Medical Officer Faces Legal Action over Enforced Abortion Restrictions
In Germany, a Catholic-sponsored hospital has imposed a ban on performing abortions, even in cases of severe fetal malformations, following a recent court ruling. This decision has sparked public protests and an ongoing debate on the Church's special rights within medical care, especially regarding medically indicated abortions.
The dispute centres around the Lippstadt Clinic, where gynecologist Joachim Volz had previously performed medically indicated abortions at the Evangelical Hospital Lippstadt. However, since February 2025, this has been prohibited by the Catholic sponsor. The ban extends beyond hospital employment to cover Volz's private practice in Bielefeld.
Sarah Gonschorek (Greens) organised a demonstration titled "Stop the Catholic Abortion Ban" near the Lippstadt Clinic, where approximately 2,000 people participated. Politicians from the federal and state levels of NRW, including the Greens' co-faction leader Britta Haßelmann, were present at the demonstration.
During the demonstration, Volz expressed confidence that "reason and humanity will prevail" in the legal dispute. He also displayed the current number of signatures on a petition he launched under the title "I am a doctor - my help is not a sin!", which has garnered over 232,000 signatures. Demonstrators carried placards reading "Heaven Hell Hypocrisy! Church, let the women go free" and "Help and self-determination instead of punishment".
The Hamm Labour Court in North Rhine-Westphalia confirmed that the Catholic hospital operator had the right to issue binding regulations on service performance within the hospital, including barring abortions. The court dismissed the lawsuit of Chief Physician Joachim Volz against the Catholic sponsor of the Lippstadt Clinic, ruling that the employer is entitled to both measures in the case.
The managing director of the clinic, Hauke Schild, argues that an employer can determine what is done and not done in his company, citing entrepreneurial freedom. However, Volz believes that the Catholic sponsor's ban ignores the medical judgment, the will of the patient, and the law which permits such an intervention in certain cases. He has stated that a resignation is not an option and that he will likely appeal the court's decision to the next judicial instance.
Abortion is technically illegal but not punishable within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy following counseling in Germany. Exceptions also exist for medical necessity, fetal malformations, or rape. This situation reflects the current balance between Germany’s general abortion laws, which allow abortion under specific conditions, and the authority of Catholic hospital operators to restrict abortion services on religious grounds in their institutions. The hospitals’ internal regulations are currently supported by court rulings as a lawful exercise of their rights in setting medical service policies.
- The ban on medically indicated abortions at the Lippstadt Clinic, a Catholic-sponsored hospital, has led to a ongoing debate about the Church's special rights within medical care, particularly in relation to policy-and-legislation surrounding women's health and family-health.
- The recent court ruling, which upholds the Catholic sponsor's right to issue binding regulations within the hospital, has been met with public protests, such as the demonstration titled "Stop the Catholic Abortion Ban."
- Hospital gynecologist Joachim Volz, who had previously performed medically indicated abortions, is at the center of the controversy after being prohibited from doing so since February 2025. This ban extends to his private practice in Bielefeld.
- The whirlwind of events has garnered the attention of general-news media outlets, with crime-and-justice sections also reporting on the legal disputes and court rulings.
- The decision by the Hamm Labour Court supports the hospitals’ internal regulations, allowing them to restrict abortion services on religious grounds. However, this has been met with criticism from Volz, who believes that the Catholic sponsor's ban ignores medical judgment, the will of the patient, and the law.
- Despite the court's decision, Volz remains resolute, stating that he will likely appeal the decision to the next judicial instance, further fueling the debate on sexual-health, mental-health, and health-and-wellness issues, as well as the role of politics in these matters.
