Affirm that promoting and protecting children’s right to privacy requires ensuring abortion is safe, legal, and accessible and with the greatest possible respect for children’s autonomy in abortion-related decisions.
Urge states to take urgent action to decriminalize abortion and lift harmful restrictions on abortion access, including by repealing requirements mandating parental involvement in children’s and adolescents’ abortion decisions.
Urge all states to take measures to combat the stigma around adolescent sexuality and promote healthy adolescent sexual practices, including through national and local campaigns involving and designed by young people.
Urge all states to implement mandatory comprehensive sexuality education that complies with international standards and is scientifically accurate, rights-based, and age-appropriate. Ensure that the curriculum reaches students from an early age and builds incrementally to equip them with developmentally relevant information about their health and wellbeing. Ensure that teachers are adequately trained to teach this curriculum, and schools provide safe spaces for children and adolescents to discuss issues in a confidential, non-stigmatizing manner.
Urge all states to expand access to appropriate, adolescent-friendly, confidential, non-stigmatizing health services for a full range of sexual and reproductive health needs, without requiring parental notification or consent. Ensure that staff are trained to manage individual cases without stigmatizing young people, particularly children who are already sexually active.
Ask that all states ensure that health centers do not stigmatize adolescents who are sexually active, and that they are staffed with medical personnel qualified to provide confidential and comprehensive adolescent health services.
Urge all states to abandon practices that stigmatize or discriminate against pregnant students, and to immediately end pregnancy testing in schools, and remove school bans on pregnant girls and young mothers.
Call on all states to ensure that students can equally and anonymously report any form of abuse, violence, sexual violence, or intimidation by students and teachers, by ensuring schools have functioning confidential and independent reporting and support mechanisms appropriate to the local school context. These could involve a child-friendly and free telephone hotline system set up to refer complaints directly to a relevant agency, and, preferably, a trained counsellor or school staff appointed to provide support to children affected, design measures to protect children, and in cases of sexual violence, confidentially report abuses to relevant authorities, or, including a local child protection committee or focal point, the local prosecutor’s office or specialized police unit, where available.
Urge all states to legally require head teachers and school officials to report any cases of sexual violence to local mechanisms, including the prosecutor’s office and the police.
Encourage states to adopt school policies and procedures that respect students’ sexual orientations and gender identities.
Urge states to ensure that all children and young people have access to accessible, confidential counseling and other mental health supports.
Urge governments to enact laws or update existing laws, to address and provide effective remedies for technology-facilitated GBV and specifically consider consent, including around circulation of images, and to ensure that law enforcement authorities have the resources, expertise, and accountability to ensure that they handle technology-facilitated GBV appropriately.
Urge governments to provide all survivors of technology-facilitated GBV with psychosocial support, legal assistance, and assistance removing images from the internet.
Urge governments to make mandatory in national curriculums comprehensive sexuality education that teaches children—and parents—about consent and digital citizenship.
Urge private companies to meet their responsibilities under the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to work with survivors and governments to block and delete non-consensual intimate images in a timely manner, and cooperate with law enforcement, in accordance with due process rights, in all investigations of technology-facilitated GBV.
Urge states to perform due diligence to ensure that the technology they recommend for online learning protects children’s privacy rights.
Urge states to provide guidance to schools on the inclusion of data privacy clauses in contracts signed with EdTech providers, to protect the data collected on children during this time from misuse.
Urge states with existing child data protection laws not to waive them, and for states without such laws to institute data protection laws for children.
Urge EdTech companies to protect children’s privacy at all stages of the data lifecycle, and to provide children with the choice of meaningfully opting out of the collection of their data, as well as to enable them to delete their data.
Urge governments to ensure protections for the privacy of children accused of committing a crime.
Urge governments to adopt strong child data protection laws that meaningfully regulate the collection, processing, use, and sharing of children’s personal data, and to strengthen child-specific data privacy measures in existing national data protection laws.
Urge governments that are considering linking civil and criminal identity databases to first conduct a privacy and human rights impact assessment, publish an evidence-based rationale of the link between the means and the ends, and invite engagement with the public and with lawmakers to assess the necessity, proportionality, and legality of biometric surveillance infrastructure, with special consideration for its implications for children and their privacy.
The Dominican Republic has the highest teen pregnancy rate in Latin America and the Caribbean, according to the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO).
Abortion is illegal in all circumstances in the Dominican Republic, even when the life of the pregnant person is in danger. Human Rights Watch research published in a 2018 report found the country’s total abortion ban had devastating consequences. People facing unplanned or unwanted pregnancies—including those resulting from rape or incest, or when the fetus will not survive—were often forced to choose between unsafe abortion or continuing their pregnancies, even if they did not want to and even if they faced serious health risks, including death. Some people couldn’t afford to travel to another country where abortion is legal or find safe providers to help them to end a pregnancy, but many, especially people living in poverty or in rural communities, risked their health and lives to have abortions, often without any guidance from trained providers. Some suffered serious health complications, and even death, from unsafe abortion.
