关于欧洲人权法院2020年2月11日对格里姆马克诉瑞典和斯廷诉瑞典的裁决的声明。

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW Przeglad Sejmowy Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.31268/ps.2022.92
Oktawian Nawrot
{"title":"关于欧洲人权法院2020年2月11日对格里姆马克诉瑞典和斯廷诉瑞典的裁决的声明。","authors":"Oktawian Nawrot","doi":"10.31268/ps.2022.92","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The commented decisions concern the issue of freedom of conscience in the midwifery profession and the possibility of its restriction by the state in connection with the need to ensure access to health care for pregnant women, in particular those choosing to terminate their pregnancy. The European Court of Human Rights, breaking with the previous line of jurisprudence, ruled that where the possibility of termination of pregnancy is provided for by national law and implemented within the framework of the health care system, a person intending to exercise the profession of midwife, which entails, inter alia, the obligation to participate in abortion procedures, cannot exempt herself from this obligation on the grounds of conscientious objection. The author disagrees with the position of the Court and with the reasoning presented by it, which led it to declare the complaints as manifestly unfounded.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Glosa do postanowień Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka w sprawach Grimmark vs. Szwecja oraz Steen vs. Szwecja z dnia 11 lutego 2020 r. – sprzeciw sumienia położnych\",\"authors\":\"Oktawian Nawrot\",\"doi\":\"10.31268/ps.2022.92\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The commented decisions concern the issue of freedom of conscience in the midwifery profession and the possibility of its restriction by the state in connection with the need to ensure access to health care for pregnant women, in particular those choosing to terminate their pregnancy. The European Court of Human Rights, breaking with the previous line of jurisprudence, ruled that where the possibility of termination of pregnancy is provided for by national law and implemented within the framework of the health care system, a person intending to exercise the profession of midwife, which entails, inter alia, the obligation to participate in abortion procedures, cannot exempt herself from this obligation on the grounds of conscientious objection. The author disagrees with the position of the Court and with the reasoning presented by it, which led it to declare the complaints as manifestly unfounded.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42093,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Przeglad Sejmowy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Przeglad Sejmowy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2022.92\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Przeglad Sejmowy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2022.92","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

所评论的决定涉及助产士职业的良心自由问题,以及国家出于确保孕妇,特别是选择终止妊娠的孕妇获得保健服务的需要而对其进行限制的可能性。欧洲人权法院打破了以前的判例路线,裁定如果终止妊娠的可能性是由国家法律规定并在保健制度框架内实施的,打算从事助产士职业的人,除其他外,有义务参加堕胎程序,不能以良心反对为理由免除这一义务。发件人不同意法院的立场和它提出的理由,这导致法院宣布控诉显然是毫无根据的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Glosa do postanowień Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka w sprawach Grimmark vs. Szwecja oraz Steen vs. Szwecja z dnia 11 lutego 2020 r. – sprzeciw sumienia położnych
The commented decisions concern the issue of freedom of conscience in the midwifery profession and the possibility of its restriction by the state in connection with the need to ensure access to health care for pregnant women, in particular those choosing to terminate their pregnancy. The European Court of Human Rights, breaking with the previous line of jurisprudence, ruled that where the possibility of termination of pregnancy is provided for by national law and implemented within the framework of the health care system, a person intending to exercise the profession of midwife, which entails, inter alia, the obligation to participate in abortion procedures, cannot exempt herself from this obligation on the grounds of conscientious objection. The author disagrees with the position of the Court and with the reasoning presented by it, which led it to declare the complaints as manifestly unfounded.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊最新文献
Nowa Zelandia: Wyrok Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 21 listopada 2022 r. w sprawie Make It 16 Incorporated vs. Attorney-General (dotyczący wieku uprawniającego do głosowania w wyborach), sygn. akt SC 14/2022 Dopuszczalność odwołania od uchwał Krajowej Rady Sądownictwa w sprawach przeniesienia sędziego do innego wydziału Posłanka Wanda Ładzina (1880–1966) i jej działalność w Polsce i we Francji Uczestnictwo Sejmu i Senatu w procedurze kontroli przestrzegania zasady subsydiarności a przyszłość parlamentów narodowych w procesach decyzyjnych Unii Europejskiej Uzasadnienie orzeczeń sądowych – wybrane problemy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1