[Drafting Still] Maternity and Childcare Support

[Cretox State]

"Abortions 4 All"

[Godular]

"Abortions 4 All"

That’s already at vote.

[Godular]

Access to Pre-Natal Healthcare

But actual childcare is included in this proposal. I do not wish the title to be misleading.

[Confused No Name]

Supporting At-Risk Pregnancies?

Also, "Such supports can and should remain subject to any currently established eligibility requirements" might be slightly strict. We get that it exists to prevent certain groups of people, such as criminals, from getting welfare, but many nations in the WA already have excessively strict welfare regulations preventing all poor and pregnant people from getting welfare that would continue to exist because of this clause. Something like "Such supports are to remain subject to all current and future General Assembly Resolutions" might be better, as we sadly can't trust all nations to restrict welfare fairly.

[Godular]

Supporting At-Risk Pregnancies?

Also, "Such supports can and should remain subject to any currently established eligibility requirements" might be slightly strict. We get that it exists to prevent certain groups of people, such as criminals, from getting welfare, but many nations in the WA already have excessively strict welfare regulations preventing all poor and pregnant people from getting welfare that would continue to exist because of this clause. Something like "Such supports are to remain subject to all current and future General Assembly Resolutions" might be better, as we sadly can't trust all nations to restrict welfare fairly.

I'm thinking that's sort of an unspoken thing that's already standard for any World Assembly resolution.

As for the name... hmm... I'm on the fence about changing the name in general... though I do admit that it probably needs SOME KIND of change.

[Union of Sovereign States and Republics]

OOC: What about "Support for Families at Risk"? It changes the words just slightly but it sounds better IMO.

[Godular]

OOC: What about "Support for Families at Risk"? It changes the words just slightly but it sounds better IMO.

It breaks with the existing theme though.

[Flying Eagles]

Supporting At-Risk Pregnancies?

Also, "Such supports can and should remain subject to any currently established eligibility requirements" might be slightly strict. We get that it exists to prevent certain groups of people, such as criminals, from getting welfare, but many nations in the WA already have excessively strict welfare regulations preventing all poor and pregnant people from getting welfare that would continue to exist because of this clause. Something like "Such supports are to remain subject to all current and future General Assembly Resolutions" might be better, as we sadly can't trust all nations to restrict welfare fairly.

I'm thinking that's sort of an unspoken thing that's already standard for any World Assembly resolution.

As for the name... hmm... I'm on the fence about changing the name in general... though I do admit that it probably needs SOME KIND of change.

“Such supports can and should remain subject to any currently established eligibility requirements”. Would eligibility requirements include national laws? As that would make any nation with a law that states that “poor people who get pregnant can’t get welfare” exempt from this clause.

[Godular]

I'm thinking that's sort of an unspoken thing that's already standard for any World Assembly resolution.

As for the name... hmm... I'm on the fence about changing the name in general... though I do admit that it probably needs SOME KIND of change.

“Such supports can and should remain subject to any currently established eligibility requirements”. Would eligibility requirements include national laws? As that would make any nation with a law that states that “poor people who get pregnant can’t get welfare” exempt from this clause.

"If I understand correctly, I do believe that there are certain extant General Assembly resolutions currently in effect that preclude that eventuality from taking place."

[Araraukar]

The Nations of the World Assembly,

OOC: This should likely be "The World Assembly" instead, given that later verbs are singular, instead of multiple, and also because the member nations have no authority over the General Fund or telling each other what to do. The World Assembly as an entity does.

ACKNOWLEDGING that access to abortion services is one of the most heavily ensconced rights among the nations of the WA, yet also one of the most heavily debated and contentious issues on the floor, that many nations have moral qualms regarding abortion access, and often feel disenfranchised by the prevailing atmosphere of perceived lack of compromise and understanding;

COGNIZANT of the fact that many abortions are taken performed because of the impact that such a pregnancy would have upon one's economic and or educational circumstances, in addition to any medical or psychological ramifications, and that the costs of medical services childcare are often seen as prohibitive to with unplanned pregnancies;

OOC: If you still for some reason want to include abortion mentions, remove the struck out bits and replace where applicable. And yes I mean removing the first of these clauses entirely, because given the passage of IA's latest resolution, much of it just became even more removed from reality.

Also, the costs of medical care made no sense when member nations are required to ensure that everyone can afford medical care, so I changed it to "childcare", as that's a large reason of financial worries in RL even in nations with extensive welfare systems.

RESOLVED to put forward a some means of reducing abortions in by which member states by presenting a means to may ameliorate the financial and physiological ramifications of unplanned pregnancy pregnancies, which are often among the root causes of the need for abortion services, thereby preventing them from becoming unwanted pregnancies,

OOC: With the edits suggested in previous clause, these ones help to make it sound less of anti-abortion one and more pro-childcare one. (EDIT: It still mentions abortion as for some irrational reason you're focused on that.)

Didn't go beyond the preamble, because you will likely need to edit some of the active clauses anyway, given the passage of the latest abortion resolution.

[Flying Eagles]

Didn't go beyond the preamble, because you will likely need to edit some of the active clauses anyway, given the passage of the latest abortion resolution.

We're going to disagree with that assessment, as this resolution does not ban abortion, but rather provides socioeconomic and holistic supports in the hope that it is not necessary.

[Araraukar]

Didn't go beyond the preamble, because you will likely need to edit some of the active clauses anyway, given the passage of the latest abortion resolution.

We're going to disagree with that assessment, as this resolution does not ban abortion, but rather provides socioeconomic and holistic supports in the hope that it is not necessary.

OOC: The combination of 1.a. and 2.a. at least.

