Tag Archive for: Legal Interruption of Pregnancy

,

Challenges in the implementation of abortion: the Meeting of the National Alliance of Lawyers for the Human Rights of Women was held

On April 8 and 9, members of the National Alliance of Lawyers for the Human Rights of Women from all over the country met in Córdoba.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

More than 50 lawyers from different parts of the country met last weekend to discuss the challenges in the implementation of the Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy Law and design legal strategies to overcome them.

Among the challenges encountered in access to the rights recognized by Law 27,610, more than a year after its sanction, the lack of knowledge about the law in the community, the geographic and economic barriers to access, the lack of of availability of health centers, the obstruction by social works and prepaid medicine companies, the obstruction derived from the abuse of the figure of conscientious objection and the improper judicialization of access to abortion. A special concern was expressed about the criminalization of the doctor Miranda Ruiz in the province of Salta, for which it was agreed to articulate strategies to support the request for her dismissal.

The meeting, led by lawyers from civil society organizations that make up the Alliance (Catholics for the Right to Decide, Fundeps, Amnesty International, CELS, ELA and Fundación MxM) allowed the exchange of local experiences and the strengthening of networks for the defense rights from a feminist perspective.

The Alliance is an intergenerational and federal space created in 2011 and made up of 300 legal professionals from 20 provinces. It is an articulation that allows the exchange between those who exercise the Law from different fields and for a more equitable and egalitarian society.

With the energies renewed thanks to the reunion, they agreed and articulated lines of action to continue demanding the effective application of the law throughout the country and online.

,

Declaration of interest for criminal prosecution of a doctor who carried out an ILE in Salta

Civil society organizations Catholics for the Right to Decide Argentina (CDD), the Foundation for the Development of Sustainable Policies (Fundeps) and the Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS) accompanied today
legal considerations in the framework of the criminal process of a doctor resident of Salta who carried out an ILE within the framework of Law 27.610 on Access to the Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy, as part of the health team of the Juan Domingo Perón Hospital in the city of Tartagal.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

The practice had been requested by a patient of legal age, in full exercise of her autonomy. When she was received at the health center, she was cared for by an interdisciplinary team, who, with the endorsement of the director of the
hospital, they found that it was the causal health and that it was duly justified. It is about the possibility of interrupting the pregnancy when the life or health of the pregnant person is at risk.

The procedures performed by the medical team are within the law and each step was recorded in the medical record. The doctor who is currently going through a criminal process is the only non-objector professional, who guarantees the right to comprehensive health for women and other people with the ability to gestate in the area.

It is essential that this case be analyzed in the light of local norms and in line with international human rights instruments. A pregnancy can be legally interrupted when any dimension of health is at risk, be it physical, mental or social health.

Likewise, particular consideration must be given to the social interest that governs this matter, as well as the impact that any judicial decision has in relation to the implementation of a public policy that provides for access to a fundamental human right such as access to Legal and Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy.

,

Supreme Court must reject litigation against abortion law

Faced with the ruling of the Federal Court of Appeals of Salta that intends to validate that “every citizen” can request the suspension of the law of voluntary interruption of pregnancy, a group of civil society organizations filed an appeal before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (CSJN).

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

Amnesty International (AI), the Latin American Justice and Gender Team (ELA), the Women x Women Foundation (MxM), the Foundation for the Development of Sustainable Policies (Fundeps) and the Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS) requested the highest court of Justice in the country to reject any attempt to restrict the rights of women, girls, adolescents and people with childbearing capacity.

Although the ruling of the Chamber of Salta does not affect the validity of Law 27,610, it is imperative that the CSJN accompany its own jurisprudence on the right to legally interrupt a pregnancy (FAL ruling) and the decisions that from the sanction of the law has issued the judiciary around the country, and rejects actions that seek to prevent women from exercising their right to a legal abortion.

The law of access to voluntary interruption of pregnancy meant a feminist conquest in line with international human rights law. It was approved by Congress after a broad and participatory debate.

