March 2nd marked the first anniversary of She Decides, a global movement gathering individuals, organizations and governments committed to building a “new normal” where women and girls everywhere can decide about their own bodies, lives and futures. Without question. IPPF EN is very encouraged at how European donor countries have rallied behind She Decides, contributing €223 million of the €400 million raised so far. However, although the European pledges are promising, analysis shows that much more will need to be done in 2018 and beyond if we are to achieve the full realization of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) around the world. In the current landscape – where cuts in funding for global health have reduced the operating budgets of some IPPF members by up to 60% - it is more important than ever that European politicians maintain a strong and united front as champions of women’s right to live free reproductive lives, both in the EU and in the Global South. As civil society, we know that many women and girls, especially the most marginalized, run the risk of being left behind and denied life-saving services if financial and political commitments from decision-makers are insufficient. Civil society organizations have a critical role to play in ensuring that SRHR are fully within reach for all, especially in the Global South where they remain key providers of SRHR services. This is why we are strongly committed as IPPF to remain a leading global SRHR advocate and health care provider. By maintaining its longstanding strong support for SRHR, the European Union can truly contribute to improving people’s lives, both in the EU and globally. It must demonstrate real commitment in its next budget – the Multiannual Financial Framework - which is currently being prepared by the European Commission and which will guide EU spending for the coming years. The ongoing EU-UN Spotlight Initiative provides an additional opportunity for the EU to make its commitment real by tackling SRHR as a key area to effectively combat violence against women and girls. We are hopeful about the EU commitments already made, but much more remains to be done if Europe is to play the fullest role possible in enabling everyone to decide about their own bodies, lives and futures.   *Based on a speech given by Aurore Guieu, IPPF EN, during the Infopoint She Decides Day 2018. The recording of the event is available.

Global gag rule impact for IPPF is a life or death situation for clients The impact for people receiving care from member associations of the International Planned Parenthood Federation around the world is devastating. A total of 29 countries are seeing clinics, staffing, services and health supplies reduced due to the loss of US funding through the global gag rule. The policy, the most extreme of its kind, will hurt family planning , HIV, sexual and gender based violence and Tuberculosis healthcare for men, women and young people.  IPPF’s members believe reproductive health care is a right and everyone should be able to make choices about their well-being. The Global Gag Rule not only undermines but violates these rights and therefore, IPPF and its members cannot and will not support it. The review is unable to quantify the long term effects of the Global Gag Rule. But those effects are already being felt by people in need of care. IPPF members have already been forced to close clinics, reduce staff and cut back on critical health supplies. This is just the beginning of a long lasting and tragic legacy. The cuts hit services and people in a many ways. Not all of them can be quantified. In many cases, IPPF Members are the one lifeline for our clients. The human cost – people not being able to make choices about their lives – is beyond figures. Combined with loss of USAID family planning funding, the added loss of HIV funding doubles the impact on clients’ lives and health in many countries in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean where the amounts of the losses are larger and the populations affected are often the most marginalised and vulnerable. Examples of impact: Mozambique www.ippf.org/blogs/global-gag-rule-ggr-cuts-deep-sexual-and-reproductive-healthcare-mozambique IPPF Member Association: Associação Moçambicana para Desenvolvimento da Família (AMODEFA) USAID support accounted for 60% of funding 47% reduction in AMODEFA personnel: redundancy of 43 staff and release of 650 peer educators Closure of 18 youth-friendly clinics Closure of 72 mobile clinics per month Swaziland: IPPF Member Association: Family Life Association of Swaziland (FLAS) USAID support accounted for 25% of funding Redundancy of 12 staff and 26 outreach workers Reduced geographic coverage of services from 14 to 4 towns Botswana: IPPF Member Association: Botswana Family Welfare Association (BOFWA) 60% of funding at risk Suspension of one clinic, services of 7 others scaled to bare minimum 71% reduction in skilled staff About IPPF: IPPF is made up of national organisations that offer sexual and reproductive health and rights services. The Federation has 141 Member Associations and 24 partners covering over 170 countries.This globally connected, locally owned network delivers 300 services every minute of every day. Human cost in figures www.ippf.org/news/human-cost-global-gag-rule Global gag 1 year on www.ippf.org/resource/global-gag-rule-one-year and www.ippf.org/global-gag-rule Country stories: www.ippf.org/stories/i-am-afraid-what-will-happen-when-there-will-be-no-more-projects-one

