REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – 2023-24

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS

[Argentina, preventable maternal death,”obstetric violence”] Britez Arce et. al. v. Argentina. (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, November 16, 2022). Decision in English. Decision in Spanish. Press Release Jan 18, 2023. Comment by CRR. [Earlier: Merits report by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (Report 236/19, Case 13.002. Report in English-download.)

[Bolivia, rape of a minor, revictimization] Losado v Bolivia (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, November 18, 2022) English press release Jan 19, 2023 Summary in Spanish. Decision in Spanish. The Court held Bolivia responsible for gender and child discrimination, and revictimization of an adolescent victim of sexual violence during the judicial process.

[Colombia, abortion decriminalized] Sentencia C-055-22.  Expediente D-13.956. Demanda de inconstitucionalidad contra el artículo 122 de la Ley 599 del 2000. (Constitutional Court of Colombia, February 21, 2022). Decision in Spanish (414 pages).  Backup decision in Spanish.  Unofficial English translation. 27-page Spanish press release.  English summary of Press Release.  1-page Spanish press release. [Abortion is decriminalized within 24 weeks of gestation, and thereafter permitted on specified grounds.] 

[El Salvador, abortion, anencephaly] Beatriz v. El Salvador, Case 13-378, Report No. 09/20, Inter-Am. C.H.R. (2020) (Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, January 5, 2022): Report in Spanish. Case Summary in Spanish.  Press release in English. [Woman with lupus and kidney failure denied abortion for fetus with anencephaly.] Inter-American Court of Human Rights held hearings in March 2023.

France made abortion a fundamental constitutional right. March 4, 2024. Parliamentarians voted to revise the country’s 1958 constitution to enshrine women’s “guaranteed freedom” to abort. News report in English.

[Mexico, Abortion decriminalized], Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación [Supreme Court], 2023..Review of Constitutional Protection. Amparo en revisión 267/2023. Sept. 6, 2023. Speaker: Justice Ana Margarita Ríos Farjat. Decided September 6, 2023. Official Press release in Spanish.   [Abortion is decriminalized throughout Mexico.]

[Northern Ireland, UN CEDAW] Report of the Inquiry concerning the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland under article 8 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, (2018) U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/OP.8/GBR/1  Original CEDAW 2018 report.  Comments by Clare Pierson. [abortion, a crime in Northern Ireland following sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against Persons Act 1861, was legalized in 2020.]
—Follow-up report submitted by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, 16 January 2023, published March 14, 2023 as CEDAW/C/OP.*/GBR/3/Add.1.  Followup report in different formats, English, French and Spanish.  [Among other reforms, Northern Ireland established a Gender Equality Strategy Expert Advisory Panel whose Report of December 2020 is online here]. 

[Peru, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child] Camila v. Peru, Communication No. 136/2021.U.N. Doc CRC/C/93/D/136/2021 (June 13, 2023) Decision online in Spanish, Arabic and Russian.  Decision in English (May 25, 2023, *unofficial draft). Case note by Godfrey Kangaude.  [Child raped by her father. Ruling: Peru violated child rape victim’s rights by failing to guarantee access to abortion and criminally prosecuting her for self-abortion.]

[Peru, child marriage] Ley N.º 31945 to prohibit and eliminate any possibility of marriage with minors under the age of 18 was promulgated on 25 November 2023. Prior to the new legislation, Article 42 of Peru’s Civil Code permitted adolescents to marry from the age of 14 under certain conditions, with consent from at least one parent, despite the minimum legal age of marriage being 18 years for girls and boys. Context in English.

[Poland, ECtHR ruled against fetal abnormality abortion ban] M.L. v. POLAND (Application no. 40119/21) (European Court of Human Rights, December 14, 2023) [Woman forced to travel for abortion of malformed fetus. Court found violation of ECHR Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the ECHR, following a 2020 Constitutional Court ban on legal abortion in case of foetal abnormalities. Press release. Decision of 14 Dec 2023.

[Poland, fetal abnormality risk, inadmissible] A.M. and others v. Poland (application no. 4188/21, 4957/21, 5014/21,5523/21, 5876/21, 6114/21, 6217/21, 8857/21) (European Court of Human Rights, May 16, 2023) ruled these 8 cases inadmissible because each applicant could not claim to be a victim of a violation of the ECHR owing to risk of a future violation. Press Release. Decision of 16 May 2023.

[Spain, access to abortion information] Tribunal Supremo de España, Sala Tercera, de lo Contencioso-administrativo, Sección 4ª, S 1231/2022, 3 Oct. 2022 (Rec. 6147/2021)  Decision in Spanish.  Spanish backup copy.  Decision in English.  English backup copy. [The Government cannot block public access to a website containing information or opinions without judicial authorization.  This includes the site of Women on Web, which discusses access to abortion.

[Turkey, abortion for rape victim], [Case of] R.G. [GK], B. No: 2017/31619, 23/7/2020,.July 23, 2020. (Grand Chamber of the Turkish Constitutional Court)   27-page decision in Turkish. Backup copy. Official press release in English. Backup copy.  Comment  in English on IACL/AIDC Blog. Article in English from a Turkish Journal of Constitutional Law  [procrastination after rape victim applied for abortion violated the right to protect one’s corporeal and spiritual existence (provided under Article 17 of Turkish Constitution.

[UK – challenge to fetal abnormality ground for abortion] R (on the Application of Crowter and Ors) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care EWCA Civ 1559 Case No: CA-2021-000314 (UK Court of Appeal (Civil Division) London, 25 Nov., 2022, Judgment summary. Decision online.  [UK legislation allowing abortion for substantial risk of a born child’s serious handicap (such as Down syndrome) is not incompatible with disabled persons’ human rights to respect for their private and family life and to nondiscrimination.] This was an appeal of [2021] EWHC 2536 (Admin) Case No. CO/2066/2020 (High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, London) Sept 23, 2021.  Judgment and summary.    [fetus has no established rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), so UK abortion law allowing legal abortions in cases of severe fetal abnormalities is compatible with ECHR.]

[Venezuela, obstetric violence] Inter-American Court of Human Rights – Case of Rodríguez Pacheco et al. v. Venezuela. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 1, 2023. Series C No. 504. Press release in English. Official Summary in Spanish. 82-page judgment in Spanish. Download partial dissent by Judge Sierra Porto. Download: partial dissent by Judge Pérez Goldberg. The Court ruled that Venezuela is responsible for deficiencies in Judicial Proceedings on a Complaint of acts of obstetric violence and medical malpractice that took place in a private hospital.