Admitting that any citizen can act on behalf of the “unborn” against the rights of women and people with childbearing capacity is contrary to the National Constitution because it violates their right to make autonomous decisions within their private sphere and without interference by third parties, the principle of division of powers and self-restriction of the Judiciary, and the constitutional guarantee of due process.

On the facts

In December 2020, the former Salta senator María Cristina Fiore Viñuales filed a lawsuit against the Protocol for the Comprehensive Care of People with the Right to Legal Interruption of Pregnancy of 2019. She then expanded her petition requesting the unconstitutionality of Law 27.610 This action was considered inadmissible in the first instance. On August 27, the Federal Court of Appeals of Salta reversed that decision.

In addition to validating the collective representation of fetal life, the lawsuit sends out a worrying message because it reinstates a violent network against women who decide not to continue with a pregnancy. It not only calls for the suspension of the law, but also requests that measures be ordered that could involve violence against women.

Additional Information

The signatory organizations had already appeared in the cause in April of this year on behalf of the group of women and people with other gender identities with the capacity to gestate.

Link to presentation

,

Salta: the doctor guaranteed the rights of the young woman to a legal interruption of pregnancy

Today they arrested a doctor at the Juan Domingo Perón Hospital, in Tartagal, in Salta, for practicing a Legal Interruption of Pregnancy. The practice was requested by a patient of legal age, in full exercise of her autonomy. To apply for the practice, he traveled more than 53 kilometers to the hospital. The 21-year-old girl was in the 22nd week of pregnancy.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”

When she was received at the health center, she was cared for by an interdisciplinary team made up of a doctor, a social worker and a psychologist. He had separate interviews with each of them, who also informed the director (manager) of the hospital, who found that it was the causal health and that it was duly justified.

Article 86 of the Penal Code allows abortion until week 14 without having to give explanations about the reasons for doing so. It also allows abortion if the pregnancy to be interrupted was the product of rape or if the life or integral health of the pregnant person was at risk. The latter was the case of the young woman from Salta.

The young woman was accompanied throughout the process and was cared for by professionals who guaranteed her rights and listened to her.

From within the hospital, professionals opposed to the comprehensive health of women, seeing that they could not interrupt the process, decided to summon the young woman’s family. In this way, they violated his right to confidentiality and contravened his will.

Her relatives arrived in the middle of the procedure and the young woman had a moment of doubts, but immediately decided to continue with the procedure and expressed it. It is important to note that the complaint to the doctor was not made by the young woman, whose rights were not violated, but by a relative.

The procedures performed by the medical team are within the law and each step taken was accompanied with conviction by the hospital management and recorded in the medical record. The doctor who was arrested today in an intimidating and disciplinary scene in her workplace, is the only non-objector professional, who guarantees the right to comprehensive health for women and other people with the ability to gestate in the area. This afternoon she was released.

We believe that it is essential to respect the privacy of the young woman, as neither the objector doctors who called relatives, nor the media that fall into morbidity without real data, nor the judicial power that could have saved the staging of the disciplinary detention. It is also essential that those who put obstacles to access the rights arising from a democratic society receive the corresponding sanctions.

Guaranteeing rights is not a crime.

Firms:

  • Amnistía Internacional Argentina
  • Católicas por el Derecho a Decidir
  • CEDES
  • CELS
  • ELA
  • Fundación Huésped
  • Fundeps
  • FUSA AC
  • Mujeres x Mujeres
  • REDAAS
,

National Cycle of Training in Legal and Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy

Focusing mainly on students, professionals and workers in the health field, Fundeps, Ecos and Andhes launch a cycle of virtual meetings where different aspects related to the voluntary and legal interruption of pregnancy will be addressed, from a comprehensive and interdisciplinary.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

Through 4 free webinars of national scope, work will be done on protocols, legal framework, safe techniques, ways of monitoring situations and other tools to take into account regarding Law 27,610.

The first meeting will be on August 27 at 6:00 p.m. It will focus on conditions and standards of application of IVE / ILE, conscientious objection and responsibility of health professionals and will have the participation of Marisa Herrera, Doctor in Law from the University of Buenos Aires, CONICET researcher and teacher .