The death of 16-year-old Rosaura Almonte Hernández in 2012 illustrates the impact of the country’s criminal laws that block access to abortion to protect the health of the pregnant person. Rosaura, known as “Esperancita,” was diagnosed with leukemia, but she was initially denied access to chemotherapy because she was seven weeks pregnant. Her mother requested access to therapeutic abortion, and her request was denied. Weeks later, under mounting international pressure, doctors provided Esperancita with chemotherapy, but she died in August 2012. In 2017, her mother, Rosa Hernández, with support from the organizations Women’s Link Worldwide and Colectiva Mujer y Salud filed a petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) seeking justice for her daughter’s death. In 2020, the IACHR announced that it had admitted the case for review.
Criminalization of abortion in El Salvador—where abortion has been illegal under all circumstances since 1997—also demonstrates the human cost of a restrictive environment. Providers and those who assist face prison sentences of six months to 12 years. Dozens of girls and women, mostly from high-poverty areas, were prosecuted in the past two decades for what lawyers and activists say were obstetric emergencies. In some cases, the courts accepted as evidence a questionable autopsy procedure known as the “floating lung” test to forensically support the claim that a fetus was delivered alive. As of September 2020, 19 women who said they suffered obstetric emergencies remained imprisoned on charges of abortion, homicide, or aggravated homicide. At least 16 of them had been convicted of aggravated homicide.
Abortion is a crime in Brazil, except in cases of rape, when the life of the pregnant person is at risk, or the fetus has anencephaly. Human Rights Watch has documented the devastating consequences of Brazil’s severe abortion restriction. In August 2020, a 10-year-old-girl in Espírito Santo State discovered she was pregnant after four years of repeated rape by her uncle, who threatened her to keep quiet. The girl wanted to end the pregnancy and under Brazilian law, she had the right to do so. However, the hospital where she was admitted refused to perform the abortion, alleging it did not have the authority to conduct the procedure. Meanwhile, Brazil’s government allegedly sent a delegation to try to prevent the girl from having an abortion. A judge intervened and granted the girl legal permission to terminate the pregnancy. Following the ruling, an anti-abortion activist published the girl’s name and the name of the hospital, 900-miles from her home, where she would have the procedure and anti-abortion protesters blocked access to the hospital and harassed and insulted its personnel. The girl finally had an abortion on August 17.
Even in the very limited cases in which the termination of a pregnancy is legal is Brazil, access to abortion can be very difficult. In a country of 210 million people, only 42 hospitals are performing legal abortions during the Covid-19 pandemic, according to a study by the nongovernmental group Article 19 and the news websites AzMina and Gênero e Número. In 2019, it was 76 hospitals.
In August, the Health Ministry issued a regulation that erects new barriers to legal abortion access and could discourage women and girls from seeking medical care. Among other measures, the regulation requires medical personnel to report to the police anyone who seeks legal termination of a pregnancy after rape, regardless of the rape survivor’s wishes. The Ministry of Family, Women, and Human Rights has also announced the creation of a hotline for medical personnel that could be used to report women and girls whom they suspect had an illegal abortion, for possible prosecution.
Abortion in Honduras is illegal in all circumstances, including rape and incest, when a pregnant person’s life is in danger, and when the fetus cannot survive outside the womb. The country’s criminal code imposes prison sentences of up to six years on women and girls who induce abortions and on medical professionals who provide them. The government also bans emergency contraception, or the “morning after pill,” which can prevent pregnancy after rape, unprotected sex, or a contraceptive failure.
In 2017, 820 girls ages 10 to 14 gave birth in Honduras, according to data from the health secretary. Many of these girls became pregnant from statutory rape under Honduran law, which establishes that 14 is the age of sexual consent. A social worker at a women’s rights organization that helps survivors of violence told Human Rights Watch she has counseled girls who were 16, 15, or even 12 years old who became pregnant as a result of incest or rape and were forced to continue their pregnancy. “To have to continue with an unwanted pregnancy that resulted from abuse, it’s almost torture,” she said.
Women interviewed by Human Rights Watch in 2019 said they tried to end unwanted pregnancies using the medication misoprostol and in unsafe clinics with untrained providers. Several sought emergency treatment at hospitals afterward for complications such as uncontrolled bleeding or intense pain. Data from the Honduras health secretary show more than 8,600 women were hospitalized for complications from abortion or miscarriage in 2017.