In the last year, increased political attacks on the safety and dignity of women, within the EU and beyond, have made human rights a hot topic in the European public sphere, writes IPPF EN's Regional Director Caroline Hickson. It has been an eye-opener to see just how cynically populist politicians will sacrifice women to further their own political agendas and consolidation of power. Any illusion that the battle for free reproductive lives had been won is shattered. It is genuinely frightening to see the emergence of a repressive, chauvinist force across our continent, prepared to openly bully and harass women within the most intimate sphere of their lives. But as a wave of solidarity sweeps across Europe in response to some of the most egregious political assaults, echoing similar outcry in the US and beyond, it has become plain that the abuse directed towards women’s freedoms and needs strikes a major chord with ordinary people. This Thursday (28 September), to mark the Global Day of Action for Access to Safe and Legal Abortion, a solidarity march will be held in Brussels to denounce all governments who still deny the basic right to a free reproductive life. The march builds on the extraordinary struggle of Spanish women in 2015, of Polish women in 2016, and the continued injustice faced by Irish and Maltese women, as well as rising threats in countries such as Lithuania. It will demand that access to safe and legal abortion care becomes a reality in all European countries. This is a European rally to show that women matter, their health matters and their lives matter. The European Union is based on shared fundamental values that we must defend. Gender equality and solidarity are at the heart of the European Treaties. And yet on women’s autonomy and self-determination, we are currently faced with a two-speed EU where people living in some places enjoy basic rights while in other countries these are denied. It is unacceptable, for example, that in Ireland, nearly 4,000 women a year are forced to travel to the UK to exercise their reproductive right to discontinue a pregnancy. The Irish healthcare system abandons these women, forcing them to travel abroad for basic healthcare. As always, it is the most vulnerable and marginalized, the ones who can’t make that journey to the UK, who suffer the most. Meanwhile, refusal of care by the majority of doctors on grounds of conscience, which women face in both Poland and Italy, jeopardises access to legal abortion care and exposes women to health risks that could be easily avoided. In Italy, a pregnant young woman died last year when doctors refused to provide essential, life-saving care on grounds of so-called conscience. Doctors who stand up to the establishment, refusing to turn their backs on women who need them, risk seeing the effect on their career progression. It is not acceptable that a woman in France can freely access these vital services, while in a different European country she would be exposed to humiliating and degrading treatment preventing her from deciding about her future and the future of her family. The EU continues to make progress in its approach to gender equality, but if women cannot live a free reproductive life, there is no gender equality. Reproductive coercion has no place in 21st century Europe. Too many people believe that the European Union is primarily a mechanism of economic cooperation, but the reality check of Brexit and other global events have highlighted that the EU is and should be much more than that. Member states can only trust each other if they share the values of human rights and democracy. Their treatment of women is a crucial test of the former, while hostility in Hungary and Poland to the rule of law shows that the latter cannot be taken for granted. If these shared and interlinked values are easily breached, the Union may further unravel. In such turbulent political times, there is an opportunity for citizens and leaders to reflect on the values of Europe and call for human dignity to be upheld for everyone, wherever they happen to live. If we fail to react and speak up for the kind of Europe we want, then we fail to safeguard the most precious human freedom to decide about one’s own private life. We must start right here on 28 September, in Brussels, by making clear that people’s intimacy, joy and freedom cannot be taken away by repressive, backward-looking forces. There is a moral urgency to fight reproductive coercion and oppression in the European Union. This opinion piece appeared on Euractiv.com.

