Opinion: the Italian government must re-evaluate its stance on contraception for women

"Even if the government is indeed being sincere in their desire to protect the rights of unborn children by restricting access to contraception, by their own admission low birth rates in Italy persist," writes Arianna Belluardo in this op-ed for commonspace.eu. "Meanwhile, evidence thus far shows that improving access to contraception would not depress birth rates, but contrarily, reduce the rate of practised abortions, which remain in some cases physically and emotionally draining for women. The result of this intellectual confusion is a concerning reversal of women's rights, which itself can have further highly negative consequences on parents and their children in the future, as it would force those who do not want to, to raise a child that would be unwanted, and therefore, most likely unhappy."

In April, AIFA, the Italian Medicines Agency, granted free access to birth control for all women, a historic step in simplifying a controversial topic in a  country heavily  influenced by the Catholic Church. However, it took the government only a few weeks to make it complicated.

Despite abortion being legally protected since 1978, women’s rights still have a long way to go in Italy. Accessing abortion remains challenging due to a significant number of gynecologists who identify as conscientious objectors and refuse to perform abortions, as permitted by Italian law. 

However, the unconditional free distribution of birth control across Italy granted by the AIFA would have followed other European countries such as Spain and France, and as well as  the Emilia-Romagna and Toscana regions which already approved the measures months ago. The estimated cost for the measure is €140 million per year, which, according to Wired, is a perfectly feasible sum for the state to bear. The premises for the measure to be carried forward are promising, however, the government-controlled bodies of AIFA disagree.

Even though the agency’s technical bodies had already approved the disposition on free contraception, the Administration Council (Consiglio di Amministrazione), the organ that oversees the decisions of the agency, has put a stop to the measure by raising several concerns. These ranged from women’s physical health, to decreasing birth rates, to religious and moral motives. The concerns posed by the government are not simply politicians’ declarations to the press, but also opinions that  find their space for debate in the Administration Council, which has the ultimate decisional power and is deeply influenced by current politics, starting from its board, which is appointed by the Minister of Heath.

No consideration has been given to the actual reasons for Italy's low birth rate, access to contraception is not one of them 

The board is composed of five seats, three of which are occupied by people close to or belonging to Lega; the right-wing party guided by Matteo Salvini. Hence, the most important body of the agency is currently ruled by conservative figures, if not far-right, whose parties have long advocated against women’s right to abortion and entertained controversial organisations such as Pro Vita & Famiglia. Speaking to Ansa.it about the proposed measure, the board member of Pro Vita & Famiglia, Maria Rachele Ruiu, recently said "there is nothing more dangerous for women's health than trivializing issues that impact them directly, such as abortion, contraception, gender and prostitution".

Not only did the board of directors question whether the contraceptive should be reimbursed for all women of childbearing age, but they also suggested that it should only be available to those with financial difficulties, or within the age range of 19 to 26 years. The right-wing government in Italy, which has strongly advocated for so-called traditional family values since Giorgia Meloni's election campaign and prioritised advocating to increase birth rates in the country, had already expressed opposition to the initial decision made by the AIFA. 

Specifically, Lavinia Mennuni, a senator from the Brother of Italy party (Fratelli d’Italia), called on the agency to reconsider its decision and instead focus on support for pregnancy and families. She also suggested that the government should have the authority to decide on the availability of the birth control pill, rather than the AIFA. 

It is concerning how no consideration has been given to the actual reasons for Italy’s low birth rate, such as the lack of means families have to actually raise children. Instead, birth control and abortion have been blamed as selfish tools that women use to not start a family. Ironically, if the government is so against abortion, it should consider the statistics from the Emilia-Romagna and Toscana regions, which have proven that free birth control has greatly reduced requests for abortion. This should ultimately be an aim of the government as well, since it has spoken out against it and wants to limit it. In any case, access to contraception in Italy is already limited, requests for abortions are higher in those regions where access to contraception is more limited, and yet low birth rates nationwide persist.

