Abortion Crisis in Peru: Finding a Woman’s Right to Obtain Safe and Legal Abortions in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Under Peruvian law, abortion is illegal unless it is necessary to save the life of the mother. At the same time a woman can be imprisoned if she receives an illegal abortion. Yet, despite its illegality and the threat of punishment, there are over 350,000 illegal and clandestine abortions performed each year in Peru and nearly 65,000 of these women are hospitalized due to complications. Peru has the second-highest maternal mortality rate in South American and unsafe abortions account for nearly one quarter of the deaths. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women may provide an answer to the problem of unsafe and illegal abortions in Peru. Although it doesn't explicitly provide that a woman has a right to access safe and legal abortions, it impliedly does so. This Note argues that the actions of the Convention’s Committee reveal that a woman has a right to safe and legal abortions and that Peruvian women should take the next step by asserting their claim to this right through the formal complaint procedure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".