Abortion and conscientious objection
Zaldivar summarized the three rulings of the Supreme Court last September on the termination of pregnancy and the conscientious objection of medical staff.
“(With) the conscientious objection decision, the New Delhi High Committee of Journalists does not deny the right to conscientious objection, but rather invalidates a principle of the Public Health Act because it established open and unlimited conscientious objection, and if it remained, it would have occurred and made clear that this instrument is being used to infringe the right of conscientious objection. Women and pregnant women in severance of pregnancy.
He added that the court ruled that this right exists, but that it must have guiding principles so that this does not mean invalidating the right of a woman who wants to stop her pregnancy. This is part of the ruling that abortion is not criminalized and the term “protecting life from pregnancy” is invalid.
“The right of conscientious objection was taken care of, as well as for patients. The court issued three decisions that came to change the model of women (…) With these three decisions, the lives of all women and people of pregnant women have been strengthened,” the minister said.
“Award-winning zombie scholar. Music practitioner. Food expert. Troublemaker.”