SCHOLARSHIP

[comparative abortion law] Rebecca J. Cook and Bernard M. Dickens, “Abortion,” in Jan M. Smits, Jaakko Husa, Catherine Valcke and Madalena Narciso, eds., Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law, 3rd ed., (Cheltenham, UK: Elgar Publishing, 2023), 3-11. Abstract online here. Full text and PDF online

[abortion law, Colombia] “The new Colombian law on abortion,” by Isabel C Jaramillo Sierra, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 160.1 (January 2023): 345-350.  Abstract and Article. 

[abortion law and policy] “Self managed abortion: aligning law and policy with medical evidence,” by Patty Skuster, Heidi Moseson and Jamila Perritt, in International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 160.2 (February 2023): 720-725. Abstract and Article.  

[abortion law and policy, guideline] “The WHO Abortion Care Guideline: Law and Policy–Past, Present and Future,” by Joanna N. Erdman, in International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 162.3 (Sept 2023): 1119–1124. Abstract and Article.  WHO Abortion Care guideline, 2022.

[adolescents, Africa] “Integrating child rights standards in contraceptive and abortion care for minors in Africa,” by Godfrey Dalitso Kangaude, Catriona Macleod, Ernestina Coast and Tamara Fetters, International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 159.3 (December 2022): 998-1004.   Abstract and Article.

[Africa, Zimbabwe, rewrite abortion decision, gender equality] Charles Ngwena and Rebecca J. Cook, “Restoring Mai Mapingure’s Equal Citizenship,” In: Rebecca J. Cook, ed., Frontiers of Gender Equality: Transnational Legal Perspectives (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023). Abstract online.  Book available here. Introduction to the book (by Rebecca Cook).

[gender equality, health, CEDAW GR 24] “Gender Equality in Health Care: Reenvisioning CEDAW General Recommendation 24,” by Joanna N. Erdman and Mariana Prandini Assis, in Frontiers of Gender Equality: Transnational Legal Perspectives, ed. Rebecca J. Cook (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023). Abstract online in English. Portuguese translation of this chapter. Book available here. Introduction to the book (by Rebecca Cook).

[gender equality] Rebecca J. Cook, “Many Paths to Gender Equality,” Introduction to: Frontiers of Gender Equality: Transnational Legal Perspectives (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023). Introduction online.

[infertility] “”Human Rights Approaches to Reducing Infertility,” by Payal K. Shah and Jaime M. Gher, in International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics.162.1 (July 2023): 368–374.  Abstract and Article. 

US-focused news, resources, and legal developments are available  on Repro Rights Prof Blog. View or subscribe.

JOBS
Links to employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here.

______________
Contributed by: the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca.   See Program website for our Publications,  Research resources, and Reprohealthlaw Commentaries Series.  TO JOIN THE REPROHEALTHLAW BLOG: enter your email address in the upper right corner of our blog, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – Autumn 2022

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS

COLOMBIA: Corte Constitucional [Constitutional Court] February 21, 2022, Sentencia C-055-22.  27-page Spanish communicado.  27-page unofficial English translation.  Nota de Prensa (Spanish).   Download unofficial English translation.  (Abortion is decriminalized within 24 weeks of gestation.]

INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS – EL SALVADOR Manuela et al. v. El Salvador,  Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No 441. (November 2, 2021).  Decision in English.. Backup copy. Decision in Spanish.  Backup copy in Spanish..Comment by Centre for Reproductive Rights.  [El Salvador was held accountable for the arbitrary detention, torture, and conviction of a woman after obstetric emergency and loss of pregnancy in 2008. Convicted of “aggravated homicide.” Two years later, Manuela died from cancer, in prison.]

KENYA: PAK & Salim Mohammed v. Attorney General & 3 Others (Constitutional Petition E009 of 2020) [2022] KEHC 262 (KLR) (24 March 2022) (High Court of Kenya at Malindi)  Decision online.   Backup copy.    Press release by CRR. [Abortion care is a fundamental constitutional right. Arrests of patients and clinicians are illegal. Parliament is directed to align law and policy with the Constitution.]

MEXICO: AI 148/2017 Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación 2021,  Acción de inconstitucionalidad AI 148/2017, Sept 7, 2021  Decision in Spanish.   News report in English.   Official press release in Spanish.  Official press release in English.  [Criminalizing abortion is unconstitutional; state interests in protecting fetus cannot outweigh the reproductive rights of women.]

MEXICO AI 106/2018: Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación [Supreme Court] 2021, Acción de inconstitucionalidad AI 106/2018 and 107/2018), Sept. 7, 2021.  Decision in Spanish.  Official press release in English.  [States may not establish a right to life from the moment of conception in their local constitutions]

MEXICO AI 54/2018: Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación 2021, Acción de inconstitucionalidad AI 54/2018, Sept 21, 2021.   Decision in Spanish.  Decision backup.    Official press release in English.  [This ruling struck down part of the General Law regulating health services nationwide, because it established an expansive right to conscientious objection by medical personnel, without establishing the limits necessary to ensure patients’ rights to healthcare.]

NEW ZEALAND: High Court decision in NZ Health Professionals’ Alliance v Attorney-General, Sept. 24, 2021, upholds sections of the Contraception, Sterilisation, and Abortion Act 1977 (‘CSAA’), amended in the Abortion Legislation Act 2020, regarding conscientious objectors’ duty to refer and (within reason) accommodation of objecting employees. News report.  Decision online. Commentary on decision. 

NORTHERN IRELAND Judicial review by Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission: In re NIHRC (Abortion), “In the matter of an application by The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review – In the matter of the failure by the Secretary of State, Executive Committee and Minister of Health to provide women with access to Abortion and Post Abortion Care in All Public Health Facilities in Northern Ireland [2021] NIQB 91 Delivered 14 October 2021.    Decision online.  Backup copy.    Official Summary.  News story.   [Secretary of State failed to comply with 2019 Act  to “expeditiously” provide women in Northern Ireland with access to high quality abortion and post abortion services].

POLAND: Applications have been filed before the European Court of Human Rights by more than 1,000 Polish women who were denied abortions or who postponed their reproductive decisions out of fear. [because of the Constitutional Tribunal’s October 2020 ruling that disallowed abortion in cases of severe and irreversible fetal defects. Result: almost total ban on abortion.] Human Rights Watch report.

POLAND: “Izabel”, 22-weeks pregnant, died of septic shock in Sept 2021 while doctors waited for her doomed fetus to die within her.  Washington Post Nov 2021 article. Mass protests focused on the Oct 2020 abortion ban ruling, but, so far, only hospital and staff have been held accountable. Notes from Poland, Sept. 2022.

UNITED STATES: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, No. 19-1392, 597 U.S. _ (2022) (Supreme Court of the United States), held that the Constitution of the United States does not confer a right to abortion. Case summary by CRR. Amicus brief by Martha Davis et al. IJGO article and other amicus briefs.

