[DRAFT] Convention on Reproductive Rights

[Losthaven]

Convention on Reproductive Rights
Category: Civil Rights ~*~ Strength: Strong

The General Assembly:

[appropriate preamble to be drafted later];

Now, therefore, the Member Nations of the World Assembly hereby enact the following provisions:

ARTICLE I. Guaranteeing Reproductive Freedom

(Sec. 1) The World Assembly, and each of its member nations, will make no law prohibiting an adult individual from procreating, reproducing, or begetting offspring.

(Sec. 2) The World Assembly, and each of its member nations, will make no law requiring an adult individual to procreate, reproduce, or beget offspring.

(Sec. 3) Forced sterilization shall never be used as a punishment for crime or to otherwise control the reproductive ability of a population.

(Sec. 4) An adult individual who wishes to be medically sterilized must be permitted to do so.

ARTICLE II. Access to Contraception

(Sec. 1) Any birth control device or method which is reasonably safe for adult use according to best medical practices and science shall be legal to own, possess, and use within all Member Nations.

(Sec. 2) Reliable, safe birth control devices which can be used and obtained without the assistance of a medical professional, such as condoms, must be made freely available to adults within all Member Nations.

(Sec. 3) Reliable, safe birth control devices which require the assistance of a medical professional, such as birth control drugs or implanted devices, must be made available to adults within all member nations at a reasonable cost.

ARTICLE III. Access to Abortion

(Sec. 1) Services and devices for early detection of pregnancy must be made freely available to adults within all member nations.

(Sec. 2) A pregnant adult individual shall have the right to seek and obtain an abortion at a cost proportionate to their ability to pay until the point that the offspring is viable. Viability, in this context, means that the offspring is able to survive out side the womb, to a degree of medical certainty, with or without medical assistance.

(Sec. 3) Abortion services must be provided as soon as practicable without delay once a pregnant adult individual has made the choice to obtain an abortion.

(Sec. 4) Member Nations may make information about the alternatives to abortion available for an individual to consider but may not condition abortion services on the person receiving, reading, or considering the alternatives.

(Sec. 5) Once an offspring is viable, there is no right to obtain an abortion except in cases where the health or safety of the pregnant individual is threatened, or as otherwise required by existent WA law.

ARTICLE IV. Access to Assisted Reproduction

(Sec. 1) Services and devices for medically or technologically assisted reproduction which have been vetted by the medical community and deemed reasonably safe for use, such as sperm donation and artificial insemination, must be made available in all member nations.

(Sec. 2) Member nations need not subsidize the cost of assisted reproduction but may not impose artificially high prices beyond the reasonable, free-market costs to deliver safe services and devices.

(Sec. 3) Member nations are encouraged to subsidize assisted reproduction for individuals who wish to reproduce but are unable to do so without medical or technological assistance.

ARTICLE V. Access to STD Treatment

(Sec. 1) Services and devices for the treatment of Sexually Transmitted Diseases, which have been vetted by the medical community and deemed reasonably safe for use, must be made freely available in all member nations.

(Sec. 2) Member nations are free to provide information and education in avoiding STDs, including abstinence education, when providing treatment.

(Sec. 3) Treatment options for STDs need not be pleasant but must conform to standard medical best practices.

ARTICLE VI. Miscellaneous Provisions

(Sec. 1) Member nations may require individuals who have procreated and produced viable offspring to support their offspring in any manner deemed appropriate under national or international law.

(Sec. 2) If, for whatever reason, a member nation is unable to comply with any of the above requirements for access to contraception, abortion, assisted reproduction, or STD treatment, the WA Health Authority shall act and expend funds to the degree necessary to fulfill those mandates within that member nation.

[Potted Plants United]

(Sec. 5) Once an offspring is viable, there is no right to obtain an abortion except in cases where the health or safety of the pregnant individual is threatened, or as otherwise required by existent WA law.

