A comparative legal analysis of the pro-choice and pro-life movements' arguments : is there the possibility of a restricted choice?

Abstract

Malta is the last European country which criminalises abortion under all circumstances whilst other countries have chosen to decriminalise the act of terminating a pregnancy. Some European countries have adopted a restrictive type of legislation which takes on a pro-life perspective, whilst others have adopted a liberal legislation with a pro-choice perspective. The aim of this dissertation is to analyse and compare these two different types of legislations together. This was done by selecting 4 countries and researching their abortion legislations and any cases which have emerged about abortion. A qualitative comparative analysis was then conducted of these laws and cases. This was done to be able to reach a conclusion as to whether a restrictive type of legislation would be a viable option for Malta to adopt, meaning whether adopting regulations which decriminalise abortion in certain exceptional circumstances, as would be indicated in the law, would be accomplishable. Through the in-depth research which was made into the legislations of the selected counties it was discovered that the countries started off with a blanket ban on abortion, a stance similar to that in Malta. They then introduce a restrictive type of legislation which gives women the opportunity to obtain a legal termination of their pregnancy. Two of the countries, Sweden and Denmark, then chose to widen their allowances and adopted a more liberal approach toa abortion. This thus led to the conclusion that restrictive type of legislation would be the primary step which Malta must adopt should the need arise to decriminalise abortion. Thus, the conclusion of this dissertation is used to propose what kind of legislation can adopted in Malta.