哈佛法学院最近欢迎来自墨西哥最高法院的两位法官讨论他们国家进行堕胎的决定-新东方前途出国

　　Abortion battles in Mexico and beyond: The role of law and the courts

　　墨西哥及以后的堕胎斗争：法律与法院的作用

　　By Kaitlyn Dowling, October 17, 2019

　　作者：Kaitlyn Dowling，2019年10月17日

　　Mexico has witnessed heated political and legal mobilization by both progressive and conservative forces regarding the issue of abortion in recent years. Harvard Law School recently welcomed two justices from the Mexican Supreme Court of Justice to discuss recent decisions affirming access to abortion in their country. Justice Gutiérrez Ortiz Mena LL.M. ’98 and Justice González Alcántara Carrancá discussed the holdings, implications, and context for the rulings. The justices were joined by Judge András Sajó, retired vice president of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as other experts on providing sexual and reproductive health services in challenging contexts.

　　近几年来，墨西哥在进步和保守势力方面都对堕胎问题进行了激烈的政治和法律动员。哈佛法学院最近欢迎来自墨西哥最高法院的两位法官讨论最近决定在他们国家进行堕胎的决定。古铁雷斯·奥尔蒂斯·梅纳尔法官和冈萨雷斯·阿尔坎塔拉·卡兰卡法官讨论了这些裁决的内容、含义和背景。欧洲人权法院退休副院长安德烈斯·萨霍法官以及其他在挑战性环境下提供性健康和生殖健康服务的专家也加入了法官的行列。 在线咨询

　　Credit: Lorin Granger Justice Alfredo Gutiérrez Ortiz Mena, of the National Supreme Court of Justice, Mexico.

　　信用：洛林格兰杰法官阿尔弗雷多GuTi Errz奥尔蒂斯曼娜，墨西哥国家最高法院法官。

　　Credit: Lorin Granger Justice Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá of the National Supreme Court of Justice, Mexico, with Cristina Alonso, founding member and president of the Mexican Midwifery Association (2014 to 2017), and founder of the Mexican Network of Midwifery Centers. An afternoon panelist, Alonso offered her impromptu services as an interpreter for the justice during the morning session.

　　墨西哥州国家最高法院，胡安，Cristina Alonso，墨西哥助产协会（2014至2017）的创始成员和主席，以及墨西哥助产中心网络的创始人路易斯。阿隆索是一名下午的小组成员，她在上午的会议上即兴为法官提供翻译服务。

　　As Mexican Supreme Court of Justice clerk Adriana Ortega Ortiz wrote in advance of the event, the justices were asked to consider if “denial to provide abortion services due to health risks in a government-run health facility” violated women’s constitutional rights. In making their decision, the justices looked at several important questions. The constitution guarantees a right to health, but does that include abortion care due to health risks? Are both public and private health care facilities required to perform the procedure, free of charge? What types of “health” are protected by the constitution: physical, mental, or social health?

　　正如墨西哥司法部长Adriana Ortega Ortiz在事前所写的那样，法官们被要求考虑是否“拒绝在政府经营的医疗机构提供堕胎服务”违反了妇女的宪法权利。法官们在作出决定时，考虑了几个重要问题。宪法保障健康权，但这是否包括因健康风险而进行的堕胎护理是否要求公共和私人医疗机构免费执行该程序什么样的“健康”受到宪法的保护：身体健康、精神健康或社会健康？