OOC: ...no. Especially given the definition of viability. EDIT: I may personally disagree with the idea of getting an abortion after the actual viability (no expensive machinery needed) point, but there's no fucking hell of a reason to deny that choice from someone else whose circumstances I have no way of knowing.

Plus if I suddenly found myself in that condition (would have to be the second coming of Jesus or alien implantation), I probably would have the abortion anyway (unless it was an actual alien implantation, because then I would totally want to see what came out even if it killed me), to save the poor bastard from having to share my genes.

[WayNeacTia]

"No."

Wayne

[The New Nordic Union]

(Sec. 2) A pregnant adult individual shall have the right to seek and obtain an abortion at a cost proportionate to their ability to pay until the point that the offspring is viable. Viability, in this context, means that the offspring is able to survive out side the womb, to a degree of medical certainty, with or without medical assistance.

(Sec. 5) Once an offspring is viable, there is no right to obtain an abortion except in cases where the health or safety of the pregnant individual is threatened, or as otherwise required by existent WA law.

'Against.'

[Attempted Socialism]

Convention on Reproductive Rights
Category: Civil Rights ~*~ Strength: Strong

ARTICLE III. Access to Abortion
(Sec. 2) A pregnant adult individual shall have the right to seek and obtain an abortion at a cost proportionate to their ability to pay until the point that the offspring is viable. Viability, in this context, means that the offspring is able to survive out side the womb, to a degree of medical certainty, with or without medical assistance.

(Sec. 5) Once an offspring is viable, there is no right to obtain an abortion except in cases where the health or safety of the pregnant individual is threatened, or as otherwise required by existent WA law.

ARTICLE V. Access to STD Treatment
(Sec. 2) Member nations are free to provide information and education in avoiding STDs, including abstinence education, when providing treatment.

"We are vehemently against any notion that allows directly anti-education and anti-human policies like abstinence misinformation. Calling it "education" reveals your abhorrent ideas.
The Solidarity Movement is also against any limit on abortion, even after technical viability has been achieved.
All in all, this replacement is worse than Reproductive Freedoms, and much, much worse than any qualified, hypothetical, draft that pro-choice nations have or can make, like the draft from the delegation of Wallenburg."

[Kenmoria]

(Sec. 5) Once an offspring is viable, there is no right to obtain an abortion except in cases where the health or safety of the pregnant individual is threatened, or as otherwise required by existent WA law.

“I am opposed based on section III-5. Also, you have for some reason omitted the section in Reproductive Freedoms protecting abortion providers and receivers from harassment. What was your reason for doing so?”

[Imperium Anglorum]

Abortionplexes for all.

[Marxist Germany]

"Against, we will not accept such compromise that's massively in favour of the pro choice side. The most I will accept is 1st trimester on demand abortions and later dates for cases of rape, or life threatening conditions."

[The Greater Union of Man]

Convention on Reproductive Rights
Category: Civil Rights ~*~ Strength: Strong

The General Assembly:

[appropriate preamble to be drafted later];

Now, therefore, the Member Nations of the World Assembly hereby enact the following provisions:

ARTICLE I. Guaranteeing Reproductive Freedom

(Sec. 1) The World Assembly, and each of its member nations, will make no law prohibiting an adult individual from procreating, reproducing, or begetting offspring.

(Sec. 2) The World Assembly, and each of its member nations, will make no law requiring an adult individual to procreate, reproduce, or beget offspring.

(Sec. 3) Forced sterilization shall never be used as a punishment for crime or to otherwise control the reproductive ability of a population.

(Sec. 4) An adult individual who wishes to be medically sterilized must be permitted to do so.

ARTICLE II. Access to Contraception

(Sec. 1) Any birth control device or method which is reasonably safe for adult use according to best medical practices and science shall be legal to own, possess, and use within all Member Nations.

(Sec. 2) Reliable, safe birth control devices which can be used and obtained without the assistance of a medical professional, such as condoms, must be made freely available to adults within all Member Nations.

