Should there be a human right to abortion? : a review of the rulings of the European court of human rights

Abstract

Abortion is defined, by the Oxford Constitutional Law website as the intentional termination of a pregnancy with the knowledge that it will result in the death of the embryo or offspring. However, this definition conceals a fundamental ambiguity concerning what constitutes an abortion.1 Furthermore, when situations like these are concerned there is always room for public opinion. Consequently, the pro-choice and pro-life arguments arose. Pro-choice refer to the action concerned being the choice of the mother, the woman. This can be seen in conjunction with the ECHR’s “Right to respect for private and family life.” This research will examine the complex relationship between abortion regulations and human rights through case law. The argument arises of whether or not a public entity can interfere with what a woman does to/with her body, which in essence is a part of her ‘private life.’2 On the other hand, there is the ‘Right to Life’ argument. This, in turn compounds the discussion as to when the concept of life begins. Which is thus another the key element of the pro-life stance. Comprised in Article 2 ‘the Right to Life.’ Therefore, in essence we have two conflicting rights, which give rise to multiple other debates and may all be acceptable in a court of law if used with good reason. However, the issue should not comprise to place the mother against her offspring. The intent of this dissertation is to analyse whether to see if Abortion on trial, specifically, has gained enough qualities to start being considered on its own as a separate Human Right. Thus, aiming to identify these qualities, from the cases at hand, and why they are important for general Human Life if it is to be considered a Human Right.