REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – Sept 2018

September 30, 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 abstractsAbortion 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 onlineSubmitted 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.

[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.

 

 

 

 


CEDAW re Northern Ireland abortion laws: grave and systematic violations of women’s rights

April 26, 2018

Many thanks to Professors Claire Pierson of the University of Liverpool,  Kathryn McNeilly of Queen’s University Belfast and Fiona Bloomer of Ulster University, founding members of the Reproductive Health Law and Policy Advisory Group, online here, who kindly commented on the results of CEDAW’s inquiry into Northern Ireland’s abortion laws, based on their 9-page Briefing Document:

Reproductive Health Law and Policy Advisory Group,  Briefing Document: 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, April 2018.
Briefing on CEDAW’s Northern Ireland inquiry and UK response – (9 pages).

From the late twentieth century onwards, human rights emerged as a significant tool, drawing attention to reproductive health provision for women. In Northern Ireland, however, it is only recently that human rights have stimulated meaningful discussion on local abortion access. The UN CEDAW Committee has become the latest body to engage rights in this way.

In early 2018, the CEDAW Committee completed an Optional Protocol inquiry into Northern Ireland’s abortion laws. CEDAW’s report, online here, found the United Kingdom in violation of several articles of the Convention through maintenance of a criminal framework permitting abortion in Northern Ireland only in circumstances of threat to life or serious and long-term threat to health. These violations were found to be grave and systematic.

The inquiry was undertaken following a 2010 submission by the Family Planning Association for Northern Ireland (FPA), Alliance for Choice and the Northern Ireland Women’s European Platform (NIWEP). In 2014, the UK submitted written observations on the submission to CEDAW.  These denied that violation of rights had occurred and outlined that legislative change was not envisaged.  Upon reviewing the UK response and material received by the FPA, Alliance for Choice and NIWEP, CEDAW determined the allegations were reliable and assigned two delegates to conduct an inquiry in 2016.

In addition to the impact of the region’s restrictive criminal law on women’s health and equality, the report highlights concerns with wider access to reproductive and sexual health services, including: post-abortion care, harassment at reproductive health clinics, and a lack of adequate sexual health education. It particularly notes the disproportionate impact of restrictive abortion access on rural and poorer women.

The Committee made 13 recommendations, including repeal of the current criminal law (sections 58 and 59 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861) and the creation of legislation to allow for abortion under particular grounds.  The UK Government has issued a response outlining that it does not accept that women in Northern Ireland have been subject to grave and systematic violations of rights under the Convention.

A separate legal challenge to the compatibility of Northern Ireland’s law with domestic human rights commitments is being heard by the UK Supreme Court. Pressure is mounting for the UK to seriously consider the rights implications of abortion law in this region.

RELEVANT LINKS:
CEDAW’s Report, see: Committee on the Elimination  of Discrimination against Women,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, U.N.  Doc, CEDAW/C/OP.8/GBR/1, February 23, 2018.  CEDAW’s report on abortion law in Northern Ireland, 19 pages

Observations of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on the report of the inquiry concerning United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women under article 8 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women*  United Kingdom response, 7 pages

The Reproductive Health Law and Policy Advisory Group, discussed above, has issued a  a Briefing Document summarizing both the CEDAW report and the UK government’s response 9-page briefing.


REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – March 2018

March 30, 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.

SCHOLARSHIP:

“Abortion by telemedicine in Northern Ireland: patient and professional rights across borders,” by Tamara Hervey and Sally Sheldon. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly (2017) 68.1: 1-33    Article onlineSubmitted Text.

Abortion Law in Transnational Perspective: Cases and Controversies, ed. Rebecca J. Cook, Joanna N. Erdman and Bernard M. Dickens (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014),  Table of Contents with chapter summaries.     Table of Cases.   English edition. now  in paperback, 20% discount code PH70. —–Spanish edition:  El aborto en el derecho transnacional: casos y controversias,  ed. Rebecca J. Cook, Joanna N. Erdman y Bernard M. Dickens (Mexico: FCE/CIDE, 2016)   En espanol, 2016: Fondo de Cultura Económica y Libreria CIDE.   Índice con resúmenes de todos capítulos    Tabla de jurisprudencia.
Abortion Law Decisions online, a Table of Cases with links.  English.   Spanish.

