The battle for universal reproductive justice is ongoing in Mexico, where 19 of the 32 states have legalised abortion up to 12 weeks. But a 20th state has become a rara avis, where abortion is both a legal right granted by courts and a crime in the penal code.
Local feminists in Chihuahua, Mexico’s largest state, have won abortion rights in three class action lawsuits this year. These court rulings ordered the state government to provide abortion services throughout the public health system, establish protocols to help people access the service and inform them of their rights to do so.
They also ordered the state Congress to remove the crime of abortion from its penal code, in line with the 2021 Mexican Supreme Court decision that deemed it unconstitutional to punish somebody for having an abortion. This has still not been done.
Chihuahua, which borders the US states of New Mexico and Texas, is one of Mexico’s most conservative states. An openDemocracy investigation published earlier this year revealed that private individuals and businesses in the state give more money to the national anti-abortion disinformation network Vida y Familia AC (Vifac) than anywhere else in Mexico.
Our report also uncovered how Vifac penetrates the state’s public institutions, taps into public resources and dodges the law to set up local groups and programmes to provide sex education based on religious values.
openDemocracy recently spoke with one feminist activist, Mariela Castro Flores, who has been at the forefront of these two battles in Chihuahua: fighting for both abortion rights and a rights-based secular sexual education for children and adolescents.
Castro Flores is the spokesperson for Marea Verde Chihuahua, a group that provides support to people seeking abortions, which was behind one of the successful lawsuits. She is also a researcher for the Alliance for the Defence of the Secular State (Adela) and an advisory member of the National Institute of Women, the federal public agency in charge of gender policies, human rights and intersectionality.
This is an excerpt from an interview with her.
This interview has been translated from Spanish, and edited for length and clarity.
openDemocracy: Nineteen Mexican states have legalised abortion up to 12 weeks. Given the three class action lawsuits that won legalisation in Chihuahua earlier this year, why isn’t it the 20th state on that list?
Castro: It is a strange case because, in Chihuahua, abortion is a right granted by a court ruling and is still a crime written in the penal code. But actually, the litigation strategy used in Chihuahua [feminist groups filing class action lawsuits, rather than one for every woman requiring an abortion] has been the spearhead for action elsewhere.
Groups in Yucatán and Zacatecas have also been to court to try and bring changes to their state constitutions and penal codes, with the Yucatán case going all the way to the Supreme Court. [In both cases, courts ordered the congresses to remove unconstitutional articles in the penal code that made abortion at will illegal. Zacatecas did so last month, while Yucatan Congress is yet to pass a law on it.] But authorities standing in the way of compliance are all over the place.
Chihuahua’s court rulings established specific procedures and ordered that abortion services of the highest medical and human rights standards be provided. In other states, where abortion was made available through legalisation in Congress rather than through court rulings, less detail was included in the laws – meaning authorities can make excuses to deny access to abortion. Here in Chihuahua, with this court ruling, people must be offered an abortion service. That seems to be a substantial difference between legislation and the judicial process.
[But the health ministry in Chihuahua still tries to avoid abortions being carried out.] So we are working with the health authorities to translate the ruling into concrete actions. We are on this path of supporting litigation. People who approach us for help getting an abortion are given two options, a self-managed abortion with a follow-up group that provides support for an abortion, such as Marea Verde, or support to access an abortion in a local healthcare facility.
What were the rulings about?
We started to litigate for people seeking abortions individually after the 2021 Supreme Court ruling decriminalised abortion nationwide. But those lawsuits were personal and when they were successful, only the person who had filed for it could get an abortion in a hospital or clinic. Then we decided to emulate other [class action] litigation strategies that allowed, for example, equal marriage in this country. If the congresses refuse to legislate, let the judiciary be the one to move forward.
The Supreme Court's constitutional ruling on a case in the state of Coahuila in 2021 established that no person could be criminalised for a reproductive decision. It was pivotal and formed the basis for our class action lawsuits.
The first decision was issued in February, but we only made it public in May in order to present it more forcefully along with the other two rulings, one of which was specifically for non-binary pregnant people.
These rulings can’t be appealed. What do they mean for the Chihuahuan health authorities?
They are mandatory for all the public healthcare services in Chihuahua. If someone in a remote municipality requires an abortion, the public health institutions must make it accessible, including by transferring them to the nearest hospital where they can be treated.
Are women still penalised for having an abortion in Chihuahua?
No. Actually, there have not been any women in prison in Chihuahua for having abortions for about four years, since the Supreme Court issued its ruling.
But what does real access to abortion look like?
If there are refusals, they don’t come from medical staff, but from the authorities. [Somebody in Chihuahua who requires an abortion must fill out a form and send it to the state’s secretary of health, who is supposed to respond within 24 hours. If they don’t respond or refuse the request, the individual can file a non-compliance appeal to a judge, who should order the service be provided.]
