The Brazilian Association of Women in Legal Careers (ABMCJ) filed a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality so that the Federal Supreme Court (STF) suspends a law in Goiás that determines that the state provides, “as soon as possible”, the ultrasound exam containing the fetal heartbeat for pregnant women who are going to legally terminate their pregnancy.
In a note released by ABMCJ, the association reinforced to the STF, based on the Citizen Constitution, that “the law in Goiás violates the principles of human dignity and also restricts the right to health”. According to the institution, the legislation is embarrassing in trying to convince women to give up their right to legal abortion. In Brazil, termination of pregnancy is permitted in cases where the pregnancy is the result of rape, when there is a risk to the pregnant woman’s life or when there is a diagnosis of fetal anencephaly.
“Constraining women, aiming to convince them not to exercise their right to legal and safe abortion, constitutes a surreptitious attempt to control the woman’s body, which, in the context of legal abortion, implies a stance that aims to create a undue burden on her to exercise her rights to bodily privacy, psychological-social health and family planning to terminate the pregnancy in a case authorized legally or by Supreme Court precedent in abstract control of constitutionality”, highlighted the statement.
PRG-GO says the law does not establish ‘obligation’
The legislation, sanctioned on January 11, is part of the Awareness Campaign against Abortion and provides guidelines for public education and health policies throughout the state. In addition to providing ultrasound containing the heartbeat, there are guidelines for preparing lectures on the subject for children and adolescents and also establishing partnerships with private NGOs to “guide and provide psychological and social assistance to pregnant women who express a desire to abort , always prioritizing the maintenance of the life of the unborn child.”
The Attorney General of Goiás defended that the law is constitutional and stated that it “does not establish the obligation for the pregnant woman to be subjected, in cases of legal abortion, to any additional requirement as a condition for carrying out the medical procedure”. According to the organization, the campaign “offers general guidelines for informative actions on the topic, without interfering with medical procedures currently carried out within the scope of the Unified Health System (SUS) or the private network”.
“Thus, state public agents will not be able to impose on the pregnant woman any measures related to viewing the fetus (before or after the termination procedure), listening to heartbeats and similar measures, under penalty of personal liability,” said PGR-GO , in note.
GLOBO sought out the author of the law, former state deputy Fred Rodrigues (Christian Democracy), but received no response until the publication of this report. On social media, the parliamentarian criticized the institutions that defend the annulment of the law and wrote that the rule “does not say mandatory, whoever saw this needs glasses or use the diploma as toilet paper”.