Heidi Crowter says the current legislation discriminates against people with disabilities. It allows abortion up to birth if the foetus has a condition such as Down syndrome.

"I am taking this case to Strasbourg because it is downright discrimination that people with disabilities are treated differently," she says.

Crowter, a 27-year-old mother, has been actively campaigning against the legislation on social media to no avail.

She is preparing to appeal to the ECHR this week because England's Supreme Court refused to hear her case.

Crowter has campaigned for a law change since 2018. It was then she joined a legal challenge brought by a mother whose son has Down syndrome.

She argues the law's message is that people with disabilities are not valued equally and that it violates their human rights.

"In 2023, we live in a society where disabled people are valued equally after birth but not in the womb," she says.

The UK government defends the law as a balance between women's and unborn children's rights.

Abortion is a personal choice and women should have access to safe and legal services, the government argues.

The Court of Appeal ruled last November that the law was not unlawful and did not interfere with the rights of those who live with disabilities.

Growing support for Crowter

Disability-rights groups and pro-life organisations support Crowter's case.

Ross Hendry, CEO of CARE, a Christian charity that advocates for life issues, has this to say:

"It is completely wrong that disability is a ground for abortion up to birth. Would we accept a law allowing babies to be aborted to term based on their sex, or their race? The current approach sends a message that the lives of people with disabilities are worth less than others."

Lynn Murray, spokesperson for Don't Screen Us Out has a daughter with Down syndrome.

"It's inspiring to see that Heidi is now going to be taking her landmark case all the way to ... Strasbourg. As a mother of a 23-year-old daughter who has Down syndrome, I see every day the unique value she brings to our family and the positive impact she has on others around her."

Increasing statistics

There were 3,370 disability-selective abortions in 2021 - a nine percent increase from 3,083 in 2020.

Late-term abortions at 24 weeks' gestation or over where the baby had a disability increased by 20 percent from 229 to 274.

The law

In England, Wales and Scotland, there is a general 24-week time limit for abortion.

If the baby has a disability, including Down syndrome, cleft lip or a club foot, abortion is a egal right up to birth.

If Crowter wins her case at the ECHR in Strasbourg, it could have implications for all 46 Council of Europe countries as they are bound by its rulings.

Crowter hopes her case will inspire others to stand up for their human rights and dignity.

The ECHR decision is expected to be issued sometime in 2023.

Source

• Catholic News Agency

The court found there was a violation of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights that everyone's right to life shall be protected by law.

The landmark euthanasia case was brought to the court in Strasbourg by Tom Mortier, de Troyer's son. She died in 2012 after she had approached the country's leading euthanasia advocate, who ultimately agreed to euthanise her despite being a cancer specialist.

Before her death by euthanasia at age 64, neither her son nor any family member was consulted.

Read More

The decision to cancel the flight capped three days of frantic court challenges from immigrant rights lawyers. They had launched a flurry of case-by-case appeals to block the deportation of everyone on the government's list.

Britain in recent years has seen an illegal influx of migrants from such places as Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, Sudan, Iraq and Yemen.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced in April that certain asylum seekers arriving in the UK would be sent to the African country, Rwanda.

Johnson made an agreement with Rwanda that people who entered Britain illegally would be deported to the East African country. In exchange for accepting them, Rwanda will receive millions of pounds (dollars) in development aid. The deportees will be allowed to apply for asylum in Rwanda, not Britain.

The bishops of England and Wales described Johnson's new policy as "shameful".

"The UK's plans to forcibly deport to Rwanda some of those seeking refuge in our country is shamefully illustrative of what Pope Francis has called the ‘loss of that sense of responsibility for our brothers and sisters on which every civil society is based'," the prelates said in a statement published on the website of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales.

Johnson had emphatically defended Britain's plan, arguing that it is a legitimate way to protect lives and thwart the criminal gangs that smuggle migrants across the English Channel in small boats.

Responding to the decision, Patel said she was "disappointed" by the legal challenge. She made pointed criticisms of the ECHR ruling and noted that the policy would continue.

"We will not be deterred from doing the right thing and delivering our plans to control our nation's borders," she said. "Our legal team are reviewing every decision made on this flight, and preparation for the next flight begins now."

The Rwandan government said it was still committed to taking in asylum seekers sent by the UK. "We are not deterred by these developments. Rwanda remains fully committed to making this partnership work," government spokeswoman Yolande Makolo told AFP.

"The current situation of people making dangerous journeys cannot continue as it is causing untold suffering to so many. Rwanda stands ready to receive the migrants when they do arrive and offer them safety and opportunity in our country."

Johnson hinted that the UK could leave the ECHR to make removing illegal migrants from the UK easier.

Asked whether it was time for the UK to withdraw from the ECHR after the government's difficulty in implementing its Rwanda policy, the prime minister said: "Will it be necessary to change some laws to help us as we go along? It may very well be."

Sources

The Guardian

Crux Now

MSN

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has reaffirmed that same-sex marriages are "not allowed" under Russia's constitution.

The Strasbourg court had issued a ruling on Tuesday urging Moscow to formally acknowledge homosexual couples.

But senior Russian lawmakers have accused the court of "meddling" in the country's internal affairs.