We had already done a lot of work on authorities’ refusals to follow NOM-046 [a federal decree issued in 2005 that made it mandatory to offer abortion services to all victims of domestic, sexual and gender violence throughout the country].
We also did a lot of advocacy work to ensure that medical staff declared whether or not they would be conscientious objectors to abortion when hired, which is a legal requirement. But there were staff who declared themselves conscientious objectors only when they had to perform an abortion, not for reasons related to their conscience but for convenience, to keep their jobs or to be aligned with the government’s ideology. In that regard, we forged alliances [with doctors and federal institutions] to make healthcare staff follow the guidelines of the National Centre for Gender Equity and Reproductive Health, a federal agency.
Now, in order to get a legal abortion, we have to file a request to the Ministry of Health’s legal department, which is supposed to inform the hospital that it has to provide the patient with an abortion service. And that’s where everything is turned upside down, because the legal department has used public money to hire a private law firm that, using a lot of trickery, either denies abortion requests [often by saying they are a crime in the penal code] or delays them to the point when an abortion can no longer be carried out. [Most abortions in Mexico are legal up to 12 weeks, though there are exceptions in which the time limit is lifted, such as when an abortion is required as a result of rape.]
We at Marea Verde Chihuahua and Abortistas Mx regularly file complaints and requests for the rulings to be complied with. That's how we know that the refusal does not come from hospital staff, who are sensible and offer appropriate care, but from the health authorities.
Through Freedom of Information requests to Chihuahua’s health secretary, we asked what the protocols are for offering abortions and in which hospitals they could be performed. And the answer was absurd – 20-odd pages to eventually tell me that the information was classified.
The rulings order authorities to publicise abortion services – telling the public where safe abortions are provided. And they are not doing that. Faced with this situation, we have to set priorities and pay attention to what is essential: first, guarantee abortion for those who need it, and second, provide legal support.
Do you continue to support people who need an abortion, and if there is an emergency, do you do it through self-management?
We continue to provide both legal support and self-management when necessary.
Earlier this year, when openDemocracy published our investigation on Vifac’s private funding, we found that Chihuahua was the state where the organisation had received the most money and had set up a group to provide religious sex education in schools. Does comprehensive sex education (CSE) exist in Mexico?
Yes, it does, and it’s based on the highest standards of human rights and respect for inclusion and diversity, not just sexual, but cultural and religious diversity. But there also exists interference from organised, religious groups of parents who are supported by politicians to favour certain agendas.
They find the recognition of sexual diversity, diverse families and trans children controversial. And there are more radical people, who deny history and don’t want certain historical facts to be taught in school.
Tell me about your battle to stop Vifac’s school programmes.
In 2022, we at the Alliance for the Defence of the Secular State (Adela) produced research that was published in the magazine Proceso about Vifac's school programme, Formando Corazones (Shaping Hearts in English), which was previously named Saber Amar (Knowing to Love).
Saber Amar was a curriculum based on religious values that was implemented in private schools from 2012 onwards. FECHAC [the Spanish acronym for the Chihuahua Business Foundation, which administers a trust fund fed by a payroll tax surcharge] offered funding that allowed Saber Amar to reach all schools in poverty-stricken areas in Chihuahua City. FECHAC set up full-time schools in school canteens, where mothers could send their children to be looked after while they went to their jobs. Those were public schools teaching children this religious curriculum.
During the term of former Chihuahua governor Javier Corral, who was in office from 2016 to 2021, public resources were authorised for Saber Amar to reach public primary, secondary and high schools across the state.
Then, the curriculum gained so much strength. In 2018, Vifac started Formando Corazones in Chihuahua, which was a curriculum revamp under a different name. It produced and published new educational materials, teaching guides and reference books for all grades, preschool, primary, junior high and high school. Vifac also established a new nonprofit of the same name, Formando Corazones, through which it continues to promote and teach this curriculum. We know that they are Vifac because their governing body and board of directors are the same people.
This curriculum, as you said in your article, promotes chastity, abstinence and gender stereotypes. It was rejected by some teachers and parents at primary schools [who were unhappy with the religious education]. But the Directorate of Secondary Education decided to move forward, and the director general of the Chihuahua High School Board, Teresa Ortuño, also said yes [to teaching the curriculum in secondary schools, but not primary schools].
It took three years of work before we managed to get the teaching of this curriculum suspended in 2022, through a technical opinion from the federal Public Education Department. This established that the programme violated the General Education Law and the principle of the secular state because it promoted the values of one religion as morally correct and did not recognise the religious and philosophical diversity that should be the founding of secular education.