[abortion law, South Korea]  A critical assessment of abortion law and its implementation in South Korea, by Hyosin Kim & Hyun-A Bae, Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, 24.1 (2018): 71-87, Abstract and article.

“Access to Abortion in Cases of Fatal Fetal Abnormality: A New Direction for the European Court of Human Rights?” by Dr. Bríd Ní Ghráinne,  and Dr Aisling McMahon,  (March 12, 2018). 31-page working paper

[Africa] Legal Grounds III: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in Sub-Saharan African Courts  (Pretoria, Pretoria University Law Press (PULP), 2017).  PDF 228 page bookPrevious volumes online at CRR.      Printed edition from PULP.
Online edition with links to decisions and updates.

Breaking Ground 2018: Treaty Monitoring Bodies on Reproductive Rights, 3rd edition, by the Center for Reproductive Rights, summarizes United Nations jurisprudence, especially the standards being adopted on reproductive health information and contraception, maternal health care, and abortion.  54 page report.

[Chile] Landmark abortion law ruling by Constitutional Court of Chile, August 28, 2017 is now in English with its official synthesis and a table of contents.   Decision translated to English    Amicus curiae briefs also in English:  (1)  decriminalization of abortion Spanish and English;   (2) conscience and conscientious objection:  Spanish  and English.
Spanish Decision “Descargar Sentencia”.   Accompanying documents.  Submissions.      Síntesis.

“The Costs of Conscience,” by Micah Schwartzman, Nelson Tebbe, and Richard Schragger (March 2018) Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 2018-14.  Abstract and article. 

FIGO Bioethics Curriculum:  Introduction to Principles and Practice of Bioethics: Case Studies in Women’s Health, now in Spanish.  Table of Contents and List of Case Studies.   Curriculum in EnglishCurriculum in Spanish

“Reproductive Autonomy of Women and Girls under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,  by Prof. Charles Ngwena, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 140.1 (Jan. 2018):128-133PDF online for 12 months.    Submitted Text.

Reproductive Health and Human Rights:  Integrating Medicine, Ethics and Law, (Oxford University Press, 2003)  Portuguese, 602 pages and Spanish (both now free online).    English  (through Oxford Scholarship Online)  French paperback.     Case Studies in Arabic online

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


NEWS:

Ireland:  May 25th 2018 date for Referendum on abortion “Voters will be asked if they want to repeal article 40.3.3 – known as the eighth amendment – which since 1983 has given unborn foetuses and pregnant women an equal right to life . . . enshrining a ban on abortion in the country’s constitution.”  If repealed, government will allow abortion within 12 weeks of pregnancy. Guardian newspaper

Paraguay’s harsh abortion law endangers adolescents.  Raped 14-year-old girl with pregnancy complications dies during caesarean section to save baby.  Human Rights Watch report

 

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.


Mandatory Waiting Periods and Biased Abortion Counseling in Central and Eastern Europe

November 30, 2017

Congratulations to Leah Hoctor and Adriana Lamačková of the Centre for Reproductive Rights, whose article has just been published in the Ethical and Legal Issues section of the International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics.  The article addresses the recent retrogressive introduction of mandatory waiting periods and biased counseling and information requirements prior to abortion in Central and Eastern Europe.

Leah Hoctor and Adriana Lamačková,  Mandatory Waiting Periods and Biased Abortion Counseling in Central and Eastern Europe (2017). International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 139 (Nov. 2017): 253–258. 
PDF at Wiley Online Library.    Submitted text online at SSRN.

