issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 328 (2018)
04.10.2018
No breach of woman’s rights in home birth case, but Court calls on Croatia
to regulate legislation more clearly
European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been:
no violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private life) of the European Convention on Human
Rights.
The case concerned Croatian legislation on home births. The applicant in the case is a mother who
gave birth to her fourth child at home with the help of a midwife from abroad. She alleged in
particular that, although Croatian law allowed home births, women such as her could not make this
choice in practice because they were not able to get professional help.
The Court accepted that at first there might have been some doubt as to whether a system for
assisted home births had been set up in Croatia. It therefore called on the authorities to consolidate
the relevant legislation so that the matter is expressly and clearly regulated.
However, it found that the applicant had clearly been made aware, through the letters from the
Croatian Chamber of Midwives and the Ministry of Health which she had received while she had still
been pregnant with her fourth child, that the domestic law did not allow assisted home births. It
further found that the authorities had struck the right balance between the applicant’s right to
respect for her private life and the State’s interest in protecting the health and safety of mothers
and children. It pointed out in particular that Croatia was not currently required under the
Convention to allow planned home births. There was still a great disparity between the legal systems
of the Contracting States on home births and the Court was sensitive to the fact that the law
developed gradually in this area.
Principal facts
The applicant, Ivana Pojatina, is a Croatian national who was born in 1976 and lives in Zagreb.
She gave birth to her first three children in hospital. In 2011 she became pregnant with her fourth
child and had a due date in February 2012. During her pregnancy she wrote to the Croatian Chamber
of Midwives to enquire whether she could have professional help with a home birth.
The Chamber told her that under Croatian law, health professionals, including midwives, were
unable to assist with home births. In particular, the setting up of private practices by midwives was
not clearly regulated and thus no midwife officially assisted with home births. The Chamber also
cited a statement by the Ministry of Health showing that there was no system for assisting home
births in Croatia.
On 15 February 2012 the applicant gave birth to her fourth child at home, assisted by a midwife
from abroad.
1. Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, this Chamber judgment is not final. During the three-month period following its delivery,
any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five judges
considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final
judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution.