The second meeting, to be held on September 10 at 6:00 p.m., will focus on the comprehensive approach and safe abortion techniques. It will have as exhibitors Dras. Mariana Romero and Nadya Scherbovsky. Mariana is a doctor, a researcher at CEDES / CONICET, she is a member of the Safe Abortion Access Network and technically assists health teams in the implementation of services. Nadya, for her part, is a general and family doctor, and a member of the Córdoba Integral Health Clinic, the ECOS Foundation and the Network of Health Professionals for the Right to Decide.

Then, on October 4, the third meeting will take place, and it will be attended by Luis Pedernera, a member of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. This meeting will be focused on analyzing access to the Legal and Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy in girls and adolescents.

Finally, the last meeting on October 15 will take place with a workshop dynamic, where cases will be addressed that allow participants to analyze practical situations to be able to carry out accompaniments from a rights perspective.

Registration is free and free through this form, and you can participate in the full cycle or in each meeting separately.

SIGN UP

,

Half a year of legal abortion: progress and challenges

Since its enactment at the end of last year, the IVE law is in full force and its first effects are already being verified in access to practice in health centers throughout the country. Meanwhile, in court, conservative sectors continue to try actions to postpone it.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”

The Law of Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy No. 27,610, sanctioned at the end of 2020 and in force since January 24, 2021, implied an important deepening of human rights for women and pregnant persons.

Half a year later, access to abortion is making its way into all health subsystems across the country. In Córdoba, there are more than 100 health establishments that already guarantee this right. On May 28, International Day of Action for Women’s Health, the Ministry of Health of the Nation presented the update of the protocol for the comprehensive care of people with the right to Voluntary and Legal Interruption of Pregnancy.

The new protocol

The protocol constitutes an instrument that aims to offer guidance to health teams, providing them with a regulatory framework and clinical guidelines for precise and clear care that allows them to carry out the termination of pregnancy. Compliance with the highest standards of care is contemplated, that is, those that imply respect for quality, accessibility, confidentiality, technical competence, range of available options and updated scientific information.

From a clinical point of view, the protocol incorporates international recommendations on procedures for the legal termination of pregnancy – drug dose and manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) – and reinforces the importance of rapid access to comprehensive care, reinforcing the need resolution in the first level of care and in drug treatments.

In other words, it implies reinsurance so that girls, adolescents, women and people with the capacity to carry a child receive dignified treatment and quality care, thus guaranteeing IVE until week 14 of the gestational process inclusive and the ILE when appropriate.

As it is a document that sets out certain references on how to carry out the procedure, it is not necessary for the provinces to adhere to it in order to make the implementation of National Law 27,610 effective. In other words, the law is operative regardless of the adherence or validity of the protocol.

The judicialization here and there

In different parts of the country, legal actions were initiated that marked from the first minute a strong sense of legal insecurity for those who have the right to access the practice. There are already more than 30 actions filed against the law. Most of them have been rejected without further proceedings, but excessive judicialization creates obstacles to access and confusion among users.

In Córdoba, at the beginning of April, Aurelio García Elorrio, a reference for the civil association Portal de Belén, filed an amparo against the province requesting the unconstitutionality of the law, and in turn, requested a precautionary measure to suspend the validity of the law, the which was rejected immediately. Faced with this, he filed an appeal that is currently being processed before the Superior Court of Justice.

In this case, the Public Interest Litigation Clinic, Catholics for the Right to Decide and Fundeps present ourselves as interested third parties in order to protect the rights of the group of women and pregnant persons of Córdoba. It is important to clarify that this process does not alter the validity of the law, which continues to be applicable and enforceable throughout the provincial territory.

Meanwhile, in Mar del Plata, at the beginning of June, Federal Court No. 4 in charge of First Instance Judge Alfredo Eugenio Lopez, issued a precautionary measure suspending the effects of the law, the protocol and other resolutions.

The National State immediately appeared in the file, challenging the judge for cause and appealing the precautionary measure. Thus, the case was left in the hands of the surrogate judge, Santiago José Martín, who granted the appeal with suspensive effect of the measure. This means that the injunction granted no longer has effect until the Chamber of Mar del Plata is issued on the appeal.