A number of Central and Eastern European countries have recently enacted retrogressive laws and policies introducing new pre-conditions that women must fulfill before they can obtain legal abortion services. Mandatory waiting periods and biased counseling and information requirements are particularly common examples of these new prerequisites. This article considers these requirements in light of international human rights standards and public health guidelines, and outlines the manner in which, by imposing regressive barriers on women’s access to legal abortion services, these new laws and policies undermine women’s health and well-being, fail to respect women’s human rights, and reinforce harmful gender stereotypes and abortion stigma.

Key words: Abortion; Abortion counseling; Central and Eastern Europe; Discrimination; Human rights; Informed consent; Waiting periods

The published article is online in PDF at Wiley Library.
Full text, as submitted, is online at SSRN.
Ethical and Legal Issues in Reproductive Health: 80 other concise articles.


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.


HR expert: Conscientious objection may not hinder lawful abortions

September 29, 2017

Many thanks to Christina Zampas, one of fifty international experts and policymakers who recently convened in Montevideo, Uruguay, to share findings on the legal status and harms of conscientious objection to lawful abortions.   The refusal to provide services on grounds of conscience hinders lawful abortion in countries with both liberal and restrictive laws.  The practice also stigmatizes basic reproductive health services and in some cases pushes women to carry risky or unintended pregnancies to term, or to seek illegal or unsafe alternatives, which may have dire consequences, including death.

United Nations and regional human rights bodies have recognized the harmful effects of conscientious objection on the health and human rights of women.  They have articulated state obligations under the rights to health, to privacy and to non-discrimination, to ensure that women can access reproductive health services that they are lawfully entitled to receive.  For decades, human rights bodies have recommended that to comply with human rights obligations, states should decriminalize abortion, liberalize restrictive laws and remove barriers that hinder access to safe abortion.[1] “[I]n cases where abortion procedures may lawfully be performed, all obstacles to obtaining them should be removed,” including the unregulated practice of refusing to provide services based on conscience. [2]

UN treaty bodies have expressed concern about the harmful impact of the exercise of conscientious objection and have repeatedly urged those states that permit the practice to adequately regulate it to ensure that it does not limit women’s access to abortion services. [3]  The UN Special Rapporteur on Health, for example, has recognized that “conscientious objection laws . . . make safe abortions and post-abortion care unavailable, especially to poor, displaced and young women. Such restrictive regimes, which are not replicated in other areas of sexual and reproductive health care, serve to reinforce the stigma that abortion is an objectionable practice.” [4]   He has also recommended that states “[e]nsure that conscientious objection exemptions are well-defined in scope and well-regulated in use and that referrals and alternative services are available” and urged states to ensure that conscientious objection cannot be invoked in emergency situations. [5]

Human rights bodies have called on states to prohibit the improper use of conscientious objection by medical professionals.  And while human rights law does not require states to allow conscientious refusals to abortion, these human rights bodies have noted that where states do allow for it, they must regulate it, to ensure that it does not deny or hinder women access to lawful abortion.  They have explicitly specified that the relevant regulatory framework must ensure an obligation on healthcare providers to refer women to alternative health providers [6] and must not allow institutional refusals of care. [7]   The CESCR Committee, which monitors state compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,  has specifically recommended that states should also ensure that “adequate number of health-care providers willing and able to provide such services should be available at all times in both public and private facilities and within reasonable geographical reach.” [8]

This first International Convening on Conscientious Objection and Abortion, held August 1-3, 2017 in Montevideo, Uruguay, was sponsored by Mujer y Salud Urugay (MYSU) and the International Women’s Health Coalition (IWHC).  Participants agreed to further legal, ethical, health, and policy objectives that can mitigate the damaging effects of conscientious objection and reduce the immense burden on women who seek a legal, professional service that must be rendered without prejudice.
About the International Convening on Conscientious Objection and Abortion
Report on the meeting, and its declarations in English and Spanish
Report by South African delegation.

Conscientious Objection – List of resources from members of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program are online here.

