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.

USA: Abortion Rights after the Dobbs decision

Congratulations and thanks to Martha F. Davis, University Distinguished Professor of Law at Northeastern University School of Law in Boston, MA, whose recently published contribution to the Ethical and Legal Issues in Reproductive Health section of the International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics discusses how the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, has opened the door to new abortion restrictions, complicating care and threatening providers. We are pleased to circulate the following abstract:

Martha F. Davis “The state of abortion rights in the US,”  International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 159.1 (October 2022): 324-329.  PDF at Wiley online.  Submitted text at SSRN.

Abstract: In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), the US Supreme Court reversed longstanding court precedents that protected abortion as a fundamental right. Without that federal baseline, many states are passing restrictive laws that threaten providers and complicate patient care. The legal issues raised by these state restrictions are complex, including questions such as the ex-territorial application of state restrictions and federal authority to regulate access to medication abortion. Meanwhile, providers who risk criminal or civil penalties for violating these laws may be deterred from providing services to those seeking care, including for ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages. State variations are dramatic, with some states taking steps to strengthen their abortion protections while others are eliminating abortion access even in situations of rape or incest. As dire as these developments are, it is hoped that they can serve as a wake-up call heard worldwide, to avoid complacency and maintain vigilance to protect abortion rights.

RELATED RESOURCES:

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, No. 19-1392, 597 U.S. _ (2022) (Supreme Court of the United States), June 24, 2022  [which held that the Constitution of the United States does not confer a right to abortion]. Decision online.  Case summary by CRR.   

Brief of International and Comparative Legal Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support of Respondents. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Amicus brief by Martha Davis et al. 

Brief of European Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support of the Respondents, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Amicus brief by European Law Professors.

Brief of United Nations Mandate Holders As Amici Curiae in Support of the Respondents, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Amicus brief of United Nations Mandate Holders.

[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. Soon after the Dobbs decision in the U.S., France opened debate to formally include the right to abortion in the French Constitution with the filing of a constitutional bill, a pioneering historic opportunity to open the constitutional text to reproductive questions.

Ethical and Legal Issues in Reproductive Health – more than 100 other concise articles 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 the 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.

Malawi’s first abortion ruling sheds light on law and hospital norms

Many thanks to legal scholars Lewis Bande, Ph.D, and Godfrey Kangaude, LL.D., for submitting a learned commentary on the High Court of Malawi’s first ever “Ruling on a judicial review application to access safe abortion,” decided June 15, 2021. Their 6-page summary and analysis of this decision has just been published at this link, among the online updates to the third volume of case summaries, Legal Grounds: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in Sub-Saharan African Courts. Here is a brief overview of their comments on the following case:

The State (On the Application by HM (Guardian) on behalf of CM (Minor) vs The Hospital Director of Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital & The Minister of Health: Judicial Review Cause Number 03 of 2021 (unreported) (High Court of Malawi, Zomba District Registry) Decision of 15 June 2021. Decision on Google drive. (Download:) Legal Brief by Lewis Bande and Godfrey Kangaude. 

The case centres upon a minor known as “C.M.,” a 15-year-old girl who had been “defiled,” impregnated and abandoned by a married man.  She claimed to have been refused termination of pregnancy at the Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital’s facility for survivors of sexual abuse. There, healthcare providers told her that abortion is illegal in Malawi.  From legal counsel, the girl’s family later learned that abortion is indeed illegal under the antiquated Malawi Penal Code of 1930, but prosecution can be avoided under Section 243, which provides:

A person is not criminally responsible for performing in good faith and with reasonable care and skill a surgical operation upon any person for his benefit, or upon an unborn child for the preservation of the mother’s life, if the performance of the operation is reasonable, having regard to the patient’s state at the time, and to all the circumstances of the case.

Healthcare providers routinely interpret this Section of the law restrictively, excluding victims of defilement or sexual assault. In this context, abortion requests and refusals normally happen orally and are not usually recorded in medical records.

