TIME00329

Colombia: Sentence T-636/2011 (Armenia) – The claimant, A.A., requested an abortion due to the strong likelihood of fetal malformation (as she suffered from epilepsy and the drugs she was taking could adversely affect her pregnancy). Her request was denied by two different courts and was then appealed to the Constitutional Court. After further medical examinations, however, she discovered that the fetus did not have any malformations, and she withdrew her request. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court ruled on A.A.’s case, deciding (1) to revoke the denials of the first and second instance courts and (2) to warn the health care provider of its obligation to observe the provisions of Sentence C-355 and refrain from making unwarranted value judgments. Colombia: Sentence T-636/2011 (Armenia) – The claimant, A.A., requested an abortion due to the strong likelihood of fetal malformation (as she suffered from epilepsy and the drugs she was taking could adversely affect her pregnancy). Her request was denied by two different courts and was then appealed to the Constitutional Court. After further medical examinations, however, she discovered that the fetus did not have any malformations, and she withdrew her request. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court ruled on A.A.’s case, deciding (1) to revoke the denials of the first and second instance courts and (2) to warn the health care provider of its obligation to observe the provisions of Sentence C-355 and refrain from making unwarranted value judgments. Colombia: Sentence T-636/2011 (Armenia) – The claimant, A.A., requested an abortion due to the strong likelihood of fetal malformation (as she suffered from epilepsy and the drugs she was taking could adversely affect her pregnancy). Her request was denied by two different courts and was then appealed to the Constitutional Court. After further medical examinations, however, she discovered that the fetus did not have any malformations, and she withdrew her request. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court ruled on A.A.’s case, deciding (1) to revoke the denials of the first and second instance courts and (2) to warn the health care provider of its obligation to observe the provisions of Sentence C-355 and refrain from making unwarranted value judgments. Colombia: Sentence T-636/2011 (Armenia) – The claimant, A.A., requested an abortion due to the strong likelihood of fetal malformation (as she suffered from epilepsy and the drugs she was taking could adversely affect her pregnancy). Her request was denied by two different courts and was then appealed to the Constitutional Court. After further medical examinations, however, she discovered that the fetus did not have any malformations, and she withdrew her request. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court ruled on A.A.’s case, deciding (1) to revoke the denials of the first and second instance courts and (2) to warn the health care provider of its obligation to observe the provisions of Sentence C-355 and refrain from making unwarranted value judgments. Colombia: Sentence T-636/2011 (Armenia) – The claimant, A.A., requested an abortion due to the strong likelihood of fetal malformation (as she suffered from epilepsy and the drugs she was taking could adversely affect her pregnancy). Her request was denied by two different courts and was then appealed to the Constitutional Court. After further medical examinations, however, she discovered that the fetus did not have any malformations, and she withdrew her request. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court ruled on A.A.’s case, deciding (1) to revoke the denials of the first and second instance courts and (2) to warn the health care provider of its obligation to observe the provisions of Sentence C-355 and refrain from making unwarranted value judgments. Colombia: Sentence T-636/2011 (Armenia) – The claimant, A.A., requested an abortion due to the strong likelihood of fetal malformation (as she suffered from epilepsy and the drugs she was taking could adversely affect her pregnancy). Her request was denied by two different courts and was then appealed to the Constitutional Court. After further medical examinations, however, she discovered that the fetus did not have any malformations, and she withdrew her request. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court ruled on A.A.’s case, deciding (1) to revoke the denials of the first and second instance courts and (2) to warn the health care provider of its obligation to observe the provisions of Sentence C-355 and refrain from making unwarranted value judgments. Colombia: Sentence T-636/2011 (Armenia) – The claimant, A.A., requested an abortion due to the strong likelihood of fetal malformation (as she suffered from epilepsy and the drugs she was taking could adversely affect her pregnancy). Her request was denied by two different courts and was then appealed to the Constitutional Court. After further medical examinations, however, she discovered that the fetus did not have any malformations, and she withdrew her request. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court ruled on A.A.’s case, deciding (1) to revoke the denials of the first and second instance courts and (2) to warn the health care provider of its obligation to observe the provisions of Sentence C-355 and refrain from making unwarranted value judgments. Colombia: Sentence T-636/2011 (Armenia) – The claimant, A.A., requested an abortion due to the strong likelihood of fetal malformation (as she suffered from epilepsy and the drugs she was taking could adversely affect her pregnancy). Her request was denied by two different courts and was then appealed to the Constitutional Court. After further medical examinations, however, she discovered that the fetus did not have any malformations, and she withdrew her request. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court ruled on A.A.’s case, deciding (1) to revoke the denials of the first and second instance courts and (2) to warn the health care provider of its obligation to observe the provisions of Sentence C-355 and refrain from making unwarranted value judgments. Colombia: Sentence T-636/2011 (Armenia) – The claimant, A.A., requested an abortion due to the strong likelihood of fetal malformation (as she suffered from epilepsy and the drugs she was taking could adversely affect her pregnancy). Her request was denied by two different courts and was then appealed to the Constitutional Court. After further medical examinations, however, she discovered that the fetus did not have any malformations, and she withdrew her request. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court ruled on A.A.’s case, deciding (1) to revoke the denials of the first and second instance courts and (2) to warn the health care provider of its obligation to observe the provisions of Sentence C-355 and refrain from making unwarranted value judgments.