(Sec. 3) Reliable, safe birth control devices which require the assistance of a medical professional, such as birth control drugs or implanted devices, must be made available to adults within all member nations at a reasonable cost.

ARTICLE III. Access to Abortion

(Sec. 1) Services and devices for early detection of pregnancy must be made freely available to adults within all member nations.

(Sec. 2) A pregnant adult individual shall have the right to seek and obtain an abortion at a cost proportionate to their ability to pay until the point that the offspring is viable. Viability, in this context, means that the offspring is able to survive out side the womb, to a degree of medical certainty, with or without medical assistance.

(Sec. 3) Abortion services must be provided as soon as practicable without delay once a pregnant adult individual has made the choice to obtain an abortion.

(Sec. 4) Member Nations may make information about the alternatives to abortion available for an individual to consider but may not condition abortion services on the person receiving, reading, or considering the alternatives.

(Sec. 5) Once an offspring is viable, there is no right to obtain an abortion except in cases where the health or safety of the pregnant individual is threatened, or as otherwise required by existent WA law.

ARTICLE IV. Access to Assisted Reproduction

(Sec. 1) Services and devices for medically or technologically assisted reproduction which have been vetted by the medical community and deemed reasonably safe for use, such as sperm donation and artificial insemination, must be made available in all member nations.

(Sec. 2) Member nations need not subsidize the cost of assisted reproduction but may not impose artificially high prices beyond the reasonable, free-market costs to deliver safe services and devices.

(Sec. 3) Member nations are encouraged to subsidize assisted reproduction for individuals who wish to reproduce but are unable to do so without medical or technological assistance.

ARTICLE V. Access to STD Treatment

(Sec. 1) Services and devices for the treatment of Sexually Transmitted Diseases, which have been vetted by the medical community and deemed reasonably safe for use, must be made freely available in all member nations.

(Sec. 2) Member nations are free to provide information and education in avoiding STDs, including abstinence education, when providing treatment.

(Sec. 3) Treatment options for STDs need not be pleasant but must conform to standard medical best practices.

ARTICLE VI. Miscellaneous Provisions

(Sec. 1) Member nations may require individuals who have procreated and produced viable offspring to support their offspring in any manner deemed appropriate under national or international law.

(Sec. 2) If, for whatever reason, a member nation is unable to comply with any of the above requirements for access to contraception, abortion, assisted reproduction, or STD treatment, the WA Health Authority shall act and expend funds to the degree necessary to fulfill those mandates within that member nation.

My nation cannot, in good conscience, approve or abide by a proposal that would allow for the abortion of any Human. If the mother does not wish to carry the child, it is taken to our incubation facility in the capital, where they will be cared for and brought to term with our state-of-the-art technology.

[Attempted Socialism]

"Against, we will not accept such compromise that's massively in favour of the pro choice side. The most I will accept is 1st trimester on demand abortions and later dates for cases of rape, or life threatening conditions."

"Here's the thing, Ambassador: If you really believe that the foetus should be granted personhood, at conception or first trimester, then later abortions because of rape is punishing a person for the actions of their parents. To avoid being seen as a terrible person because of the horrors you inflict on women, you're willing to punish what in your mind is a child, solely for the actions of the father? Your policies are disgusting.
Furthermore, Reproductive Freedoms is, as I think I have told you before, the best compromise you can hope for. Who would be in favour of this so-called convention? Pro-choice delegations? Absolutely not; we're basically satisfied with the current compromise and see no need to move backwards. Anti-choice delegations? As you say yourself, you're against it for giving women too many rights over their own body. Who would vote for?"

Convention on Reproductive Rights
Category: Civil Rights ~*~ Strength: Strong

My nation cannot, in good conscience, approve or abide by a proposal that would allow for the abortion of any Human. If the mother does not wish to carry the child, it is taken to our incubation facility in the capital, where they will be cared for and brought to term with our state-of-the-art technology.