The Court’s Ruling: The Court rejected the application for judicial review on the sole ground that there was no evidence that the First Defendant, as director of a public hospital, was responsible for any “decision” that could be judicially reviewed. As Bande and Kangaude observe, the Court cannot be faulted for this ruling. However, the Court proceeded to speculate that this application would probably have failed on other grounds that seem debatable. The Court’s ruling, they write, shows room for further litigation on the interpretation of the current law for girls and women who have been sexually assaulted.  In the ruling, the Court used language that suggests that it recognizes that preservation of a woman’s life entails preserving her mental and physical health. This seems progressive on the part of Court, as it conforms with the consensus in the human rights discourse that the rights to health and life are closely related.   

Significance: Although permission for judicial review was denied, this ruling is a milestone, marking the very first instance that the High Court of Malawi has acknowledged and discussed the position that abortion can be lawfully performed in Malawi. The ruling also shows that defiled or raped Malawian girls and women are being excluded from safe abortion, and they are forced to keep pregnancies that are a result of sexual assault because the Section 243 exception is interpreted restrictively by health providers. The Second Defendant in this case was, appropriately, the Minister of Health, because decisions to refuse terminations of pregnancy would be based on policies for which the Health Minister is responsible.

The Malawi Law Commission’s 2015 review of the colonial abortion law proposed liberal changes to the law which, if implemented, would eventually expand access to safe abortion.[1] Rather than waiting for law reform, the Ministry of Health should immediately provide defiled girls and rape victims with access to safe abortion by clarifying the application of the existing abortion law. In the Health Ministry’s current Standards and Guidelines for Post Abortion Care (2020)[3], section 1.2, it remains unclear whether victims of sexual violence can access safe terminations legally. Professional guidelines should clarify that any girl or woman who has been raped or defiled should have an option to terminate the pregnancy, and without being subjected to burdensome requirements such as proving severe depression or suicidal ideation. Meanwhile, health advocates should continue to champion law reforms that respect Malawi’s constitutional and international obligations toward girls and women.

Related Resources:

[1]   Malawi Law Commission. Report of the Law Commission on the review of the law on abortion (Penal Code CAP.7:01 of the Laws of Malawi). Lilongwe: Malawi Law Commission; 2015. Report online.

 [2] See also: Godfrey Dalitso Kangaude and Chisale Mhango, “The Duty to make abortion law transparent: A Malawi case study” International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 143.3 (Dec. 2018): 409–413, Published Version at IJGO.  Submitted text online at SSRN.

[3] Ministry of Health, Malawi, Standards and Guidelines for Post Abortion Care 2020.   43-page document. PAC Guidelines.

(Download:) Legal Brief by Lewis Bande and Godfrey Kangaude. 

________
Compiled by the Coordinator of 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.

Kenya: “JMM” decision: Abortion legal after rape; Restore training guidelines

Many thanks to Benson Chakaya, a D.Phil Candidate and M.Phil Graduate in the LL.M./M.Phil (Sexual & Reproductive Rights in Africa) degree program at the Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria.  He also serves as National Coordinator for Right Here Right Now Kenya ​hosted by the ​Family Health Options Kenya and formerly worked with the Network of African National Human Rights Institutions.  His full case summary and comment has been added to the online update of Legal Grounds III: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in Sub-Saharan African Courts.

We also thank Bernard Dickens, Professor Emeritus of Health Law and Policy at the University of Toronto, co-editor and author of Abortion Law in Transnational Perspective: Cases and Controversies (2014), who provided a concise overview of this important decision:

Federation of Women Lawyers (Fida – Kenya) & 3 others v Attorney General & 2 others [2019] eKLR, Petition No. 266 of 2015, Decision of June 12, 2019. (High Court of Kenya at Nairobi, Constitutional and Human Rights Division)
Decision online. Case Comment by Benson Chakaya (Download PDF).

This decision followed the death from consequences of unsafe abortion of a 14-year-old rape victim. The Federation of Women Lawyers and other petitioners challenged the constitutionality of decisions of the Director of Medical Services (DMS) of the Ministry of Health, who was also Registrar of the Kenya Medical Practitioners and Dentists Board regulating medical practice and institutions, to withdraw the Ministry’s 2012 Standards and Guidelines for Reducing Morbidity and Mortality from Unsafe Abortion in Kenya, and National Training Curriculum for the Management of Unintended, Risky and Unplanned Pregnancy.