Faced with this panorama and by virtue of the importance of the case, from Fundeps we present ourselves in the file as “friends of the court”, with the aim of providing human rights arguments, specifically on the right to health and sexual and reproductive rights. and non-reproductive.

It is elementary to think of Law 27,610 as a public health policy representative of fundamental human rights standards. These lawsuits are not mere isolated events, but constitute a form of activism that hinders and limits a basic health practice of sexual health. In Córdoba we already know the effects of the judicialization of the provincial guide for the care of non-punishable abortions that Portal de Belén began in 2012. This case had the consequence that women and pregnant people of Córdoba who were in qualified situations by the Penal Code to access the practice of non-punishable abortion could not do so in this jurisdiction during all the years in which the amparo was pending resolution, resulting in a serious impact on their most basic human rights, despite the fact that later it was The action was rejected due to lack of case and lack of standing.

Faced with this scenario, the competent courts in cases where the law is under discussion have the opportunity to establish clear guidelines regarding the protection of fundamental rights such as sexual and (non) reproductive rights. A solution that respects these rights is simply to maintain the validity of Law 27,610 on Access to Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy, not giving rise to the requested precautionary measures.

 

Authors:

Agostina Copetti

Sofia Mongi

Contact: 

Mayca Balaguer

,

The Ministry of Health responds to a request for information on the implementation of the ILE in Córdoba

After the request for information presented in October, the Ministry of Health provided data on the implementation of the Legal Interruption of Pregnancy in the province, starting from the entry into force of the local protocol that had been suspended.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”

With the fall of the precautionary measure that suspended the application of the provincial guide for the care of non-punishable abortions, the health services of the province of Córdoba began to guarantee the practice in those cases where the pregnancy was the result of rape, or implied a risk to the life or health of the pregnant person, as indicated in art. 86 of the Penal Code.

As indicated in the response sent on December 3, 2020, from September 1, 2019 (the court case was terminated on the 24th of that month) until November 30, 2020, a total of 949 were registered in the province. Legal Interruption of Pregnancy practices: 112 correspond to 2019 and 837 to 2020.

Of this total, the most invoked cause was the risk to comprehensive health, for which 906 practices were carried out (96%). Because it was a risk to life, 20 practices were carried out (2%). The causal violation was invoked in a total of 22 practices (the other 2%).

ILE quantity

From September 2019 to November 2020
Causal health hazard - 95.6%
Causal violation - 2.3%
Causal danger to life - 2.1%

With regard to training and training instances, the agency reported that 6 weekly virtual meetings were held by the National Directorate of Sexual and Reproductive Health of the Ministry of Health of the Nation (in June and July 2020), and 1 meeting virtual organized by the National Directorate of Sexual and Reproductive Health, articulated with the Provincial Program Maternity and Responsible Paternity, in June 2020.

Regarding the purchase and distribution of medicines and supplies to carry out the practice, the Ministry reported that in 2019, 135 misoprostol treatments were used, all from the National Directorate, and in 2020 a total of 1,248. among which 698 come from the National Directorate or clearing operations with other provinces, and 550 were purchased directly by the provincial Ministry.

Incomplete information

Despite having responded to the request for information, the Ministry of Health failed to answer all the questions regarding how conscientious objection operates by health professionals and how referrals for this reason are in practice. It also did not answer questions related to the budget for these services.

It is not the first time that the Ministry of Health fails to comply with a request for access to public information. In 2019, after submitting a request on the same issue, the Administration only responded after we went to court, through an injunction for delay. Even so, the information that he presented in the context of the file was incomplete, so we continue to demand before the courts that he fulfill his duty to provide public information in a timely manner.

The province of silence

There were 7 years in which the local guide to access abortion for reasons contemplated in the Penal Code was suspended. During all that time, pregnant people who needed to access the practice had to do so in health centers in other jurisdictions or, directly, in hiding. It was the feminist networks that generated channels to refer cases and assist them despite the judicial blockade.

