The Supreme Court and Debunking Abortion Myths
← Back
Health care personnel can invoke conscientious objection to prevent women and other pregnant people from having an abortion: FALSE
Conscientious objection must not, under any circumstances, restrict or violate the human rights of others; therefore, health care personnel cannot invoke it to evade their obligations.
In Action of Unconstitutionality 54/2018, the SCJN held that conscientious objection is not an absolute right and therefore cannot be invoked in all cases or in any form. For its regulation and exercise to be valid, it must comply with certain limits, including that it be individual in nature; that it involve a genuine conflict of conscience within a constitutional and democratic framework; and that it respect the human rights of others. In this way, the rights of women and other people with the capacity to gestate—recognized in the Constitution and in the country’s health laws—are protected, and the state’s obligation to guarantee them in a timely, high-quality, and non-discriminatory manner is reaffirmed. To this end:
- institutions must at all times have sufficient, available, and trained personnel to guarantee the right to health;
- only personnel directly involved in the procedure may invoke conscientious objection, and they must do so within a short time frame; otherwise, the objection will be deemed inadmissible;
- conscientious objection is not valid when it puts the patient’s life at risk, if it involves a medical emergency (such as cases of pregnancy termination due to sexual violence), if it poses a risk to health, or if it may prolong the service user’s suffering;
- conscientious objection by health care personnel must not hinder or delay the provision of a service; and
- objection on discriminatory grounds—such as sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, etc.—is not permitted.
The SCJN had already stated in other cases that, in order to promote, protect, or restore the health of women and other pregnant people in all its dimensions, abortion must be considered a health service; therefore, the Mexican state is obligated to guarantee access to it. Thus, conscientious objection must not prevent or constitute an obstacle to the exercise of the right to health, including access to abortion services for those who request them.
