The Supreme Court and Debunking Abortion Myths

Abortion requests must be reviewed and approved by hospital bioethics committees: FALSE

Bioethics committees do not have this authority.

In 2015, Marimar, a 17-year-old girl, was a victim of sexual violence and became pregnant. Accompanied by her mother, she went to the Public Prosecutor’s Office to report the assault, where the two were informed that Marimar had the right to terminate the pregnancy; however, they were not informed of the procedure nor referred to any health institution. They then went to the Dr. José G. Parres General Hospital of Cuernavaca, where they were told that the pregnancy was high-risk and therefore requested its legal termination. The hospital’s Bioethics Committee decided to deny Marimar this right—despite it being guaranteed by the LGV and NOM 046—and determined that she should continue the pregnancy, arguing that “although the product presented a congenital malformation, it did not pose a risk to its health or to the mother’s life.”

This case—also accompanied by GIRE—was brought before the SCJN. In 2018, through Amparo in Review 601/2017, the Court determined that the Bioethics Committee’s refusal to provide medical abortion services in a case involving a pregnancy resulting from sexual violence had violated Marimar’s reproductive rights by disregarding the provisions of the LGV, the Criminal Code of the State of Morelos, and Article 1 of the Constitution. Moreover, the SCJN emphasized the obligation to provide timely, comprehensive, and effective reparations for the human rights violations suffered by Marimar and her family.

← Back