Conscientious Objection to Abortion and Accommodating Women’s Reproductive Health Rights: Reflections on a Decision of the Constitutional Court of Colombia from an African Regional Human Rights Perspective, by Charles G Ngwena,  Journal of African Law 58.2 (October 2014) 183 – 209  now online here.

Christina Zampas is a Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Fellow at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law.  Short bio

ENDNOTES:
[1]  See, e.g., Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations: Jamaica, para. 14, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/JAM/CO/3 (2011) (urging the state to “amend its abortion laws to help women avoid unwanted pregnancies and not to resort to illegal abortions that could put their lives at risk. The State party should take concrete measures in this regard, including a review of its laws in line with the Covenant.”); Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations: Mali, para. 14, U.N. Doc. CCPR/CO/77/MLI (2003); Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations: Djibouti, para. 9, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/DJI/CO/1 (2013); Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations: Ireland, para. 13, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/IRL/CO/3 (2008). See also Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 28: Article 3 (The Equality of Rights Between Men and Women), (68th Sess., 2000), para. 10, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.10 (2000).

[2]  Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations: Argentina, para. 14, U.N. Doc. CCPR/CO/70/ARG (2000); see also CESCR, Concluding Observations: Argentina, para. 22, U.N. Doc. E/C.12/ARG/CO/3 (2011); Poland, para. 28, U.N. Doc. E/C.12/POL/CO/5 (2009); CEDAW, Concluding Observations: India, para. 41, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/IND/CO/3 (2007); Poland, para. 25, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/POL/CO/6 (2007).

[3]  ESCR Committee, Concluding Observations: Poland, para. 28, U.N. Doc. E/C.12/POL/CO/5 (2009); CEDAW Committee, Concluding Observations: Poland, para. 25, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/POL/CO/6 (2007); Slovakia, para. 29, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/SVK/CO/4 (2008); Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations: Poland, para. 12, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/POL/CO/6 (2010).

[4] Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Interim rep. of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, transmitted by Note of the Secretary-General, para. 24, U.N. Doc. A/66/254 (Aug. 3, 2011), para. 24.

[5] Id. Para 65(m), and Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Anand Grover – Mission to Poland, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/14/20/Add.3 (2010). paras. 50, and 85(k).  See also: CESCR Gen. Comment 22 in note 8 below.

[6]  See, e.g., CEDAW, General Recommendation No. 24: Article 12 of the Convention (Women and Health), para. 11, U.N. Doc. A/54/38/Rev.1, chap. I (“It is discriminatory for a State party to refuse to legally provide for the performance of certain reproductive health services for women. For instance, if health service providers refuse to perform such services based on conscientious objection, measures should be introduced to ensure that women are referred to alternative health providers.”); CESCR, Gen. Comment No. 22, paras. 14, 43; HRC, Concluding Observations,: Italy, U.N. Doc. HRC/C/ITA/CO/6, paras 16-17 (2017); CEDAWConcluding Observations: Croatia, para. 31, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/HRV/CO/4-5 (2015) (urging the State party to “ensure that the exercise of conscientious objection does not impede women’s effective access to reproductive health-care services, especially abortion and post-abortion care and contraceptives”); Hungary, paras. 30-31, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/HUN/CO/7-8 (2013) (urging the State party to “[e]stablish an adequate regulatory framework and a mechanism for monitoring of the practice of conscientious objection by health professionals and ensure that conscientious objection is accompanied by information to women about existing alternatives and that it remains a personal decision rather than an institutionalized practice”); CESCR, Concluding Observations: Poland, para. 28, U.N. Doc. E/C.12/POL/CO/5 (2009) (“The Committee is particularly concerned that women resort to clandestine, and often unsafe, abortion because of the refusal of physicians and clinics to perform legal operations on the basis of conscientious objection…. The Committee calls on the State party to take all effective measures to ensure that women enjoy their right to sexual and reproductive health, including by enforcing the legislation on abortion and implementing a mechanism of timely and systematic referral in the event of conscientious objection.”).