NEW INTERNATIONAL ABORTION CARE GUIDELINE

[WHO] Abortion Care Guideline (Geneva: World Health Organization, 2022). Chapter 2 discusses Law and Policy.
Download the Guideline, or see Overview and Supplementary resources.

SCHOLARSHIP

[abortion law, France] [Why and how to constitutionalize abortion law]: ‘Pourquoi et comment constitutionaliser le droit à l’avortement,” par Stéphanie Hennette-Vauchez, Diane Roman et Serge Slama, La Revue des Droits de l’Homme, Actualités Droits-Libertés | 2022 Juillet 2022. Full text in French.

[abortion law, Latin America] “Pushing Past the Tipping Point: Can the Inter-American System Accommodate Abortion Rights?” by Patricia Palacios Zuloaga, Human Rights Law Review 21.4 (Dec 2021): 899–934. Abstract and Article.

“Abortion Lawfare in Latin America: Some Reading Keys for a Changing Scenario, ” special issue eds. Catarina Barbieri, Camila Gianella, Maria Defago, and Marta Machado (2021) Rev. Direito GV vol. 17 no 3, Sao Paulo, Brazil. Epub Dec 15, 2021. Overview and three articles in English.

[abortion law, Mexico] “The Decriminalization of Abortion: A Landmark Decision by the Mexican Supreme Court,” by Joy Monserrat Ochoa Martínez,and Roberto Niembro Ortega, I-CONnect Blog, Posted: 12 Oct 2021. Expert comment.

[abortion law, Poland] “The Scales of the European Court of Human Rights: Abortion Restriction in Poland, the European Consensus, and the State’s Margin of Appreciation,” by Julia Kapelańska-Pręgowska, Health and Human Rights Journal 23.2 (Dec 2021): 213-224. Abstract and article.

[abortion law, USA] “The state of abortion rights in the US,” by Martha F. Davis. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 159.1 (Oct 2022): 324-329 Abstract online. Article: free access .

[abortion law, USA] Abortion and the Law in America: Roe v. Wade to the Present, by Mary Ziegler. (Cambridge University Press, 2020). Publisher’s abstract.

“Conscientious Objection and the Duty to Refer,” by Bernard M. Dickens, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2021; 155: 556-560. PDF at Wiley Online.  Submitted Text at SSRN.

[conscientious objection: Argentina] “Regulating Conscientious Objection to Legal Abortion in Argentina: Taking into Consideration Its Uses and Consequences,” by Agustina Ramón Michel, Stephanie Kung, Alyse López-Salm, and Sonia Ariza Navarrete, Health and Human Rights Journal 22.2 (Dec 2020): 271 – 384. Abstract and article.

[Conscientious objection: South Africa, nurses] “Power dynamics in the provision of legal abortion : a feminist perspective on nurses and conscientious objection in South Africa” by Satang Nabaneh, Doctoral Thesis (LLD)–University of Pretoria, 2020, now online: Doctoral thesis – 290 pages.

Conscientious Objection / The Right to Conscience, an annotated bibliography, updated Feb. 15, 2021 Conscience Bibiography.

[Conscientious objection] Global Map of Norms regarding Conscientious Objection, a searchable interactive map for comparative law, by Agustina Ramón Michel (coordinator) and Dana Repka (CEDES / REDAAS) with the support of Ipas and the ELA team. Updated December 15, 2022: Global Map of Norms re Conscientious Objection.

“Contested Rights: Abortion and Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in the United Nations,” by Erin Aylward, Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, Canada, Nov. 2020. Abortion/SOGI thesis.

[migrants] “International migrants’ right to sexual and reproductive health care,” by Y. Y. Brandon Chen, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2022;157: 210–215  PDF at Wiley online.  Submitted Text at SSRN. 

US-focused news, resources, and legal developments are available  on Repro Rights Prof Blog. View or subscribe.

JOBS
Links to employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here.
______________
Compiled by: the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca.   See Program website for our Publications,  Research resources, and Reprohealthlaw Commentaries Series.  TO JOIN THE REPROHEALTHLAW BLOG: enter your email address in the upper right corner of our blog, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – Summer 2020

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates bi-monthly by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS
[Argentina, abortion, conscience]  Argentina Ministry of Health issued a protocol expanding hospital abortion access to pregnancies resulting from rape. Raped girls 13 and over can have abortions without parental consent. The protocol also weakens a doctor’s ability to refuse to perform such abortions due to personal objection. New York Times, Dec 12, 2019.

[IACtHR, Ecuador], First standards for protection from sexual violence in schools: Paola del Rosario Guzmán Albarracín et al. v. Ecuador, Case C No. 405 (June 24, 2020) Sentencia en espanol – 85 paginas. Public Hearing Jan. 28 2020.  Resolución (Asuntos) 7 paginas. Reprohealthlaw blog summary.
Case comment in English (10 pages).

Ugandan Constitutional Court declares maternal health a constitutional right. First African court to do so. The Center for Health Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) and 3 Others v Attorney General [2020], Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2011 (Constitutional Court of Uganda at Kampala). [Maternal health] Decision of August 19, 2020. Reprohealthlaw blogpost. Longer comment with the Court’s twelve “Declarations.”

[United Kingdom, surrogacy] Whittington Hospital NHS Trust (Appellant) v. XX (Respondent) [2020] UK Supreme Court 14. (April 1, 2020) allows paid surrogacy, where legal, in foreign countries. Decision (24 pages). Article by Prof. Bernard Dickens.

WEBINARS
“Access to medical abortion: Global South perspectives,”, with Panelists Dr. Shilpa Shroff, Prof. Dipika Jain, Dr. Sana Durvesh, and Moderator, Sai Jyothirmai Racheria. Organizers: SARJAI and SAIGE. Friday, Sept. 4, 2020, 14:30 (GMT+8, Kuala Lumpur time). Register here for Sept 4.

“Telemedicine, self-managed abortion and access to abortion in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic,” chaired by Mariana Romero (Argentina). Speakers: Jade Maina (Kenya), Maria Mercedes Vivas (Colombia), Wendy V. Norman (Canada), Rodica Comendant (Moldova), Jasmine Lovely George (India), Kinga Jelinska (The Netherlands), Marge Berer (United Kingdom), to be held: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 (2:00-3:30 p.m. British Summer Time). Register here for Sept 23.

“Telemedicine / self-managed abortion is critical to strengthening women and girls’ reproductive rights and reducing maternal mortality” FIGO webinar, chaired by Prof. Dame Lesley Regan (FIGO), with speakers: Ambassador Dr. Eunice Brookman-Amissah (Ghana), Marge Berer (UK), Christina Zampas (Switzerland), Nelly Munyasia (Kenya), Evelyn Odhiambo (Kenya). Will be available in English, Spanish and French. To be held Thursday Sept. 24, 2020 at 15:00-16:30 (British Summer Time). Register for Sept 24.

