TIME00299

TIME00299
Latin America and the Caribbean
Colombia
Yes
Abortion
Advance
Court ruling
07-2010
Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.Colombia: Sentence T-585/2010 (Villavicencio) – The claimant, C.C., requested an abortion on the grounds of risk to her health and life. Claiming conscientious objection, her attending physicians refused to perform the procedure, and the hospital asked her to fulfill additional requirements. C.C. filed a tutela, which was denied by the court of first instance. She then appealed to the Constitutional Court, which stated that pregnant women cannot be forced “to take heroic sacrifices or lay down their own rights for the benefit of third parties or the public interest.” It also stressed the importance of timely diagnoses by health care providers. Finally, it ruled that the hospital had violated C.C.’s fundamental right to abortion.