The DMS had justified these withdrawals on the claim that “the only law in force with respect to abortion is the Penal Code” (para. 366), which provides in section 158 that anyone who “with intent to procure the miscarriage of a woman…unlawfully administers to her or causes her to take any poison or other noxious thing, or uses any force of any kind, or uses any other means whatever, is guilty of a felony…”. The DMS claimed that it was unlawful to set standards and training for unlawful procedures, and warned that offenders faced legal and professional disciplinary sanctions. The DMS cited in support Article 26(4) of the Kenyan Constitution, that “Abortion is not permitted unless, in the opinion of a trained health professional, there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger, or if permitted by any other written law”.

However, the Court rejected DMS and other respondents’ restrictive arguments that “trained health professional” meant only a registered physician, that “health” meant only physical health, and their disregard of other written law. The Article 26(4) exception was interpreted liberally to accommodate midwives, nurses and other trained health service providers, and psychological and mental health indications for abortion. The Court widely reviewed U.S., U.K. and Canadian jurisprudence and international human rights treaties adopted by Kenya, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (the Maputo Protocol), to nullify the DMS withdrawals as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional, and declare abortion of pregnancy resulting from rape or defilement that “poses a danger to the life or the health (physical, mental and social well-being)” of the victim to fall within the exception provided by Article 26(4) of the Constitution. The respondents were ordered to pay Ksh.3,000,000 (about US $27,445) “for the physical, psychological, emotional and mental anguish, stress, pain, suffering and death of [the rape victim] occasioned by respondents violation “of her constitutional rights to the required standard of indicated trained medical care.” (para. 415).

The full decision (69 pages) is online here.
Case summary (9 pages) by Benson Chakaya can be downloaded here (PDF)

RELEVANT RESOURCE:
Legal Grounds III: Reproductive and Sexual Health in Sub-Saharan African Courts contains summaries and comments on 60+ court decisions, 2008-present
Online edition with updates and links to decisions.
Published books – free PDF download: Legal Grounds I (2005), Legal Grounds II (2008), Legal Grounds III (2017).
______________
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.

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.

Ob-Gyn duties to Refugees and migrants

Congratulations to Prof. Margit Endler and colleagues on the Committee for Human Rights, Refugees and Violence Against Women of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO), who recently published an article in the “Ethical and Legal Issues in Reproductive Health” section of the International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

“Sexual and reproductive health and rights of refugee and migrant women: gynecologists’ and obstetricians’ responsibilities,” by Margit Endler, Taghreed Al Haidari, Sameena Chowdhury, Jan Christilaw, Faysal El Kak, Diana Galimberti, Miguel Gutierrez, Atziri Ramirez‐Negrin, Hemantha Senanayake, Rubina Sohail, Marleen Temmerman, and Kristina Gemzell Danielsson, for the FIGO Committee for Human Rights, Refugees and Violence Against Women, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 149.1 (April 2020): 113–119. PDF at Wiley Online.   Abstract and Submitted Text.

Abstract:
Ensuring universal access to sexual and reproductive healthcare services is Target 3.7 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). Refugee and migrant women and children are at particular risk of being forgotten in the global momentum to achieve this target. In this article, we discuss the violations of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) of particular relevance to the refugee and migrant reality. We give context‐specific examples of denial of health services to vulnerable groups; lack of dignity as a barrier to care; the vulnerability of adolescents; child marriage; weaponized rape; gender‐based violence; and sexual trafficking. We discuss rights frameworks and models that are being used in response to these situations, as well as what remains to be done. Specifically, we call for obstetricians and gynecologists to act as individual providers and through their FIGO member societies to protect women’s health and rights in these exposed settings.

The full text of this article can be freely downloaded by anyone for one year: PDF at Wiley Online. 
After that year, researchers who lack institutional access can download:
Submitted Text through SSRN.