Today the new law 27,610 on Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy is in force throughout the national territory. With its publication in the Official Gazette on January 18, and having entered into force on January 24, it is striking that the Ministry of Health of Córdoba has not yet ruled on the matter. No public statement has yet been made on how the province’s health services will be organized for law enforcement purposes.

But the right to interrupt the pregnancy freely until the 14th week of gestation, along with abortion for reasons, is enforceable and must be guaranteed in Córdoba and throughout the country.

More information

Contact

,

Legal abortion must be fully enforced throughout the country

Civil society organizations demand, after the precautionary measure decided by a Chaco fair judge, that access to the voluntary interruption of pregnancy be guaranteed in that province. It is a right won in a democratic process, after a long debate in Congress.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”

Law 27610, which regulates access to voluntary interruption of pregnancy and post-abortion care, must be fully applied throughout Argentina. After the precautionary measure resolved by the fair judge, Marta Beatriz Aucar de Trotti, in charge of the Civil and Commercial Court No. 19 of the city of Resistencia, which suspended the application of the law in the territory of Chaco, we demand that no Zones of discrimination are created for the rights to health and autonomy of women and other people with the ability to gestate based on the domicile set in one or another province.

The action was filed by six people, who argued an alleged contradiction between the Provincial Constitution and national law and asked that the law be suspended throughout the territory. The judge omits to rule on the inadmissibility of such requests in our legal system and is unaware that no judge can suspend the validity of a law with general effects. In addition, she does not warn that the fact that the Chaco Constitution protects life from conception is not an obstacle to the application of the law, neither in Chaco nor in any of the other provinces that provide that type of protection. This evaluation of the constitutionality of the abortion legislation was already carried out by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in the “FAL” ruling in 2012.

Amnesty International, CELS, the Latin American Justice and Gender Team (ELA), Mujeres x Mujeres and Fundeps emphasize the importance of both the provinces and the national State upholding the law and questioning judicial decisions that put the right to abortion in crisis , particularly when they do so in violation of the principle of constitutional supremacy, the division of powers and distort the democratic debate.

The Supreme Court of the Nation has already said, within the framework of a precautionary measure that suspended throughout the country the application of the audiovisual communication services law, that a precautionary measure that suspends the validity of an entire law with general effects for the entire population, is incompatible with the concrete control of constitutionality of the laws, the division of powers and reasonableness.

Beyond the differences with this case, when issuing a precautionary measure, judges must take into account the credibility of the rights affected and the danger of delaying a decision on the case. To do so, it must analyze the consequences of the issuance of its measure in a broad way, taking into account the interest of society as a whole and the impact on the rights enshrined.

In the precautionary measure issued, the existence of an infringed right to the plaintiffs, nor the danger of delay, are not proven. And what is very serious, the measure puts at risk at the local level the right to health of women, girls and people with childbearing capacity.

Decisions of this type only undermine the use of legal tools, so important for the guarantee of rights such as precautionary measures, and the legislative process carried out with a wide debate in December, supported by strong social support and with the transversal accompaniment of the main political forces.

It is important that the users of these services and with the right to access the voluntary interruption of pregnancy as established by Law 27,610 know that the national State and the provinces must guarantee their access throughout the country. Until the Chaco justice reverses this precautionary measure, we must emphasize that the right to legal abortions in force in Argentina for a hundred years (that is, if the pregnancy was the result of rape, if the pregnancy affects the health of the person or if it puts your life at risk) is in force in Chaco as in the entire national territory, and health personnel must provide those services.

Faced with attacks of this type on existing rights, we insist that the provinces and the national State question the judicial decisions that deprive women, girls and people with the capacity to gestate in the exercise of their sexual and reproductive rights, including the right to abortion. We must continue to take care of everyone’s health.