[Asked by openDemocracy, Vifac Chihuahua said Saber Amar was its sexual education programme between 2012 and 2018, when it established “a new programme for both public and private schools on comprehensive education on affectivity and sexuality named Formando Corazones.
“This programme is completely secular, based on the National Sexuality Education Standards K-12. Since 2019, Vifac is not related to any public schools’ educational curricula”.
In written answers by email, Vifac Chihuahua added: “Formando Corazones was a new and different nonprofit with goals, vision, mission and values which are not Vifac’s”.
Vifac also said that: “Formando Corazones got support from the Chihuahua government for the awareness and prevention of adolescent pregnancy in 2018 and 2019. Formando Corazones became a publishing house in 2022 and it does not work as a tax-exempt nonprofit anymore”.
The group added: “Formando Corazones has not worked in the public schools system since 2019”, while Vifac “remains committed to comprehensively support vulnerable pregnant women, always following the laws”.]
Formando Corazones was cancelled as a nonprofit in 2022. openDemocracy’s research uncovered another organisation created by Vifac in Chihuahua, Yo Amo la Vida (I love life), which also provides this type of training for children, parents and teachers.
[Despite the federal education department suspending the teaching,] Formando Corazones continues to exist as an educational curriculum. Yo Amo la Vida has grown and strengthened because it is based in a region known as ‘the chastity belt’ of Chihuahua, five very conservative neighbouring municipalities. Yo Amo la Vida uses the same Formando Corazones programme specifically in that region.
Yo Amo la Vida also joined the Municipal Groups for the Prevention of Adolescent Pregnancy (GMPEA). All municipalities are required to have a GMPEA branch, made up of civil society, academia and public institutions, which must work to eradicate child pregnancy and reduce teenage pregnancy. To do so, they receive public funds to raise awareness of sexual and reproductive rights and contribute to comprehensive sexual education at all levels, from preschool onwards.
Yo Amo la Vida has been a permanent obstacle for GMPEAs. Among other things, GMPEAs have to provide awareness and training on sexuality issues for parents in the school community, but while the groups have to function all year round, they do not receive enough federal funding to cover the whole year. So Yo Amo la Vida says ‘I’ll take care of it’ [offering to provide training and awareness activities], but it provides that kind of content [based on] religious and moral values.
[In its written answers to openDemocracy, Vifac Chihuahua distanced itself from this new group. It said: “Yo Amo la Vida is a totally independent nonprofit, so we ignore its specific activities.”]
Why don’t the authorities ensure that this doesn’t happen?
Groups such as Vifac and Formando Corazones become entrenched in public institutions by offering these kinds of services, especially in smaller municipalities where public services don’t stretch to everybody. These groups come in as saviours, saying: ‘We’ll do it’. And they are welcomed because, with the funding that you revealed in the investigation, they have the means to do it.
What Vifac and its various associated groups and programmes do is tap into institutional spaces, created to comply with federal human rights policies, to do just the opposite. And they have alliances with conservative politicians.
How did Adela campaign to get the Formando Corazones curriculum cancelled in public schools?
We started analysing the educational materials it delivered, which had not been approved by the federal secretary of education as required by law. And we saw that the conceptual basis came directly from the encyclicals of Pope John Paul II.
Then we began to see that there was a positive public perception of Formando Corazones. We wondered why. The director and some officials of the Colegio de Bachilleres (the High School Board, which runs public secondary schools) said that due to the curriculum being taught, teenage pregnancy had been reduced in 2018/19.
I used Freedom of Information laws to request statistics on teenage pregnancies from the years before Formando Corazones was implemented, in order to compare. I also asked for the methodology that the High School Board had followed, its statistical basis and what measures it took when a teenage pregnancy occurred, as well as the model of comprehensive sexual education it presented and what public policy it had adhered to.
It was clear from the responses that it did not do any kind of research. Some pregnancies were not registered, and one of its tactics was withdrawing girls who were visibly pregnant from school, supposedly with the option of returning when she was no longer pregnant. So we also found they were violating rights because she was denied her right to education. There was no quantifiable criterion that could explain the relationship of Formando Corazones to the supposed decrease in teenage pregnancies.
With all these facts – a religious curriculum based on John Paul II's encyclicals, proof that the Colegio de Bachilleres was lying, and violations of the secular state – a media campaign began to question public officials.
This was supported by a request from federal congressional deputies to the Chihuahuan secretary of public education to stop teaching religious programmes in public schools, and three public forums to analyse how religious fundamentalisms interfere with public education. We finally achieved this technical recommendation – an order from the secretary of education – to stop this teaching in schools.
[Chihuahua’s High School Board authorities who decided to include Formando Corazones’ curriculum and publicised the alleged drop in adolescent pregnancy are no longer in office. New authorities didn’t answer our request for comments.]
Diana Cariboni
