The presentation for the appeal of abortion in the TC endorses the system of deadlines and proposes giving more information to women

The draft sentence of the current Law on abortion in the Constitutional Court validates the system of deadlines for the voluntary interruption of pregnancy approved by the Government of

and only appreciates the unconstitutionality of the article that regulates the information received by the women before abortion.

The presentation by magistrate

has had access

, maintains that

, through the system of deadlines, structures "a social, care and health model of a preventive nature at two levels: on the one hand, tends to set the conditions to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and, on the other, tries to avoid the production of abortions by articulating policies to support maternity".

The draft ruling explains that the system of deadlines established by Organic Law 2/2010 "is in line with the laws on voluntary termination of pregnancy in neighboring countries, whose constitutions, by the way, recognize and guarantee the right to life in terms similar to those of the Spanish Constitution".

Specifically, it includes how in

(since the 1975 law, modified by another 2001 law),

(1967 and 1990),

(1973),

(1975),

(1975),

(1977),

(1978),

(1980),

(1986),

(1990),

(1992),

(2002), or

(2007) have established deadline systems, "in which the woman can freely decide to voluntarily interrupt her pregnancy during the first weeks of gestation (up to 12-14 weeks of gestation, in most laws, which they go up to the first 18 weeks, in the case of Sweden), generally with a previous period of reflection, more or less brief, and the provision in many cases of counseling for the pregnant woman by a medical center or social assistance, and even, in some countries, an interview with the pregnant woman; outside of this initial period, the practice of abortions is foreseen in cases, medically justified, of risk to the life or health of the pregnant woman, as well as infeasibility and serious abnormalities or diseases of the fetus,until the twenty-second or twenty-fourth week of gestation, or even later, depending on the case".

In addition, the paper understands that in Organic Law 2/2010 -where the

was replaced by that of deadlines- "the legislator starts from the recognition of prenatal life as a legal right worthy of protection, as required by our STC 53/1985, while affirming that this must be made compatible with the fundamental rights of pregnant women (particularly with their personal autonomy, their dignity and the free development of their personality), to the extent that in any unwanted pregnancy there is a serious situation of personal conflict for the woman".

Judge Arnaldo emphasizes that "the exclusion of

during the first months of pregnancy in the terms provided for in article 14 of Organic Law 2/2010 (only during the first 14 weeks and under the legally established conditions) cannot reasonably be be interpreted as a waiver of the protection of the life of the unborn".

The draft ruling explains that "the fact that the fetus is viable (and, therefore, deserving of the protection of

as a constitutionally protected legal right) does not allow ignoring the existence of a situation of conflict with the rights rights of pregnant women (STC 53/1985, FJ 8), which the legislator must consider".

Debate in plenary, next week

Throughout

, which will be submitted for debate in plenary session next week, the professor of Constitutional Law only intends to declare the last paragraph of

of Organic Law 2/2010 unconstitutional and void, where it is established that "It will be communicated, in the documentation delivered, that said information may also be offered verbally, if the woman requests it."

Enrique Arnaldo interprets that this subparagraph allows the woman to not be offered this information if she does not expressly request it, "so that in such a case it would not be guaranteed that the pregnant woman would give her consent to the previously informed abortion practice. ".

In contrast, the draft ruling establishes that "pregnant women cannot be deprived or limited in their right to receive personalized, adequate, complete and sufficient information, both on the physical and psychological consequences of carrying out the intervention, as well as on the social policies to support maternity and pregnant women, so that they can decide freely, consciously and responsibly if they want to terminate the pregnancy or continue with the pregnancy, and that decision of the pregnant woman, given the existence of the complex conflict between rights and constitutionally protected goods that all abortion raises, can only be taken after a

".

Finally, regarding the recognition of the exercise of the right to

health professionals "directly involved" in the voluntary interruption of pregnancy, the text maintains that "it is neither an arbitrary restriction of the right, nor contrary to its essential content , provided that it is understood that it does not refer exclusively to the professionals who carry out the practice of the intervention itself in the centers of the public health network or in accredited ones, but also includes the health professionals involved in the previous actions of the process that leads to the termination of pregnancy for medical reasons referred to in

and that it does not exclude others who may have a subsequent implication, such as those in charge of collecting and destroying the remains derived from the practice of abortion".

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more