SCHOLARSHIP
“Access to Abortion: An Annotated Bibliography of Reports and Scholarship,” prepared by the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 2nd edition, 2020, 44 pages, (organized by country, focuses on barriers and recommendations, ) Annotated bibliography.

[abortion] “Abortion,” thematic chapter in Comparative Human Rights Law, by Sandra Fredman (Oxford UP, Nov. 2018). Institutional access through Oxford Scholarship Online. About the book.

[abortion, Argentina, Ireland, US] “Argentina’s path to Legalizing Abortion:  A comparative analysis of Ireland, the United States and Argentina,” by  Andrea F. Noguera, Southwestern Journal of International Law 25.2 (2019): 356-392.    Article online.

[abortion, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay ] “Challenges and opportunities for access to legal and safe abortion in Latin America based on the scenarios in Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay,” by Beatriz Galli – Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 2020 – SciELO Public Health

[abortion, Brazil] Understanding the sexual and reproductive health needs in Brazil’s Zika-affected region: placing women at the center of the discussion,” by D. Diniz, L. Brito, I. Ambrogi, AB Tavares, M. Ali. International of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 2019; 147: 17 Institutional access

[abortion, India] “Reimagining Reproductive Rights Jurisprudence in India: Reflections on the Recent Decisions on Privacy and Gender Equality from the Supreme Court of India,” by Dipika Jain and Payal Shah. Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 39.2(2020), 1-53. Article online.

[abortion law, India] “A Womb of One’s Own: Privacy and Reproductive Rights,” Arijeet Ghosh & Nitika Khaitan (2017) 52:42/43 Economic & Political Weekly, [1-9], re landmark Aug 24, 2017 privacy decision (Puttaswamy) already helped decriminalize homosexuality, adultery–potentially abortion. Article online.

Human Rights Quarterly is freely available online during the COVID-19 pandemic.  All issues.

[obstetric violence] “Operationalizing a Human Rights-Based Approach to Address Mistreatment against Women during Childbirth,” by Christina Zampas, Avni Amin, Lucinda O’Hanlon, Alisha Bjerregaard, Hedieh Mehrtash, Rajat Khosla, and Özge Tunçalp, Health and Human Rights Journal, 22(1) 2020: 251-264 Article online.

[surrogacy] “Paid surrogacy abroad does not violate public policy: UK Supreme Court,” by Bernard M. Dickens, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 150.1 (2020): 129-133. PDF at Wiley Online.    Abstract and Submitted Text.

[U.S. reproductive decisions] Feminist Judgments: Reproductive Justice Rewritten, ed. Kimberly Mutcherson, Cambridge UP, 2020. Book details.

US-focused news, resources, and legal developments are available  on Repro Rights Prof Blog. View or subscribe.

Violence Against Women’s Health in International Law, new book by Sara De Vido, Manchester University Press, 2020. Abstract and Table of Contents.

JOBS
Links to employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here.
______________
Compiled by: the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca.   See Program website for our Publications,  Information resources, and Reprohealthlaw Commentaries Series.  TO JOIN THE REPROHEALTHLAW BLOG: enter your email address in the upper right corner of our blog, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

Ecuador: IACtHR’s first ruling re sexual abuse and death of student

Many thanks to Esteban Vallejo Toledo, a PhD student in Law & Society at the University of Victoria, B.C. Canada, for his detailed analysis and comments on the pioneering decision of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the first to address state responsibility for the problem of sexual abuse of adolescents in schools.

Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Paola del Rosario Guzmán Albarracín et al. v. Ecuador, Case C No. 405 (June 24, 2020) Sentencia en espanol.   10-page Case Comment in English.

From 2001 to 2002, Paola del Rosario Guzmán Albarracín, a student at a public high school in Guayaquil, Ecuador, was sexually harassed and seduced by the vice-principal, after having requested his help to improve her declining academic performance. When she appeared to be pregnant, the vice-principal urged her to interrupt the pregnancy and requested the school doctor to provide an abortion. The physician agreed to carry out the procedure, but expected Paola to have sexual intercourse with him as a condition. On December 12, 2002, Paola swallowed a lethal dose of white phosphorus and fell ill at school. School authorities did not take effective measures to provide or summon medical assistance or contact her family. Paola’s mother learned of her daughter’s condition thanks to a classmate and went to the school to bring Paola to a hospital. Paola died in hospital the following day. She was 16 years old.

After Paola’s death, her family discovered the acts of harassment, coercion, and sexual abuse that she had suffered.  Although they filed several complaints against the vice-principal and the school, the Ecuadorean justice system neglected the case and failed to conduct a proper investigation and deliver justice. With legal help from a local NGO and the Center for Reproductive Rights, Paola’s family brought her case to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which held a public hearing in 2015 and issued a Merits report with recommendations for Ecuador. When Ecuador failed to comply, the Commission submitted the case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which held 8 hours of public hearings in January 2020.

On June 24, 2020, the Inter-American Court issued an 85-page ruling in Spanish. In his 10-page analysis in English, Esteban Vallejo Toledo emphasizes that IACtHR decisions are not only viewed as a form of reparation, but also as legal norms that directly affect national legal orders. As such, from a legal perspective, the Court’s final decision on sexual violence in educational settings will contribute to improving the legal orders of Ecuador, and of other member states of the Inter-American System of Human Rights.

The Court concluded that: (1) Ecuador had violated Paola’s rights to life, integrity, dignity, and education. Likewise, Ecuador had not prevented acts of violence against adolescent women and had abstained from implementing policies to do so; (2) Ecuador had infringed rights to judicial protection, and equality before the law; (3) Ecuador had contravened the right to psychological and social integrity of Paola’s mother and sister, who suffered trauma and social stigma, then spent decades struggling for justice. On the other hand, (4) Ecuador could not be proven responsible for alleged acts of torture, nor cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, because extreme sexual violence could not be proven, and because a negligent autopsy had left Paola’s presumed pregnancy and hence her obstructed abortion unproven.

To endorse and complement the recommendations already presented by the Commission in 2018, the Court ordered Ecuador to: (1) provide any physical and mental health support needed by Paola’s relatives; (2) publicize the Court’s decision; (3) publicly acknowledge its responsibility; (4) grant a senior high school degree to Paola; (5) institutionalize an official day against sexual violence in schools; (6) implement policies to prevent harassment and sexual violence within schools as well as protocols to investigate cases of harassment and sexual violence within schools and to protect victims and witnesses; (7) provide comprehensive monetary reparations to Paola’s family; and (8) submit a progress report to the Court within one year.

It is hoped that this important first decision will raise awareness and prompt important reforms to protect children and teenagers from sexual violence in Ecuador and throughout the Americas.

