Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42434475›Full record

ArticleFeminist legal studies2026

Abortion Lawfare and the Margin of Appreciation in the ECtHR Jurisprudence on Poland.

Marta Bucholc, Iskra de Vries, Bartosz Cyran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Feminist legal studies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Marta BucholcFaculty of Sociology, University of Warsaw, Karowa 18, 00-927 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1874-2024
Iskra de VriesFaculty of Sociology, University of Warsaw, Karowa 18, 00-927 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0009-0001-2371-9793
Bartosz CyranInterdisciplinary Doctoral School, Faculty of Law and Administration, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0009-0005-8717-0399

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article examines the legal device known as the margin of appreciation at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). To critically evaluate its modus operandi, we first explore scholarly literature on its functioning to then analyse the margin's application in abortion-related jurisprudence. By relying on the framework of reproductive justice, we present three objections to the doctrine. First, spurious incrementalism addresses individualised burdens of standardised human rights procedures, which place disproportionate procedural and evidentiary constraints onto applicants and reinforce prevailing injustices. Second, politicised presentism explores the normative prioritisation of state representatives, which entrenches static abortion attitudes, even in the face of evolving societal views or the rights of minority groups. Third, the watershed of injustices interrogates the possibility of justifying restrictive jurisdictions through market logics, which displaces access to human rights across borders, compelling citizens to engage in a form of absurd forum-shopping for reproductive health care.

Indexed as

AbortionECtHRMargin of appreciationPolandReproductive justice

Identifiers

PMID42434475
PMCPMC13350197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.