Skip to content
logo

International Justice Resource Center

International Justice Resource Center

  • View ijrcenter’s profile on Facebook
  • View ijrcenter’s profile on Twitter
  • View ijrcenter’s profile on Instagram
  • View ijrcenter’s profile on LinkedIn
  • View ijrcenter’s profile on YouTube
  • View ijrcenter’s profile on Vimeo
  • About IJRC
    • Who We Are
      • Board of Directors
      • Advisory Board
    • What We Do
      • Online Resource Hub
      • Litigation & Advocacy Support
      • Trainings
    • IJRC in the News
    • Work with IJRC
    • Contact Us
  • Human Rights Law
    • Human Rights Overview
    • Civil & Political Rights
    • Vulnerable Groups
    • Economic, Social & Cultural Rights
    • Country Factsheets
    • Research Aids
      • Books & Articles
      • Civil Society Actors
      • Human Rights Conditions
      • International Human Rights Instruments
      • Jurisprudence & Document Databases
    • Related Areas of Law
      • Asylum & the Rights of Refugees
      • International Criminal Law
      • International Humanitarian Law
      • Regional Integration Agreements
  • Courts & Monitoring Bodies
    • United Nations
      • Human Rights Council
      • Universal Periodic Review
      • Independent Experts
      • Human Rights Treaty Bodies
        • Human Rights Committee
        • Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
        • Committee Against Torture
        • Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
        • Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
        • Committee on Enforced Disappearances
        • Committee on Migrant Workers
        • Committee on the Rights of the Child
        • Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
        • Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture
    • Africa
      • African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
      • African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights
      • COMESA Court of Justice
      • East African Court of Justice
      • ECOWAS Court of Justice
      • Southern African Development Community Tribunal
    • Americas
      • Inter-American Court of Human Rights
      • Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
      • Caribbean Court of Justice
      • Central American Court of Justice
      • Court of Justice of the Andean Community
    • Asia
    • Europe
      • European Court of Human Rights
      • European Committee of Social Rights
      • Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights
    • Middle East and North Africa
    • National Bodies
      • National Courts
      • National Human Rights Institutions
      • Truth and Reconciliation Commissions
      • Universal Jurisdiction
    • Hearings & Sessions
    • Other International Bodies
      • International Court of Justice
      • International Criminal Court
      • ICTR
      • ICTY
      • Internationalized Criminal Tribunals
      • International Labour Organization
      • Courts and Tribunals of Regional Economic Communities
  • News & Events
    • News Room
    • IJRC Daily
    • Hearings & Sessions
    • IJRC Events
  • Media & Publications
    • IJRC Publications
    • IJRC Interview Series
    • Educational Videos
      • Advocacy before the Inter-American Human Rights System
      • El Litigio e Incidencia ante el Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos
      • Atuação perante o Sistema Interamericano de Direitos Humanos
      • Pledwaye Devan Sistèm Entè-Ameriken pou Pwoteksyon Dwa Moun
    • Training Sessions
  • Donate

Spanish Courts’ Handling of Obstetric Violence Violated CEDAW, Committee Finds

March 11, 2020 IJRC discrimination, economic, social & cultural rights, health, international human rights, UN treaty bodies, Universal system, women's rights
Gladys Acosta Vargas, Vice-Chairperson of the CEDAW Committee
Credit: UN Women via Twitter

In its first decision regarding obstetric violence, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW Committee) has found that Spain violated the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) when domestic courts did not adequately assess a woman’s claims that she had been subjected to excessive and unnecessary exams, medication, and other interventions without her consent during labor, resulting in “lasting physical and mental trauma.” [OHCHR Press Release] The CEDAW Committee concluded that the domestic courts deferred to the hospital instead of respecting the principle of informed consent, relied on gender stereotypes, and did not fairly evaluate her claims, in violation of CEDAW articles 2(b), (c), (d), and (f), 3, 5 and 12. See CEDAW Committee, S.F.M. v. Spain, Communication No. 138/2018, Views of 28 February 2020, UN Doc. CEDAW/C/75/D/138/2018 (Spanish only). The Committee urged Spain to provide appropriate reparations to the applicant, including financial compensation, and take specific steps to ensure respect for women’s human rights in the context of pregnancy and reproductive health care. See id. at paras. 7.2, 8.