[Flying Eagles]

We're going to disagree with that assessment, as this resolution does not ban abortion, but rather provides socioeconomic and holistic supports in the hope that it is not necessary.

OOC: The combination of 1.a. and 2.a. at least.

I believe the point that the Ambassador from Araraukar is making is that providing "termination of pregnancy" "free of charge" would be an illegal duplication of GA#286 and GA#499. We would agree with that assessment.

[Godular]

OOC: The combination of 1.a. and 2.a. at least.

I believe the point that the Ambassador from Araraukar is making is that providing "termination of pregnancy" "free of charge" would be an illegal duplication of GA#286 and GA#499. We would agree with that assessment.

“I did wonder if it would be, though I do believe that none of the active clauses incorporated ‘abortion’ in its terminology. The only non-preamble portion that spoke of it was in the definitions.“

OOC: Will look into the additional changes later. Got some errands to run.

[Flying Eagles]

I believe the point that the Ambassador from Araraukar is making is that providing "termination of pregnancy" "free of charge" would be an illegal duplication of GA#286 and GA#499. We would agree with that assessment.

“I did wonder if it would be, though I do believe that none of the active clauses incorporated ‘abortion’ in its terminology. The only non-preamble portion that spoke of it was in the definitions.“

OOC: Will look into the additional changes later. Got some errands to run.

OOC: GAR#499 states that an "abortion means a medical procedure to terminate a pregnancy deliberately" Therefore, I'd say that they would be synonyms, and this is illegal duplication.

[Godular]

“I did wonder if it would be, though I do believe that none of the active clauses incorporated ‘abortion’ in its terminology. The only non-preamble portion that spoke of it was in the definitions.“

OOC: Will look into the additional changes later. Got some errands to run.

OOC: GAR#499 states that an "abortion means a medical procedure to terminate a pregnancy deliberately" Therefore, I'd say that they would be synonyms, and this is illegal duplication.

OOC: I didn't say I was gonna avoid changing it, just that I'm not sure if having that mentioned in the definitions means that it specifically duplicates other legislation. Also, I guess I have time after all.

Araraukar: Many of the changes have been entered in.

[Kenmoria]

“I did wonder if it would be, though I do believe that none of the active clauses incorporated ‘abortion’ in its terminology. The only non-preamble portion that spoke of it was in the definitions.“

OOC: Will look into the additional changes later. Got some errands to run.

OOC: GAR#499 states that an "abortion means a medical procedure to terminate a pregnancy deliberately" Therefore, I'd say that they would be synonyms, and this is illegal duplication.

(OOC: I see this as acceptable duplication to expand upon an area. This is a piece of legislation about pre-, mid- and post-natal care, of which abortion is only a small part.)

[Flying Eagles]

OOC: GAR#499 states that an "abortion means a medical procedure to terminate a pregnancy deliberately" Therefore, I'd say that they would be synonyms, and this is illegal duplication.

OOC: I didn't say I was gonna avoid changing it, just that I'm not sure if having that mentioned in the definitions means that it specifically duplicates other legislation. Also, I guess I have time after all.

Araraukar: Many of the changes have been entered in.

I was just trying to help answer your question

[Godular]

OOC: GAR#499 states that an "abortion means a medical procedure to terminate a pregnancy deliberately" Therefore, I'd say that they would be synonyms, and this is illegal duplication.

(OOC: I see this as acceptable duplication to expand upon an area. This is a piece of legislation about pre-, mid- and post-natal care, of which abortion is only a small part.)

OOC: While I do agree with this, at this juncture I decided that any specific mention of abortion within the definitions and active clauses was somewhat unnecessary.

OOC: I didn't say I was gonna avoid changing it, just that I'm not sure if having that mentioned in the definitions means that it specifically duplicates other legislation. Also, I guess I have time after all.

Araraukar: Many of the changes have been entered in.

I was just trying to help answer your question

OOC: My apologies if I gave the impression that I was disputing your comment, as such was not my intent.

[Flying Eagles]

I was just trying to help answer your question

OOC: My apologies if I gave the impression that I was disputing your comment, as such was not my intent.

It’s fine. Sorry for giving the impression that I was trying to overrule you.

P.S. My concern was that in your active clauses, you require termination of pregnancy to be provided for free. Other resolutions require abortion to be provided for free in their active clauses. It could be argued termination of pregnancy and abortion are synonyms, and I was using the GAR#499 definition of abortion to try to show how one may come to this conclusion. Not sure if you understood this, BTW. These also seemed to be Araraukar’s concerns, can Araraukar clarify please?

[Godular]

OOC: My apologies if I gave the impression that I was disputing your comment, as such was not my intent.

It’s fine. Sorry for giving the impression that I was trying to overrule you.

P.S. My concern was that in your active clauses, you require termination of pregnancy to be provided for free. Other resolutions require abortion to be provided for free in their active clauses. It could be argued termination of pregnancy and abortion are synonyms, and I was using the GAR#499 definition of abortion to try to show how one may come to this conclusion. Not sure if you understood this, BTW. These also seemed to be Araraukar’s concerns, can Araraukar clarify please?

OOC: Shoo, I'd appreciate having somebody from the Secretariat weigh in on the concern.

[Godular]

Any other feedback? I'm thinking I might submit it on monday, barring any other last minute changes.

[Kenmoria]

“Your ‘cognisant’ clause ends with a semicolon, whereas your ‘resolved’ clause ends with a comma. You should stick to one or the other.”

[Godular]

“Your ‘cognisant’ clause ends with a semicolon, whereas your ‘resolved’ clause ends with a comma. You should stick to one or the other.”

fixed... felt too big for a simple comma.

[Flying Eagles]

The list of supports in 2b kinda duplicates the list of supports in 1b.