Unpacking the legality of termination of pregnancy based on ‘social grounds’ under South African law
Main Article Content
Abstract
The topic of abortion was in the limelight again in Dobbs v Jackson, where the US Supreme Court overturned the decision of Roe v Wade, ‘which guaranteed women and pregnant people a constitutional right to abortion’. While not bound by the judgment, this gives us an opportunity to reflect on the current law in South Africa which regulates the termination of pregnancy. The primary piece of legislation which governs abortion is the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act. Section 2 of the Act lists the grounds under which one may lawfully terminate a pregnancy. One of those grounds relates to the period of the 13th up until the 20th week of the gestation period, and states that if a medical practitioner, after consultation with the pregnant woman, is of the opinion that the continued pregnancy would significantly affect the social or economic circumstances of the woman, then the pregnancy may be lawfully terminated. The question is: What exactly is meant by ‘social grounds’? This article considers this aspect from a legal perspective and attempts to provide clarity on the issue, in the hope that this will be of assistance to medical practitioners who are concerned about the outcome of their actions, when assisting persons in this position.
Article Details
Issue
Section

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The SAJBL is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
How to Cite
References
Christian Lawyers Association v Minister of Health (Reproductive Health Alliance as Amicus Curiae) 2005 (1) SA 509 (T) para 698.
South Africa. Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act 92 of 1996. https://www.gov. za/documents/choice-termination-pregnancy-act (accessed 2 May 2023).
ConstitutionoftheRepublicofSouthAfrica1996.https://www.gov.za/documents/ constitution-republic-south-africa-1996 (accessed 2 May 2023).
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996. S12.
Christian Lawyers Association v Minister of Health case no. 7728/2000 (TPD).
Sun N. Overturning Roe v Wade: Reproducing injustice. BMJ 2022;377:1-2. https://
doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o1588
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996. S39.
Favier M, Greenberg JMS, Stevens M. Safe abortion in South Africa: We have
wonderful laws but we don’t have people to implement those laws. Int J Gynecol
Obstet 2018;143(Suppl 4):38-44. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12676
South Africa. Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act 92 of 1996. S 2(1)(b)
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996. S 2.
South Africa. National Health Act 61 of 2003. https://www.gov.za/documents/
national-health-act (accessed 2 May 2023).
South Africa. National Health Act 61 of 2003. S 2(c)(i)
South Africa. Abortion and Sterilisation Act 2 of 1975. https://www.lexisnexis.co.za/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/820325/Abortion-and-Sterilisation-Act-No.-2-of-1975.pdf (accessed 2 May 2023).
McQuoid-Mason DJ. Termination of pregnancy: Cultural practices, the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act and the constitutional rights of children. S Afr Med J 2018;108(9):721-723. https://doi.org/10.7196/samj.2018.v108i9.13289
Du Plessis L. Re-interpretation of Statutes. Pietermaritzburg: LexisNexis, 2004:102. 16. Du Plessis L. Re-interpretation of Statutes. Pietermaritzburg: LexisNexis, 2004:103. 17. Du Plessis L Re-interpretation of Statutes. Pietermaritzburg: LexisNexis, 2004:106. 18. Du Plessis L Re-interpretation of Statutes. Pietermaritzburg: LexisNexis, 2004:93. 19. Du Plessis L Re-interpretation of Statutes. Pietermaritzburg: LexisNexis, 2004:103-104.
Du Plessis L. Re-interpretation of Statutes. Pietermaritzburg: LexisNexis, 2004:104.
Powsa v Member of the Executive Council for Economic Affairs, Environmentalism and Tourism, Eastern Cape 2001 3 SA 582 (SCA) para 10.
Du Plessis L. Re-interpretation of Statutes. Pietermaritzburg: LexisNexis, 2004:94.
Botha C. Statutory Interpretation, 4th ed. Cape Town: Juta, 2010: 86.
Oxford Online Dictionary https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/ english/social_1?q=social (accessed 22 February 2023).
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996. S 9.