[7]  See, e.g., CEDAW, Concluding Observations: Hungary, para. 31(d), U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/HUN/CO/7-8 (2013); CRC, Concluding Observations: Slovakia, paras. 41(f), U.N. Doc. CRC/C/SVK/CO/3-5 (2016).

[8] UN CESCR, Gen. Comment No. 22, paras. 14, 43 (“Unavailability of goods and services due to ideologically based policies or practices, such as the refusal to provide services based on conscience, must not be a barrier to accessing services. An adequate number of health-care providers willing and able to provide such services should be available at all times in both public and private facilities and within reasonable geographical reach. … Where health-care providers are allowed to invoke conscientious objection, States must appropriately regulate this practice to ensure that it does not inhibit anyone’s access to sexual and reproductive health care, including by requiring referrals to an accessible provider capable of and willing to provide the services being sought, and that it does not inhibit the performance of services in urgent or emergency situations”).

————-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

April 21, 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.

CONFERENCE

“Improving   women’s    journeys    through    abortion,”  12th FIAPAC Conference,   October 14-15, 2016, Lisbon, Portugal.  Pre-conference workshops on values and advocacy on October 13, 2016, on (1) Decriminalization and (2) Surgical abortion in the second trimester.  Francophone session on 16 October.  Flyer online.   Programme.

EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES

“Global School Health Rights Litigation” intensive course June 13-17, 2016  O’Neill Institute and Harvard FXB  at Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, DC for specialist-level knowledge re litigating health-related rights at the national, regional, and international levels.  Apply by May 1, 2016.  Course details.

LL.M. en Derechos Humanos y Derecho Humanitario (en Espanol), American University Washington College of Law,  Washington DC, USA,  Cursos Virtuales, y Cursos Presenciales.   Informacion.

RESOURCES

Abortion Law in Transnational Perspective, Spanish edition, forthcoming summer 2016 from CIDE/FCE, Mexico City.  Spanish flyer online.

[abortion] The Moral Case for Abortion, by Ann Furedi, Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. Publisher’s webpage.

[abortion] “Zika Virus and Global Implications for Reproductive Health Reforms,” by James G. Hodge, Alicia Corbett, Ashley Repka and P.J.  Judd. (March 9, 2016). forthcoming in Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness  Abstract and 3-page article

[abortion, Brazil]  Reproductive Rights and the Zika epidemic in Brazil, Supreme Court challenge, by Prof. Debora Diniz Portuguese with English subtitles. 30-minute film. Prof.  Prof. Diniz comments in English:  4-minute video

[abortion, Canada – PEI province] In face of lawsuit based on Charter of Rights and Freedoms, PEI drops opposition to abortion, plans to provide access by end of 2016. ARN press release.

[abortion, conscientious objection, Italy and Sweden] “Abortion Inside Swedish Democracy: Paradoxical Secularizations and Unbalanced Pluralisms,” by Melisa L Vazquez, Calumet – Intercultural Law and Humanities Review, 2016, Issue 2: 1-56. Abstract and article.

[abortion, Northern Ireland]  Guidance for Health and Social Care professionals on termination of pregnancy in Northern Ireland. Guidance online.

[abortion, pre-natal testing] “Non-Invasive Testing, Non-Invasive Counseling,” by Rachel Rebouché, Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 43.2 (2015): 228-240. Abstract and article.

[abortion, sex selection] “Testing Sex,” University of Richmond Law Review 49.1 ( 2015) 519-577. Abstract and article.

[assisted reproduction]  “Securing the Future of Genetic Enhancement: A Review Essay of ‘Humanity Enhanced’, by Russell Blackford.  Reviewed by Bernard M. Dickens,  Population and Development Review 41(1)(March 2015): 151-68.  Abstract and Review.

“Ethical Issues of Uterus Transplantation,” by Bernard M. Dickens,  International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 133.1(2016): 125-128.  Abstract and Article.

