From: WGNRR Updates <off...@wgnrr.org>
Subject: Romanian women at risk / Mujeres rumanas en riesgo
To: "Kamukunji Paralegal Trust" <kap...@live.co.uk>
Date: Monday, April 16, 2012, 8:48 AM
WGNRR Members' Update keeps members informed about the Coordination Office activities, conferences, resources, funding opportunities, solidarity, etc. It also gives members space to make announcements, request information or share points of view. Your contributions are welcome! Send them to off...@wgnrr.org
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Kamukunji Paralegal Trust,
See Spanish below / En español mas abajo.
On this occasion we want to bring to your attention the serious threats to women´s right to decide over their own bodies without coercion that are taking place in Romania and Ukraine.
Ukraine
In Ukraine a proposed law would ban abortion and add a penalty for couples who do not have children. Moreover, the initiative also includes a ban on the act of sex in the missionary position.
An initiator of the bill said that the missionary position has been proven ineffective for conceiving children. However, some activists argue that the inclusion of the anti-missionary law is only a diversion tactic to distract from the initiative’s real anti-choice purpose. Supporters of the proposed law in the Verkhovna Rada say that they support this initiative out of concern for Ukraine’s declining population and low fertility rate.
However, it is clear that the initiative also has the intention of controlling women’s choices, it has support from religious figures.
To sign the petition to urge Mykola Azarov, the Prime Minister of Ukraine, not to support this proposed law go to:
http://forcechange.com/17532/urge-ukraine-not-to-prohibit-abortion-and-childlessness/
Romania
The parliament there wants to pass a law that would force every woman who seeks and abortion to undergo an extremely biased “pregnancy crisis counseling” and a mandatory wait of five days "to reflect". As the draft itself explains “Pregnancy crisis counselling offices are established with the aim to inform in an organized, confidential and safe framework, pregnant women regarding the risks of abortion, the rights and benefits pregnant women have according to the law so that the decision regarding the pregnancy to be fully informed”.
We are asking organizations to sign the letter at the end of this e-mail, no later than April 20. Please respond to Johanna Westeson (jwes...@reprorights.org) and Iustina Ionescu (iion...@ecpi.ro) with your signatures.
The letter will be translated and sent to the following:
- President of Romania, Traian Basescu
- Prime Minister, Mihai Razvan Ungureanu
- President of the Romanian Senate, Vasile Blaga
- President of the Romanian Chamber of Representatives, Roberta Alma Anastase
- Presidents of the commissions from the Senate & Chamber of Representatives assigned with drafting the report/advice on the draft law.
To read an unofficial translation of the draft law click here.
Below are the details of the pregnancy crisis counseling offices functions.
As you can read this so called counselling has the potential to be really traumatic
“c) Pregnancy crisis counselling represents the activity of:
-
Investigating the motives that determine the pregnant woman to ask for a voluntary pregnancy interruption;
-
Explaining and illustrating with images photo/video the medical procedure of abortion;
-
Informing regarding the existence of immediate and late physical and mental risks and complications to abortion on demand (such as sterility, psychological suffering, post-abortion syndrome, etc);
-
Informing regarding embryonic and foetal development from the moment of conception of the child until birth, through discussions, presenting short video material, as well as underlining the fact that as soon as conception, the embryo is a human being in the full sense of the word, whose life will end as a result of the medical procedure;
-
Presenting ultrasound exams of the pregnancy and handing a photographic or video record, when this is possible;
-
Explaining the alternatives to abortion, such as: the possibility to give the child to adoption, maternal to foster care in a family or in an institution, nurseries having a weekly schedule, etc;
-
Informing regarding social, medical, psychological, financial and maternal assistance during pregnancy and after birth, provided by various state institutions or private organizations;
-
Handing a list with institutions and organizations that provide assistance and support, such as: non-governmental organization, religious denominations, social assistance from the part of mayor’s office through the Social Assistance and Child Protection Department, maternal centres, etc".