Related Resources
Ethical and Legal Issues in Reproductive Health: 90+ concise articles online. _____________
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.

Mexico Supreme Court affirms abortion right for rape victims “Marimar” and “Fernanda”

Congratulations to GIRE (“Grupo de Información en Reproducción Elegida”), the Mexican organization that provided the rape victims with legal support in cases before the Supreme Court of Mexico.  We thank Jennifer Paine of GIRE for writing an English summary of these two significant Mexican decisions.

In April 2018, the Supreme Court of Mexico unanimously voted in favor of two separate cases where a woman or girl who became pregnant due to rape was denied access to a legal abortion:

[Case of “Marimar”] Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Segunda Sala [Supreme Court] 2018,  Amparo en Revisión 601/2017   (Ciudad de Mexico) April 4, 2018.  Decision in Spanish.   Backup copy.

[Case of “Fernanda”]  Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Segunda Sala [Supreme Court] 2018,  Amparo en Revisión 1170/2017  (Ciudad de Mexico) April 18, 2018.  Decision in Spanish.   Press release in Spanish.

Both rulings recognized that the denial of a legal abortion after rape constitutes a violation of reproductive rights.  This is important because abortion after rape is legal in all 32 states in Mexico.  The federal “Victim’s Law” allows a woman or girl, 12 or more years of age, who has suffered sexual assault and become pregnant, to access abortion at any public health center.  Modified in 2016, the content of the law is now taken directly from international treaties.  For example, the law does not require the woman or girl to file a report with the police or receive authorization from the court, nor does it require parental consent for minors over 12 to receive abortion.   In the law, abortion care under these circumstances is defined as “emergency medical services.

The Court used constitutional and international law to support its rulings. The first article of the Mexican Constitution states:

. . . all individuals shall be entitled to the human rights granted by this Constitution and the international treaties signed by the Mexican State, as well as to the guarantees for the protection of these rights. Said human rights shall not be restricted or suspended, except for the cases and under the conditions established by this Constitution itself.

The provisions relating to human rights shall be interpreted according to this Constitution and the international treaties on the subject, working always in favor of the broader protection of people.

Furthermore, Mexico’s Federal Executive Committee must play an important role:

…The Committee should place sufficient emphasis so that the corresponding comprehensive reparations establish guarantees of non-repetition that eradicate the serious human rights violations such as those in the present case, in that all types and levels of authorities should treat requests for the termination of pregnancy after sexual assault effectively, immediately and without objection, privileging the rights of all women who have been victims of cruel and inhuman acts such as sexual assault; these authorities should be aware their action of carrying out the legal termination of pregnancy is derived not only from secondary law, but from the compulsory observance of constitutional mandate.
(=”Fernanda” ruling, AR 1170/2017, pp. 32-33, trans. GIRE)

In international law, the Case of Paulina Ramírez Jacinto against Mexico, which resulted in a friendly settlement agreement before the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights in 2007, undoubtedly supported the conceptualization of the rights that had been violated, given that the facts in both 2018 cases were very similar to Paulina’s experience, especially the denial of a health service that State is obligated to provide.

In addition, this international precedent helped to underline that Mexico has serious problems, for some time now, in complying with its obligations related to abortion services for rape survivors. Even though the legal and normative framework has been improved to eliminate the need for previous reporting of the rape, authorization of parents or guardians, and the time limit for the service, in practice, this framework has not been implemented.

The first case, which GIRE began defending in 2016, was won for a minor known as “Marimar.” Her case represents the first-ever Mexican Supreme Court ruling regarding the denial of a woman’s access to abortion. Abortion had been discussed previously by the Court, but always as an element of a law or policy; this is the first time the Court ruled on a case of a woman’s specific experience of denial of her legal right to abortion.

Marimar’s long road to justice began after she was raped in November 2015 when she was 17 years old. In her efforts to secure a legal abortion, Marimar was forced to confront endless bureaucratic delays, discrimination and unnecessary barriers from authorities, after which she was ultimately denied a legal abortion. Along with GIRE, Marimar and her mother filed a legal stay for the cruel and inhumane treatment to which she was subjected in the hospital. The Collegiate Court in charge of resolving the stay determined that this case was of special relevance and requested Supreme Court review, thus leading to its acceptance by the Supreme Court and the eventual positive ruling.

