Volume 19, Issue 60 (4-2025)
MLJ 2025, 19(60): 1080-1103 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Khaghani Esfahani M, Abbasi M. Criticism of Iran's Legislative Criminal Policy towards Abortion; A Comparative Study. MLJ 2025; 19 (60) :1080-1103
URL: http://ijmedicallaw.ir/article-1-2054-en.html
URL: http://ijmedicallaw.ir/article-1-2054-en.html
1- Institute for Research and Development in the Humanities (SAMT), Tehran, Iran
2- Medical Ethics and Law Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
2- Medical Ethics and Law Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract:
Background and Aim: Abortion is among the most contentious issues in criminal law and social policymaking, closely intertwined with women’s civil rights, medical ethics, public health systems and social support structures. In Iranian law, despite the existence of multiple regulations aimed at protecting the fetus, legislative conflicts, normative fragmentation, the absence of coherent supportive policies and weak enforcement mechanisms have hindered the formation of an effective and preventive criminal policy, thereby contributing in practice to the persistence of criminal abortion. Women’s decisions regarding abortion are strongly influenced by factors such as job security, maternity leave, health insurance coverage and economic capacity-considerations that have also received significant attention in the legal systems of the United States and England, where criminal policies are increasingly integrated with welfare and public health strategies. This article seeks to critically examine Iran’s legislative criminal policy in protecting both the fetus and the mother and to compare it with the approaches adopted in the United States and England in order to propose a more realistic framework for reducing criminal abortion.
Method: This study employs a qualitative design grounded in documentary analysis and comparative methodology. Relevant statutes, criminal regulations, juristic opinions and policy documents concerning abortion in Iran are examined through a critical lens. Subsequently, the legal frameworks of the United States and England are comparatively analyzed with particular emphasis on the relationship between criminalization, social prevention and non-penal support mechanisms. Legal developments following the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in the United States, along with the role of the public health system and welfare services in England, are treated as two salient reference points in this comparison.
Ethical Considerations: This Article has completely adhered to the moral principles such as honesty, respect for rights and confidentiality and the principle of intellectual property.
Results: The findings indicate that Iran’s criminal policy prioritizes penalization over prevention and social support; moreover, this penal approach lacks sufficient effectiveness due to legislative inconsistency and weak implementation. Criminal protection of the fetus without concurrent support for the mother has intensified the tension between fetal rights and women’s rights. By contrast, in English law and in several U.S. states, the reduction of criminal abortion has largely been pursued through the expansion of social protections, healthcare services, counseling programs, maternity leave and support for working mothers. These experiences suggest that an effective criminal policy requires the integration of punitive instruments with supportive measures and the active participation of both the state and society.
Conclusion: Reducing criminal abortion in Iran necessitates a fundamental reassessment of legislative criminal policy and a transition beyond a purely punitive paradigm. Without addressing the social, economic and legal contexts shaping women’s decisions, harsher penalties are unlikely to produce deterrence and may instead lead to an increase in unsafe abortions. The experiences of the United States and England demonstrate that a successful criminal policy rests on balancing fetal protection with maternal support and on combining punishment with social prevention and welfare policies. Accordingly, the formulation of coordinated legislative strategies and the strengthening of support systems for mothers and children constitute an unavoidable imperative in Iran.
Please cite this article as:
Khaghani Esfahani M, Abbasi M. Criticism of Iran's Legislative Criminal Policy towards Abortion; A Comparative Study. Medical Law Journal. 2025; 19: e71.
Method: This study employs a qualitative design grounded in documentary analysis and comparative methodology. Relevant statutes, criminal regulations, juristic opinions and policy documents concerning abortion in Iran are examined through a critical lens. Subsequently, the legal frameworks of the United States and England are comparatively analyzed with particular emphasis on the relationship between criminalization, social prevention and non-penal support mechanisms. Legal developments following the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in the United States, along with the role of the public health system and welfare services in England, are treated as two salient reference points in this comparison.
Ethical Considerations: This Article has completely adhered to the moral principles such as honesty, respect for rights and confidentiality and the principle of intellectual property.
Results: The findings indicate that Iran’s criminal policy prioritizes penalization over prevention and social support; moreover, this penal approach lacks sufficient effectiveness due to legislative inconsistency and weak implementation. Criminal protection of the fetus without concurrent support for the mother has intensified the tension between fetal rights and women’s rights. By contrast, in English law and in several U.S. states, the reduction of criminal abortion has largely been pursued through the expansion of social protections, healthcare services, counseling programs, maternity leave and support for working mothers. These experiences suggest that an effective criminal policy requires the integration of punitive instruments with supportive measures and the active participation of both the state and society.
Conclusion: Reducing criminal abortion in Iran necessitates a fundamental reassessment of legislative criminal policy and a transition beyond a purely punitive paradigm. Without addressing the social, economic and legal contexts shaping women’s decisions, harsher penalties are unlikely to produce deterrence and may instead lead to an increase in unsafe abortions. The experiences of the United States and England demonstrate that a successful criminal policy rests on balancing fetal protection with maternal support and on combining punishment with social prevention and welfare policies. Accordingly, the formulation of coordinated legislative strategies and the strengthening of support systems for mothers and children constitute an unavoidable imperative in Iran.
Please cite this article as:
Khaghani Esfahani M, Abbasi M. Criticism of Iran's Legislative Criminal Policy towards Abortion; A Comparative Study. Medical Law Journal. 2025; 19: e71.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Received: 2025/11/10 | Accepted: 2026/02/25
Received: 2025/11/10 | Accepted: 2026/02/25
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