En esta ocasión le escribimos con el objetivo de informarle sobre las serias amenazas al derecho de las mujeres a decidir sobre sus propios cuerpos sin coerción que están tomando lugar en Rumania y Ucrania.
Ucrania
En Ucrania un proyecto de ley busca prohibir el aborto y añadirá una multa para las parejas que no tienen hijos/as. Más aun busca prohibir el acto sexual en la posición del misionario.
Un iniciador de este proyecto señala que la posición sexual del misionario ha sido probada como inefectiva para concebir. Aunque, algunxs activistas señalan que la inclusión de la ley anti-misionario es solo una táctica de distracción para quitar la atención del propósito real de esta ley que es restringir el derecho a elegir. Quienes apoyan esta ley en el Verkhovna Rada señalan que apoyan esta iniciativa debido a su preocupación por la disminución de la población ucraniana y su baja tasa de fertilidad.
Aunque, es claro que la iniciativa también tiene la intención de controlar las opciones de las mujeres porque es apoyada por figuras religiosas.
Para firmar una petición que inste al Primer Ministro de Ucrania Mykola Azarov a no apoyar este proyecto de ley, visite:
http://forcechange.com/17532/urge-ukraine-not-to-prohibit-abortion-and-childlessness/
Rumania
El parlamento rumano quiere pasar una ley que forzará a cada mujer que busca acceder a un aborto a someterse a una extremadamente sesgada “consejería de embarazo en crisis/pregnancy crisis counseling” y a “reflexionar” por 5 días. Ilustrativa del espíritu de este proyecto es la definición de los objetivos de la consejería “las oficinas de consejería de embarazo en crisis se establecerán con el objetivo de informar en un ambiente organizado, confidencial y seguro a las mujeres embarazadas sobre los riesgos del aborto, los derechos y beneficios que las mujeres embarazadas tienen de acuerdo a la ley, para que la decisión sobre la preñez este completamente informada”.
Le pedimos a las organizaciones firmar la carta que explica en detalle porque esta ley es nociva y contraria a los derechos humanos, no mas tarde del 20 de Abril. Por favor envié sus adhesiones a Johanna Westeson, (jwes...@reprorights.org) y Iustina Ionescu (iion...@ecpi.ro) con sus firmas.
Esta carta será traducida al rumano y enviada a las siguientes personas:
- Presidente de Rumania, Traian Basescu
- Primer Ministro, Mihai Razvan Ungureanu
- Presidente del Senado, Vasile Blaga
- Presidente de la Cámara Rumana de Representantes, Roberta Alma Anastase
- Presidentes de las comisiones del senado y la Cámara Rumana de Representantes asignada con la redacción del reporte/ aconsejar sobre el proyecto de ley.
Para leer una traducción al inglés no oficial del borrador de esta ley cliqueé aquí.
Abajo hay algunos detalles de las funciones de las oficinas de consejería de embarazo en crisis.
“La consejería de embarazo en crisis representa la actividad de:
-
Investigar los motivos que determinan que la mujer embarazada pida una interrupción voluntaria del embarazo;
-
Explicar e ilustrar con imagines de fotografías/video el procedimiento medico de aborto;
-
Informar sobre la existencia de riesgos y complicaciones físicas y psíquicas inmediatos y tardíos como resultado del aborto en demanda (como esterilidad, sufrimiento psicológico, síndrome post-aborto, etc.);
-
Informar sobre el desarrollo embrionario y fetal desde el momento de la concepción del niño/a hasta el parto, a través de discusiones, presentando materiales de video breves, así como subrayando el hecho de que desde el momento de la concepción, el embrión es un ser humano en todo el sentido de la palabra, cuya vida se terminara como resultado del procedimiento medico;
-
Presentando exámenes de ultrasonido de la preñez y entregando imágenes fotográficas o en vídeo, cuando sea posible;
-
Explicando las alternativas al aborto, tales como: la posibilidad de dar al niño/a en adopción, dejarlo al cuidado de una familia o institución, “nurseries having a weekly Schedule” ¿salas cuna?, etc.;
-
Informar sobre la asistencia social, medica, psicológica, financiera y materna durante la preñez y después del parto, provistas por varias instituciones del estado u organizaciones privadas;
-
Entregar una lista con instituciones y organizaciones que proveen asistencia y apoyo, tales como: ONGs, instituciones religiosas, asistencia social desde las municipalidades a través de la Asistencia Social, el Departamento de Protección infantil, los centros maternos, etc”.