The second case was for Fernanda, who was raped by an acquaintance and became pregnant in 2016. Fernanda repeatedly requested access to an abortion from the Oaxaca health sector, but the hospital was on strike and did not do anything but acknowledge receipt of her requests. Thus Fernanda, like Marimar, was denied access to abortion care.

Though these rulings are positive, and the two young women received justice, it is important to recognize the physical and emotional turmoil to which the women were subjected by authorities, in total disregard of their legal obligations. It is also important to note that these two cases are not isolated incidents. According to a report from the Executive Commission for Attention to Victims (CEAV), one in four girls in Mexico is sexually assaulted before age 18, and the majority of pregnancies in girls under age 14 are the result of rape.

Still, women and girls who become pregnant as a result of a rape are routinely denied access to legal abortion in the country. According to official data from the National Public Security System, from 2009 to 2016, state public prosecutor offices and the national Public Prosecutor’s Office received 111,413 reports of rape.  There is no reliable data on how many rapes resulted in pregnancy, but the the federal and state health departments report having carried out only 63 legal abortions under this indication during the same period.  (GIRE, Violencia sin interrupción, p. 8)

These two recent rulings are important victories in the fight for reproductive justice in Mexico. With the Supreme Court’s decision, it is now established that a woman or girl’s human rights are violated when she is denied access to a safe and legal abortion after rape. This aligns with United Nations reports condemning lack of access to abortion as a form of torture.  The cases also set a precedent for the entire country, empowering survivors of rape with knowledge that the Supreme Court is on their side.
_________________
Related resources:

Maternity or Punishment:  Criminalization of Abortion in Mexico (GIRE, 2018)  Report in Spanish .

Girls and Women without Justice: Reproductive Rights in Mexico (GIRE 2015)  Report in Spanish

Violence without Interruption (GIRE, 2017).  Report in Spanish

Annotated Bibliographies on Indications for Abortion:
Rape or Incest (English).    Rape or Incest (Spanish)
Fetal anomaly (English).
______________
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 – October 2018

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

Bulgaria:  Constitutional Court declares the Istanbul Convention against violence against women  unconstitutional.  July 27, 2018.  Oxford Human Rights Hub article.

Constitutional Court of Croatia.  Decision of March 2, 2017.  Rješenje Ustavnog Suda Republike Hrvatske, broj: U-I-60/1991 i dr. od 21.veljace 2017.  Decision online in Croatian. Backup copy.  Summary in English from CRR   Croatian Court’s Press release – 11 pages in English.

CALL FOR ABSTRACTS:

Fourth International Congress on Women’s Health and Unsafe abortion (IWAC 2019), February 19-22, 2019, Asia Hotel, Bangkok Thailand  Theme:  “We Trust Women: Universal Access to Safe Abortion.”  Submit abstracts by Nov 15, 2018  Call for Abstracts

SCHOLARSHIP:

Abortion Law in Transnational Perspective: Cases and Controversies, ed. Rebecca Cook, Joanna Erdman and Bernard Dickens (Philadelphia: Univ. Pennsylvania Press, 2014) Now in Paperback.  20% discount code: PH70.  English abstracts.   Spanish edition – abstracts.  Table of Cases in English or Spanish.

[Africa]  “(De)Criminalizing Adolescent Sex: A Rights-Based Assessment of Age of Consent Laws in Eastern and Southern Africa,” by Godfrey Dalitso Kangaude and Ann Skelton,  (peer-reviewed) Sage Open 2018 (Oct-Dec): 1-12.   Article online.

[Brazil – anencephaly – Supreme Court]   “The STF decision on abortion of anencephalic fetus: A Feminist Discourse Analysis” by Lucia Goncalves de Freitas, Alfa, Sao Paulo, 62.1 (2018): 11-33.   Article in English.