Amnistía Internacional Argentina

CELS

ELA

Fundeps

Mujeres x Mujeres

With agreement on the opinion, the discussion begins in the Chamber of Deputies

After the plenary meeting of the General Legislation, Criminal Legislation, Social Action and Public Health, and Women and Diversity commissions, an agreement was finally reached on the bill for the Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy that will be voted on tomorrow at the venue. of the Chamber of Deputies. What modifications does it have with respect to the project that the Executive Power had presented in November? What can we expect from today’s session? We tell you here.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

As planned in the legislative agenda, this Wednesday, December 9, the committee meeting was held to rule on the IVE bill. With 77 votes in favor, 30 rejection and 4 abstentions, an agreement was reached on the text of the project. The same thing had happened hours before in the plenary session of the Budget and Social Action and Public Health committees, which had discussed the First 1000 Days bill. Both projects will be discussed at the venue this Thursday, December 10.

What is the agenda for the day?

The call for the session was set at 11 in the morning, and the order of treatment of the projects will be first that of IVE and then that of Attention and comprehensive health care during pregnancy and early childhood, known as the program of the First 1000 days.

Throughout the day, the Campaign for Legal, Safe and Free Abortion called to accompany the vote in public spaces throughout the country. In Buenos Aires, the vigil will begin at 10 am in the vicinity of Congress, with activities throughout the day and until the law is voted. In Córdoba, the call is in the former Plaza Vélez Sarsfield from 6:00 p.m. As the right to abortion is a matter of public health, and taking care of ourselves as well, we reinforce the recommendations to participate in the vigil:

  • We wear a nose mask at all times.
  • We wash our hands with alcohol gel.
  • We keep the distance of 2 meters.
  • We take care of the sun with sunscreen, light clothing and a hat.
  • We bring fresh water to stay hydrated.
  • We do not respond to anti-rights provocations and we try to always be accompanied and attentive.

As the two bills will be discussed, the session is expected to last several hours. On IVE, a total of 170 deputies would speak, so the vote on the law would be in the early morning hours.

What does the opinion say? What modifications do you propose?
A few weeks ago we published this analysis with a systematization of the bills that would serve as the basis for this debate: the one presented by the Executive Power in November and the one presented by the Campaign in 2019, contrasting with the opinion approved by the Chamber of Deputies in 2018.

Yesterday a new opinion was approved, which foresees some modifications in the project presented by the Executive Power. What are they about?

In Art. 8, which regulates cases where the person requiring the practice is a minor, now a reference is made directly to art. 26 of the CCyC. Before the amendment, it was specified that those between 13 and 16 years of age have sufficient aptitude and maturity to decide on the practice and give due consent, unless a procedure that involves a serious risk to their health or life must be used. The reference to the applicable legal framework for these cases is maintained, as proposed by the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Law No. 26.061 on the Comprehensive Protection of Boys, Girls and Adolescents, which always provides that their best interests are protected and their rights guaranteed. to be heard.

On the other hand, the new Art. 11 is added, which indicates:

CONSCIOUS OBJECTION. OBLIGATIONS OF HEALTH ESTABLISHMENTS. Those health effectors of the Private Subsector or Social Security that do not have professionals to carry out the interruption of pregnancy due to the exercise of the right to conscientious objection in accordance with the previous article, must foresee and order the referral to an effector actually perform the service and that it is of similar characteristics to the person requesting the benefit consulted. In all cases, the practice must be guaranteed in accordance with the provisions of this law. The procedures and costs associated with the referral and the transfer of the patient will be the responsibility of the effector who performs the referral. All referrals contemplated in this article must be billed according to the coverage in favor of the effector performing the practice.

This new article provides a solution for the cases of private health or social security institutions where there is no non-objector professional, indicating that they must arrange the referral to another institution that does carry out the practice, guaranteeing that it is done in accordance with the law , and taking charge of all the procedures and costs associated with the referral and transfer.

At the same time, the wording of Article 10 is maintained, which recognizes the right to conscientious objection, with some limitations, such as that whoever objects must uphold their decision in all areas, public and private, in which they exercise their profession; She must also refer the patient in good faith to be attended by another professional in a temporary and timely manner, without delay; You must adopt all the necessary measures to guarantee access to the practice and finally you must comply with the rest of your professional duties and legal obligations.