RELEVANT RESOURCES:
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Paola Guzmán Albarracín and Family Members v. Ecuador (Paola Guzmán Albarracín y familiares v. Ecuador). Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Caso 12.678, Audiencia en espanol 19 Oct 2015. Informe 2018 (en espanol). Merits Report in English, 2018.

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Paola del Rosario Guzmán Albarracín et al v. Ecuador, Case C No. 405 (June 24, 2020) Public hearing Jan 28, 2020. Resolución of 27 Jan. 2020. Sentencia en espanol, 24 June, 2020. Case comment in English.

“First standards for protection from sexual violence in schools: Inter-American Court of Human Rights – Guzmán Albarracín et al v. Ecuador,”  by Esteban Vallejo Toledo, Case Comment (10 pages)
______________
Compiled by: the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca.   See Program website for our Publications,  Information resources, and Reprohealthlaw Commentaries Series.  TO JOIN THE REPROHEALTHLAW BLOG: enter your email address in the upper right corner of our blog, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – April/May 2020

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates bi-monthly by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS
[Ecuador] Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Caso Guzmán Albarracín y otros Vs. Ecuador. Decision (January 27 2020) against sexual abuse in educational system. Decision online. 8-hour Public hearing, Jan. 28, 2020.  Guardian newspaper report  

CASEBOOKS
[India] Securing Reproductive Justice in India: A Casebook, ed. Mrinal Satish, Aparna Chandra, and Payal K. Shah, (New York: Center for Reproductive Rights, 2019) 520-page book/chapters online.

[United States] Feminist Judgments: Reproductive Justice Rewritten, ed. Kimberly Mutcherson, Feminist Judgment Series: Rewritten Judicial Opinions. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020). Institutional access.

SCHOLARSHIP
“Abortion in the context of COVID-19: a human rights imperative,” by Jaime Todd-Gher & Payal K Shah (2020) Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters, 28.1 Article online.

[abortion, India] “Reimagining Reproductive Rights Jurisprudence in India: Reflections on the Recent Decisions on Privacy and Gender Equality from the Supreme Court of India,” by Dipika Jain and Payal Shah. Columbia Journal of Gender and Law, 39.2(2020), 1-53. Article online.

[abortion, U.K.] “Decriminalising Abortion in the UK- What Would It Mean?” ed. Sally Sheldon and Kaye Wellings. (Bristol: Policy Press, March 23, 2020) 112 pages, Open Access book.

[abortion laws: Uruguay, South Africa] “Abortion, health and gender stereotypes: a critical analysis of the Uruguayan and South African abortion laws through the lens of human rights,” by Lucia Berro Pizzarossa, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Groningen, 2019. 304 pages. Complete thesis. Abstract.

[conscience, Europe] “Conscientious Objection under the European Convention on Human Rights: The Ugly Duckling of a Flightless Jurisprudence,” by Stijn Smet, in The European Court of Human Rights and the Freedom of Religion or Belief: The 25 Years since Kokkinakis, ed. Jeroen Temperman, T. Jeremy Gunn and Malcolm D. Evans (Brill, 2019) 282–306. Institutional access.

[conscience, Italy] “The impact of gynecologists’ conscientious objection on abortion access,” by Tommaso Autorino, Francesco Mattioli e Letizia Mencarini,  Social Science Research 87 (March, 2020): 102403  16-pages, Institutional access.

Conscientious Objection / The Right to Conscience – annotated bibliography, updated March 17, 2020. Download here.

Human Rights Quarterly is freely available online during the COVID-19 pandemic.  All issues.

US-focused news, resources, and legal developments are available  on Repro Rights Prof Blog. View or subscribe.

WEBINAR:
“COVID-19: What implications for SRHR globally?” by Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters, webinar March 27, 2020. 100-minute video.

JOBS
University of Toronto, Faculty of Law @UTLaw seeks new Director, International Human Rights Program. Apply by June 17, 2020. Details and application information.

Links to employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here.
______________
Compiled by: the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca.   See Program website for our Publications,  Information resources, and Reprohealthlaw Commentaries Series.  TO JOIN THE REPROHEALTHLAW BLOG: enter your email address in the upper right corner of our blog, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

Inter-American Repro Rights Reparations – thesis by Ciara O’Connell

Congratulations to Dr. Ciara O’Connell, now a Research Fellow at the Law School of Trinity College Dublin, whose 2017 doctoral thesis from the University of Sussex is now freely accessible online. We are pleased to circulate her abstract, into which we have inserted {in curly brackets} her introductions to the three Inter-American cases she analyzed.

Ciara O’Connell, “Women’s Reproductive Rights: Repairing Gender-Based harm in the Inter-American System of Human Rights,” PhD diss., University of Sussex, U.K., School of Law, Politics and Sociology, March 2017. Doctoral thesis online.

This thesis examines women’s reproductive rights litigation before the Inter-American System of Human Rights and determines how the Inter-American System can more effectively take account of, and repair, harms specific to women in reproductive rights cases. It builds upon a growing body of literature on women’s rights in the Inter-American System, and employs feminist socio-legal methodologies to identify the structural obstacles which cause violations of women’s reproductive rights, and to challenge the gap between gender-based rhetoric and reparation in women’s reproductive rights cases. The thesis centres around three specific cases. These cases are critically examined using the Holistic Gender Approach to Reparations developed by Ruth Rubio-Marín and Clara Sandoval. In applying this Approach to the case studies, it is possible to determine how, to what extent and to what effect, each reproductive rights case incorporates gendered harm in its reparation design.

{The cases selected for this research project are emblematic in nature, and represent violations of women’s reproductive rights on a massive scale. The first case study examines María Mamerita Mestanza Chávez v. Peru, which was a Friendly Settlement Agreement. This case remains open before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and was selected because it addressed the coercive sterilization of thousands of Peruvian women, and because the Agreement included an analysis, albeit limited, of socio-cultural discrimination as a cause of women’s reproductive rights violations.
The second case, Paulina del Carmen Jacinto Ramírez v. Mexico, was also a Friendly Settlement Agreement, but in this case the State and the victim reached an agreement before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights formally admitted the case. The case was an abortion rights case that highlights the restrictions women and girls face when attempting to access their legal rights to abortion services. The Inter-American Commission closed this case, despite the fact that the State of Mexico failed to comply with all of the measures of the Friendly Settlement Agreement. The analysis conducted of each of these Agreements highlights the potential of the Friendly Settlement Agreement mechanism to transform the reproductive lives of women through gender-based reparations.
The final case, Artavia Murillo et al. v. Costa Rica, was selected for analysis because it is, at this point, the Inter-American System’s only binding reproductive rights judgment, and as such, it is the first glimpse into the Inter-American Court’s approach to repairing gender-based
harm in a reproductive rights case. This case examined the right to in vitro fertilization for heterosexual married couples in Costa Rica, and is especially significant because the Inter-American Court expanded the definition of reproductive health, and included an analysis of the disproportionate impact of gender stereotyping on the lives of women.}
(pp. 8-9)

This research utilizes doctrinal and empirical research methods to draw conclusions about how the Inter-American System and members of civil society such as women’s rights organizations and litigators can expand upon and improve the Inter-American System’s approach to repairing and eliminating violations of women’s reproductive rights. Through information gathered from interviews with actors familiar with the case studies and the Inter-American System, this thesis determines a number of strategies to improve the transformative potential of reparations issued by the Inter-American Commission and Court. These strategies, when combined with the Holistic Gender Approach to Reparations, establish the foundation on which to develop a “gender reparations tradition” within reproductive rights litigation before the Inter-American System of Human Rights.

