Foetal Rights and the Law

-

 



To deny a woman her basic rights is to challenge her very humanity." Nelson Mandela.This quote encapsulates the fundamental tension in the discourse on foetal rights and women's reproductive choices, highlighting the essential need to respect and uphold women's autonomy while navigating the complex moral landscape surrounding the rights of the unborn.

The law does not choose between the rights of the mother and the rights of the unborn; it must navigate the complex terrain where life begins and personal autonomy is at stake.

Foetal Rights and the Law

The concept of foetal rights occupies a contentious and evolving place within the legal landscape, raising fundamental questions about the moral, ethical, and legal status of the unborn. As societies grapple with the intersection of women's reproductive rights and the rights purportedly granted to developing foetuses, the legal frameworks governing these issues vary significantly between jurisdictions. In jurisdictions like the United Kingdom, the foetus is afforded little legal protection until the point of viability, placing emphasis on a woman's autonomy and choice. Conversely, in the United States, increasing movements toward "personhood" laws and the establishment of legal rights for the unborn challenge this autonomy and complicate the discourse surrounding abortion.

In recent years, the legal status of foetuses has gained prominence, particularly in light of landmark cases and legislative changes that have shifted public perception and policy. The balance between a woman's right to choose and the evolving recognition of foetal rights shapes ongoing debates, influencing court decisions, state laws, and societal attitudes. As such, understanding the legal principles governing foetal rights becomes essential for navigating the complexities of reproductive health, personal freedoms, and ethical considerations in contemporary society. This examination reveals a multifaceted legal landscape that continues to evolve, reflecting broader societal values and conflicts over the moral implications of life, autonomy, and the rights of both women and the unborn.

 

Position of Foetal Rights in Africa
The status of foetal rights in Africa is influenced by a myriad of factors, including cultural, religious, legal, and political contexts. Generally, many African countries exhibit a reluctance to recognize foetal rights explicitly, often positioning the rights of women and mothers as paramount, particularly in regard to reproductive health and decisions surrounding pregnancy.

In several African nations, abortion laws are highly restrictive, primarily permitting the procedure only under specific circumstances, such as to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest. For instance, countries like Nigeria and Zambia have stringent abortion laws, which indirectly emphasize maternal rights over the rights of the foetus. Conversely, nations such as South Africa have more progressive abortion laws, allowing women to terminate a pregnancy on request within the first trimester, thus prioritizing the woman’s autonomy.

While foetal rights are less formally recognized, there is an increasing acknowledgment of the need to protect foetal health, particularly concerning prenatal care and the consequences of maternal actions that may affect the developing foetus. Some countries have enacted laws aimed at preventing harmful practices during pregnancy, suggesting an emerging discourse around the responsibilities of mothers toward their unborn children.

 Movements and Advocacy

1. Pro-Life Movements: Various religious and cultural groups advocate for greater recognition of foetal rights, asserting that life begins at conception. These movements often lobby against legalizing or liberalizing abortion laws, framing their arguments around moral and ethical considerations surrounding the sanctity of life. For instance, pro-life organizations have gained traction in countries like Uganda and Kenya, pushing for stricter regulations on abortion and greater legal protections for the unborn.


2. Women's Rights Advocacy: Conversely, women’s rights organizations are actively campaigning for reproductive rights, focusing on issues of maternal health, access to safe abortion, and autonomy over reproductive choices. These advocacy groups highlight that restricting abortion undermines women’s rights and can lead to unsafe practices that jeopardize both maternal and foetal health. They argue that laws should empower women to make informed choices rather than impose restrictions that infringe on their bodily autonomy.

3. Health and Legal Reforms: In some countries, movements advocating for improved healthcare access and reproductive rights have led to discussions about revising existing laws to better protect the health of both mothers and foetuses. These efforts often call for comprehensive reproductive health education, access to contraception, and safe abortion services, emphasizing the interconnectedness of maternal well-being and foetal health.


Examples of Foetal Rights and Related Movements in Africa

1. South Africa
   -  South Africa has progressive abortion laws, allowing women to terminate a pregnancy on request during the first 12 weeks. Beyond 12 weeks, abortion is permitted under certain conditions (e.g., health risks or serious foetal abnormalities). The Abortion and Reproductive Rights Coalition in South Africa advocates for reproductive health rights, emphasizing the importance of safe and legal access to abortion services while ensuring that women can make informed choices regarding their pregnancies.
   
