Government College University, Lahore

Department of Statistics
Population Studies
STAT-3205

Name: Qurat-ul-Ayn Naeem

Roll no: 1248-BH(E)-STAT-19
Semester: 6th
Session: 2019-2023
Submitted to: Dr. Jamal Abdul Nasir

1|Page
# Latest age specific death rate of Pakistan
Pakistan - Adult mortality rate between age 15 and 60
In 2020, adult mortality rate for Pakistan was 22.51 deaths per 100 populations. Adult mortality
rate of Pakistan increased from 21.12 deaths per 100 populations in 1975 to 22.51 deaths per 100
populations in 2020 growing at an average annual rate of 0.77%.
 Adult mortality rate is defined as the percentage of total deaths between ages 15 and
60 (per 100 total population), both sexes combined.
Pakistan - Crude death rate
In 2020, crude death rate for Pakistan was 6.84 deaths per thousand populations. Between 1971
and 2020, crude death rate of Pakistan was declining at a moderating rate to shrink from 14.92
deaths per thousand populations in 1971 to 6.84 deaths per thousand populations in 2020.
 Crude death rate is known as the number of deaths over a given period divided by
the person-years lived by the population over that period. It is expressed as number
of deaths per 1,000 populations.
Mortality rate in Pakistan 2019, by gender
The statistic shows the adult mortality rate in Pakistan from 2009 to 2019, by gender. According
to the source, the adult mortality rate is the probability of dying between the ages of 15 and 60 -
that is, the probability of a 15-year-old dying before reaching age 60, if subject to age-specific
mortality rates of the specified year between those ages. In 2019, the mortality rate for women
was at 136.4 per 1,000 female adults, while the mortality rate for men was at 171.98 per 1,000
male adults in Pakistan

2|Page
# Latest age specific death rate of Afghanistan
Afghanistan - Adult mortality rate between age 15 and 60
In 2020, adult mortality rate for Afghanistan was 30.31 deaths per 100 populations. Adult
mortality rate of Afghanistan increased from 25.9 deaths per 100 populations in 1975 to 30.31
deaths per 100 populations in 2020 growing at an average annual rate of 1.81%.
Afghanistan - Crude death rate
In 2020, crude death rate for Afghanistan was 6.16 deaths per thousand populations. Between
1971 and 2020, crude death rate of Afghanistan was declining at a moderating rate to shrink
from 26.33 deaths per thousand populations in 1971 to 6.16 deaths per thousand populations in
2020.
Mortality rate in Afghanistan 2019, by gender
The statistic shows the adult mortality rate in Afghanistan from 2009 to 2019, by gender.
According to the source, the adult mortality rate is the probability of dying between the ages of
15 and 60 - that is, the probability of a 15-year-old dying before reaching age 60, if subject to
age-specific mortality rates of the specified year between those ages. In 2019, the mortality rate
for women was at 188.84 per 1,000 female adults, while the mortality rate for men was at 233.88
per 1,000 male adults in Afghanistan.

# What is the Abortion Policy of Pakistan?

3|Page
o Women in Pakistan have a high level of unmet need for contraception— estimated at 20% in
2012–2013. This results in high rates of unintended pregnancy, unplanned births and induced
abortion. Improving and expanding the provision of family planning services are critical to
enable women and couples to have the number of children they want, when they want them.
o The decline in the number of births in Pakistan has been slower than in other Asian countries.
The total fertility rate dropped from about six children per woman in the early 1980s to 4.4 in
2003. However, the rate decreased more slowly from 2006 to 2013 (from 4.1 to 3.8). On
average, Pakistani women still have one child more than they desire.
o In Pakistan, abortion is legally allowed only to save the life of a woman or to provide
“necessary treatment” early in pregnancy. Given a lack of clarity in interpreting the law, legal
abortion services are difficult to obtain, and most women who have an abortion resort to
clandestine and unsafe procedures.

UNINTENDED PREGNANCY AND OUTCOMES

o The proportion of pregnancies that were unintended rose from 38% in 2002 to 46% in 2012,
which indicates that increases in contraceptive use have not kept pace with the growing
desire for smaller families.
o The unintended pregnancy rate increased between 2002 and 2012, rising from 71 to 93 per
1,000 women aged 15–49.
o In 2012, there were approximately nine million pregnancies in Pakistan, of which 4.2 million
were unintended. Of these unintended pregnancies, 54% resulted in induced abortions and
34% in unplanned births.
o The proportion of unintended pregnancies resulting in induced abortions varied significantly
among provinces. Sindh and Baluchistan had the highest proportions (62% and 63%,
respectively), while the lowest was found in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (40%).

