2 comments  

Nancy Northup is a CLS alum, Center for Gender & Sexuality advisory board member, and the President of the Center for Reproductive Rights. She shares the exciting news that the Center for Reproductive Rights won a landmark reproductive rights case in Poland below:

(CENTER PRESS RELEASE) Today, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Poland violated a woman’s human rights when she was repeatedly denied a prenatal genetic examination after a doctor discovered fetal irregularities during a sonogram. The test would have informed the woman’s decision on whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. For the first time in its history, the Court specifically found that an abortion-related violation amounted to inhumane and degrading treatment. The Court also cited a violation of the woman’s private life and ordered the Polish government to compensate her.

“Today’s decision is a groundbreaking victory for women across Europe. Governments cannot let doctors impose their anti-abortion ideology on pregnant women who are seeking genetic testing,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “The court has recognized that withholding information or lawful health services from a woman deprives her of the ability to make extremely important and private decisions about her own life.”

Poland has one of the most restrictive abortion laws in Europe, but the law does allow for abortion in cases of fetal abnormality. In the ruling, the Court also noted that Poland needs to effectively implement its law by ensuring women’s access to diagnostic procedures.

R.R.*, the woman who filed a petition against Poland, was repeatedly sent to numerous doctors, clinics and hospitals far from her home and even hospitalized for several days without explanation – all in an effort to prolong her pregnancy. In the end, her pregnancy surpassed the time limit for abortion on fetal impairment grounds. R.R. is represented by lawyers from the Polish Federation for Women in Family Planning and the University of Warsaw Law Clinic with the Center for Reproductive Rights.

“Unfortunately, R.R.’s experience is a common one in Poland. The exceedingly restrictive and unclear abortion law framework in the country continues to expose women to serious human rights violations. It’s time that the Polish government enforces its laws and protects the human rights of its citizens,” said Christina Zampas, senior regional manager and legal adviser for Europe. ”

In R.R. v. Poland, R.R. argued that her rights to be free from inhuman and degrading treatment, private and family life, access to justice, and nondiscrimination were violated and asked that Poland change its practice for prenatal examinations and women’s access to abortion and its policy on conscientious objection.

*The initials used are a pseudonym used to protect the identity of the client.

2 comments

  1. European Court Issues Landmark Decision Against Poland, Says Women Entitled To Prenatal Genetic Testing http://t.co/SYLFJAH

  2. European Court Issues Landmark Decision Against #Poland, Says Women Entitled To Prenatal Genetic Testing http://t.co/1LjjBSB

Add a comment


Comments are subject to moderation and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of
Columbia Law School or Columbia University.

FEATURED POSTS

CATEGORY CLOUD

"Homeland" Security Abortion Rights Adoption adultery Alien Tort Claims Act Asylum Bankruptcy BDS Bullying Census Politics Children Citizenship Civil Unions Columbia Law School Compulsory Marriage Condoms Contraception Cordoba House Criminal Law Cures for Homosexuality Defense of Marriage Act Disability Rights Discrimination Divorce Domestic Partnership Domestic Violence Domestic Workers Don't Ask Don't Tell Economic Justice Education Egypt Elections Employment Discrimination ENDA Estate Planning Events Family Law Fellowships femininity Free Speech Gender and Technology Gender Identity Discrimination Gendering the Economy GSL Online Haiti Hate Crimes Health Care Hilary Clinton Hillary Clinton HIV HIV Discrimination Homelessness Homophobia Housing Human Rights Identity Politics Illegitimacy (sic) Immigration Reform In-ing Incest India International Law Islamophobia Israel Justice Sotomayor King & Spalding Labor Trafficking Land Reform Law School Legal Profession Legal Scholarship Lesbian & Gay Parenting LGBT Parenting Marital Status Discrimination Marriage Masculinity Medicaid Michelle Obama Migration Military National Security Obama Administration Obama Appointments Outing OWS Palestine Parenting Pinkwashing Policing Politics of the Veil Polyamory Popular Culture Pornograpy Pregnancy Presidential Politics Prisons Privacy Products Liability Profanity Prop 8 Prosecutorial Discretion Publications Queer Theory Queer vs. Gay Rights Race and Racism Racial Stereotyping Rape Religious Fundamentalism Reproductive Rights Reproductive Technology Romania Rwanda Sartorial Commentary Schools Sex Discrimination Sex Education Sex Stereotyping Sexting Sex Trafficking Sexual Assault Sexual Duplicity Sexual Harassment Sexual Health Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic Sexual Orientation Discrimination Sex Work SMUG Sodomy Law Reform Sports Supreme Court Surrogacy Technology Title IX Trafficking Transgender Uganda Uncategorized Violence Women and Poverty Women of Color Zimbabwe

Academic Calendar  |  Resources for Employers  |  Campus Map & Directory  |  Columbia University  |  Jobs at Columbia  |  Contact Us

© Copyright 2009, Columbia Law School. For questions or comments, please contact the webmaster.