It is also prohibited for cases in which the life or health of the pregnant person is in danger and requires immediate and urgent attention, and for cases that require post-abortion health care. This article also provides that non-compliance may give rise to disciplinary, administrative, criminal and civil sanctions, as appropriate.

However, this wording does not contemplate limitations that did arise in the opinion of the Deputies of 2018, such as that the objection had to be previously expressed individually and in writing, and communicated to the highest authority of the health establishment.

Another important point of that opinion is that it obliged the health establishments to keep a record of the professional objectors, having to inform the health authority of their jurisdiction, and explicitly prohibited institutional conscientious objection and / or ideology.

What does the inclusion of articles that admit the assumption of individual conscientious objection, and assumptions of institutions where there is no non-objector professional, mean?

We know that conscientious objection is a legal institute used to obstruct or delay access to sexual and (non) reproductive health services, as we have seen in cases of contraception and legal interruption of pregnancy. Recognizing it within the law, with the legal status of “right”, does nothing other than enable non-compliance with the law itself, seriously jeopardizing its effectiveness.

Conscientious objection is a legal institute that allows certain persons to be exempted from complying with a legal obligation, in cases where the action ordered by the norms contradicts their deepest religious, ethical or moral convictions; provided that this does not cause harm to third parties.

We understand that the incorporation of individual conscientious objection for direct intervention in the practice of IVE is based on respect for this freedom of conscience or religion, as long as it is exceptionally allowed and with all the limits mentioned. But recognizing the claim of private institutions to exempt themselves from the provision of pregnancy termination services is unthinkable. We fear that this may happen in the event that all the health professionals of an institution declare themselves as objectors. Even if it is not the institution that denies the service, if all its professionals are objectors, it becomes a disguised institutional conscientious objection.

A solution of this type violates the freedom and right to health of patients, and increases costs and problems for the public health system, which will be burdened by having to resolve the situations that the private subsystem derives. We are also concerned that as a consequence of this recognition, the situation in Uruguay will be repeated, where high levels of objection are identified, and there are even jurisdictions with 100% professional objectors. This exacerbates the difficulties that affect rural areas or areas far from large cities, where access to health services is more limited and there are fewer public institutions.

The private institutions that provide health services perform essential public functions: the provision of health services to the population. The fact that these functions are carried out for profit and through a private contract does not detract from the nature of the service. Therefore, the social function that these private companies fulfill is different from that of others that are not committed to guaranteeing people’s fundamental rights. In this sense, the social and legal requirement that is made to companies or entities that provide health services is much greater. Not only should they guarantee non-discrimination in access to services, but they are also subject to greater control and surveillance by the State.

In this sense, admitting that an entire institution can be exempted from the provision of IVE services is unjustified and would disproportionately put at risk the access to health of the people associated with them.

In any case, the opinion obliges these establishments to guarantee the referral, in a place with similar characteristics to the one that the person requesting the benefit consulted, where the practice must be guaranteed in accordance with the law. Then it indicates that the procedures and costs associated with the referral and transfer will be the responsibility of the institution that referred, providing that it will always be invoiced in favor of the effector who actually performs the practice.

It will be law

Despite these controversial points, we welcome the approval of the majority opinion and await treatment in both Houses before the end of the year. We recognize that reaching this instance was the result of the struggles of the human rights movement that has been promoting this law for so many years.

The National Congress now has the duty to give the legislative discussion with responsibility that a public health problem of this magnitude deserves, in this new opportunity to enact the law and mark progress in the protection of the rights of women and individuals. pregnant women in our country.

We hope that those who legislate put aside their personal convictions and private morals when tackling this project. They are legislating on our future, on our health and on our lives. We demand that you do so responsibly, supporting this bill with your positive vote, because it is a bill that expands rights and saves lives.

This afternoon, we go for the half penalty. And before the end of 2020, for the conquest of the right to legal, safe and free abortion.

,

We present ourselves as “friends of the court” before the Supreme Court of Justice of Tucumán

This is the case of “María Magdalena”, a woman who came to the guard of a hospital with an abortion in progress and suffered torture, inhuman treatment and obstetric violence when she was treated, and later was unable to access justice in the province of Tucumán.