OOC: First, don't quite the entire resolution if you're not going to reply to it part-by-part, especially on the first page. Second, you're a WA member. On Abortion and Reproductive Freedoms are already in effect in your nation, which means that on-demand abortion is freely available, basically up until birth. Your nation, in good conscience, approves of and abides by a resolution going further than what you're rejecting here.

[Bears Armed]

OOC
Not that the Bears would vote for this anyway, but you probably need to insert the words 'legally competent' in front of 'adult'.

[Araraukar]

OOC
Not that the Bears would vote for this anyway, but you probably need to insert the words 'legally competent' in front of 'adult'.

OOC: Or just drop mentions about adults and go for "individual capable of consenting". Since not all nations (most RL nations don't) have age of consent set at age of majority.

[Marxist Germany]

"Against, we will not accept such compromise that's massively in favour of the pro choice side. The most I will accept is 1st trimester on demand abortions and later dates for cases of rape, or life threatening conditions."

"Here's the thing, Ambassador: If you really believe that the foetus should be granted personhood, at conception or first trimester, then later abortions because of rape is punishing a person for the actions of their parents. To avoid being seen as a terrible person because of the horrors you inflict on women, you're willing to punish what in your mind is a child, solely for the actions of the father? Your policies are disgusting.
Furthermore, Reproductive Freedoms is, as I think I have told you before, the best compromise you can hope for. Who would be in favour of this so-called convention? Pro-choice delegations? Absolutely not; we're basically satisfied with the current compromise and see no need to move backwards. Anti-choice delegations? As you say yourself, you're against it for giving women too many rights over their own body. Who would vote for?"

"Personally, I would like abortion to be illegal in all cases except for life endangerment, alas, this is the World Assembly and usually, compromise is necessary."

[Separatist Peoples]

"Against, we will not accept such compromise that's massively in favour of the pro choice side. The most I will accept is 1st trimester on demand abortions and later dates for cases of rape, or life threatening conditions."

"Why would anybody on the pro-choice side make that compromise?"

[Grays Harbor]

"Against, we will not accept such compromise that's massively in favour of the pro choice side. The most I will accept is 1st trimester on demand abortions and later dates for cases of rape, or life threatening conditions."

"Why would anybody on the pro-choice side make that compromise?"

“Because not everybody on either the pro-choice or pro-life sides are dogmatic ideologues incapable of coming to an agreement which may not be 100% absolutely what they demand, and who may well be reasonable folks?”

[Separatist Peoples]

"Why would anybody on the pro-choice side make that compromise?"

“Because not everybody on either the pro-choice or pro-life sides are dogmatic ideologues incapable of coming to an agreement which may not be 100% absolutely what they demand, and who may well be reasonable folks?”

"Then they're irrational. Compromise isn't necessary unless you cannot achieve victory without it. Here, the pro-choice side can do so. Compromise is inherently counter to the interests of the group in control. There's no reason to do so."

[Marxist Germany]

“Because not everybody on either the pro-choice or pro-life sides are dogmatic ideologues incapable of coming to an agreement which may not be 100% absolutely what they demand, and who may well be reasonable folks?”

"Then they're irrational. Compromise isn't necessary unless you cannot achieve victory without it. Here, the pro-choice side can do so. Compromise is inherently counter to the interests of the group in control. There's no reason to do so."

"The term for this is tyranny by majority, something we usually try to avoid.."

[Separatist Peoples]

"Then they're irrational. Compromise isn't necessary unless you cannot achieve victory without it. Here, the pro-choice side can do so. Compromise is inherently counter to the interests of the group in control. There's no reason to do so."

"The term for this is tyranny by majority, something we usually try to avoid.."

"So...democracy?"

[Sierra Lyricalia]

"Then they're irrational. Compromise isn't necessary unless you cannot achieve victory without it. Here, the pro-choice side can do so. Compromise is inherently counter to the interests of the group in control. There's no reason to do so."

"The term for this is tyranny by majority, something we usually try to avoid.."

