Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 June 2015
This article, by Mercedes Robba and Mariana Lavalle, deals with the civil right to reproduction and procreative liberty aroused by the Argentinian legislation and Court's decisions, in the light of the new concept of family in the country. This contribution focuses exclusively on the barriers to equal access to reproductive health in Argentina, taking into account infertility, infecundity and childlessness, according to the right to raise a family in conditions of equality and freedom.
1 Of relevance to this work, within the Argentina constitutional block (Article 75 Paragraph 22 of the Constitution..), the right to reproductive health has support in the following instruments that recognize the right to health: American Declaration of Rights and Duties of Man, art. XI; Universal Declaration of Human Rights, arts. 25 and 30; Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights on Economic, Social and Cultural issues “Protocol of San Salvador”, art. 10; International Covenant on Economic, social and cultural rights, arts. 12 and 15.1.b); Convention against the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), art. 16, ss. e; and Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities UN, art. 23. Similarly, the art 42 and Art. 75 ss. 23 of the Constitution must be considered. Locally, the Constitution of the City of Buenos Aires guarantees the right to health in the arts. 20 and 37 as well as 418 CABA recognizes Reproductive Health and Responsible Procreation Act.
2 In relation to the meaning of motherhood in Latin America and its implications, see the speech by Paola Bergallo on the public hearing at the case “Artavia Murillo and others (IVF) vs. Costa Rica “processed by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Accessed: March 11, 2015. https://vimeo.com/48973738.
3 With regard to the protection of the family, recognized in Article 17 of the American Convention, the 5th paragraph of the General Comment N° 19 of the Human Rights of the United Nations explains that “[t]he right to found a family implies in principle, the possibility to procreate and live together. When States parties adopt policies on family planning, they must be compatible with the Covenant and should be neither discriminatory nor compulsory ”.
4 Regarding the separation between sexuality and procreation, see: Ariza, Lucía “‘Dar vida’: en torno al derecho a la cobertura médica del tratamiento de la infertilidad”. In: Madre no hay una sola. Experiencias de maternidad en la Argentina actual, coordinado por Felitti, Karina (Buenos Aires: Ciccus 2011) 73–91.Google Scholar
5 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, art. 16 e).
6 In relation to the subject, see: Famá, María VictoriaIncidencia de la Ley 26.862 sobre acceso integral a las técnicas de Reproducción Asistida (Derecho de Familia y de las Personas agosto 2013). The online appointment subject to subscription is: AR/DOC/2625/2013.Google Scholar
7 Law 26,862 of medically assisted reproduction, enacted on June 5, promulgated on June 25, 2013 and published on 26 June 2013 in the Official Bulletin. On the implications of this rule see: Garay, Oscar ErnestoCobertura, igualdad e inclusión en la ley de fertilización humana asistida (La Ley 2013–D). The online appointment subject to subscription is: AR/DOC/2361/2013; Herrera, MarisaLa Ley de cobertura médica para los tratamientos de reproducción asistida. Saldando deudas (La Ley 2013-C) 1281. The online quotation subject to subscription is: AR / DOC / 2256/2013; and Rosales, Pablo OscarBreve reseña de la reciente Ley nacional 26.862 de reproducción médicamente Asistida (Derecho de Familia y de las Personas agosto 2013) 72. The online quote subject to subscription is: AR / DOC / 2636/2013.
8 View: Herrera, Marisa and Lamm, EleonoraCobertura médica de las técnicas de reproducción asistida. Reglamentación que amplía el derecho humano a formar una familia (La Ley 2013–D) 1037. The online quote is subject to subscription: AR/DOC/2899/2013.Google Scholar
9 It is considered a low complexity techniques are those that concern the connection between egg and sperm into the female reproductive system, achieved through ovulation induction, controlled ovarian stimulation, triggering ovulation and intrauterine insemination intracervical or intravaginal with partner's sperm or donor (art. 2 Decree 956/2013).
10 It is understood as high complexity techniques are those where the binding between egg and sperm takes place outside the female reproductive system, including in vitro fertilization; intracytoplasmic sperm injection; cryopreservation of oocytes and embryos; donation of oocytes and embryos and reproductive tissue vitrification (art. 2 Decree 956/2013).
11 In Argentina the right of same-sex couples to marry was recognized by Law 26,618. In relation to this subject, see: Marisa Herrera Panorama general del derecho de las familias en el Código Civil y Comercial. Reformar para transformar (La Ley, Suplemento Especial Nuevo Código Civil y Comercial Noviembre 2014) 39. The online quotation subject to subscription is: AR / DOC / 3846/2014.
12 Law 26,994 approved by the new Civil and Commercial Code of Argentina was passed on July 2nd 2014.
13 In relation to art. 19 of the Civil and Commercial Code -on the beginning of human existence and the second transitional rule -on protection of the not implanted embryo - see: “Basics of the draft of the Civil and Commercial Code of the Nation”. Accessed: March 5th, 2015. http://www.nuevocodigocivil.com/pdf/Fundamentos-del-Proyecto.pdf. Also, see Aida Kemelmajer de Carlucci, Marisa Herrera and Eleonora Lamm Cuando voces autorizadas se suman para llegar a buen puerto: No a la actuación del asesor de menores como ‘defensor de los embriones (La Ley 2014–E) 1372. The appointment online subject to subscription is: AR/DOC/3667/2014) and Aida Kemelmajer de Carlucci, Marisa Herrera and Eleonora Lamm Hacia la ley especial de reproducción asistida: cuando la razón prima (La Ley 2014–F).