Case Overview & Procedural Background

In September 2009, the applicant, S.M.F., was 39 weeks pregnant when she went to a Spanish hospital to get advice on the mild contractions she was experiencing. See id. at para. 2.1. Although she had had a normal pregnancy up to that point and was not yet in labor, the medical staff admitted S.M.F. and began a series of interventions that ended when her daughter was born approximately 40 hours later. The baby required seven days of hospitalization because of a bacterial infection contracted during S.M.F.’s labor, and hospital staff strictly limited S.M.F.’s access to her.

In December 2011, after the hospital failed to respond to the applicant’s complaint, she filed a claim before a ministry of health for pecuniary damages. See id. at paras. 2.1-2.5, 2.13. The ministry of health dismissed her claim and, on appeal, a national administrative court agreed with the ministry of health. See id. at paras. 2.14-2.17. The applicant filed an appeal with the relevant Superior Court, which concluded that administrative court’s assessment was more generalized than what would be preferable and did not thoroughly assess the information provided by the applicant, but nevertheless held that there had been no violation of informed consent regulations for the procedures that the applicant underwent given that “the provision of consent under such conditions and during birth was impossible.” See id. at para. 2.18. The Superior Court also concluded that it was “perfectly understandable” that the father could not be present during birth. See id. Finding insufficient evidence of medical malpractice, the Superior Court found against the applicant. See id. The Spanish Constitutional Court held the final appeal inadmissible. See id. at para. 2.19.

In October 2018, the applicant submitted a complaint to the CEDAW Committee alleging violations of CEDAW articles 2 (State duties), 3 (equality), 5 (stereotypes and cultural prejudices), and 12 (health) of the CEDAW due to the State’s failure to provide access to adequate health services, free of violence and discrimination, and for not being able to exercise her personal autonomy during childbirth. See id. at para. 3.1. The CEDAW Committee admitted the complaint, concluding that the applicant had adequately exhausted domestic remedies. See id. at para. 6.3. The CEDAW Committee also rejected the State’s argument that the applicant was asking the Committee to reassess the facts and evidence evaluated by the domestic courts, which would be outside the Committee’s competence. See id. at paras. 6.4-6.5. The Committee noted that the applicant alleged that the domestic judicial process was itself discriminatory because it was based on gendered stereotypes and, therefore, the Committee had competence to evaluate her complaints. See id. at para. 6.4.

CEDAW Committee’s Analysis

The CEDAW Committee’s analysis focused on the administrative and judicial proceedings in Spain, rather than on the applicant’s treatment in the hospital itself, and drew on the recent report on obstetric violence by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women. See id. at para. 7.3. The CEDAW Committee noted that the UN Special Rapporteur defines obstetric violence as “violence experienced by women during facility-based childbirth” and that this problem is “widespread and systemic in nature.” See id. In particular, the Committee highlighted the UN Special Rapporteur’s conclusion that episiotomies “may have adverse physical and psychological effects on the mother, can lead to death and may amount to gender-based violence and torture and inhuman and degrading treatment.” See id.

The Committee first analyzed whether the State met its obligation to exercise due diligence in its administrative and judicial proceedings with respect to the author’s complaints, and to eliminate gender stereotypes from its proceedings. See id. at para. 7.4. While the State claimed that it had conducted a thorough and exhaustive examination of the evidence presented, the CEDAW Committee concluded that the national courts “only gave credibility to the hospital reports and assumed stereotypes.” See id. Taking into account the information presented by the parties, the Committee found that the State did not conduct a thorough analysis of the facts or give equal weight to the evidence presented by the applicant. See id.