[Brazil – obstetric care, maternal mortality /morbidity, Alyne case]  “Implementing international human rights recommendations to improve obstetric care in Brazil,” by Alicia E Yamin, Beatriz Galli and Sandra Valongueiro.   International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 143.1 (October 2018): 114-120.    Download full text PDF now, because Free Access expires in 6 months.    Abstract online in English   For Portuguese abstract, click on :Supporting Information”.  

[Brazil – zika, microcephaly]  BOOK:  Zika: from the Brazilian backlands to a Global Threat (Zed Books, 2017)  in English  and  Portuguese .

[conscience]  “Balancing Freedom of Conscience and Equitable Access,” by Wendy Chavkin, Desiree Abu-Odeh, Catherine Clune-Taylor, Sara Dubow PhD, Michael Ferber and Ilan H. Meyer, American Journal of Public Health 108.11 (Nov 2018): 1487-88.  Article online.

[conscientious objection, Ireland] “Conscientious Objection, Harm Reduction and Abortion Care,”  by Ruth Fletcher, in Mary Donnelly and Claire Murray eds., Ethical and Legal Debates in Irish Healthcare: Confronting Complexities (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2016) pp. 24-40.  Pre-publication version.     Book information. 

[conscientious objection – South Africa “Let’s call ‘conscientious objection’ by its name: Obstruction of access to care and abortion in South Africa,” by Satang Nabaneh, Marion Stevens & Lucía Berro Pizzarossa,  24 October 2018, Oxford Human Rights Hub.

[Forced sterilization] “Gendered Power Relations and Informed Consent: The I.V. v. Bolivia Case,” by Martín Hevia and Andrés Constantin, Health and Human Rights Journal.  Early view of full text.

[Intersex] “Management of intersex newborns: Legal and ethical developments,” by Bernard M. Dickens, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics  143.2 (Nov. 2018): 255–259.  PDF at Wiley online.   Submitted text at SSRN.

[Ireland] “Reproductive Justice in Ireland: A Feminist Analysis of the Neary and Halappanavar Cases,” by Joan McCarthy,  in: Mary Donnelly and Claire Murray, eds., Ethical and Legal Debates in Irish Healthcare: Confronting Complexities (Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 2016).   Submitted Text online.   Book information. 

[Ireland and Britain] “Reproductive rebellions in Britain and the Republic of Ireland: contemporary and past abortion activism and alternative sites of care,” by Ben Kasstan and Sarah Crook, in Feminist Encounters: A Journal of Critical Studies in Culture and Politics, 2.2 (2018):  1-16.  Article online.

Annotated Bibliographies – now available:  Right to Conscience
Fetal anomaly indication for abortion .  Rape or Incest abortion – English.  or Spanish)  Latin America:  Causal violación y/o incesto   (Toronto: International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, 2018).

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 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 – Sept 2018

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

[UN – CEDAW and CRPD] “Guaranteeing sexual and reproductive health and rights for all women, in particular women with disabilities,”   Joint statement by the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), 29 August 2018.  Decriminalize abortion, repeal discriminatory health policies and abortion laws that perpetuate deep-rooted stereotypes and stigma and undermine women’s reproductive autonomy and choice.    PDF online.

CALL FOR PAPERS:

“The Impact of Politics on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights,” for publication in Reproductive Health Matters, May 2019.  Submissions due October 31, 2018.  RHM Call for papers

SCHOLARSHIP:

[abortion law – Brazil]    “Brazilian Supreme Court Public Hearing on the Decriminalization of Abortion:   Antecedents, Contents, Meanings” by Sonia Corrêa  (published by Sexuality Policy Watch, 2018)  27 pages PDF     Direct download.

[abortion law – Brazil]  Testimony by Prof. Rebecca Cook . . .against Unsafe Abortion in the Public Hearing of the Brazilian Supreme Court, caso ADPF 442, Brasilia, August 3, 2018.   English original.    em Portugues do Brasil.   Testimonio – Espanol traducido por CLACAI (Consorcio Latinoamericano contra el aborto inseguro).    Uno otro en Espanol.  