2. Nigeria
   - Abortion in Nigeria is highly restricted, mainly allowed only to save the mother’s life or in cases of rape. The punitive legal landscape places limitations on women's access to reproductive health services.
   -Several pro-life organizations, such as The Life League and the Youth Coalition for Sexual and Reproductive Rights, actively campaign against legalizing abortion, promoting foetal rights from conception. In contrast, groups like *Women Advocates Research and Documentation Centre (WARDC)* work to advocate for women's health and reproductive rights, highlighting the need for safe reproductive health options.

3. Kenya
   - The Kenyan Constitution allows for abortion in certain circumstances, such as to protect the mother's health or in cases of emergency. However, access to safe abortion remains limited, and the laws are ambiguous.
   -The Coalition on Women's Rights in Kenya and other women’s health organizations advocate for improved access to abortion services and comprehensive sexual and reproductive health education, emphasizing the importance of women’s rights alongside discussions on foetal health and protection.

4. Uganda
   - In Uganda, abortion is only lawful to save the mother’s life, making the regulations and their enforcement generally restrictive. 
   - Pro-life groups, such as The Uganda Youth Network, aim to promote foetal rights and oppose the liberalization of abortion laws. Conversely, organizations like IPAS Uganda focus on increasing access to safe abortion services and reproductive healthcare, fighting against unsafe, illegal abortions that endanger women’s lives.

5. Tanzania
   - Abortion is permitted only in specific circumstances, such as to save the life of the mother or in cases of physical or mental health risks.There are active discussions around enhancing women’s reproductive rights through organizations like Tanzania Women’s Network, which advocate for women's health issues, including safe abortion and reproductive health that considers both maternal and foetal welfare.

6. Zimbabwe
   - Similar to other nations in the region, Zimbabwe’s abortion laws are restrictive, allowing the procedure only under specific conditions—including when the mother’s life is at risk.
   - Advocacy groups like Women’s Action Group (WAG) work towards improving women’s health rights, arguing for the decriminalization of abortion and reproductive choices. They seek to address the health impacts of restrictive laws on women, which indirectly relate to foetal health outcomes.

Foetal Rights and the Law

Under English law, a foetus does not enjoy legal protection until it reaches a stage where it is capable of being born alive. However, a negligence claim may be brought if carelessness results in harm to the foetus. Similarly, in the United States, the unborn have not been recognized as persons in the full legal sense. This legal stance ostensibly protects women's autonomy during the early months of pregnancy, yet it is evident that both in the United Kingdom and the United States, the status of the foetus remains ambiguous. As a pregnancy progresses, the prima facie right of the foetus to protection from maternal harm increases, often to the detriment of the mother's autonomy over her body.


In England, the foetus has no rights to protection from its mother, except for the right conferred on a child born alive to sue through a ‘next friend’ for injuries suffered in the womb. Consequently, it is unsurprising that the issue of foetal welfare has often been overshadowed by judicial and medical perspectives prioritizing the mother's best interests. This has been articulated repeatedly in U.S. courts, particularly concerning forced Caesarean sections and the judicial oversight of a woman's right to choose abortion. For instance, in Jefferson v. Giffin Spalding County Hospital (1981), the Supreme Court of Georgia placed an unborn foetus in the custody of the Department of Family and Children Services, granting the Department authority to make all medical decisions regarding the foetus's birth, including the necessity of a Caesarean section, based on the mother's refusal due to her religious beliefs. Although the court acknowledged the limited powers concerning mentally competent adults, it exercised its authority to protect the child's right to life.

The Warnock Committee Report addressed the pivotal question of when an embryo should receive legal protection. While the Committee deemed the law regarding abortion outside its terms of reference, its report provided a thorough examination of the complex moral, legal, political, and social issues surrounding the foetus. While endorsing the production and experimentation on surplus embryos from fertility treatments, the Committee did not advocate for unrestricted medical experimentation. Instead, it recommended a compromise: recognizing the absence of foetal rights until the point of viability, it prohibited experimentation on embryos beyond 14 days post-conception, thereby acknowledging the uniqueness of human life while also valuing medical research.

Under English law, a natural father has no right to control his wife regarding abortion decisions. This issue was highlighted in *Paton v. British Pregnancy Advisory Service Trustees*, where a husband sought an injunction to prevent his wife from undergoing an abortion, but the application was denied. A similar outcome occurred in Cosby v. Phia, where a father attempted to prevent the termination of a pregnancy. Thus, the law respects the woman's autonomy in deciding whether to carry a foetus to term.