Unintended Pregnancies
Intended births
45%
Induced Abortions
25%
Unintended Mis-
carriages
6%

Induced Abortions
Miscarriages
Unintended births
Intended Miscarriages Unintended births Miscarriages
9% 15%
Intended births

INCIDENCE OF ABORTION

4|Page
o There were an estimated 2.25 million induced abortions in Pakistan in 2012. The majority of
these abortions were clandestine, and placed women’s health and lives at risk.
o In 2012, the national abortion rate was 50 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–49. This rate
is much higher than the rate estimated for 2002, 26.5 per 1,000. Even acknowledging an
underestimation of the 2002 rate, which did not count private-sector procedures, a significant
increase likely occurred over this 10-year period.
o The abortion rate varied substantially among provinces: The highest rates were in
Baluchistan and Sindh (60 and 57 abortions per 1,000, respectively), and the lowest was in
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (35 per 1,000).
POLICY AND PROGRAM IMPLICATIONS
o The consequences of unintended pregnancy and induced abortion result in substantial costs to
the country’s health care system, as well as to women and their families. Policy- makers and
service providers must make improved access to quality contraceptive services an urgent
priority, especially in rural areas, so that Pakistani women are better able to time and space
their pregnancies and have the number of children they desire.
o The provision of family planning counseling and methods should be made a routine part of
post abortion care in both public- and private-sector facilities.
o Expanding public-sector services will require the training of additional health care providers,
including doctors and midlevel providers in safer methods of treating post abortion
complications. Essential supplies— such as manual vacuum aspiration kits and disinfectant
equipment—must be made consistently available.
o The effective expansion of family planning services will also require recognition within the
health sector that family planning is an essential part of improving maternal, neonatal and
child health. The provision of all of these services must be better integrated.

# What is the abortion policy in United States?

5|Page
Restrictions on women’s access to safe abortion are not limited to Mexico. Even in the United
States, where abortion is legal, services are not readily accessible. In fact, many women and girls
face serious legal or financial obstacles to accessing safe abortion services because of
burdensome regulations, lack of providers, insufficient funding, or political opposition.
Obstacles to safe abortion in the United States seem to be on the rise. Since the landmark
Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade in 1973, which established women’s right to decide
with regard to abortion as a matter of privacy, both state and federal legislators have limited
access to legal abortion. These roll-back measures generally seek to do one of two things:
1. curtail women’s access to legal abortion (such as through mandatory waiting periods or
mandatory—and at times manifestly inaccurate—counseling); or
2. limit legal access to abortion to certain populations (such as rape victims or women
whose lives are endangered by their pregnancy).
Women with limited economic resources face additional obstacles to safe abortion, resulting
particularly in discrimination against women who may already be marginalized. Abortion
services have been subject to a federal funding freeze since 1977 except in cases of life
endangerment, rape, or incest. Furthermore, the majority of states do not provide funding for
abortion services that fall outside these exceptions. A safe abortion often costs $500-$1,500. As a
result, women with limited resources—who have not been raped or whose lives are not
endangered by their pregnancy—may be forced to choose between carrying an unwanted
pregnancy to term or taking desperate measures that could seriously jeopardize their health.
Regulatory Obstacles to Abortion in the United States
Since 1973, the United States Supreme Court has consistently ruled that an outright ban on
abortion is unconstitutional. However, the Court has allowed states to regulate and limit access to
abortion, so long as they do not place an “undue” burden on the individual seeking to terminate
her pregnancy. Over the past decade, legislators at the state and federal levels have pushed the
limits of this Supreme Court mandate, and at times have imposed regulations with the explicit
aim of challenging the constitutionality of legal abortion. Many states implement regulations
that, in practice, may be unduly burdensome. For example, some states require that women and
girls who wish to terminate a pregnancy submit themselves to counseling, which, in addition to
being unsolicited, is often manifestly biased and medically unsound.
Inaccurate or Imposed Information
According to the nongovernmental research organization Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), as of
September 2006 well over half the states in the United States (32) subject all women seeking
abortion to mandatory counseling. Three states require clinics to inform women of a purported
link between abortion and breast cancer, which numerous scientific studies have conclusively
disproved. Four states also stipulate that women must be told that the fetus might be capable of
feeling pain at any point during gestation. Such information, however, is contrary to recent
scientific studies that conclude that fetuses cannot feel pain until the twenty-ninth week of
gestation. In fact, as 90 percent of abortions in the United States occur in the first twelve weeks

