Memo from Latin America: woman who sought abortion in El Salvador provides baby

On Tuesday, less than a week later the woman publicly known, but only as Beatriz, was primarily of a caesarean section, the high-risk pregnancy ended after nearly seven months of pregnancy, raise a fundamental question: succeeded doctors in a country that forbids to end abortion under any circumstances to the pregnancy, without breaking the law?

Doctors said the answer in El Salvador is scarce and strict law itself. No instructions for the procedure in complex cases or a clear definition of what they say is an abortion has strict Penal Code of the country open interpretation.

The Court seemed to recognize the ambiguity also when it ruled 4-1 against Beatrizs appeal, calling on the Government "absolute disability to authorize the practice of abortion."

But the judgment further, the decision to "medically to intervene" Beatriz save by medical professionals had to be determined.

On Monday, doctors removed Beatrizs fetus - she had a fatal error that prevents the brain - through an incision in her abdomen. It would have used the same process, court rules in favor of the Beatriz had ruled after her lawyer and the country's Health Minister, Maria Isabel Rodriguez.

However, was the procedure no abortion, which Health Minister said because the fetus was delivered, placed in an incubator and provided by liquids. He lived for five hours.

A Salvadoran anti-abortion group called the outcome a victory for the procedure called an induced birth, in which the child of a natural death died. Some proponents of abortion welcomed the outcome, also say that it showed, that El Salvador ironclad restrictions on women with dangerous pregnancies to compromise, even if the fetus had little or no chance to survive.

"It is an abortion," said Alejandra Cardenas, legal counsel for the Center for reproductive rights. "they are to interrupt an unprofitable pregnancy."

At its root, some legal experts said, was the case largely a battle over words.

Salvadoran law makes no difference between an abortion and an induced premature birth, said Evelyn Farfan, Professor of constitutional law at the University of El Salvador. So, if the judge, that said a was allowed to intervene but was not an abortion, said she "modulates the terminology they used in the judgment to say the same thing, without reference to the same word".

Salvadoran obstetricians and gynecologists have developed their own procedures to bridge the gap in the law, including the definition of the 20th week of pregnancy as the dividing line between what would be an abortion and a premature birth.

But many uncertainties remain. Morena Herrera, a supporter of abortion and a close advisor of Beatriz, said that one of the doctors procedure concerned was in Monday's, that he would be prosecuted.

Sidney Blanco, one of the judges of the High Court ruled against Beatriz, said "if they intervene, and survived only Beatriz" because the fetus could not be saved, then it could be that their doctors "committed itself no crime".

Lawyers and doctors say that pregnancies in El Salvador times regularly to various gestation are completed.

"The individuals, it is a risk," said Ms. Herrera.

Motivation has become a decisive factor in the distinction of abortions of premature deliveries, some doctors say.

"An abortion is done with the intent to kill the child," said Jose Miguel Fortin Magana, Director of the Institute of legal medicine, which evaluates medical questions for Supreme Court of the country. "An induction is done with the intent to save the mother."

Dr. Margarita de Romero is a gynecologist in San Salvador for 20 years. She said she was deeply religious and oppose abortion, but had terminated pregnancies or induced premature birth many times.

Gene Palumbo contributed reporting.

View the original article here