizing-abortion-does-not-reduce-maternal-mortality/

Does this strike anyone as likely to be unreliable?


Likeminas (talk) 20:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine they're reliable for Chile's having received the International Protect Life Award, since it's an anti-abortion award and they are an anti-abortion news service. However, you're right in that we'd need a real source to confirm the low mortality rate. (Although the "International Protect Life Award" doesn't seem to be a notable award, so it may be that the entire paragraph can be scrapped.) Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:26, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Abortion in Chile. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:48, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Abortion in Chile. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:38, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Modern Latin America

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2023 and 1 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AnaHdgs (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Lucypoppysue, Sbruce210.

— Assignment last updated by Katherine.Holt (talk) 16:39, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Abortion_in_Chile&oldid=1195166201"