"The problem with this idea is that contrary to this weird fantasy you have of nations having 'rights' that can be 'oppressed,' the focus of these laws is on individuals - the people who live in member states. By definition, nothing that increases the rights of people can be tyrannical."

"Hopefully that clarifies things for you, ambassador. Your previous conception of affairs was downright silly."

[Kenmoria]

"Then they're irrational. Compromise isn't necessary unless you cannot achieve victory without it. Here, the pro-choice side can do so. Compromise is inherently counter to the interests of the group in control. There's no reason to do so."

"The term for this is tyranny by majority, something we usually try to avoid.."

“Consensus is ideal when you have a small group of individuals working together. However, it is simply impossible to achieve everyone’s happiness in an international organisation of unparalleled size. Therefore, the ideal solution is to guarantee the satisfaction of the maximum number of people. Where two sides are close in number, this entails a compromise. Where they are not, this leads to the pragmatic solution of the larger group’s needs being met.

The Kenmoria WA Mission does not particularly like Reproductive Freedoms, but we recognise that we are in the minority and unlikely to change anything with futile complaints. In fact, this proposal fulfils our wants even less, by universally denying abortion past the point of viability, even in cases of rape or threat to the mother.”

[Youssath]

"We in Youssath would vote against this resolution. There are multiple things that are disturbing to us in this draft, but as this very chamber has previously echoed their thoughts which resonated within us, we will stay at this vote until the following clarifications can be made."

[Losthaven]

"Why would anybody on the pro-choice side make that compromise?"

“Because not everybody on either the pro-choice or pro-life sides are dogmatic ideologues incapable of coming to an agreement which may not be 100% absolutely what they demand, and who may well be reasonable folks?”

This is kinda what I was going for. The proposal is just an idea for pursuing progressive reasonable legislation on this topic by including a discussion of sexual health, reproduction, and contraception in general which have been somewhat neglected in our many abortion debates.

Despite what I have seen from some of the more rabid delegations in this assembly, I am still convinced that the ideal for both sides of the abortion debate would be a world without abortion. The difference is that those with pro-choice views would see that happen through education and contraception aimed at avoiding unwanted pregnancies in the first place, while keeping abortion as a (sad) fallback option to respect the bodily sovereignty rights of the mother in less-than-ideal circumstances. Those with pro-life views would largely ban the practice of abortion, bodily sovereignty and privacy interests be damned, with some willing to recognize extreme situations like the health of the mother that would justify abortion (although sadly I still hear far too often from pro-life nations, often run by males, that a pregnant woman should rather die of complications than be complicit in aborting her future child).

Where I believe Reproductive Freedoms went most terribly wrong, even from a pro-choice standpoint, is that it seems to require (with easy loopholes) that abortion on demand be available even past the point of viability. Even a baby a week overdue could be killed, despite being at least as much a person as any baby born prematurely. I've never heard a very convincing logical argument for why it should be permissible to kill the fetus through abortion once the fetus is viable. Most resort to some kind of argument from tribalism: my side likes this, yours doesn't; your side sucks so my side is going to pursue this as far as possible. That kind of blind loyalty to permitting abortion as an end in and of itself loses sight of the fact that abortion ought to be properly viewed as a means to protect rights, not as a right itself. Arguing that a woman's bodily sovereignty extends to killing a fetus that no longer needs access to her body to survive goes a step beyond reason, at least on the surface.

I would work on this further to address some of the comments like:

• that abortion should be made even more accessible than in the current draft, or , or
• reworking the language of the educational provision to provide for general education regarding the many ways to avoid STDs without using the apparently highly-charged term abstinence (please note, I didn't say anything about the distasteful "abstinence-only" education sometimes promoted by religious groups, and any doctor will tell you that even while there are reliable measures to take to avoid STDs the most reliable way is by not engaging in risky sexual behavior), or
• clarifying the many references to "adults" with the substantially less-reasonable conventions that somehow became permanent staples of this assembly from long before I ever joined, or
• adding additional circumstances that would justify aborting a viable fetus, like fatal deformity or rape (with apparently very late notice that the rape had resulted in pregnancy).

