Colmed schließt sich den Kritiken gegen das Projekt Höre auf dein Herz an und verteidigt die Existenz einer informierten Einwilligung ohne Zwang

Chile’s Medical Council (Colmed) has joined growing criticisms against the proposed law titled “Listen to Your Heart,” introduced by National Libertarian Party (PNL) deputy Cristóbal Urruticoechea. The bill would require doctors to listen to the fetal heartbeat before performing an abortion in three specific cases, making this step mandatory for the procedure to proceed. The initiative has sparked intense ethical and legal debates over medical autonomy, patient rights, and clinical practices. The proposal has drawn sharp criticism from Colmed, which argues that the law raises fundamental ethical concerns regarding the nature of clinical care centered on the patient. According to the council, the legislation introduces a requirement that could conflict with the principles of informed consent and patient-centered care. They emphasized that modern medicine recognizes informed consent as a dialogue process between healthcare providers and patients aimed at enabling free, autonomous decisions based on relevant information. Colmed stated that the core issue lies in whether such a legal mandate aligns with clinical ethics, particularly in situations involving severe maternal distress. The organization stressed that informed consent should not be strengthened through compulsory procedures but rather through the quality of the doctor-patient relationship, mutual trust, and the ability to make decisions without pressure. In addition, Colmed highlighted international consensus among organizations such as the World Health Organization, the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO), and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). These bodies agree that informed consent must be personalized, free from coercion, and focused on the individual's autonomy. The council further noted that in critical scenarios, such as life-threatening maternal conditions, lethal fetal inviability, or pregnancies resulting from sexual violence, the ethical response should involve reinforcing respectful care grounded in evidence and clinical judgment, while avoiding actions that could further victimize women. Bioethics, according to Colmed, demands protecting patients' freedom of choice and preserving the integrity of medical practice. Imposing obligations that do not enhance care could harm the doctor-patient relationship, they warned. The proposed law has received support from members of the Republican Party and Renewal National, but it has faced rejection from both the ruling party and opposition factions. Yesterday, former Minister Karla Rubilar criticized the proposal, arguing that it alters the spirit of existing legislation allowing voluntary termination of pregnancy under three specific circumstances and increases suffering for women undergoing the process. The controversy surrounding the “Listen to Your Heart” project reflects broader tensions around reproductive rights, medical ethics, and legislative influence on clinical practice. As discussions continue, the role of informed consent and the balance between state regulation and professional discretion remain central issues.