IPPF EN is outraged by the Polish authorities’ latest move to limit access to emergency contraception. Last Friday 23rd June, Poland's President Andrzej Duda approved a new law limiting access to the only available emergency contraceptive pill. The law will come into effect next month and will end prescription-free emergency contraception. We condemn this outrageous violation of the private lives and intimacy of women and men. This not only tramples on women’s dignity and autonomy but it clearly aims to bully them into a pregnancy. This is yet another example of reproductive coercion which will affect the lives of countless women and couples in Poland, particularly the youngest, poorest or most isolated. Government-mandated meddling with the reproductive lives of women, men and families is unacceptable. These new restrictions were pushed through in May by Poland's ruling rightwing Law and Justice (PiS) party and adopted in the Polish parliament. Polish president, Andrzej Duda, gave his official consent to the law last Friday despite the opposition of women and human rights groups and opinion polls showing most Poles opposed it. This latest move follows an attempt to impose a total ban on abortion and undermine access to assisted reproduction. With this decision, the government blatantly flouts the will of its own people after hundreds of thousands of protesters hit the streets over last year’s proposal in what became known as the ‘Czarny Protest’. On women’s rights within the European Union, we are faced with a dichotomy where girls living in the right place can get free contraception, including over-the-counter emergency contraception, while others face an uphill struggle. In Poland, even a teenage rape victim has to fight to find a doctor who may – or may not - help her. The new Polish law passed by the country’s archaic authorities allows for the potential abuse of power by doctors who may feel that they have a right to judge the sexual lives of women based on their own moral convictions. As Europeans we cannot stand still and watch.

IPPF EN has joined a call to action to support the rights of Polish women, severely threatened by the proposition of a revised anti-abortion law. The draft proposition has been endorsed by the Prime Minister Beata Szydlo and the leader of the governing PiS party, Jaroslaw Kaczynski. The new proposal would introduce a complete ban on abortion.  The current abortion law in Poland is already one of the most restrictive in the EU, allowing women to terminate pregnancy only in three extreme cases: when her life and/or health are threatened, when the pregnancy is the result of a criminal act, or when the foetus is severely damaged. The draft law will not only introduce a complete ban on abortion but a new category into the criminal code – “prenatal murder” – which will introduce a prison sentence of between three to five years for women, doctors and those helping to perform an abortion. This citizen's initiative is currently awaiting a decision by the President of the Lower Chamber of the Parliament on whether it will be registered. The deadline for this decision is Monday, April 11th. If successful, the “Stop Abortion” committee will then have three months to collect 100,000 signatures to ensure that the law will be debated, and most likely voted on, by the Polish Parliament dominated by PiS. Such a ban would lead to the endangerment of the life and health of women, an increase in maternal mortality and an increase in unsafe and clandestine abortions.The draft law doesn’t make any reference to the protection of a woman’s life, health and wellbeing.  Last weekend’s demonstrations against further restrictions on the right to abortion brought thousands of Polish women and men to the streets of Warsaw and other Polish towns. A big protest in front of the Polish Parliament is due to take place this Saturday, April 9th. To support the call to action, see ASTRA’s Facebook event page: Porozumienie ODZYSKAĆ WYBÓR (Regaining Choice Coalition) where you are encouraged to submit a photo to the event wall.

The United Nations Human Rights Committee has expressed serious concerns about the difficulties women face across Italy in accessing legal abortion services as a result of the Italian authorities’ failures to address serious gaps in services due to the high number of health care professionals denying care across the country. The report released today found that the Italian government’s failure to ensure adequate availability of abortion care violates women’s human rights and compels many women to seek clandestine abortions. The United Nations Human Rights Committee urged the Italian Government to take the necessary measures to guarantee unimpeded and timely access to legal abortion services across the entire country to all women seeking these services. Among the necessary measures, the Italian government must create an effective referral system for women who are refused abortion care by medical professionals “This requires establishing protocols and guidelines ensuring that hospitals that do not provide abortion services can guarantee that patients receive them at other health facilities,” explains Irene Donadio, from IPPF EN. “This outcome is an important result for women in Italy. For a long time, too many women in Italy were maltreated when they requested the provision of a service guaranteed by law. After the Council of Europe, the United Nations demanded respect for the rights and dignity of women. Now the Italian government must take appropriate measures.” LAIGA, Vita di Donna, the International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network (IPPF EN) and the Center for Reproductive Rights submitted a report to the United Nations Human Rights Committee highlighting Italy’s breaches of its human rights obligations to guarantee women’s access to legal abortion services. Dr Silvana Agatone, gynaecologist and president of LAIGA, said: “If the Italian government follows the recommendations as it must, women will finally be guaranteed that when hospitals do not provide the service, there is a well-documented path to another service provider in a short time. It is a step forward!” Katrine Thomasen, Senior Legal Advisor at the Center for Reproductive Rights added:  “Women in Italy face serious risks to their health and wellbeing as a result of Italian authorities’ failures to guarantee access to quality reproductive health services. Today the Human Rights Committee made it clear that the Italian government cannot ignore its human rights obligations and must guarantee women’s access to legal abortion services. It’s time the government prioritizes women’s health and works swiftly to implement measures that give women timely access to the full range of reproductive health services, including legal abortion.”   *** Contact Irene Donadio, Lead Strategic Partnerships: [email protected] Tel (0032)491719390 for further information  *** Photo: AFP/Getty Images

On 23 January 2017 President Trump signed an executive order reinstating the Global Gag Rule, or the Mexico City Policy.  The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) believes in the right of every individual to decide about their own health and well-being.  As an organisation that seeks to protect and improve the lives of women, men and children around the world, IPPF and its partners in 170 countries will not sign a policy that denies human rights and puts the lives of women at risk.   The Global Gag Rule denies U.S. funding to organisations like IPPF if they use money from other donors to provide abortion services, counselling or referrals—even if abortion is legal in a country. It blocks critical funding for health services like contraception, maternal health, and HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment for any organisation that refuses to sign it. When it has been enacted by previous Republican Presidents, evidence has shown that the Global Gag Rule has not reduced the number of abortions; rather, by eliminating access to contraception, it has led to more unintended pregnancies and more unsafe abortions.     IPPF is the largest non-governmental provider of contraception in the world. It has worked with thU.S. government for decades. Our global network of local partners delivers more than 300 services every minute of every day, including 70 million contraceptive services every year.  The Global Gag Rule’s reinstatement will result in additional unintended pregnancies and countless other needless injuries and deaths. It means IPPF will lose $100 million USD for proven programs that provide comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services for millions of women and youth who otherwise go without these vital services, including women suffering the burden of health and humanitarian crises.  Over the years USAID has been a huge supporter of family planning – with a budget of over $600 million per year. Reinstatement will mean that years of progress to increase access to essential services globally, will be lost. We cannot—and will not—deny life-saving services to the world’s poorest women.  We will work with governments and donors to bridge the funding and service gaps the Global Gag Rule creates. We will ensure that women can exercise their rights and access safe abortion and family planning.  WHAT IS THE GLOBAL GAG RULE? Click here for further details.

The messages of solidarity sent to women in Ireland and South America throughout the “Black Protest” clearly indicated that this mass mobilisation against the proposed abortion ban in Poland is not only a Polish matter. If we are truly worried about the ongoing political developments and how will they shape the future of Europe, we must ensure that the gender perspective is taken into account in the current debate. What are the lessons learned from Central and Eastern Europe with regards to women’s rights and what European values are at stake? Anyone who thinks that the rise of opposition to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in Central and Eastern Europe is a recent development is sadly mistaken. Since 1989, the status of SRHR and women’s rights in the region has been in permanent crisis. It was one of the most unexpected results of the Soviet bloc’s transition from communism to democracy, yet it was not prominent enough. Of course, Central and Eastern Europe is not a monolith, and the socio-economic and political situations at national level varies - not to mention the division between non-EU and EU countries or the ongoing war in Ukraine, which turned almost 2 million people into refugees. But it is women that have been among the groups most affected by the post-communist transformation in the region. The role of women in a post-Soviet Europe The notion of gender equality was instrumentally used in the Soviet Union to fulfil its totalitarian goals, however it had a substantial impact on women’s lives compared to the pre-war situation in the whole region. Access to education, healthcare services, childcare, abortion and paid maternity leave were widespread and free.  The collapse of the Soviet Union brought back the conservative view on child bearing and a new, enthusiastic belief in the “invisible hand” of the free market economy that led to tax reductions, mass privatisation and marketisation. For women, gender blind policies meant losing not only access to abortion but access to a wide range of social and economic rights. Almost entirely excluded from the mainstream political agenda, women have organised themselves through formal and non-formal forms of participation that is visible in the high levels of feminisation seen in the NGO sector across Central and Eastern Europe. Nevertheless, another common characteristic for this region is the precarious situation of women’s organisations, which remain constantly underfunded and without sufficient resources, often operating in a hostile environment. They, however, still provide various services which should be ensured by governments. This is not merely an enormous challenge for influencing national governments and implementing real change locally, but also remains challenging for effective advocacy at European and international levels. While through a global perspective Europe is considered to hold a progressive position on SRHR, for the vast majority of women in Central and Eastern Europe, this is not the reality. A rise of illiberal Democracy Narrowing the discussion to Poland and Hungary, the two major players across Central and Eastern Europe, we see in both countries the rise of illiberal democracy. Andrea Pető from the Central European University and Weronika Grzebalska from Polish Academy of Sciences use a metaphor of the “polypore state” to describe it: “A polypore is a parasitic fungus that feeds on rotting trees, contributing to their decay. In the same way, the governments of Poland and Hungary feed on the vital resources of their liberal predecessors, and produce a fully dependent state structure in return.”. For instance, the Polish government recently announced that a new department will be established to bring NGO’s under centralised control and to decide who will receive state funding, and for what. Already this year, a few Polish women’s organisations working on domestic violence were rejected in the grant-making process in favour of organisations that do not challenge the political status quo.  The illiberal governance poses a serious threat to all kinds of human rights organisations, making them incapable of operating within the existing political structure. The worsening of conditions for women in Central and Eastern Europe have been explained as a political and cultural backlash. Some have ascribed this to a lack of a well-established political culture or a tradition of civil society. However, this year’s events in the Western world (Brexit and Trump’s election), should make us think that the anti-liberal changes are equally endangering women’s rights all over Europe and beyond. Recent attempts to fully ban abortion in Poland saw the mobilisation of various opposition groups to SRHR and women’s rights in Europe. The organisation Ordo Iuris, that prepared the bill on abortion which was later rejected by the Polish parliament under the pressure of the “Black Protest”, is linked to the “One of Us”. “One of Us” is a European Citizen’s Initiative gathering anti-choice organisations from all over Europe. Their ultra-conservative stance against women’s rights is at the same time against European values - encompassing respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all. Over the last decade, almost all EU member states within Central and Eastern Europe have struggled with a profoundly divided political establishment and increasing socio-economic inequalities. Many people do not see the EU as a guarantor of a dignified life and the market-driven economy did not bring promised prosperity for all. The side effects of which include a rise in populism and opposition to SRHR, which have instilled hatred in those who feel insecure and excluded. On Human Rights Day, it is crucial to reflect on the strong backlash against women’s rights across Europe. The “Black Protest” was a clear reminder that the situation in Central and Eastern Europe is critical for the advancement of SRHR, not only for women in the region but across the entire continent. The political situation in Central and Eastern Europe also has clear implications on the successful development and implementation of progressive European policies. I strongly believe that our community and the progressive movement will be able to safeguard women’s rights in Europe while pushing for a systematic change. Yet it is absolutely essential that we display solidarity and work together to ensure social justice, both at the local and transnational levels if we are to effect any positive change. By Helena Szczodry, Eurongos

