ON
← Back to feed
Colmed joins the criticism against the project Listen to your heart and defends the existence of informed consent free of coercion
CL🏛️ PoliticsProgressive6 hr. ago

Colmed joins the criticism against the project Listen to your heart and defends the existence of informed consent free of coercion

The article reports that the Chilean Medical College (Colmed) has strongly criticized the 'Escucha su corazón' bill proposed by PNL deputy Cristóbal Urruticoechea. The bill requires doctors to listen to fetal heart activity before allowing abortion in three specific cases, conditioning the procedure on patient acceptance. Colmed argues this initiative raises ethical concerns, questioning whether mandatory intervention aligns with patient-centered care. They emphasize that informed consent should be a dialogue between healthcare providers and patients, ensuring autonomy and freedom from coercion. Colmed references international medical organizations like WHO, FIGO, and ACOG, which support personalized, non-coercive consent. The bill, supported by members of the Republican Party and Renovación Nacional, has faced criticism from both ruling party and opposition figures, including former minister Karla Rubilar, who claims it undermines existing abortion laws and increases women’s suffering.

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.

How each side covered it

The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.

How each side covered it

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Covered around the world

The same event as reported in other countries.

Covered around the world

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Claims check

Key factual claims, and how many sources assert vs dispute each.

Claims check

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Go to the primary sources (1)

The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.

1 reports

La Tercera logoLa TerceraIndependent🔒ProgressiveFactual 85Objective 786 hr. ago
Colmed joins the criticism against the project Listen to your heart and defends the existence of informed consent free of coercion

The article reports that the Chilean Medical College (Colmed) has strongly criticized the 'Escucha su corazón' bill proposed by PNL deputy Cristóbal Urruticoechea. The bill requires doctors to listen to fetal heart activity before allowing abortion in three specific cases, conditioning the procedure on patient acceptance. Colmed argues this initiative raises ethical concerns, questioning whether mandatory intervention aligns with patient-centered care. They emphasize that informed consent should be a dialogue between healthcare providers and patients, ensuring autonomy and freedom from coercion. Colmed references international medical organizations like WHO, FIGO, and ACOG, which support personalized, non-coercive consent. The bill, supported by members of the Republican Party and Renovación Nacional, has faced criticism from both ruling party and opposition figures, including former minister Karla Rubilar, who claims it undermines existing abortion laws and increases women’s suffering.

Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the legislation as ethically problematic and potentially harmful to women, emphasizing the importance of autonomy and non-coercion. It highlights the stance of medical professionals and international health organizations against the bill, suggesting a left-leaning perspective that

Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports the stance of Colmed regarding the 'Escucha su corazón' bill, citing specific concerns about mandatory fetal heart monitoring before abortion procedures. It references international medical organizations like WHO and FIGO, aligning with cross-source consensus that info

Why objectivity (78): The article presents Colmed’s position as a professional organization, using neutral language to describe their concerns. However, there is subtle advocacy for patient autonomy and criticism of government intervention, which may lean slightly towards supporting abortion rights. While not overtly bia

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories