The Midwife’s Tale: Conscientious Objection to Abortion after Grimmark and Steen

Abstract

Abstract In early 2020, the European Court of Human Rights decided two cases of Swedish midwives who had been denied employment following their refusal to assist in performing abortions because of their religious beliefs: Grimmark v Sweden and Steen v Sweden. Surprisingly to many, their applications were declared inadmissible. This comment aims to determine whether they should indeed have been rejected at the preliminary stage and what message that ruling sent to a wider public regarding the Court's stance on the issue of conscientious objection. The author arrives at the conclusion that the two applications could have legitimately been expected to be fully examined and finds the Court's decisions highly unsatisfactory: not only do they demonstrate a regrettable lack of consideration with regard to the applicants' claims, but they also contribute to the ongoing uncertainty as to the Court's views on the limits of accommodation of conscience-based claims in healthcare and beyond.