Today marks the fourth anniversary of the senseless death of Savita Halappanavar, who died at Galway University Clinic in Ireland after she was denied a life-saving abortion during her miscarriage. Although she begged doctors to terminate her pregnancy, the hospital refused, citing Ireland’s restrictive abortion laws, under which doctors can be prevented from making clinical decisions in the best interests of pregnant women’s health. Savita died of septicaemia a week after she was admitted to hospital at just 31-years of age. The flagrant disregard for Savita’s life and health is indicative of a society where rights of pregnant women are violated on a daily basis. Tragically, just 12 days before the anniversary of Savita’s death, a similar case was reported, this time in Italy. Valentina Milluzzo was 19 weeks pregnant with twins when she was hospitalised in Sicily after one of the foetuses became distressed. She was told that the doctor, a conscientious objector, would not operate while there was a foetal heartbeat. Valentina miscarried both foetuses before she died of septicaemia on October 16, 2016. She was 32-years old. What is especially outrageous about this case is that abortion is legal in Italy, yet health care providers continually side-step the law by invoking the “conscience clause”, even though objecting doctors are not legally permitted to deny care when the life of a pregnant woman is in danger, under any circumstances. Restrictions on access to abortion, wherever they exist, do not reduce the need for abortion. Women either suffer harm to their health or where possible they seek services outside of their own healthcare system. This is costly, delays access and creates social inequities – and it is likely to increase the number of women seeking illegal and unsafe abortions. Since 1980, at least 167,000 women and girls have travelled from Ireland to access abortion services in another country; with around 10 women travelling each day from Ireland to the UK. Irish abortion laws are so extreme that if a woman is pregnant with a foetus that is unlikely to survive birth, she must still carry that pregnancy to term or travel to another State for a termination. In June of this year, the U.N. Human Rights Committee called for reform of Irish abortion laws after it found that a woman carrying a foetus with a fatal abnormality was subjected to discrimination and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment due to Ireland’s abortion laws. The lessons from Italy and Ireland must be that access to abortion care is vital for women.

This year, Belgium marks the 25th anniversary of its legalisation of abortion. At a conference on abortion stigma on 3 April, IPPF EN’s Regional Director, a Belgian and former activist for that legal breakthrough, reflected on the historical journey towards abortion rights in Belgium, and the current state of play more broadly. Photo credit: Fonds La Cité collection Carhop By Vicky Claeys I really believe that Belgians can be proud of their ethical achievements. Our country has strong Catholic origins, but we have taken big legislative steps forward because society has been ready for change. At the moment we are one of the leading countries on same-sex marriage and euthanasia, and we have a workable abortion law which ensures – crucially for women - that abortions are fully reimbursed by the social security system. Along with the Netherlands, Belgium is one of the countries in the world with the lowest abortion rates AND with one of the lowest rates of teenage pregnancies. I don’t think it’s because sexuality education here is perfect, but we do we have a high level of modern contraceptive use, and of course we have a good functioning system on abortion. The story of how Belgium built the momentum needed for abortion to be legalised illustrates that illegal abortion does not always need to mean unsafe (although in most parts of the world it is!). On the other hand, we also know that legal does not always mean safe, for example in Russia where abortion is legal but women are still dying from unsafe practices. IPPF truly believes that safe and legal abortion, comprehensive sexuality education and access to modern contraceptives are the ingredients for healthy nations where women are able to finish education, have a healthy family, work and contribute to the economy, to be active citizens. Belgium’s long road to an abortion law Astonishingly, abortion is still mentioned in the Belgian Penal Code. This hangover from Napoleonic times, when it was totally illegal, is confusing in today’s context, and contributes to ongoing abortion stigma because it means it is still considered as crime rather than a health issue. There was a first attempt to change the law in 1971, and a medical doctor – Dr Willy Peers - was jailed for the first time for performing an abortion in 1973. Peers’ patient was a 16 year old girl with learning disabilities who had been raped by her father. This very sad case resulted in a big public reaction, a lot of debate and protests. It was not enough to force a change in the abortion legislation, but formed the basis for a trade-off to make contraception legal. It’s amazing to think that this was only 42 years ago, even if it was “in the past century,” as journalists tend to say these days! In 1975 the first of many high quality – but completely illegal - abortion centres was established. Belgium’s Ministry of Justice took no action in the hope that Parliament would update the legislation to bring it in line with the reality of life in the country.  