Struggling
to define abortion in El Salvador
The Salvadorian Health
Ministry approved to terminate Beatriz’ high risk pregnancy through a
caesarean; but, was it an abortion?
Last week, the Supreme
Court of El Salvador once again maintained their position against abortion, as
well as denying Beatriz’ petition to undergo a therapeutic abortion. It also ordered her doctor’s to keep her
under medical monitoring to follow all of the necessary procedures to save her
life.
As a result of that,
the Ministry of Health approved a cesarean delivery because her fetus had no
chances of survival outside of her womb.
The cesarean was performed on Monday, June 3, 2013 and the fetus died
hours later, while Beatriz was recovering in the hospital; her life is no
longer at risk.
Salvadorian antiabortion
groups celebrated the Court and the Ministry of Health’s decision to “induce
birth” because it showed the general population that the fetus died through
natural causes. Reproductive rights
advocates, however, view the medical intervention as an abortion. Alejandra Cardenas, legal adviser, of the
Center of Reproductive Rights told the New York Times that, “It is an abortion
[because] they interrupted an unviable pregnancy.”
“Salvadorian laws have
no distinction between abortion and an induced premature birth,” said Evelyn
Farfan, a professor of constitutional law at the University of El
Salvador. Therefore, when judges approved
the medical intervention, but denied the abortion petition, “they modulated the
terminology they used in the ruling to say the same thing without referencing
the same word, abortion.” – Evelyn Farfan said.
The Salvadorian
Obstetrics and Gynecologists made their own procedure fit the gap of the law,
which defines that after 20 weeks of pregnancy, there is a difference between
abortion and premature delivery. With
undefined guidelines for abortion, the decision, according to some doctors was
unclear. “The abortion was made with
intent of killing a baby” stated Jose Miguel Fortin Magana, director of Legal
Medicine Institute. He also said to the
New York Times that “an induction was done with the purpose to only save
Beatriz’ life.”
I hope Beatriz’ case
helps women in El Salvador fight for their rights. It should be proof that they are in charge of
their life decisions, especially when their life is at risk.
Katie McDonough is an
assistant editor for salon focusing on lifestyle follows her on
twitter@kmcdonough.com or her e-mail at
I think it is a shame that they made this woman carry this baby past 20 weeks just to prove they were not doing an abortion. If they knew the baby would not survive outside of the womb they should have done something about it right away. I feel that if a woman is carrying a child that will not survive once born, was raped, or life is in danger then they should have the right to make that choice whether to get an abortion or not.
ReplyDeleteI'm not too familiar with this case and would have to read more about it to state a definite opinion on whether I agree with the procedure being an abortion or not. If Beatriz's life was in danger as well as her baby's, then doctors do need to take all legal precautions to care for their patients. Also, my opinion does depend on whether Beatriz admitted herself to the hospital or not. This is an aspect I constantly see being avoided. If she took herself to the hospital she is asking for help and doctors are going to give her that the best way they know how. However, IF they waited 20 weeks to complete the procedure to justify their actions, then I think it is completely injustice and morally wrong. There are quite a bit of variables that need to be considered in this case. It is very interesting, though, and reminds me of the debate on transvaginal ultrasounds, I think that is a topic that would interest you.
ReplyDeleteElduvina, after reading your blog about Beatriz’s case I just cannot understand how the government in El Salvador can get away with something like that. It is clearly that the best decision in this case would be to perform an abortion on Beatriz not only because the baby does not have a chance of living a healthy normal life, but because Beatriz’s life is at risk also. The government should not be the making the decisions that put at risk your own life. Government was created to ensure democracy and equality, not to decide how long I live or when should I die. It is important to remember that government was created to represent the people and they are nothing without the people. In this case the government from El Salvador is not only not representing Beatriz in a good way, but is also violating her human rights. That should not be allowed at El Salvador or at any other place.
ReplyDelete