Under constitutional amendments adopted last year, Russia outlawed same-sex unions by stipulating that the "institution of marriage is a union between a man and a woman".

But the European Court of Human Rights was urged to rule on the amendments, and whether Russia had violated its citizen's right to respect for private and family life.

Read More

Specialists at Great Ormond Street Hospital where eleven-month old Charlie has being cared for say he has no chance of survival or improvement. Prolonging his life may cause significant suffering.

Charlie cannot see, hear, move, cry, swallow or breathe on his own.

The ten points Sgreccia made are:

1. People who cannot be cured have the most right to be taken care of.
2. Every human being, including the new-born, has a right to dignity regardless of their state of health. This dignity includes their right to care and attention.
3. Feeding and hydration are not therapies, so the hospital's decision to withdraw Charlie's life support is essentially letting him die of hunger and thirst just because he can't feed himself.
4. Doctors and the patient (in this case Charlie's parents on his behalf) must be actively involved in the decision making process and not have to "suffer passively the decisions and choices of others".
5. Charlie needs an integral palliative and systematic approach, regardless of whether he is able to recover. This approach could hypothetically accompany experimental work on his condition.
6. In relation to pain control; it is in Charlie's best interests. It will assure him the most dignified existence possible if he cannot access the experimental protocol in the United States.
7. The European Court of Human Rights did not respect the criteria (one to six) above and "glided in an unbelievable way on all the aspects of content listed up to here and ...beyond, assuming a purely procedural position.
8. There can be a conception of the efficient management of health resources that generates a "rampant disposable culture."
9. There is a cultural paradigm that tends to recognise the non-dignity of certain human existences and confuses that with the pathology with which they are suffering.
10. In these new cultural paradigms you can detect the ambivalence of those who, in demanding the freedom to make their own decisions regarding euthanasia - based on individual autonomy — at the same time deny this autonomy in other cases ...[like Charlie's].

Source

• Zenit
• BBC
• Image: Il dono della vita

In a nine to eight vote decision, the court ruled the decision not to renew Jose Antonio Fernandez Martínez's contract "was legitimate and proportionate".

Fernandez Martínez was ordained in 1961 and applied for a dispensation from celibacy 23 years later.

He did not receive a response and married a year later, going on to teach Catholic religion in a high school in the Murcia region.

In 1997, the local bishop declined to renew his contract.

The previous year, the Murcia newspaper La Verdad published an article about the "Movement for Optional Celibacy" of priests (MOCEOP) of which Fernandez Martínez was an active member.

The article included comments from several people disagreeing with the Church's position on abortion, divorce, sexuality and contraception.

It was illustrated by a picture of Fernandez Martínez with his family.

The following year, he was granted dispensation from his clerical duties, but was told that his contract would not be renewed unless a bishop agreed.

After several hearings in Spanish courts, the case was appealed to the ECHR.

The ECHR held it is not unreasonable for the Church to expect particular loyalty of religious education teachers, since they could be regarded as its representatives.

When one of the Church's teachers challenges its teaching, it raises a credibility problem, the ruling noted.

Fernandez Martínez had been voluntarily part of a circle of people bound by a duty of loyalty to the Church, it added.

Being seen as part of a movement campaigning against that teaching clearly ran counter to that duty, the ruling continued.

In a dissenting opinion, Russian Judge Dmitry Dedov said Europe's human rights convention "does not entitle religious organisations, even in the name of autonomy, to persecute their members for exercising their fundamental human rights".

He said the discipline of priestly celibacy "contradicts the idea of fundamental rights and freedoms".

Sources

• Catholic News Agency
• The Journal
• Image: La Vie

The court, which has jurisdiction over 47 European countries, said Poland had violated the European Convention on Human Rights because the girl — who was allegedly raped as a 14-year-old — was denied an abortion at hospitals in her home town and in Warsaw.

The teenager, identified only as P, eventually had an abortion in Gdansk, some 500 kilometres from her home, after the Ministry of Health intervened.

The Strasbourg-based court declared the abortion refusal was "inhumane and degrading", and said the girl did not receive objective medical counseling.

The court ordered Poland to pay compensation of 30,000 euros to the girl and 15,000 to her mother, who favoured an abortion.

Polish attorney Karina Walinowicz called the European court's verdict "completely out of order and conflicting with Polish law".

"I'm really worried this could dangerously impact future cases," she told the Catholic News Agency. 
Poland's current law allows for abortion in three cases: rape or incest, if the mother's health is at grave risk, or if the fetus suffers from a disease or malformation.

Poland and Ireland are the only two countries in the European Union which have not implemented the EU's abortion laws.

Anette Ignatowicz, a former policy advisor for European Dignity Watch, an organisation that investigates EU institutions, called the court's decision "yet another attempt to push legalising abortion in Poland".

Opinion polls show that Poles are becoming increasing pro-life, with 76 per cent of those aged 15 to 24 favouring a total ban on abortion.

According to one of Poland's biggest opinion poll agency, CBOS, those who viewed abortion as acceptable went down dramatically from 65 per cent in 1993 to 9 per cent in 2011. Another Polish market research agency, Grupa IQS, found that 65 per cent of Poles viewed abortion as unacceptable in 2011.

Sources:

Catholic News Agency

Reuters

Image: Asbarez.com