In 2012, María Magdalena (name used to preserve her anonymity) arrived at the Nuestra Señora de las Mercedes Maternity guard with a miscarriage in progress. The gynecologists who treated her, Claudia Callejas and Alejandra Bereguer, performed a curettage without anesthesia and later reported her to the police, accusing her of having caused the abortion.

María Magdalena was dismissed in 2015 and has been trying to get justice ever since. She denounced these doctors for gender violence and violation of professional secrecy, but in all the judicial instances of Tucumán they refused to investigate, and they filed the case.

The case reached the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation and in February of this year it was resolved that the Judicial Power of Tucumán should investigate the medical actions of the gynecologists and rule on the denounced facts, since these signify a flagrant violation of the Women rights.

From Fundeps, we present an Amicus Curiae presenting a series of arguments to substantiate the human rights violations suffered by María Magdalena, and thus demand that justice be done. Among them, we highlight the right to a life free of violence in the framework of health care, compliance with the medical obligations of health professionals (derived from the Law on the Rights of the Patient in their Relationship with Professionals and Health Institutions) and the right to access justice.

We demand that the Judicial Power of Tucumán comply with its duty to guarantee women the full enjoyment of their rights and that it punish those who attempt against them, doing justice for María Magdalena and all women who see obstacles hindering access to essential services under conditions. safe and affordable.

Author

Sofia Armando

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

,

Conversation “ILE, Pandemic and Telemedicine: new challenges”

On Friday, August 21, the first virtual discussion on Legal Interruption of Pregnancy, Pandemic and Telemedicine was held together with the Network of Health Professionals for the Right to Decide. This meeting aimed to review the current regulations, socialize the different challenges that arise when implementing the ILE during the pandemic, the limitations that health professionals face and the advantages of Telemedicine.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

In the current context of the pandemic, the WHO has ruled that different health practices are “essential services”, such as systematic vaccination, treatment of chronic diseases, and sexual, reproductive and non-reproductive health services, among which includes care during pregnancy, childbirth and the Legal Termination of Pregnancy. The national health authorities and various specialized health institutions did the same. However, the lack of information and measures by the competent authorities, together with the absence of a clear legal framework, make it difficult for health professionals to be able to effectively comply with ILE practices, and for pregnant people to exercise rights that, in the current health situation, require special attention in order to avoid their subjugation.

In the meeting, in which a total of 40 health professionals participated, they spoke about the legal framework under which the practice of Telemedicine is governed in Córdoba and Argentina in general, in the particular context of the pandemic and independent of it, practical examples and parallels with international regulations were given. The instance also served to share different experiences experienced by professionals, who highlighted the importance and need of spaces for the exchange of tools, information and updating of regulatory knowledge for the exercise of practices in a safe way, both for patients and professionals of the intervening health.

Presentation of the booklet “Aborting with rights during the pandemic: Legal Interruption of Pregnancy as an essential service”

Fundeps presented at the meeting a document that develops the technical and legal aspects that must be considered when guaranteeing the Legal Interruption of Pregnancy during the crisis generated by the coronavirus, with references to protocols and recommendations prepared by the World Health Organization and other health institutions. It also contains a section on the use of telecare to attend to these practices, considering the modifications recently promoted by the pandemic. The document is a synthesis of the updated information for the attention of the ILE, following the principles of risk reduction and resource optimization.

Knowledge exchange as a fundamental tool

We celebrate these instances of training and exchange with different actors involved in the realization of human rights, as in this case, health professionals. Meetings like this are essential for these health practices to be carried out without risk or fear and in a complete, informed and safe way.

More information

Authors

Irene Aguirre

Luz Baretta

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

,

Aborting with rights during the pandemic: Legal Termination of Pregnancy as an essential service

The following primer develops the technical and legal aspects that must be considered when guaranteeing the Legal Interruption of Pregnancy during the crisis generated by the coronavirus, with references to protocols and recommendations drawn up by the World Health Organization and other health institutions. It also contains a section on the use of telemedicine to attend to these practices.

Descargar Documento / Download File