Achieving transparency in implementing abortion laws.

National and international courts and tribunals are increasingly ruling that although states may aim to deter unlawful abortion by criminal penalties, they bear a parallel duty to inform physicians and patients of when abortion is lawful. The fear is that women are unjustly denied safe medical procedures to which they are legally entitled, because without such information physicians are deterred from involvement. With particular attention to the European Court of Human Rights, the UN Human Rights Committee, the Constitutional Court of Colombia, the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal, and the US Supreme Court, decisions are explained that show the responsibility of states to make rights to legal abortion transparent. Litigants are persuading judges to apply rights to reproductive health and human rights to require states' explanations of when abortion is lawful, and governments are increasingly inspired to publicize regulations or guidelines on when abortion will attract neither police nor prosecutors' scrutiny.

The legal status of emergency contraception.

Emergency contraception (EC), an intervention within 72 h of unprotected intercourse, dates back approximately 30 years, to the Yuzpe method. Recent development of a second generation of 'morning after,' better called 'emergency' contraceptives, has raised claims that they are abortifacient. These claims are largely rejected in medical, legal and much religious reasoning. Pregnancy is usually ascribed to the postimplantation period; means to prevent completion of implantation do not terminate pregnancy. An alternative attack on EC has arisen under South American laws that protect human life 'from conception.' The chance of conception from a single act of unprotected intercourse is very low, in view of limited times of fertility during menstrual cycles. The protection of a woman's life is not suspended during pregnancy. Risks to women's interests are more credible than the chance of conception having occurred. The claim to prohibit EC to protect embryonic life from conception is therefore problematic.

La anticoncepción de emergencia es un derecho / The emergency contraception is a right

Amparada por sus derechos a la libertad de pensamiento y de conciencia en en ejercicio de su autonomía reproductiva es la mujer a quien corresponde en su fuero interno decidir si evita o no un embarazo, acudiendo por ejemplo a la anticoncepción de emergencia

Law and ethics in conflict over confidentiality?

Ethical principles that require the preservation of patients' confidential information are reinforced by principles found in several areas of law, such as law on contracts, negligence, defamation and fiduciary duty. However, laws sometimes compel disclosures of medical confidences, and more often may justify or excuse disclosures. Legally contentious issues concern patients' confidences regarding possible unlawful conduct, such as pregnancy termination, and the risk of spread of HIV and other infections. This article reviews the various legal bases of the duty of confidentiality, and legal challenges to the ethical obligation of non-disclosure. It addresses the justifications and limits of exchange of patients' health information among healthcare professionals and trainees, and considers legally recognized limits of confidential duties, and the scope of legitimate disclosure. An underlying theme is how to determine whether physicians are ethically justified in employing the discretion the law sometimes affords them to breach patients' expectations of confidentiality.