14 See: “La maternidad subrogada, en el Código Civil” Clarín: Sociedad, July 4th, 2012. Accessed: March 3rd, 2015. http://www.clarin.com/sociedad/maternidad-subrogada-Codigo-Civil_0_730726966 .html; “Código Civil: eliminan el alquiler de vientre pero sigue el divorcio exprés y la separación de bienes” iProfesional: Opinion, November 15, 2013. Accessed: March 3rd, 2015.
15 Debora Diniz y Rosely Gomes Costa Infertilidad e infecundidad: acceso a las nuevas tecnologías conceptivas (SeriAs para el debate 4 Agosto 2005) 20 (own translation). Accessed: March 4th, 2015. http://www.insumisos.com/lecturasinsumisas/Derechos%20reproductivos.pdf
16 Pitch, TamarUn derecho para dos. La construcción jurídica de género, sexo y sexualidad (Madrid: Trotta 2003) 27. (own translation).Google Scholar
17 See: Herrera, MarisaPrincipales cambios en las relaciones de familia en el nuevo Código Civil y Comercial de la Nación (Infojus 2014). Accessed: March 3rd, 2015. http://www.infojus.gob.ar/marisa-herrera-principales-cambios-relaciones-familia-nuevo-codigo-civil-comercial-nacion-dacf140723-2014-10-02/123456789-0abc-defg3270-41fcanirtcodGoogle Scholar
18 Debora Diniz and Rosely Gomes Costa Infertilidad e infecundidad: acceso a las nuevas tecnologías conceptivas (SeriAs for debate August 4th, 2005) 20. (own translation). Accessed: March 4th, 2015. http://www.insumisos.com/lecturasinsumisas/Derechos%20reproductivos.pdf
19 Under Argentine law, being part of the civil law, the precedent is not mandatory.
20 File: 12. K. XLIX. REX. K., CN w/ OSECAC w/o Writ action  Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation: http://servicios.csjn.gov.ar/confal/ConsultaCompletaFallos.do?method=verDocumentos&id=711627. Accessed: March 3rd, 2015
22 S.C.K. 12; XLIX L. K., CN w/ OSECAC w/o Writ action  Attorney General's Office. http://www.mpf.gov.ar/Dictamenes/2013/MSachetta/diciembre/KC_K_12_L_XLIX.pdf. Accessed: March 3rd, 2015.
23 N, V.A and other w/ Instituto Obra Médico Asistencial (I.O.M.A.) w/o Writ  La Plata Criminal Court No. 4. http://www.rubinzalonline.com.ar/fallo/9335/. Accessed: March 3rd, 2015.
24 Artavia Murillo and others (IVF) Vs. Costa Rica  ICourtHR Series C No. 257.
25 Article 11, American Convention on Human Rights.
26 Article 7, American Convention on Human Rights.
27 Recital 142.
28 Recital 143.
29 Recital 144.
30 This right is infringed when the means through which a woman can exercise the right to control their fertility is hindered. Thus, protection of privacy includes respect for the decisions both of becoming a parent, including the couple's decision to become genetic parents (recital 146).
31 Recital 293.
32 Recital 294 and 302.
33 Recital 303.
34 Atala Riffo and Girls Vs. Chile  ICourtHR Series C No. 239.
35 Recital 111.
36 Recital 120.
37 Recital 142.
38 Fornerón and Daughter vs. Argentina  ICourtHR Series C No. 242.
39 Rulings 330: 3248 Mazzeo, Julio Lilo and other w/ appeal and unconstitutionality 2007] Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. Recital 20 of the majority vote. http://www.csjn.gov.ar/jurisp/jsp/fallos.do?usecase=mostrarDocumento&falloId=1951. Accessed: March 11th, 2015.
40 The Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities UN (CDPCD, approved by the Law 26,378 and whose constitutional status was recently recognized by Law 27,044) Article 23 describes the sexual and reproductive rights, including the right to be parents to decide how many children to have or not have to form a family.
41 For example, in administrative proceedings there is a claim of a woman of 38 years and in a relationship with another woman regarding the refusal of the Health Insurance of the Justice (OSPJN) to provide comprehensive coverage of assisted reproduction treatments, requested since April 2014, including sperm donation. In Carbajal, MarianaArtilugios para discriminar (Página 12. 27 de diciembre de 2014). http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/sociedad/3-262750-2014-12-27.html. Accessed: March 11th, 2015.Google Scholar
42 XIV Ibero-American Judiciary Summit. Brasilia Regulations Regarding Access to Justice for Vulnerable People. http://www.osce.org/odihr/68082?download=true. Accessed: March 4th, 2015.
The 100 Rules of Brasilia enshrine the basic standards to ensure access to justice for people in vulnerable conditions to enable the said people the full exercise of the services of the judicial system. In these rules, the principles contained in the “Letter of Rights of People before Justice in the Ibero-American Judiciary Space” (Cancun 2002), specifically those included in the section entitled develop “a justice that protects the weakest” (paragraphs 23–34). In the preparatory work for these Rules major Latin American operators and networks of the judicial system have also participated: the Ibero-American Association of Public Prosecutors, the American Association of Public Defenders, the American Federation of Ombudsmen and the Ibero-American Union of Colleges and Groupings lawyers.