THE EUROPEAN COURT of Human Rights has judged that a teenage girl who was raped in Poland should have been given “unhindered” access to abortion.
The court ruled that there had been two violations of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights, as regards the determination of access to lawful abortion in respect of both applicants – a mother and a daughter – (by six votes to one) and as regards the disclosure of the applicants’ personal data (unanimously).
It further held, unanimously, that there had been: A violation of Article 5. 1 (right to liberty and security) in respect of the girl, who it called P, and a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) in respect of P.
The case concerned the difficulties encountered by a teenage girl, who had become pregnant as a result of rape, in obtaining access to an abortion, in particular due to the lack of a clear legal framework, procrastination of medical staff and also as a result of harassment.
The Court held in particular that:
the applicants had been given misleading and contradictory information and had not received objective medical counselling; and, the fact that access to abortion was a subject of heated debate in Poland did not absolve the medical staff from their professional obligations regarding medical secrecy.
Applicants
The applicants were P and her mother who are Polish nationals living in Lublin, Poland. When P was 14, in 2008, she became pregnant after being raped. In order to have an abortion, she obtained a certificate from the public prosecutor saying she had become pregnant through unlawful sexual intercourse, which is in accordance with the 1993 law on family planning.
However the mother and P said they had considerable difficulties in accessing an abortion, including contradictory information from two public hospitals.
The head of the gynaecological ward of one of the hospitals took P to see a Catholic priest without asking her if she wanted to see him. The priest tried to convince her to carry the pregnancy to term. Her mother was also asked by this gynaecological head to sign a consent form to the abortion that warned it could lead to her daughter’s death, but she refused.
The head gynaecologist refused to allow the abortion to be performed in her ward due to her religious views. The mother and P travelled to Warsaw, but an abortion was not carried out and P received messages from the priest and other people trying to convince her to change her mind. A press release had been issued by the Lublin hospital about the abortion, though it did not contain information on the girl’s identity.
They were also harassed by anti-abortion activists and taken to a police station where they were detained. The girl was placed in a juvenile shelter, and later to a hospital after reporting to be suffering from pain.
After a complaint to the Minister of Health, the girl was able to undergo an abortion in Gdánsk on 17 June 2008.
The court said in its ruling that:
Polish law in principle provided for mechanisms to reconcile doctors’ right to conscientious objection with patients’ interests, in particular by obliging the doctor to refer the patient to another physician carrying out the same service. However, it had not been shown that those requirements had been complied with in P’s case.
It also said that: “[I]t had not been shown that the legal setting in Poland allowed for [the mother’s] concerns to be properly addressed in a way that would respect her views and attitudes and to balance them in a fair and respectful manner against the interests of her pregnant daughter.
The court held that Poland was to pay the girl €30,000 and her mother €15,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage and €6,000 to both applicants in respect of costs and expenses.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say