Letter to the Romanian authorities urging them to reject the proposed law because it violates women´s human rights.
Carta a las Autoridades Rumanas instándolas a rechazar la propuesta de ley porque viola los derechos humanos de las mujeres.
[ ] April 2012
Dear Honorable:
[To be inserted]
The undersigned organizations respectfully submit this letter expressing our concern about the proposed law on the establishment, functioning and organization of crisis pregnancy counseling offices (the “Draft Law”) in Romania. We are alarmed about the establishment of crisis pregnancy counseling offices that provide mandatory biased counseling to women in connection with abortion services, and the imposition of a “reflection” period before women can access abortion services. The Draft Law imposes barriers on women’s access to legal abortion services. As such, it conflicts with women’s rights to life, privacy, physical integrity and autonomy, confidentiality, health, and non-discrimination, as protected by the Romanian Constitution and reflected in Romania’s international and regional human rights obligations.
The establishment of crisis pregnancy counseling offices that provide mandatory and biased “crisis pregnancy counseling” questions women’s decision-making authority and requires unnecessary, coercive and inaccurate medical information to be provided to women requesting an abortion. This information includes advising the woman about “the existence of … mental risks and complications from abortion on demand (such as sterility, psychological suffering, postabortion syndrome, etc.),” indicating that from conception “the embryo is a human being … whose life will end as a result of the medical procedure” and presenting “ultrasound exams of the pregnancy.”[1]Biased counseling
requirements are harmful to women seeking an abortion, creating barriers that do not serve an actual medical purpose. Imposing these barriers on women’s access to legal abortion services infringe upon women’s decision-making, perpetuate gender stereotypes about women’s ability to make reasonable decisions about reproduction, and thus, discriminate against women. Moreover, the five day “reflection” period, which begins once a woman has completed a crisis pregnancy counseling session, further reinforces the notion that women are unable to make rational and thoughtful reproductive choices. Such mandatory waiting periods unnecessarily delay abortion, decrease the safety of abortion services and may drive some women, especially adolescents, to undergo illegal abortions or seek abortions outside of Romania. We strongly urge all members of the Romanian Parliament, as well as the representatives of the Romanian Government, to take into consideration
medical guidelines and international and regional human rights standards in their consideration of the Draft Law.
The World Health Organization (WHO)guidelines on safe abortion provide concrete legal and policy guidance on the issues addressed in the Draft Law. These guidelines indicate that not medically required waiting periods constitute administrative and regulatory barriers to obtaining safe, legal abortion services that unnecessarily delay care and decrease safety.[2]Such waiting periods may also lead women to risk self-induced abortion or clandestine services.[3]
The WHO guidelines also indicate that women should be treated with respect and understanding and thus be given information in a way they can understand so that they can make a choice about having or not having an abortion to the extent permitted by law and free of inducement, coercion or discrimination.[4]Accordingly, counseling in cases of requests for abortion should be voluntary, confidential and provided by a trained person.[5]Specifically, “[a]t a minimum, abortion services should always provide medically accurate information about abortion, and offer non-directive counselling and contraceptive information and services….”[6]However, in contravention of these guidelines, the information that the crisis pregnancy counseling centers would provide according to the Draft Law is not medically accurate. A new study published by the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges dispels the myth that women who procure abortions on demand are more likely to experience mental health risks or psychological
suffering.[7]Instead, this study proves that “… for women with an unwanted pregnancy, abortion does not appear to harm their mental health.”[8]Additionally, a recent U.S. study concluded that “among women who have a single, legal, first-trimester abortion of an unplanned pregnancy for nontherapeutic reasons, the relative risks of mental health problems are no greater than the risks among women who deliver an unplanned pregnancy.”[9]This report also concluded that studies positing the existence of “postabortion syndrome” were methodically flawed.[10]Notably, post-abortion syndrome is nota diagnosis recognized by credible American medical associations.[11]Therefore, providing women with medically inaccurate information in an attempt to coerce them to carry unwanted pregnancies to term may actually expose them to a risk of psychological suffering, rather than deter mental health problems from occurring. Furthermore, counseling according to the Draft Law does not include information about contraceptive information and services. This contradicts WHO standards that recommend such counseling—provided in a voluntary, non-biased and scientifically accurate manner—as an integral part of pre- and post-abortion services.[12]