It is hypothesized that the government’s strategy is an attempt to delay the approval of the measure by the CDA until the reform of AIFA comes into effect, a reform that has been on Giorgia Meloni's government agenda since the two technical-scientific committees gave the green light for the free distribution of the pill. 

Government reforms could limit the autonomy of the agency that initially approved the free contraception measure

This reform, which would eliminate the figure of the general director and merge the two technical committees, could be a way to limit the autonomy of the agency. In fact, there is currently a President (appointed by the regional administrations), and a General Director (appointed by the Minister of Health), these two figures would conciliate both the political and the technical aspect of the organisation. The reform would put all the power in the hands of one person, making the Agency less technical and more political. The government has justified this by saying that the Agency is currently too slow in the decision-making process. 

Meanwhile, Pro Vita & Famiglia is not an isolated case of radical opinions towards women’s rights. Anti-abortion groups in Italy have intensified their opposition to abortion, and Giorgia Meloni's right-wing government has shown tolerance for these groups by advocating against “gender ideology”. The associations have, in return, claimed that they “agreed with Meloni 100%” as she has been pushing for legislation that would restrict abortion rights in the country. 

Among other things, Meloni spoke at the controversial Congresso della Famiglia (Congress of Family) which took place in 2019 in Verona. This Congress has been greatly debated in the press and flagged as homophobic by several associations; the controversies have included the organisers of the Congress distributing plastic gadgets in the shape of fetuses with the sentence “abortion stops a beating heart” underneath. This approach to abortion should not be surprising,  as last year, Italian Senator Maurizio Gasparri, representing Silvio Berlusconi's Forza Italia party, proposed an amendment to the civil code that would recognize a fetus as a human being, effectively classifying abortion as murder.

The result of this intellectual confusion is a concerning reversal of women's rights

Even if the government is indeed being sincere in their desire to protect the rights of unborn children by restricting access to contraception, by their own admission low birth rates in Italy persist. Meanwhile, evidence thus far shows that improving access to contraception would not depress birth rates, but contrarily, reduce the rate of practised abortions, which remain in some cases physically and emotionally draining for women. The result of this intellectual confusion is a concerning reversal of women's rights, which itself can have further highly negative consequences on parents and their children in the future, as it would force those who do not want to, to raise a child that would be unwanted, and therefore, most likely unhappy.

On the contrary, citizens and representatives of Italy need to ask themselves how to create a country in which young couples who actually want to start a family are able to do so.

source: Arianna Belluardo is a Junior Research Associate at LINKS Europe
photo: Shutterstock/Euractiv
The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners.

Latest

Editor's choice
News
Lula wins fourth term in Brazil, Vucic loses in Serbia

Lula wins fourth term in Brazil, Vucic loses in Serbia

In elections on both sides of the Atlantic, that are likely to have deep implications for their respective regions, one incumbent won, another lost. In Brazil, Latin America's biggest country, left-wing President Lula won a fourth term in office, defeating his right-wing challenger Flávio Bolsonaro. The 80-year-old, took just under 52% of the vote in a run-off on Sunday. Lula thanked cheering supporters in São Paulo and said he had defended Brazil's democracy. His opponent, Flavio Bolsonaro - who won the first round - says the result is "inexplicable" and called for it to be annulled. His father, ex-president Jair Bolsonaro, is currently serving a jail sentence under house arrest for plotting a coup after losing the last election. This election was bitterly fought - and it bucks a wider regional trend towards right-wing leaders. On the other side of the Atlantic, in Serbia, long-standing leader Aleksandar Vučić has admitted defeat to the student-led protest movement in snap parliamentary elections. "We still do not have final results... it is clear that we have lost these elections," the right-wing populist leader said as he conceded late on Sunday. Preliminary figures from Serbia's election commission indicated a record high turnout, which commentators had suggested would favour the student movement. Celebrations erupted after Vučić conceded. Vučić called the snap elections after two years of protests triggered by the collapse of a train station canopy in the city of Novi Sad, which killed 16 and was seen as emblematic of corruption and negligence. Both election results are going to have a deep impact on their respective regions.

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)