But this did not happen quickly enough and from 1981 we saw a wave of prosecutions as judges decided to apply the law again in the hope that this would create a sense of urgency with the legislators. For medical professionals and the women they were there to help, this meant the start of 9 years of stress and despair channelled through fury and protests. In 1985, when the practice was still illegal, as head of the network of family planning clinics in Flanders (Federation CGSO), I started overseeing coordination between the Flemish abortion centres as they  worked together to ensure high quality standards throughout the system. The centres’ approach was always to place the women seeking an abortion at the centre of their work. This resulted in a “human rights-based approach” before the term was invented! Then in 1986, two MPs took a new initiative which led, after 4 long years of negotiations and compromise-seeking between the Catholics and Humanists, to a proposal for an abortion law. I’ll always remember how in March 1990 we thought we had finally got the change we had been fighting for, and then… the King famously refused to sign the Parliamentary agreement because of his conscientious objection. This caused a mini constitutional crisis to which then Prime Minister Wilfried Martens (a Christian Democrat!) had to find a solution. In the end, the King was asked to step down for the day to allow the Minister to sign. A couple of years later I was invited to speak to women’s rights activists in Ireland, and it was only then that I realised how exceptional it was to have had for so many years people who had put their careers on the line and risked prosecution because they believed that what they were doing was right. There are many of them, and all Belgian women, in particular the younger ones, should be aware of this history and know that the options they have today are the result of a long and relentless battle. This shows the importance of civil movements, building up pressure from within society to make politicians move in the right direction and bring legislation in line with new realities. Many battles still to be fought around the world Still today, no issue is as politicized and polarised as abortion, sexuality education, contraception, gender equality and women’s rights in general. We have a constant fight in countries like Spain and also at the EU level, at the Council of Europe and the United Nations. Good abortion legislation can easily be turned back as we are seeing in the US and in Eastern Europe, and with the ongoing threats in Spain. The anti-choice movement is becoming increasingly virulent and well organised, which is a big change from the past. According to the World Health Organisation, every year in the world there are an estimated 40-50 million abortions. This corresponds to approximately 125,000 abortions per day. 47,000 women die each year of unsafe abortion. We know and everybody knows perfectly well how to reduce the burden of abortion and especially the related morbidity and mortality: sexuality education, modern contraceptives and in general a positive attitude towards sexuality and a respect for human rights. The solutions are there but the political will is lacking in too many places, in particular where governments are implementing pro-natalist policies and/or where churches have a strong influence. So, let’s be clear about some facts. Abortion is a family planning method, although not the most desirable one. Improving sexuality education and increasing the use of modern contraceptives are necessary measures that will help reduce but will not erase abortion. Abortion is a fact of life and will always be there, recognizing this will reduce stigma. Also, while keeping track of abortion rates is important to monitor what is happening in society and, for instance, to increase prevention/information for certain groups of the population, these figures should not be the sole basis for discussions on how well a country is doing in responding to women’s need when she has an unwanted pregnancy. The question on how to reduce the stigma still attached to abortion as well for women and practitioners is important at this 25th anniversary of Belgium’s abortion law. There are a couple of changes that would certainly help in reducing stigma. Getting abortion out of the Penal Code would be a major one, as still today there are too many people who think abortion is illegal in Belgium. Extending the timeframe for abortion on demand would be very helpful as it would reduce the burden on the roughly 500 women who have to travel to the UK or The Netherlands every year because they are beyond the legal time frame of 12 weeks in Belgium. This is just exporting a problem to neighbouring countries. Belgium is on the right track, but having a government that would embrace this fact of life openly and a parliament that would introduce the necessary changes would definitely reduce stigma. I hope that official recognition of the ground-breaking work done by pioneers “last century”, as well as the broad media coverage this anniversary is getting, are paving the way for adjustments to make the law even better for women who need an abortion.