[Ireland]  “Maternal brain death and legal protection of the foetus in Ireland” [case review] by Andrea Mulligan 15.2 2015 Medical Law International  182-195.  Abstract and Article.

[Ireland, maternal brain death] “Horrific court case involving a young pregnant brain-dead woman,” by Kate Butler, Lawyers for Choice. Article online.

[Latin America] IV Legal Conference on Reproductive Rights, held Nov. 2-4, 2015. Video archive  “Relatoria” online.

[Nigeria]   Maternal Health and Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 5 in Nigeria: Any Catalytic Role For Human Rights? (2015). by Obiajulu Nnamuchi, Obiajulu, Miriam Anozie, and Festus Okechukwu Ukwueze, Medicine and Law, Vol. 34, 2015.  [discusses abortion laws and unsafe abortion]  Abstract and article.

[UK, Ireland and Northern Ireland] “How can a state control swallowing?” Medical Abortion and the Law, by Sally Sheldon, March 2016.  Research summary

[United Nations] Report of the Special Rapporteur  on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment A/HRC/31/57 discusses abortion access in paras 42ff.   online in 6 languages.

NEWS

[abortion, Ireland]  Asylum seeker, refused abortion, sues the State.  News article.

[abortion, Mexico – Guanajuato] “Abortion and Human Rights in Mexico…Feminist Approaches within and Around the Law,” by Elyse  Ona Singer, Society for Medical Anthropology, Anthropology News  Article online.

[Nigeria] Case  of Illegal detention and death of woman at hospital heads to High Court of Nigeria.   CRR Press Release.

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

FELLOWSHIPS AND JOBS

The Comparative Program on Health and Society at the University of Toronto, Canada, invites applications for 2016-2017.  Complete applications due May 30, 2016.    Doctoral fellowship details: Health and human rights.     Social determinants of healthResearch Associate.

Program Manager, Women’s Health and Equality, Wyss Foundation, Washington DC,  Apply by May 31, 2016.  Job details.

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: Developments, Resources & Jobs

March 10, 2016

REPROHEALTHLAW Blog
March 10, 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

General Comment 22”  United Nations – Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) adopted a new General Comment 22 (E/C.12/GC/22)  on Article 12 (Health) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.  This new General Comment highlights the numerous legal, procedural, practical and social barriers people face in accessing sexual and reproductive health care and information, and the resulting human rights violations.  It codifies wide-ranging state obligations regarding quality maternal health care, non-discrimination, contraception, safe abortion care, sex education, disabilities, infertility care, STIs and HIV/AIDS.  It also discusses conscience issues and rural, regional or cultural disparities.  Full text of General Comment No.22.     UN Press release.

Guyana: Midwives, nurses and pharmacists can provide abortion pill.  Guyana details..

Kenya:  AIDS Law Project v Attorney General and 3 Others [2015] eKLR, Petition No. 97 of 2010 (High Court of Kenya at Nairobi). [Criminal provisions of HIV/AIDS law held unconstitutional.]  Decision online.    Case Summary by Godfrey Kangaude.  

Kenya: duty to protect rights of intersex persons (2 cases)
Baby “A” (suing through her mother, E.A.) and The Cradle the Children Foundation v Attorney General, Kenyatta National Hospital, and the Registrar of Births and Deaths [2014] eKLR, Petition No. 266 of 2013 (High Court of Kenya at Nairobi, (Constitutional and Human Rights Division)). Decision onlineFull Case Summary.
RM v The Hon. Attorney General & 4 Others, [2010] eKLR Petition no 705 of 2007 (High Court of Kenya at Nairobi, Nairobi Law Courts). R.M. Decision online.   Case summary of R.M

Uganda.  “African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights Calls on Uganda to Ensure The Right to Legal Abortion and Access to Reproductive Health Services.”  Recommendations call for Uganda to implement the Maputo Protocol—the only treaty, at both the international and regional levels, that explicitly guarantees the right to legal abortion in cases of sexual assault, rape, incest, and where the continued pregnancy endangers the mental and physical health or life of the woman or in cases of fatal fetal impairments.  CRR Press Release Mar.7, 2016
Background from CRR:  74-page report 2013 .  46-page guide to Ugandan abortion law/policy 2012CRR/CEHURD Shadow report 2014.

