Motherhood and law: Reflections on human rights provisions and selected judgments of the European courts
2021, 90, No. 1
Publication date
Publishing model
License type
Field
Discipline
Language of publication
Downloads
PDF 522 KB
Number of views:118
Number of downloads:40
Crossref citations:0
Altmetric score:0
Abstract
The article focuses upon the phenomenon of motherhood within international and European legal contexts. The initial remarks concern the analysis of motherhood as an activity deeply rooted in interpersonal relations, in accordance with the feminist theory of care. Relevant human rights provisions dealing with motherhood are identified, and the scope of mothers’ legal entitlements and public authorities’ duties is analyzed. Selected case-law of the European courts is presented, in order to identify the obligations of public authorities related to providing support to the relationship between mother and child. The selection of cases is based upon their impact on bioethics, healthcare, and medical services. Therefore, the overall goal is to examine the hypothesis of prospective correspondence or lack of correspondence between the provisions of human rights treaties on motherhood (law in books) and courts’ adjudication (law in action). In the final part of the article concluding remarks and observations are offered.
Keywords:
Bibliography
Bach-Golecka D., To be or not to be… a parent? Abortion and the right to life within a European Legal Context, (in:) A. Stępkowski (ed.), Protection of human life in its early stage: Intellectual foundations and legal means, Frankfurt am Main 2014, pp. 191-207
Brake E., Ferguson L. (eds.), Philosophical foundations of children and family law, Oxford 2018
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198786429.001.0001
Cahill C.M., The new maternity, "Harvard Law Review" 2020, Vol. 133, pp. 2221-2303
Charlesworth H., Chinkin C., Wright S., Feminist approaches to international law, (in:) R.J. Beck, A. Clark Arend, R.D. Vander Lugt (eds.), International rules: Approaches from international law and international relations, New York-Oxford 1996, pp. 253-288
Frankfurt H.G., The reasons of love, Princeton 2004
Gilligan C., In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development, London 1982
Jenson J., The new maternalism: Children first, women second, (in:) Y. Ergas, J. Jenson, S. Michel (eds.), Reassembling motherhood: Procreation and care in a globalized world, New York 2017, pp. 269-286
https://doi.org/10.7312/erga17050-016
Korsgaard C.M., Morality and the logic of caring: A comment on Harry Frankfurt", (in:) D. Satz (ed.), The Tanner lectures in moral philosophy: H.G. Frankfurt taking ourselves seriously and getting it right, Stanford 2006, pp. 55-76
Larimore W., Larimore B., His brain, her brain: How divinely designed differences can strengthen your marriage, Gran Rapids 2008
Milne E., Putting the fetus first: Legal regulation, motherhood, and pregnancy, "Michigan Journal of Gender & Law" 2020, Vol. 27, pp. 149-211
https://doi.org/10.36641/mjgl.27.1.putting
Radu M.D., The protection of children in the post-classical Roman law, "Fiat Iustitia" 2017, Vol. 11, issue 2, pp. 171-176
Ross L.R., Interrogating motherhood, Athabasca 2016
https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781771991438.01
Schwarzenbach S.A., On civic friendship: Including women in the state, New York 2009
https://doi.org/10.7312/schw14722
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950)
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966)
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966)
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (1979)
Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989)
Maternity Protection Convention (2000)
Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (2000)
Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (2011)
European Court of Human Rights:
Case of Vo v. France, Judgment of 2 June 2004, appl. No. 53924/00
Case of Evans v. the United Kingdom, Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 12 March 2007, appl. No. 6339/05
Case of Asiye Genç v. Turkey, Judgment of 27 January 2015, appl. No. 24109/07
Case of Parillo v. Italy, Judgment of 25 August 2015, appl. No. 46470/11
Court of Justice of the European Union:
Case C-34/10 Oliver Brüstle v. Greenpeace e.V., Judgment (Great Chamber ) of 18 October 2011, ECLI:EU:C:2011:669
Case C-364/13 International Stem Cell Corporation v. Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks, Judgment (Great Chamber) of 18 December 2014, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2451
Case T-561/14 European Citizens’ Initiative One of Us v. European Commission, Judgment of the 23 April 2018, ECLI:EU:T:2018:210
Other articles from the issue
Table of Contents/Spis treści
- liberal theoryfeminist theoryfamily lawethics of caretheories of recognitionliberalizmfeminizmprawo rodzinneetyka troskiteorie uznania
A review of the liberal theory of justice: Women’s invisible contributions to family
- canon lawcanon processmental incapacityincapacity to marrydiritto canonicoprocesso canonicoincapacità psichicaincapacità al matrimonioprawo kanoniczneproces kanonicznyniezdolność psychicznaniezdolność do zawarcia małżeństwa
La prova della incapacità psichica al matrimonio (can. 1095) quando la parte convenuta non collabora all’istruttoria
Similar publications
Table of Contents/Spis treści
- liberal theoryfeminist theoryfamily lawethics of caretheories of recognitionliberalizmfeminizmprawo rodzinneetyka troskiteorie uznania
A review of the liberal theory of justice: Women’s invisible contributions to family
- canon lawcanon processmental incapacityincapacity to marrydiritto canonicoprocesso canonicoincapacità psichicaincapacità al matrimonioprawo kanoniczneproces kanonicznyniezdolność psychicznaniezdolność do zawarcia małżeństwa
La prova della incapacità psichica al matrimonio (can. 1095) quando la parte convenuta non collabora all’istruttoria