The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO)have provided guidance on the right to informed consent to medical procedures. FIGO has indicated that in connection with the respect for a woman’s fundamental rights, states have the “obligation to obtain the informed consent of a woman before any medical intervention is undertaken.”[13]Informed consent is a process of communication between a health care provider and patient. It requires the patient’s consent to be given freely and voluntarily, without threats or inducements, after the patient has been counseled on available risks, potential side effects, and different methods, in a manner that is understandable to the
patient.[14]Such a process is central to ensuring a woman’s right to be involved in medical decision making.[15]However, providing information that is intended to mislead women, such as the inaccurate medical information mandated by the Draft Law, is an outright violation of a woman’s right to provide informed consent to a medical procedure. The WHO has also indicated that in connection with their right to informed consent, patients
have a “right not to be informed.”[16]Therefore, to the extent that crisis pregnancy counseling includes “presenting ultrasound exams of the pregnancy and handing a photographic or video record, when this is possible” despite the woman’s indicated preference not to receive this information, the crisis pregnancy counseling likewise violates her rights. The Draft Law is not designed to increase women’s knowledge about their health but to force or coerce them to continue their pregnancy despite their wishes. If the Romanian Government instead would take into consideration the aforementioned medical standards, this would strengthen the capacity of the health system in Romania to provide
effective access to safe and legal abortion and thereby strengthen women’s rights to health, self-determination, privacy, and non-discrimination.
Regional and international human rights standards also support ensuring access and removing barriers to abortion. The recent Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) Resolution 1607 (2008) Access to safe and legal abortion in Europe reiterated these principles and added that the decision on whether or not to have an abortion should be a matter for the woman concerned, and she should have the means of exercising this right in an effective way.[17]The European Court of Human Rights (the Court) has also stated in the case of Tysiac v. Poland and subsequently reiterated that the state’s positive obligation to secure effective respect for a pregnant woman’s right to private life
requires that the regulation of the legal termination of pregnancy is not structured in a way “which would limit real possibilities to obtain [legal abortion].”[18]States must establish effective procedural safeguards to ensure women’s access to legal abortion services in practice. In relation to access to information related to abortion, the Court held last year that denial of comprehensive information to a pregnant woman who was considering undergoing an abortion on her health status and that of the fetus amounted to violations of the rights to private life and freedom from inhuman and degrading treatment. The Court stated that in the context of pregnancy, the effective access to
relevant information on the mother’s health and fetus’ development, where legislation allows for abortion in certain situations, is directly relevant for the exercise of personal autonomy.[19]It noted that women are entitled to access information about their health and the health status of the pregnancy free from discrimination, coercion, or violence in order to “preserve their bodily integrity by making reproductive health care decisions.”[20]Moreover, the European Parliament has recommended to member states “that, in order to safeguard women's reproductive health and rights, abortion should be made legal, safe and accessible to all.”[21]
United Nations Human Rights Treaty Monitoring Bodies (UNTMBs) have consistently advised states to ensure access to reproductive health care services by removing barriers to legal abortion and ensuring that women and girls do not have to undergo life-threatening clandestine abortions.[22]Moreover, they have recognized the issue of maternal mortality due to unsafe abortion and framed this issue as a violation of the right to life.[23]Notably, contrary to the Preamble of the Draft Law, international human rights treaties do not recognize a fundamental right to life of the unborn child. As illustrated by the history of negotiations of some of the major human rights treaties, right to life provisions are not intended to protect a prenatal right to life.[24]Additionally, UNTMBs, through general comments, concluding observations, and decisions in individual cases, consistently emphasize the importance of protecting women’s rights, and assert that to guarantee women’s fundamental rights to life and health, among others, states must remove barriers to the full enjoyment of those rights, such as barriers on
abortion services.[25]
We thank you for your consideration of this letter and express our hope that Romania will continue to ensure that its laws and policies on abortion respect women’s rights and include protection for informed and non-coercive decision-making, in compliance with regional and international human rights and medical standards.
