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.

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!
Editor's choice
News
Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Armenia should sign and ratify a peace treaty with Azerbaijan before 2031, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. He described the objective as the top priority for his administration. Earlier, the Armenian prime minister also spoke about a possible land-swap with Azerbaijan Armenia and Azerbaijan should agree to establish a clear, conventional border without enclaves or exclaves, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. Armenia controls three Azeri enclaves inside its borders while Baku controls one Armenian enclave – those could be subject to a land swap, Pashinyan announced.

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)