[abortion law – El Salvador] “Physicians’ Challenges under El Salvador’s Criminal Abortion Prohibition,” by Alyson Zureick, Amber Khan, Angeline Chen and Astrid Reyes. forthcoming International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, October2018  Early view PDF.   Submitted text online at SSRN.

[abortion law – Malawi] “The Duty to make abortion law transparent:  A Malawi case study,”  by Godfrey Dalitso Kangaude and Chisale Mhango, forthcoming International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics,     Early view PDF.

Abortion Law in Transnational Perspective: Cases and Controversies, ed. Rebecca Cook, Joanna Erdman and Bernard Dickens (Philadelphia: Univ. Pennsylvania Press, 2014) 20% discount code is PH70.  Abstracts of all 16 chapters.   Spanish edition by FCE/CIDE – 16 abstracts.  Abortion Decisions: Table of Cases in English and Spanish.

[abortion policy] “The Philippines rolls back advancements in the postabortion care policy,” by Melissa Upreti and Jihan Jacob,  International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 142 (August 2018): 255–256.   PDF online.  Submitted text  at SSRN.

[abortion policies] “Access to knowledge and the Global Abortion  Policies Database,”  by Joanna N. Erdman and Brooke Ronald Johnson Jr.  International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, July 2018; 142: 120–124   PDF at Wiley online.   Submitted text at SSRN.

[Africanness, including sexuality],  What is Africanness?: Contesting nativism in culture, race and sexualities, peer-reviewed book by Charles G. Ngwena (Pretoria University Law Press, 2018) 306 pages.  “Part 3: Heterogeneous Sexualities” – chapter abstracts.    Entire book open access at PULP.     Table of Contents.   Overview, Comments from scholars,  PDFs of all chapters.   Podcast on African Rights Talk (2019) 

[Brazil – obstetric care, maternal mortality /morbidity, Alyne case]  “Implementing international human rights recommendations to improve obstetric care in Brazil,” by Alicia E Yamin, Beatriz Galli and Sandra Valongueiro.   International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 143.1 (October 2018): 114-120    Abstract online in English and Portuguese. English PDF for institutional subscribers.

[CEDAW]”The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women” by Rebecca J. Cook and Cusack, Simone Cusack.  In Tara Van Ho and Nigel Rodley, eds, Research Handbook on Human Rights Institutions and Enforcement (Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, Forthcoming).  Submitted text archived online.

[conscience]  Unconscionable: When Providers Deny Abortion Care  Report of the International Women’s Health Coalition, 2018, based on the first global meeting on the topic of “conscientious objection,” held in Montevideo, Uruguay in August 2017.    8-page report.

[intersex, gender] “Management of intersex newborns: Legal and ethical developments,” by Bernard M. Dickens, forthcoming International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2018.   Early View PDF.

[self-managed abortion] “Understandings of self-managed abortion as health inequity, harm reduction and social change,” by Joanna N. Erdman, Kinga Jelinska and Susan Yanow. Forthcoming in Reproductive Health Matters. Early view PDF.

[strategic litigation] Seeking Social Change in the Courts: Tools for Strategic Advocacy, by Mónica Roa with Barbara Klugman (Women’s Link Worldwide, 2018) practical tool for advocates from all social justice fields who are interested in using the courts and understanding “strategic litigation”  160 pages, PDF online..

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHIES:

“The Right to Conscience” – An Annotated Bibliography.   (Toronto: International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program,
Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 2018)  Conscience bibliography

Indications for abortion: new annotated bibliographies:

• Fetal Anomaly:  Annotated Bibliography on legal aspects of fetal anomaly and their implications for counseling, service delivery and abortion laws and policies (Toronto: International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 2018).  Fetal anomaly bibliography
• Rape-related abortion:  Legal and policy dimensions of rape-related abortion services (Court decisions, Treaty resources, policy guidance and publications. ) (Toronto: International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 2018).  Rape or Incest bibliography 
  
• Causal Violacion y/o incesto:  Selección de doctrina y jurisprudencia latinoamericanas sobre Causal violación y/o incesto en casos de aborto (Rape or Incest bibliography in Spanish)  (Toronto: El Programa Internacional de Derecho en Salud Sexual y Reproductivas Facultad de Derecho, Universidad de Toronto, 2018)

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 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 – August 2018

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:

Argentina:  Abortion Bill approved by Chamber of Deputies June 14, 2018, and narrowly rejected by Senate (38 to 31) August 9, 2018.  26 speakers at hearings July 31, 2018, included Argentine lawyer Mercedes Cavallo, a doctoral student at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law.  Cavallo oral argument (video).  Cavallo editorial.   New York Times article.

