Category: Law

Polish law and conduct of Polish physicians, clergy, activists and authorities leads to adverse judgement

Sean Murphy*

The European Court of Human Rights has issued a judgement adverse to freedom of conscience and ordered Poland to pay two complainants, a mother and daughter, a total of 61,000 Euros in damages and costs.  Subject to the possibility that the English translation of the judgement is faulty, the use of the term “anti-choice activist” by the judges brings their impartiality into question.  However, the facts of the case outlined in the judgement suggest that the conduct of Polish health care personnel, anti-abortion activists, clergy and state authorities effectively guaranteed an adverse outcome.

A 14 year old girl, P. supported by her mother, S.,  sought an abortion for a pregnancy alleged to have been the result of a rape.  While she obtained the necessary prosecutor’s certificate for the procedure, mother and daughter received contradictory information from two public hospitals in Lublin.  Further, health care personnel clearly violated principles of patient confidentiality and informed consent in an effort to dissuade the girl from having an abortion.  These violations included clearly coercive and manipulative tactics.  P and S experienced

  • the intervention of a priest and anti-abortion activists, unsolicited and unwanted,
  • importuning by anti-abortion activists that included confrontations in public,
  • national media attention, including a press release issued by a hospital concerning P,
  • detention and six hours of questioning by the police,
  • apprehension of the girl by state authorities, apparently for the express purpose of preventing the abortion,
  • posting on internet by the Catholic News Agency of the girl’s travel to Gdansk for an abortion,
  • the filing of criminal charges against the girl for having had unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor (i.e., the rape that resulted in pregnancy)

While the court found that objecting physicians had a legal obligation to refer patients for abortion, the source of that legal obligation was Polish law.  Article 39 of Poland’s Doctor and Dentist Professions Act imposes a legal obligation of referral.  The imposition is objectionable in principle, but the European Court of Human Rights can hardly be criticized for applying Polish law to Polish citizens.

Over 100 plaintiffs in lawsuits against U.S. government birth control mandate

The Becket Fund reports that more than 100 plaintiffs have now joined lawsuits against the federal government as a result of an administration regulation that forces employers to provide insurance for birth control and sterilization even if they object for reasons of conscience. [Becket Fund HHS Page]

 

UN Human Rights Commission demands suppression of freedom of conscience

The UN Human Rights Commison has issued a document that purports to base the restriction or suppression of freedom of conscience among health care workers on human rights claims.  Technical guidance on the application of a human rights based approach to the implementation of policies and programmes to reduce preventable maternal morbidity and mortality.  Section 30 of the document calls for changing laws and policies that allow conscientious objection “to hinder women’s access to a full range of services.”  Section 61 states that laws, polices and regulations that allow “unregulated conscientious objection” should be changed, and “newly established obligations of providers and rights of individual users should be disseminated.” The resolution was endorsed by New Zealand, Burkina Faso, and Colombia and enumerates access to abortion among “sexual and reproductive health rights.” 20 of the 47 council members opposed the text.  The UN General Assembly will consider adopting it later in October. [CFAM]

Appeal of Missouri court ruling on HHS birth control mandate

U.S. District Judge Carole Jackson of St. Louis has dismissed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services mandate brought by Frank O’Brien and his company, O’Brien Industrial Holdings LLC of St. Louis.  The suit challenged the federal government regulation that requires O’Brien to provide employees with insurance for contraceptives, embryocides and surgical sterilization.  A Catholic, O’Brien objects to facilitating any of the services for religious reasons.  The judge ruled that the indirect support did not substantially burden the free exercise of O’Brien’s religious beliefs.  Lawyer Frank Manion of the American Center for Law and Justice has filed an appeal on behalf of O’Brien.  [ACLJ comment][St. Louis-Post Dispatch][Religion Dispatches]

 

Illinois court rules in favour of pharmacist freedom of conscience

Two pharmacists have won an appeal against a 2005 executive order issued by the Governor of Illinois that required all pharmacies to fill prescriptions for the morning after pill.  The appeals court upheld a lower court injunction based on the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act.

An Illinois appeals court has ruled in favor of two pharmacists who objected to having to provide emergency contraception on religious grounds, setting a precedent their lawyer hopes will protect others from judicial or state sanctions. [San Francisco Chronicle]