The entire thesis (272 pages, PDF) can be downloaded here: Doctoral thesis.

Related Resources:

Ruth Rubio-Marín and Clara Sandoval, “Engendering the Reparations Jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights: The Promise of the ‘Cotton Field’ Judgment” (2011) 33:4 Human Rights Quarterly 1062-1091. English PDF.

“Human Rights to In Vitro Fertilization” by Fernando Zegers-Hochschild, Bernard M. Dickens and Sandra Dughman-Manzur, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 123 (2013) 86–89. English PDF. Texto y PDF en Español

Gender Stereotyping: Transnational Legal Perspectives, by Rebecca J. Cook and Simone Cusack (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010). About the book. Spanish edition (311 pages) PDF

______________
Compiled by: the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca.   See Program website for our Publications,  Information resources, and Reprohealthlaw Commentaries Series.  TO JOIN THE REPROHEALTHLAW BLOG: enter your email address in the upper right corner of our blog, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

Human rights impact of gender stereotyping in reproductive health care

Congratulations and thanks to Ciara O’Connell of the University of Pretoria’s Centre for Human Rights, and Christina Zampas,  a Fellow in the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program of the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law, whose co-authored article was recently published in the International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics:

“The human rights impact of gender stereotyping in the context of reproductive health care,” by Ciara O’Connell and Christina Zampas,  International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 144 (2019):  116–121.  PDF online here.

Abstract:
Gender stereotypes surrounding women’s reproductive health impede women’s access to essential reproductive healthcare and contribute to inequality more generally. Stereotyping in healthcare settings impedes women’s access to contraceptive information, services, and induced abortion, and lead to involuntary interventions in the context of sterilization. Decisions by human rights monitoring bodies, such as the Inter‐American Court of Human Rights’ case, IV v. Bolivia, which was a case concerned with the involuntary sterilization of a woman during childbirth, highlight how stereotypes in the context of providing health care can operate to strip women of their agency and decision‐making authority, deny them their right to informed consent, reinforce gender hierarchies and violate their reproductive rights. In the present article, IV v. Bolivia is examined as a case study with the objective being to highlight how, in the context of coercive sterilization, human rights law has been used to advance legal and ethical guidelines, including the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics’ (FIGO) own guidelines, on gender stereotyping and reproductive healthcare. The Inter‐American Court’s judgment in IV v. Bolivia illustrates the important role FIGO’s guidance can play in shaping human rights standards and provides guidance on the service provider’s role and responsibility in eliminating gender stereotypes and upholding and fulfilling human rights.

KEYWORDS

Ethical standards; FIGO guidelines; Forced sterilization; Human rights; Human rights law;  Informed consent; Inter-American Court of Human Rights; Stereotypes.

The published article is online here.

__________________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

 

REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – Feb. 2017

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates monthly by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS:

AB and Surrogacy Advisory Group v. the Minister of Social Development (Centre for Child Law as Amicus Curiae)  CCT 155/15, decided November 29, 2016 (Constitutional Court of South Africa).  Genetic link to one parent is required, and constitutional.   Surrogacy decision.   Summary by Ronaldah Lerato Karabo Ozah.

CALLS:

Meeting: INROADS (International Network for the Reduction of Abortion Discrimination and Stigma), African regional members’ gathering in Lusaka, Zambia, 29-30 May 2017.  Free membership. Free registration.   Financial support for travel expenses: apply by Wed March 8, 2017.

CFP: Sexual and reproductive health and rights in humanitarian crises, especially essays re heightened risk and vulnerability, interventions and responses, and legal and policy issues, for Reproductive Health Matters 26:51.   Submit by May 31, 2017. Call for papers.

Call for volunteer experts in sexual and reproductive health rights to review and validate country-specific data for the “National Sexual Rights Law and Policy Database.” Contact person and Countries where expertise needed.   About the database.    About the Sexual Rights Initiative.

RESOURCES
[abortion law] “Regulating Abortion: Dissensus and the Politics of Rights”  Social and Legal Studies: an international journal, 25.6 (2016): 6-166. Online for institutional subscribers.
— Introduction, by editor Siobhan Mullally
— The Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013: Suicide, Dignity and the Irish Discourse on Abortion, by Clare Murray
— Gender in Constitutional Discourses on Abortion: Looking at Spain from a Comparative Perspective, by Blanca Rodríguez-Ruiz
— Advocating Abortion Rights in Northern Ireland: Local and Global Tensions, by Catherine O’Rourke
— Killing ‘Unborn Children’? The Catholic Church and Abortion Law in Poland Since 1989, by Dorota Szelewa
— Abortion Rights as Human Rights, by Rachel Rebouché
–Talking about Abortion [in the U.S.], by Carol Sanger
 Online for institutional subscribers.

[abortion – Ireland]  “Fatal Fetal Abnormality, Irish Constitutional Law and Mellet v. Ireland,” by Fiona de Londras, Medical Law Review (2016) 24 (4): 591-607.  Article – 17 pages.

[abortion – Ireland]  “Invisible Women:  Ireland and the Fight to Access Safe and Legal Abortion,” by Chiara Cosentino, Medicina nei Secoli Arte e Scienza (Journal of History of Medicine) 28/2 (2016) 413-434.  Online for institutional subscribers.

[African court decisions]  Legal Grounds:  Reproductive and Sexual Rights in Sub-Saharan African Courts, Volume III:  54 African court cases summarized and analyzed by Godfrey Kangaude, Onyema Afulukwe, Guy-Fleury Ntwari, et. al (Pretoria University Law Press (PULP), 2017) 228 pages from PULP.   Overview including previous volumes.