Respectfully yours,
Organizations:
Center for Reproductive Rights, U.S.A.
[1]Propunere legislativa privind infiintarea, functionarea si organizarea cabinetelor de consiliere pentru criza de sarcina No.b118/20.03.2012 (Draft law on the establishment, functioning and organization of pregnancy crisis counseling offices).
[2]See World Health Organization(WHO), Safe Abortion: Technical and Policy Guidance for Health Systems90-91(2003) [hereinafter WHO,Safe Abortion].
[4]See id. at26, 65-66, 89.
[7]Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, Induced Abortion and Mental Health 8(2011).
[11]Id.; Melissa Kleder & S. Malia Richmond-Crum,NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland Fund,The Truth Revealed Maryland Crisis Pregnancy Center Investigations 1 (2008).
[12]WHO,Safe Abortion, supra note 2, at 20, 27.
[15]See Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Rep. of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health(64th Sess.), transmitted by Note of the Secretary-General, paras. 30-31, U.N. Doc A/64/272(2009) (by Anand Grover).
[16]WHO, European Consultation on the Rights of Patients, Declaration on the Promotion of Patients’ Rights in Europe, para. 2.5, ICP/HLE 121 (June 28,1994).
[18]Tysiąc v. Poland, No. 5410/03 Eur. Ct. H.R., para. 116 (2007); RR v. Poland, No. 27617/04Eur. Ct. H.R (2008), para. 200.
[19]RR, No. 27617/04, para.197.
[22]See Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 28: Article 3 (The equality of rights between men and women),(68th Sess., 2000), in Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, at 229, para. 10, U.N. Doc. HIR/GEN/1/Rev.9 (Vol. 1) (2008); Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW Committee), General Recommendation No. 24: Article 12 of the Convention (women and health),(20th Sess., 1999), in Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, at 361, paras. 14, 27, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9
(Vol. II) (2008); Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 14: The right to the highest attainable standard of health (Art. 12), (22nd Sess., 2000), in Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, at 83, para. 21, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 (Vol. I) (2008).
[23]See, e.g., CEDAW Committee, Concluding Observations: Belize, para. 56, U.N. Doc. A/54/38 (1999); Colombia, para. 393, U.N. Doc. A/54/38 (1999); Dominican Republic, para. 337, U.N. Doc. A/53/38 (1998); Chile, para. 8, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/CHL/CO/5 (2007); Madagascar, para. 14, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/MDG/CO/3 (2007).
[24]U.N. GAOR 3rd Comm., 99th mtg., paras.110-124, U.N. Doc. A/PV/99 (1948); U.N. GAOR Annex, 12th Sess., Agenda Item 33, paras.96, 113, 119, U.N. Doc. A/C.3/L.654; Question of a Convention on the Rights of the Child: Rep. of the Working Group, U.N. Comm’n on Human Rights, 36th Sess., U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/L.1542 (1980). See also Rep. of the Working Group on a Draft Convention on the Rights of the Child, U.N. Comm’n on Human Rights, 45th Sess., at 11, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1989/48 (1989).
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright © 2012 Women's Global Network for Reproductive Rights, All rights reserved.
Our mailing address is:
Women's Global Network for Reproductive Rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