 The Interaction Between Abortion, Contraception, and Sterilisation

With the increasing availability of legal abortion, there is a growing link between abortion and medical practices aimed at controlling future fertility. The most extreme example is sterilization conducted during or as a prerequisite for abortion, often without the woman's fully informed consent. In some developing countries, intrauterine devices (IUDs) may be inserted into women who have undergone illegal abortions when they seek medical treatment. In India, where abortion is legal, sterilization or IUD insertion may be required before an abortion can be performed. In Indonesia, women must either consent to a contraceptive implant or have their husbands agree to undergo a vasectomy if the family has two or more children. In efforts to regulate population control, women in the developing world are often encouraged to use Depo-Provera, a contraceptive injection that provides three to six months of pregnancy protection.

Depo-Provera has a controversial history in the West due to potential short-term and suspected long-term side effects. Despite these risks, organizations like the World Health Organization and Planned Parenthood have allegedly promoted its use for population control without providing adequate information regarding its risks or implementing necessary safeguards.

Abortion Rights in the United States

 As the medical profession took control of pregnancy and childbirth from women, who had previously managed these matters informally, the continuation or termination of pregnancy became a public issue. This shift has been particularly pronounced in the United States, where the presence of a significant Roman Catholic population and a written Constitution interpreted by the Supreme Court has made abortion a highly politicized issue. Unlike the United Kingdom, where abortion regulation is governed by statutory provisions subject to parliamentary amendment, the U.S. regulation of abortion is determined by state law and must adhere to constitutional standards.


The landmark case of Roe v. Wade. (1973) marked a significant moment in judicial decision-making. The case involved a class action suit representing multiple women's interests, not just those of the litigants. It addressed three key issues: a pregnant woman seeking an abortion, a couple wanting abortion as a last

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

8 Principles of Fuller on Inner Morality of Law

-
Image
Principles of Fuller on inner morality of law Fuller’s eight principles, as a framework for a proper legal system, emphasize the necessity of clarity, consistency, and accessibility within the law. His principles reflect the importance of laws that are understandable, stable, and enforceable to ensure justice and accountability within society. Below is a polished version of Fuller’s eight principles, capturing both their content and significance:- General Rules of Conduct: There must be rules of conduct that are established and made known in advance. These rules should not be arbitrary commands but should be expressed in general terms to provide clarity. Importantly, these rules should not be retrospective, meaning individuals should not be punished or disadvantaged for actions that were not considered unlawful at the time they were committed. Publication of the Rules: It is essential that laws and rules be publicly accessible so that people know what is expected of them. The general p...
Read more

JUDICIAL OFFICERS & CONFLICT OF INTEREST CASE LAW

-
Image
JUDICIAL OFFICERS & CONFLICT OF INTEREST CASE LAW   1.       Philip Tunoi v Judicial Service Commission and another The applicants had made a formal application by notice of motion seeking the recusal of the presiding judges; t he Hon. Mr. Justice G. B. M. Kariuki, and the Hon. Mr. Justice Milton Asike Makhandia from hearing an appeal. The appeal in question concerned a petition that had been dismissed in the High Court relating to the retirement age of the applicants as Court of Appeal judges.   The applicants sought the recusal of Hon. Mr. Justice G. B. M. Kariuki on the basis that he had previously been convicted of contempt of court in the Court of Appeal by a bench that included the first appellant. Secondly, the Hon. Mr. Justice Milton Asike Makhandia regularly frequented Karen Country Club in the company of the attorney general who is a member of the JSC (the 1 st  respondent) and had regularly discussed this matter with the AG. The cou...
Read more

ADVOCATES CONFLICT OF INTEREST CASE LAWS WITH SAMPLE PLEADINGS

-
Image
  1.      Charles Gitonga Kariuki v Akuisi Farmers Co. Ltd [1] The firm of Karanja Mbugua & Company advocates had acted for the plaintiff in a claim seeking to recover a debt of Kshs. 3 million from the defendant. The defendant’s counsel raised a preliminary objection challenging the appointment of the plaintiff’s advocates firm submitting that they had acted for the defendant in several other cases. He submitted that the defendants were apprehensive that the plaintiff’s counsel would use information acquired from the defendant to their disadvantage. The court held that it is not enough for the applicant to allege that opposing counsel acted for the defendant in several matters because the simple fact that the advocate acted for a litigant does not lead per se to a conflict of interest. The court dismissed the preliminary objection on the ground that the applicant had not tendered evidence that showed that the plaintiff’s counsel had been intimately invol...
Read more