Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
34
.
I.Roleandlegalstatusofwomen
statedthatthecontestedprovisionoflawdoesnotoverridetheprinciplethathuman
lifeislegallyprotected.Itonlyintroducesanexceptiontothisprinciple,based
onsufficientlypreciseandmeasurablereasonsofanobjective(medical)nature,
referstothepublicinterest(protectionoflife)andtakesintoconsiderationprivate
interest(rightsofamother).Itenablestheresolutionofthecollisionsbetween
relevantgoods,namelytherightsofamotherandherchild.Thejudgeconcluded
thatasaresultofthejudgementthestatewillobligeamothertocontinuewith
pregnancy,however,duetotheeconomicreasonsherchildrenafterbeingborn
willbesentencedtoaslowdeath,ofteninfear,painandlonelinesswhereasthe
parentswillbesentencedtodespairandhelplessness-thewholeburdenofthe
negligenceofthestatewillbeputonthecitizens(mothersindifficultpregnancies,
handicappedandterminallyillchildren,aswellastheirfamilies)whilethelaw
(asopposedtothemoralityorreligion)shouldnotobligeanyonetoheroismand
formulatesuchrequirementsthatexceedcommonstandardsandaretherefore
impossibletobefulfilledbyanaverageaddresseeoftheprovisions.
AccordingtojudgePiotrPszczółkowski,bythejudgementof22ndOctober
2020theConstitutionalTribunalleftasidetheperspectiveofwomen.Inthename
oftheprotectionoflifeatitsprenatalphase(whichdoesnothaveanabsolute
nature)itimposedonwomenanobligationtoaheroicstance-toacceptinevery
circumstancesthesacrificesandhardshipswhichexceedaverageconstraints
connectedwithpregnancy,deliveryandraisingofachild,regardlessofthenature
anddegreeofthepathologyregardingthedevelopmentofthefoetusorpossible
consequencestotheirlifeandhealthconnectedwiththecontinuingofthepregnancy.
Inthejudge’sopinion,inregardoftheprenatalphaseofthedevelopmentofachild,
thestateshouldratherprovideforthesupportforwomeninsuchsituationswhere
theyareconfrontedwithmedicaldiagnoseswhichcertifyasevereandirreversible
impairmentofafoetusorincurablelife-threateningdiseases.Thestate’sroleis
nottoimposeonwomeninsuchcircumstancesasingle,arbitrarymethodofthe
resolutionoftheconflictofgoods,adoptedaprioribythestate,i.e.toimposeon
themanobligationtocontinuepregnancy.
PresentlyArticle4aclause1theLawonfamilyplanningcontainsonlytwo
bindingpoints-1and3,accordingtowhichpregnancymaybeterminated,with
theemphasisthatexclusivelybythedoctor,onlyifitconstitutesthreattolife
orhealthofapregnantwoman(point1)orincaseofthejustifiedsuspicionthat
pregnancydevelopedasaresultofaprohibitedact(point3),therebysignificantly
limitingthefundamentalrightsandfreedomsofwomen,includingtherighttoself-
determination,despitebindingnormativeconstitutionalguaranteesprovidedforin
Article47whichstipulatesthat“everyoneshallhavetherighttolegalprotection