U.S.   Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt: Hearings were held in the US Supreme Court on Mar 2, 2016. The judgment is anticipated in June 2016, and it will determine whether women will have access to abortion services in Texas, and in other states with laws comparable to the restrictive Texas law.   Case history from CRR.  Official transcript, Mar 2, 2016.   Reports of the hearing: Slate article: Oral arguments.   Slate blog: “Most important question.”   Comment:  When “protecting health” obstructs choice :  SCOTUS blog.   Scholarship:  Linda Greenhouse and Reva Siegel, “Casey and the Clinic Closings: When ‘Protecting Health’ Obstructs Choice,” 125 Yale Law Journal 1428-1480 (2016) Greenhouse & Siegel article.

Zimbabwe:  Mudzuru & Another v Ministry of Justice, Legal & Parliamentary Affairs (N.O.) & Others (Const. Application No. 79/14) [2015] ZWCC 12 (20 January 2016);  Constitutional Court outlawed child marriage under 18 years old.  Decision online.   News report.

COURSES

Advanced Human Rights – short courses at the Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria, South Africa.
♦  Disability Rights in an African Context  March 14-18, 2016.  Disability Rights Course.
♦  Judicial Enforcement of Socio-Economic Rights in Africa,  Socio-Economic Rights
May 16-20, 2016
♦  Civil Society Law in Africa, June 8-10, 2016  Civil Society Law Course

RESOURCES

[abortion]  Common Law Fundamentals of the Right to Abortion, by Anita Bernstein. Buffalo Law Review Vol. 63, p. 1141, 2015; Brooklyn Law School, Legal Studies Paper No. 438. Bernstein article.

[abortion, Ireland]  The Geography of Abortion (December 11, 2015). by Fergus W. Ryan.  Ryan working paper.

[abortion, Latin America, Caribbean] Investigación sobre aborto en América Latina y el Caribe: Una agenda renovada para informar políticas públicas e incidencia (Research on abortion in Latin America & the Caribbean: A renewed agenda to inform public policy and incidence) Published by CLACAI (Latin American Consortium against Unsafe Abortion) with the support of CEDES Argentina, Population Council USA, and Promsex Peru.   Investigación en EspanolAlternative download link.

[abortion – UK]  British Abortion Law: Speaking from the Past to Govern the Future (March 2016). The Modern Law Review, Vol. 79, Issue 2, pp. 283-316, 2016.
Sheldon article.

Engendering Reproductive Rights in the Inter-American System (2016), by Ciara  O’Connell,  in Gender, Sexuality and Social Justice: What’s Law Got to Do With It?, ed. Kay Lalor, Elizabeth Mills, Arturo Sánchez García and Polly Haste. p. 58, Institute of Development Studies, 2016 . O’Connell chapter

NEWS

Malawi – homosexuality: “Malawi government challenges the clergy on gay rights.”  The real issue is whether the pending Judicial Review should declare the anti-homosexuality law invalid under the Constitution.   News report.

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

Zambia:    Chief Justice launched the first-ever gender-based violence (GBV) fast track court in Kabwe.  News report.

JOBS

Director, new Human Rights Institute, Oxford University, UK  Oxford Directorship

Director of Programs, International Planned Parenthood Federation, Western Hemisphere Region. Apply by March 15, 2016.  IPPF Director.

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer in Gender Studies @ SOAS Centre for Gender Studies, London, UK.    Apply by March 21, 2016.  Lecturer at SOAS.

Postdoctoral research fellow, 3 years, new “Political Determinants of S&R Health” project based at University of Bergen, Norway.  Apply by March 31, 2016.  Postdoc job.

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 hereTO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.