Care Denial

Alicja Tysiąc (2000) – Poland

Upon becoming pregnant in 2000, Alicja Tysiąc was denied an abortion to protect her physical health, despite her severe visual impairment. Numerous doctors concluded that the pregnancy and delivery posed a serious health risk, and some recommended sterilization after the birth due to the risk that pregnancy would have on her eyesight. But they refused to approve an abortion for her present pregnancy, despite her condition meeting the legal criteria for therapeutic abortion.

After finally obtaining a certificate authorizing the abortion, Tysiąc went to a public hospital in Warsaw to have the procedure, only to have her request refused again. At this point, the applicant had no choice but to carry her pregnancy to term.

As predicted, after the delivery, the applicant’s eyesight badly deteriorated due to hemorrhages in her retina. Corrective surgery was not possible in her case, and she faced a serious risk of blindness. Indeed, in the months and years following the birth, Tysiąc was left with a condition that needs regular treatment and daily assistance.

The legal ruling in Tysiąc v Poland, decided in 2007 at the European Court of Human Rights, held that there was a violation of Article 8 ECHR (right to private life) and awarded damages to Tysiąc. The case also demonstrated that Polish doctors evaded referral requirements by refusing to provide abortion services without invoking the “conscientious objection” provision. By not invoking this provision, they were able to avoid the obligation to refer Tysiąc to a doctor willing to provide an abortion. The case is an example of healthcare professionnals evading referral requirements and taking advantage of the space for uncertainty around “conscientious objection” clauses.

Sources:

More posts