But sadly it does seem that there is no real political appetite for correcting the overreaches of RF. The pro-life lobby apparently won't support because, despite helping them protect viable babies, this still going too far for them in recognizing the legitimate bodily sovereignty rights of women. That supports my suspicion that that retreating even from the absurdities of RF would only encourage pro-lifers to target legitimate grounds for abortion. The pro-choice lobby won't join me either because they share that same suspicion (which is probably a good reason) or they have reached a point where they've lost sight of the reasons why a sad practice like abortion must be solemnly permitted and are advocating, as pro-lifers often accuse, a pro-abortion view no longer tethered to legitimate bodily sovereignty principles.

"The term for this is tyranny by majority, something we usually try to avoid.."

You are not being subjected to tyranny by laws that prohibit you from imposing tyranny on others. The abortion laws we have in place don't force anybody to get an abortion. They protect those who are seeking an abortion from tyranny from those who would otherwise oppress them. Your right to follow your conscience and detest abortion in your personal affairs is being respected by the majority. We're just not letting you impose your view in a manner that would interfere with the bodily sovereignty rights of others.

But, to a degree, there is some tyranny in a law which says you may not interfere with a killing that could otherwise have been prevented while still respecting bodily soverignty. Which brings me to...

"Then they're irrational. Compromise isn't necessary unless you cannot achieve victory without it. Here, the pro-choice side can do so. Compromise is inherently counter to the interests of the group in control. There's no reason to do so."

Sometimes compromise occurs despite the ability of one party to obtain "victory" without the other. It can be better to effectively to moderate ones own conduct, even when you cannot be politically forced to do so, in order to recognize a reasonable limit which still respects the principle you're seeking to achieve (such as placing restrictions on abortion when bodily sovereignty could be achieved through other means such that abortion would needlessly take a viable life). In that way, compromise is not "inherently counter" to the interests of the majority. It serves perhaps the most important long term interest for any majority - preserving that majority by preserving the moral high ground. If you lose that ground, your successive generations will gradually abandon you, much as the Party of Lincoln is presently experiencing.

Not saying that's necessarily the case in the here and now, on this issue. But it's something I think more than a few of the pro-choice voices in this assembly might want to consider.

[Marxist Germany]

...By definition, nothing that increases the rights of people...

"Whilst reducing the rights of those who cannot speak for themselves."

[The New Nordic Union]

This is kinda what I was going for. The proposal is just an idea for pursuing progressive reasonable legislation on this topic by including a discussion of sexual health, reproduction, and contraception in general which have been somewhat neglected in our many abortion debates.

'It is not progressive if we go backwards. A compromise has already been reached in the form of standing WA law. If you want to legislate on sexual health or contraception, re-write the proposal accordingly, focusing on these topics.'

[Kenmoria]

I would work on this further to address some of the comments like:

• that abortion should be made even more accessible than in the current draft, or , or
• reworking the language of the educational provision to provide for general education regarding the many ways to avoid STDs without using the apparently highly-charged term abstinence (please note, I didn't say anything about the distasteful "abstinence-only" education sometimes promoted by religious groups, and any doctor will tell you that even while there are reliable measures to take to avoid STDs the most reliable way is by not engaging in risky sexual behavior), or
• clarifying the many references to "adults" with the substantially less-reasonable conventions that somehow became permanent staples of this assembly from long before I ever joined, or
• adding additional circumstances that would justify aborting a viable fetus, like fatal deformity or rape (with apparently very late notice that the rape had resulted in pregnancy).

(OOC: I would like to add the protections afforded by RF to abortion providers and patients against harassment to be included in this. Perhaps also with exceptions for when the parent or parents would be unable to provide for the child; it’s cruel to force one into the social system in a lot of RL nations.)