Brazil: Supreme Court Considers Decriminalizing Abortion.  Public Hearings held August 3-6, 2018.  New York Times article.

Mexico’s newly elected government announces plan to decriminalize abortion in first trimester, nationwide.   EFE News report.

CALL FOR PAPERS:

“The Impact of Politics on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights,” for publication in Reproductive Health Matters, May 2019.  Submissions due October 31, 2018.
RHM Call for papers

SCHOLARSHIP:

[abortion] “Access to knowledge and the Global Abortion  Policies Database,”  by Joanna N. Erdman and Brooke Ronald Johnson Jr.  International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics  2018; 142: 120–124   PDF – Wiley online.

[abortion law, Latin America] El aborto en América Latina: Estrategias jurídicas para luchar por su legalización y enfrentar las resistencias conservadoras, por Paola Bergallo, Isabel Cristina Jaramillo Sierra y Juan Marco Vaggione, compiladores,  Buenos Aires: Siglo Veintiuno y RED ALAS, 2018. Libro de 482-paginas en linea.

[abortion law] “From Ireland to Northern Ireland: campaigns for abortion law,” by Angel Li,  The Lancet 391 (10138), 16–22 June 2018, Pages 2403-2404.  Article online.

[abortion law] “Abortion law reform: Why ethical intractability and maternal morbidity are grounds for decriminalisation,” by Andrew McGee, Melanie Jansen and Sally Sheldon. ANZJOG,  Article early view online.

[abortion law] “The paradox of access – abortion law, policy and misoprostol” by Karen Marie Moland, Haldis Haukanes, Getnet Tadele, Astrid Blystad, Tidsskriftet den Norske Legeforening 2:23 January 2018, Article online.

[abortion law, Ireland] “Reproductive Justice in Ireland: A Feminist Analysis of the Neary and Halappanavar Cases,” by Joan McCarthy,  in: Mary Donnelly and Claire Murray, eds., Ethical and Legal Debates in Irish Healthcare: Confronting Complexities (Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 2016).  Book information.    Submitted Text online.

Abortion Law in Transnational Perspective: Cases and Controversies, ed. Rebecca Cook, Joanna Erdman and Bernard Dickens (Philadelphia: Univ. Pennsylvania Press, 2014) 20% discount code is PH70.  Abstracts of 16 chapters.   Spanish edition by FCE/CIDE – 16 abstracts.  Abortion Decisions: Table of Cases in English and Spanish.

[conscientious objection, Mexico] “Abortion and conscientious objection: rethinking conflicting rights in the Mexican context,” by  Gustavo Ortiz-Millán, Global Bioethics 29.1 (2018) 15 pages,  Early view online.

“The Right to Conscience” – An Annotated Bibliography.   (Toronto: International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program,
Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 2018)  .Conscientious Objection bibliography:  The Right to Conscience

Indications for abortion: new annotated bibliographies:

• Annotated Bibliography on legal aspects of fetal anomaly and their implications for counseling, service delivery and abortion laws and policies (Toronto: International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 2018).  Fetal anomaly bibliography
• Legal and policy dimensions of rape-related abortion services (Court decisions, Treaty resources, policy guidance and publications. ) (Toronto: International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 2018).  Rape or Incest bibliography 
  
• Selección de doctrina y jurisprudencia latinoamericanas sobre Causal violación y/o incesto en casos de aborto (Rape or Incest bibliography in Spanish)  (Toronto: El Programa Internacional de Derecho en Salud Sexual y Reproductivas Facultad de Derecho, Universidad de Toronto, 2018)

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 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.