The Committee reiterated that States parties have an obligation to abolish laws and regulations, as well as customs and practices that constitute discrimination against women. See id. at para. 7.5. It also explained that stereotypes, which constitute discrimination against women, impact the right of women to be protected against gender-based violence, including obstetric violence, and that national authorities must exercise caution to not perpetuate stereotypes. See id. at paras. 6.4, 7.5. The Committee found the Spanish courts had perpetuated gender stereotypes – and, therefore, discrimination – by deferring to the doctors’ judgments rather than requiring the S.M.F’s consent to treatment and by expressing sympathy for S.M.F.’s husband because he and S.M.F. did not have sex for two years, while downplaying the harm to S.M.F. See id. at para. 7.5. As such, the CEDAW Committee held that the State violated articles 2, 3, 5 and 12 of the Convention and issued several “general” recommendations to the State to ensure changes in its healthcare protocols. See id. at para. 7.6.

Recommendations

In addition to urging Spain to provide appropriate reparations to the applicant, including financial compensation for the damage to her physical and mental health, the CEDAW Committee called on Spain to: (1) ensure that all women have access to adequate obstetric care, in line with CEDAW General Recommendation No. 24 on Article 12 of the Convention, and are able to provide free, prior and informed consent before medical procedures; (2) conduct studies on obstetric violence to guide public policy; (3) provide adequate training to medical staff on women’s reproductive health and rights; and, (4) ensure access to effective remedies for cases of obstetric violence, including by providing training to judicial and administrative personnel who may deal with cases concerning women’s reproductive health. See id. at para. 8.

Additional Information

For more information on the CEDAW Committee, the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and her report on childbirth and obstetric care, women’s rights, and other UN human rights treaty bodies, visit IJRC’s Online Resource Hub. To stay up-to-date on international human rights law news, visit IJRC’s News Room or subscribe to the IJRC Daily.

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Post navigation

Previous Post:Human Rights Bodies Respond to Coronavirus, Some Suspend Scheduled Sessions
Next Post:Expert Calls for Greater Accountability for Sexual Abuse by UN Personnel

COVID-19 & Human Rights Oversight

See human rights bodies' COVID-19 guidance on our dedicated webpage, organized by mechanism and theme, and updated regularly.

For human rights bodies' schedule and activity changes due to the pandemic, see our Monthly Overview posts or the IJRC Hearings & Sessions Calendar.

Human Rights Document Search

Upcoming Hearings & Sessions

  • March 30, 2023
    • Human Rights Council 52ndHuman Rights Council 52nd

      The UN Human Rights Council is holding its 52nd regular session from February 27 to April 4, in person in Geneva, Switzerland.
      all day
    • CED 24th SessionCED 24th Session

      The Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) will hold its 24th Session from March 20 to 31, in person, in Geneva. The CED will review Costa Rica and Zambia, and adopt lists of issues for its review of Benin, Malta, and Norway. Its programme of work also includes dialogues with Germany and Argentina concerning their reports on additional information.
      all day
    • CMW 36th SessionCMW 36th Session

      The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (CMW) will hold its 36th Session from March 27 to April 6. During the session, it will hold constructive dialogues with El Salvador, Morocco, Nigeria, and the Philippines concerning their implementation of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families. The CMW will adopt lists of issues prior to reporting for Niger and Seychelles. Its agenda also includes discussion of efforts to promote the Convention.
      all day
  • March 31, 2023
    • Human Rights Council 52ndHuman Rights Council 52nd

      The UN Human Rights Council is holding its 52nd regular session from February 27 to April 4, in person in Geneva, Switzerland.
      all day
    • CMW 36th SessionCMW 36th Session

      The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (CMW) will hold its 36th Session from March 27 to April 6. During the session, it will hold constructive dialogues with El Salvador, Morocco, Nigeria, and the Philippines concerning their implementation of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families. The CMW will adopt lists of issues prior to reporting for Niger and Seychelles. Its agenda also includes discussion of efforts to promote the Convention.
      all day

Subscribe to the News Room


Search this Site

About IJRC

The International Justice Resource Center (IJRC) informs, trains, and advises advocates and individual victims on using international and regional human rights protections to advance justice and accountability in their communities.

Donate Today!

PayPal Giving Fund

Join Our Mailing List

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.Accept Read More
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Save & Accept