Government says clampdown is aimed at improving women’s reproductive health, but it comes amid anxiety about the nation’s falling birth rate

China has already enacted strict measures aimed at preventing sex-selective abortions, and health authorities also warned in 2018 that the use of abortion to end unwanted pregnancies was harmful to women’s bodies and risked causing infertility.

The state council said the new guidelines, issued on Monday, would aim to improve women’s overall access to pre-pregnancy healthcare services.

  • LeninWeave [none/use name]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Love to wait until after the article is already debunked in the comments to make my anti-China post. :big-cool:

        • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Ok and? There's literally nothing in that comment debunking any part of the article.

            • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]
              ·
              3 years ago

              All the replies show is that the article included biased language and framing, not factual inaccuracies.

              • LeninWeave [none/use name]
                ·
                3 years ago

                And someone in the comments stated that if you look at the actual document, the context of reducing non-medical abortions is that they’re going to be improving sex education and access to medical care and contraceptives to reduce the number of people who need these abortions in the first place.

                So it's not a limit on abortions. Didn't need to go past the headline to find the lie.

                Edit: also, lol at "it's not a lie, only the language and framing are dishonest".

                • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  It's unclear what measures are actually going to be taken. It is reasonable to speculate that the government may implement more restrictions, given that it's happened before.

                  Edit: also, lol at “it’s not a lie, only the language and framing are dishonest”.

                  The fact that it's framing things about China in a negative way doesn't mean that what China's doing isn't bad.

                  • LeninWeave [none/use name]
                    ·
                    3 years ago

                    OK, so there's no evidence as of now that what China is doing is bad, but you assume that they will do bad things in the future. Even if you end up being right, that's ridiculous. I think I'm done here.

                      • LeninWeave [none/use name]
                        ·
                        3 years ago

                        Guess it's time to twist ourselves into knots to explain how restricting women's reproductive rights is suddenly a good thing :yea:

                        This is the opposite of "not assuming".

                        • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]
                          ·
                          3 years ago

                          It's not assuming anything, China already has some restrictions on women's reproductive rights.

                          • LeninWeave [none/use name]
                            ·
                            3 years ago

                            I simply would not conflate a specific law in one region of China with potential national policy on the comments of a dishonest article that contains little to no evidence.

                            Seems like you're reaching for reasons to criticize China and getting angry at everyone else who isn't. As seen in this thread, it's reasonable and good to be skeptical of these articles.

                            In any case, I have family to spend time with so I won't reply further. Have a good day.