[conscientious objection] “Conscientious objection to abortion provision: Why context matters” by Laura Florence Harris, Jodi Halpern, Ndola Prata, Wendy Chavkin, Caitlin Gerdts,  Global Public Health 12 September 2016; Online for institutional subscribers

[conscientious objection] “Freedom of Conscience, Medical Practitioners and Abortion in South Africa,” by  Shaun Alberto de Freitas, International Journal for Religious Freedom, 4.1 (2011) Abstract and Article

“Conscience and Agent-Integrity: A Defence of Conscience-Based Exemptions in the Healthcare Context” by Mary Neal and Sara Fovargue,  Medical Law Review  (2016) 24 (4): 544-570. Online for institutional subscribers.

Conscientious Objection and Conscientious Commitment – publications by Bernard M. Dickens et al., and recommended reading.  Conscientious Objection publications

[embryos] The Use and Disposal of Stored Embryos, by Bernard M. Dickens.  International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 134 (2016) 114–117. Abstract and Article.

[Inter-American Human Rights] “Women’s Reproductive Rights and Reparations: Lessons from the Inter-American System of Human Rights,” by Ciara O’Connell, in Inter-American Human Rights Network, Moving Beyond the Good, the Bad and the Ugly: What to Learn From International Human Rights Systems?” Ghent, Belgium (29-30 January 2016). Conference paper.

[Uruguay model] “Reducing Maternal Mortality by Preventing Unsafe Abortion: The Uruguayan Experience.” ed. Anibal Faúndes,  International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 134, Sup 1 (Aug 2016). Articles include surveys before and after legalization, reduction in maternal deaths, role of medical abortion, barriers of conscientious objection and replication of the model in Buenos Aires province, Argentina.  IJGO Supplement

US-focused news, resources, and legal developments are available on Repro Rights Prof Blog.  View or subscribe.

NEWS

Abortion News Without the Stigma: breaking news on abortion rights.  New website tool

[Canada] “Mifegymiso” – abortion pill now available to Canadian women  Newspaper article

[Sicily, Italy] Valentina Milluzzo, aged 32, 5 months pregnant with twins when she miscarried, fell ill and died from sepsis.  Her death has reignited debate about the high number of gynaecologists and obstetricians who refuse to provide abortions.   Guardian newspaper.  Article by Elizabeth Canitano, gynecologist from “Vita di Donna” (Lives of Women)

JOBS

Links to other employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here

______________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – December 2016

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates monthly by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS

African LGBT advocacy rulings, 2014-2016   Overview by Godfrey Kangaude
—-[Botswana] Attorney General of Botswana v. Thuto Rammoge & 19 Others  [2016] CACGB-128-14 (Botswana, Court of Appeal at Gaborone).  [Appeal against LGBT organization registration dismissed]   Decision online.  Case summary for Legal Grounds III.
—-[Kenya] Eric Gitari v. Non-Governmental Organizations Co-Ordination Board & 4 Others, [2015] eKLR, Petition No. 440 of 2013  (Kenya, High Court at Nairobi).  [LGBT organizations can be registered.]  Decision online.   Case summary and analysis for Legal Grounds III.
—-[Kenya] Republic v. Non-Governmental Organizations Co-ordination Board & another ex-parte Transgender Education and Advocacy & 3 Others [2014] eKLR, JR Miscellaneous Application No. 308a of 2013 (Kenya, High Court). [Transgender organization can be registered].   Decision online.  Case summary and analysis for Legal Grounds III.
—-[Zambia] People v. Paul Kasonkomona [2015] HPA/53/2014  (Zambia, High Court).[Freedom of expression: HIV/LGBT activist acquitted for remarks made on television.]   Decisions and documents online.  Case summary and analysis for Legal Grounds III.

[Belize – homosexuality]:  Caleb Orozco v Attorney General of Belize et al., Claim No. 668 of 2010 (Supreme Court of Belize)  August 10, 2016. [First-ever successful court challenge to a Caribbean anti-sodomy law.]   38-page Judgment online.   News report.  Government won’t appeal ruling.   Press release by Caleb Orozco of UNIBAM.

[Brazil – abortion]  Habeas Corpus n. 124.306 – judged by 1^st Panel of the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court on November 29, 2016.  Summary in English by Marta Machado.   Sexuality Policy Watch comment.  English news report.  Summary in Portuguese.     Leading vote by Judge Luis Roberto Barroso in Portuguese.  Comment in Portuguese by Debora Diniz

[Brazil – zika]  Direct Action of Unconstitutionality  n. 5581 (Supreme Court of Brazil).  Zika abortion decision  delayed until early 2017.  Summary of the claim in Portuguese.

[Chile – obstetric violence against prisoner]  Lorenza Cayuhán Llebul s/amparo, Rol 92.795-2010 (Supreme Court of Chile). December 1, 2016.    Decision online in Spanish.     English summary by Carlos Herrera.

[Kenya – homosexuality] C.O.L. & G.M.N. v. Resident Magistrate Kwale Court & Others, Petition No. 51 of 2015 (Kenya, High Court –Constitutional and Judicial Review Division).  [Court allowed medical examinations including anal examinations to prove crime of homosexuality].  Decision online.     Case summary and analysis for Legal Grounds III.

[South Africa: surrogacy]  AB and Another v Minister of Social Development (CCT155/15) [2016] ZACC 43 (29 November 2016)  Constitutional Court of South Africa.  [At least one parent must donate sperm or eggs for a surrogacy agreement to be legal in South Africa]  Decision online.    News Report

SCHOLARSHIP

[abortion, health rights] “Adjudicating Health-Related Rights: Proposed Considerations for the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and Other Supra-National Tribunals,” by Alicia Ely Yamin and Angela Duger, Chicago Journal of International Law 17.1 (Summer 2016): 80-120.  Abstract and Article.

[Brazil] – [Zika: from Brazilian backlands to global threat] Zika: Do Sertão nordestino à ameaça global  by  Debora Diniz  (Rio de Janeiro:  Civilização Brasileira, 2016).  Forthcoming in English from Zed Books in September 2017, this book analyses scientific discoveries regarding Zika in Brazil as well as the impact of the epidemic on poor black and brown women’s lives.  Portuguese: Book or e-book.  Sinopse.  A história contada.
—Related resources in English:”The Zika Virus and Brazilian Women’s Right to Choose,” op/ed by Debora Diniz, February 8, 2016.  New York Times editorial.  “Zika”  30 minute April 2016 documentary with English subtitles;  “Zika: More than a health issue“ (Dec 1, 2016)   53-minute  TV interview with English subtitles.  “Zika emergency pushes women to challenge Brazilian abortion law”  Guardian news report.

[Brazil – abortion law] “Social Movements and Constitutional Politics in Latin America: Reconfiguring Alliances, Framings and Legal Opportunities in the Judicialization of Abortion Rights in Brazil” by Alba Ruibal. Contemporary Social Science 10:4 (October 18, 2016): 375-385. Abstract and article.   Other articles on strategic litigation in Latin America.

