around the world

The Constitutional Court declared illegal the ban on adopting children with HIV

A couple from the Moscow region addressed the court, who was not allowed to adopt the child because of the disease.

The Constitutional Court ruled in which recognized that the ban on adoption for people with HIV does not comply with the basic law of the country. The document is published on the court website.

With a complaint to the Constitutional Court turned a couple from the suburbs, which was denied the adoption of the child, said “Interfax”. The man and the woman are married since 2010, in 2012 the woman had a miscarriage, she was in hospital and contracted HIV infection. Later the child was born to a spouse by a surrogate mother, the wife’s sister, but the boy constantly lives and is brought up in the family. But the courts of general jurisdiction found that because of the woman’s illness, the adoption would violate the interests of the child.

The couple asked to check the compliance of the Constitution with subparagraph 6 of paragraph 1 of Article 127 of the Family Code and item 2 of the List of Diseases, in the presence of which a person can not adopt a child, take him into custody or a foster family.

The complaint stated that HIV infection is not transmitted by household means, and neither the husband nor the child has been infected for 2.5 years. Spouses also drew attention to the effectiveness of therapy prescribed to the infected. From this they concluded that the restrictions are based on an imaginary threat.

In the ruling, the Constitutional Court recalled: the world community recognized that the presence of HIV infection should not be considered a threat to the population. He recognized the disputed norms as not in accordance with the constitution and ordered the review of the applicants’ case.

In the current legislation there is no direct prohibition on the adoption or guardianship of children with those who have HIV. But in fact the prohibition extends when “there is an infectious disease before the discontinuation of dispensary observation due to persistent remission”.

Back to top button