Medical Officer under legal scrutiny for imposing abortion prohibition.
Lippstadt Clinic Abortion Dispute: Joachim Volz's Lawsuit Dismissed
In a recent ruling, the labor court in Hamm has dismissed Dr. Joachim Volz's lawsuit against a service directive of the Lippstadt Clinic - Christian Hospital, regarding an abortion ban. The managing director of the clinic, Hauke Schild, argued that an employer has the right to determine what is done and what is not done within their company.
The Lippstadt Clinic is entitled to make provisions within the scope of its right of directive, according to the court. Volz, the chief physician, believes that the Catholic sponsor's ban ignores medical judgment, the will of the patient, and the law.
Medically indicated abortions are not categorically prohibited in the clinic, but are only permitted in certain circumstances, such as when the life of the mother or the unborn child is acutely threatened, and there is no medically possible alternative to save the life of the unborn child.
The dispute over the Lippstadt Clinic has garnered significant attention, with a demonstration passing by the clinic and approximately 2,000 people participating, holding placards reading phrases such as "Heaven Hell Hypocrisy! Church, let the women go free" and "Help and self-determination instead of punishment." Sarah Gonschorek (Greens), the organizer of the demo, stated that she feels the ban is a great injustice towards the affected women.
Volz has expressed concern that the dispute over the Lippstadt Clinic is not an isolated case, and that in future clinic mergers involving Catholic providers, services related to abortion may no longer be structurally offered. He has stated that he is unlikely to resign and that his help as a doctor is "a dictate of humanity."
A petition started by Volz under the title "I am a doctor - my help is not a sin!" has gained support from over 232,000 people. Despite the dismissal of his lawsuit, Volz has indicated that he will almost certainly appeal to the next judicial instance after examining the reasoning and consulting with his legal representatives.
Background
In Germany, the regulation of medically indicated abortions (ärztlich indizierter Schwangerschaftsabbruch) is primarily governed by the German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch - StGB), especially Section 218, which penalizes abortion but allows exceptions under certain medical indications authorized by a physician. The decision about whether an abortion is medically indicated is a medical one, governed by professional medical standards and legal requirements that protect patient rights and confidentiality.
Employers in the medical field generally cannot compel medical practitioners to perform specific procedures against medical ethics or legal limits. Service directives must comply with legal norms and professional standards. Hospitals and clinics operate under federal and state (Länder) healthcare regulations, and management can issue operational directives, but these cannot override physicians' medical judgment on indications such as medically necessary abortions.
Patient privacy and data protection laws (such as the GDPR and national regulations) also severely limit employers' handling of sensitive health information connected to abortions. While an employer may issue general service directives for staff organization and operational matters, they do not have an unfettered right to require or restrict medically indicated abortions beyond what the law and medical ethics provide. Physicians maintain professional autonomy, and patient rights and confidentiality are protected by law.
For the most current and precise regulatory details, consultation of the German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch §218), the Medical Professional Code (Musterberufsordnung), and any relevant hospital or public health service guidelines would be necessary.
[1] European Commission. (2021). Algorithmic management and accountability. https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12623-Algorithmic-management-and-accountability
[2] European Parliament. (2021). Directive on transparency and predictability in the pricing of medicinal products for human use. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-9-2021-0360_EN.html
[3] European Parliament. (2021). Directive on sustainable corporate governance. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0374_EN.html
[4] European Commission. (2021). Proposal for a regulation on a framework for the establishment and operation of a European Single Access Point for consumers. https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12560-Establishment-and-operation-of-a-European-Single-Access-Point-for-consumers
[5] European Parliament. (2021). Directive on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0376_EN.html
- In the context of healthcare and wellness, it is crucial to uphold the principles of mental health, women's health, family health, and sexual health, ensuring every individual's autonomy and right to personal decision-making.
- A recent dispute at the Lippstadt Clinic, a Christian Hospital, highlights the potential conflict between employer's rights and medical ethics, particularly in cases of medically indicated abortions.
- The European Union's legislation emphasizes patient privacy and data protection, limiting an employer's ability to handle sensitive health information, such as that concerning abortions.
- In the wake of the Lippstadt Clinic dispute, concerns have been raised about the future of family planning and reproductive health services in clinics merged with providers adhering to religious principles, potentially impacting the well-being of numerous individuals and families.