[Canada – mifepristone]  “Requiring physicians to dispense mifepristone:  an unnecessary limit on safety and access to medical abortion,” by Wendy V. Norman and Judith A. Soon, forthcoming in Canadian Medical Association Journal, Early release October 18, 2016 to institutional subscribers.   Summarized in “Abortion pill dispensing by doctors and not pharmacists could hinder access … [and] entrench inequity” CBC News report.

[obstetric violence] International Human Rights and the Mistreatment of Women during Childbirth, by Rajat Khosla, Christina Zampas, Joshua P. Vogel, Meghan A. Bohren, Mindy Roseman, and Joanna N. Erdman.  Health and Human Rights Journal (in press)  Abstract and Full Text.

[reproductive rights] ” ‘Woman’ in the European Human Rights System:  How is the reproductive rights jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights constructing narratives of women’s citizenship?” by  Liiri Oja and Alicia Ely Yamin in Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 32.1 (2016): 62-95.   Abstract and Article.

[Uruguay] “Reform of abortion law in Uruguay: context, process and lessons learned,” by Susan Wood, Lilián Abracinskas, Sonia Corrêa, and Mario Pecheny, Reproductive Health Matters, online since December 8, 2016. Abstract and Article.

US-focused news, resources, and legal developments are available on Repro Rights Prof Blog.  View or subscribe.

NEWS

[Mexico] Excerpts from the Symbolic Tribunal on Maternal Mortality and Obstetric Violence, (published by GIRE, Oct 28, 2016).   5-minute film.

[Spain – conscientious objection]  Galician health system ordered to compensate woman – Forced travel to Madrid for late-term abortion of doomed fetus cost woman her uterus, nearly her life.  News report in English.  Noticias en español.

[Uruguay Model] “From Uruguay, a model for making abortion safer” [misoprostol – harm reduction instruction method spreading to restrictive jurisdictions, e.g. Uganda and Tanzania.   New York Times editorial.   Relevant 2011 article: Access to Information on Safe abortion, by Joanna Erdman.

JOBS

Links to other employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here

______________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

Forced sterilization case against Bolivia: expert testimony by Christina Zampas

 

I.V. v Bolivia is the first case the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has heard on informed consent to medical treatment and the first case alleging forced sterilization. It is only the second reproductive rights case considered by this Court.

This case concerned the involuntary sterilization in 2000 of an immigrant woman from Peru in a public hospital in Bolivia during a caesarean section.  The doctors decided that a future pregnancy would be dangerous for I.V. and performed a tubal ligation, claiming that this was necessary in order to prevent a future pregnancy. They also noted that they had obtained I.V.’s consent while on the operating table. When I.V. learned that she had been sterilized she felt devastated, and has been seeking justice ever since.

In 2015, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights referred this case to the Inter-American Court for a decision, after having concluded that Bolivia was responsible for the violation of Articles 5.1, 8.1, 11.2, 13, 17, and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights, and Article 7 of the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence against Women (Convention of Belém do Pará). The Commission’s report is online here.

Christina Zampas, a Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Fellow at the University of Toronto’s International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, presented oral expert testimony before the Court during its hearing on 2 May 2016 in San Jose, Costa Rica. Christina Zampas has studied forced sterilization issues since 2002, when at the Center for Reproductive Rights, she worked with the Center for Civil and Human Rights (Poradňa), Slovakia, to document the forced sterilization of Roma women in Slovakia, and co-authored Body and Soul: forced sterilization and other assaults on Roma reproductive freedom in Slovakia, online here.   Since then, she has engaged in advocacy and litigation before UN and regional human rights and intergovernmental bodies, calling for accountability on the issue. She has also co-chaired Open Society Foundation’s Working Group on Sterilization and has been instrumental in the development of health and medical association standards on the topic, including the World Health Organization (WHO) UN Inter Agency statement on forced and coerced sterilization (2014) online here, and the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics’  guidelines on female sterilization (2011), pages 122-126.

In her recent testimony before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Zampas focused on international and regional human rights standards in relation to informed consent to medical care generally, and to sterilization specifically.  In her presentation, she explained United Nations and European Court of Human Rights standards and case law on the subject, including on the numerous cases against Slovakia concerning forced sterilization of Roma women, as well as international health and ethical standards.  She emphasized that international and regional health and human rights standards are clear: sterilization for prevention of future pregnancy cannot be justified on grounds of medical emergency, which would permit departure from the general principle of informed consent.  Even if a future pregnancy might endanger a person’s life or health, alternative contraceptive methods can be used to ensure that the individual does not become pregnant immediately. The individual must be given the time and information needed to make an informed choice about sterilization. The provision of information, counseling and sterilization under the stressful conditions of childbirth are not only a violation of the right to information but also violate the right to privacy, physical integrity and human dignity and are a gross disregard for an individual’s autonomy, rising to the level of inhuman and degrading treatment.

Zampas’s testimony also urged the Court to address the gender stereotypes and the intersectionality of gender with other characteristics, such as race and ethnicity, disability, HIV and migrant status, often underlying the practice. These stereotypes deem women incapable of making rational decisions about their reproductive capacity, stripping them of decision-making regarding their own bodies and lives. They assume that men and people in positions of authority—such as doctors who perform medical procedures, male family members, or society at large—are better positioned to make decisions for women. Human rights bodies have recognized the power imbalances in doctor-patient relationships and how this can lead to serious abuses, including in the use of the medical necessity doctrine. She noted that such notions, prevalent in society, can lead to violations of the right to be free from discrimination.

Zampas’s testimony set forth potential individual and structural (general) remedies, including compensation and an apology, law and policy reform that is in line with human rights standards, training and education of all health care staff, adoption of ethical guidelines to address informed consent and gender stereotyping, and monitoring of public and private health centers to ensure accountability, and guarantee an effective remedy when violations do occur.

Amicus briefs in this case were filed by Women’s Link Worldwide and the Allard K. Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic, Yale Law School, Ciara O’Connell and Diana Guarinzo-Peralata at University of Sussex, and the Human Rights and Gender Justice Clinic at CUNY Law School and Women Enabled International. Expert written testimony was provided by Luisa Cabal, in her capacity as a lawyer and expert on sexual and reproductive health and rights, and Ana G. Cepin, MD, Fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

The decision is expected within the next year.

Relevant publications:

Christina Zampas is co-author with Adriana Lamačková, a former LLM student in the program, of “Forced and Coerced Sterilization of Women in Europe,” International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics (2011), Forced and Coerced Sterilization.

Sterilization: list of program resources, including articles, theses, and further reading .   Sterilization resources.

Ethical and Legal Issues in Reproductive and Sexual Health, written or edited by Rebecca Cook and Bernard Dickens, published in the International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics – Ethical/Legal articles  online.