6|Page
of the pregnancy, the mandatory information on fetal pain is not only scientifically wrong, but
also irrelevant to the vast majority of abortion patients.
Access to accurate and complete information on medical procedures is an integral part of the
human right to the highest attainable standard of health, and also essential to the principle of
informed consent. When health professionals are required to give women and girls one-sided or
inaccurate information about medical procedures—as the law mandates in many jurisdictions in
the United States—the human right to health is threatened.
Mandatory Waiting Periods Add Cost
According to AGI, 24 of the 32 states that require mandatory counseling also require women and
girls to wait for a specific period of time—most often twenty-four hours—between the
counseling session and the abortion. While a waiting period before a medical procedure may not
in and of itself be incompatible with the right to health, it can create additional, and potentially
unduly burdensome, barriers to access to safe and legal abortions. For example, in those states
where the law requires an in-person counseling procedure (as opposed to over the phone) a
mandatory waiting period requires that the patient travel at least twice to the abortion facility. As
a consequence, many must leave work for several days, and where there are no abortion facilities
nearby—and 87 percent of U.S. counties have no such facilities (2000 figures, latest available)—
the mandatory waiting period may require such additional cost as an overnight stay or several
long-distance trips.
Added Restrictions for Girls
Many U.S.-based NGOs note that girls typically are subject to more restrictions than adult
women regarding access to safe abortion. AGI and NARAL Pro-Choice America note that 44
states have laws on the books requiring parental consent or notification prior to a minor’s
abortion. More than 20 states enforce parental consent laws requiring consent from a parent
before a minor may obtain a legal abortion—in 3 cases the laws require consent from both
parents. Further, more than 10 states have laws requiring that a parent be informed of a minor’s
intent to have an abortion, and 2 states require that both parents be informed.
Mandatory parental consent and notification regulations are problematic for a number of reasons,
especially in cases where both parents must consent or be notified. Abortion providers in the
United States note from experience that the vast majority of teenage girls already seek support
and guidance from one or both parents. The impact of notification and consent laws thus falls
hardest on particularly vulnerable girls unable to involve their parents in their decision, including
girls who do not have contact with either or both parents.
International human rights law requires governments to prioritize the best interests of children at
all times, and to give the child’s opinion due weight according to his or her evolving capacities.
A parent’s declared opposition to abortion should not automatically result in the assumption that
carrying a pregnancy to term is in the best interest of the child, especially when the pregnant girl
herself declares a desire to terminate the pregnancy. A U.S. Supreme Court precedent mandates
that parental consent laws must have a judicial procedure to waive parental consent in specific

7|Page
circumstances. It is incumbent upon states to ensure that this precedent is reflected in law and
adequately protects the interests of all children.
Criminalization of Doctors and Family Members
Women and girls who procure abortions are currently not subject to criminal sanctions anywhere
in the United States. However, in some states, family members, doctors, nurses, and friends who
support women and girls in need of an abortion soon could be.
In July 2006, the U.S. Senate passed a version of the Child Custody Protection Act, a version of
which had already passed as the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act in the House of
Representatives in April 2005. If this law enters into force, any adult who helps a minor cross a
state line to procure an abortion in circumvention of parental consent or notification regulations
in the child’s home state would be committing a federal crime.
Furthermore, some states have passed legislation to criminalize medical doctors who perform
abortions on certain types of patients. Most prominent is the blanket ban on abortion in South
Dakota, signed into law in March 2006, which makes abortion illegal except when the procedure
is carried out to save the pregnant woman’s life. Nongovernmental advocacy organizations that
follow closely the developments of abortion legislation note that several other states—including
Georgia, Indiana, Ohio, Louisiana, and Tennessee—have moved to enact similar legislation.
Conclusion
Abortion is a highly emotional subject and one that excites deeply held opinions. However,
equitable access to safe and legal abortion services is first and foremost a human right. In the
United States the legality of abortion co-exists with cumbersome regulations, thinly veiled
political opposition to a woman’s right to make independent decisions regarding pregnancy and
abortion, and a lack of federal and state funding for the provision of abortion services for poor
women that seriously hampers women’s ability to exercise this right. Until access to safe
abortion is guaranteed, the human rights of women and girls across the United States will not be
fully secure.

8|Page