Reliable research shows that restrictive laws and criminal penalties do not reduce the incidence of abortion. One Honduran nongovernmental organization estimated that 50,000 to 80,000 abortions occur in the country every year. The country’s total ban on abortion in all circumstances puts pregnant people in danger and violates their rights to life, to health, and not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.
Across Ecuador, criminalization of abortion is having a devastating impact on the lives and health of people who seek abortions, face obstetric emergencies mistakenly attributed to abortion, or need post-abortion medical care or care during a miscarriage.  Pregnant people face many barriers to accessing legal abortion and post abortion care, including criminal prosecution, stigmatization and mistreatment according to recent research conducted by Human Rights Watch.
On August 25, the National Assembly approved a new Health Code that would have prohibited delaying emergency health care—including legal abortion—for any reason, including conscientious objection, and reiterated the duty of healthcare professionals to respect medical confidentiality, including in cases of an obstetric emergency. On September 25, 2020, President Moreno vetoed the bill. 
Ecuadorian law imposes prison terms ranging from six months to two years for people who receive abortions or induce abortions, and from one to three years for health providers who perform an abortion found to be prohibited by law when it was done with the pregnant person’s consent. When the abortion is conducted without the pregnant person’s consent, the law imposes prison terms ranging from five to seven years. At least 120 people have been prosecuted in Ecuador from 2009-2019 for abortion, according to Human Rights Watch research.
Abortion is legally permitted in Ecuador in cases where the pregnant person’s life or health is in danger, or the pregnant person is a person with a mental health condition who has been raped.
However, the law is interpreted very narrowly and pregnant people face many barriers to accessing legal abortion and post abortion care. Based on research conducted in Ecuador, Human Rights Watch concluded that fear of facing prosecution has encouraged doctors and healthcare workers—including both those treating patients and those in more administrative roles—to be quick to turn in their patients, violating their own professional obligations and their patients’ rights to confidentiality and privacy. Many hospitals base these policies on articles 276 and 422 of the Criminal Code, which criminalizes health workers’ failure to report a crime. However, the Constitution protects doctor-patient confidentiality, and the Criminal Code establishes that the obligation to report does not apply to such confidential communications.
In our research, Human Rights Watch found that young women living in poverty and belonging to marginalized ethnic groups are less likely to have access to the information and resources necessary to find safe abortion services. They are also less likely to have information about the law on abortion and the steps necessary to access legal abortion. Rosa, an 18-year-old mestiza young woman, arrived at an emergency room in 2015 with an incomplete abortion. She was twelve and a half weeks pregnant. The judge sentenced her to 60 days in prison for consensual abortion and told her she had “killed the one who lived inside your womb, which in a few words means to murder.”
Although Ecuador has high rates of sexual violence, rape victims (other than those with a mental health condition), including children under 18, are denied legal access to a therapeutic abortion and are often prosecuted when they manage to access abortion. The National Assembly, in 2019, rejected a proposal to decriminalize abortion in other cases of rape.
 See, for example, CRC concluding observations on Poland, UN Doc. E/C.12/POL/CO/6 (2016); Indonesia, UN Doc. CRC/C/IDN/CO/3-4 (2014); Venezuela, UN Doc. CRC/C/VEN/CO/3-5 (2014); and Morocco, UN Doc. CRC/C/MAR/CO/3-4 (2014).
 See, for example, CRC concluding observations on Sri Lanka, UN Doc. CRC/C/LKA/CO/5-6 (2018); and India, UN Doc. CRC/C/IND/CO/3-4 (2014).
 Cook R, Dickens BM, “Recognizing adolescents’ ‘evolving capacities’ to exercise choice in reproductive healthcare,” International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, July 2000, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10884530/ (accessed September 22, 2020).
 See UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/RES/1990/74, March 1990, https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx (accessed September 29, 2020), art. 12. UN Committee against Torture (CAT Committee), Concluding Observations: Greece, para. 6(m), U.N. Doc. CAT/C/CR/33/2 (2004) (“All decisions affecting children should, to the extent possible, be taken with due consideration for their views and concerns, with a view to finding an optimal, workable solution”); Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, Rep. of the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, Najat M’jid Maalla–Addendum–Mission to Latvia, para. 84(c), U.N. Doc. A/ HRC/12/23/Add.1 (2009) (“The participation of children should be strengthened on all issues concerning them, and their views should be given due weight”). Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 12: The Right of the child to be heard, (51st Sess., 2009), paras. 2, 17, U.N. Doc. CRC/C/GC/12 (2009).
 CRC Committee, Concluding Observations: India, para. 66(b), U.N. Doc. CRC/C/IND/CO/7-8 (2014) & CRC Committee, Concluding Observation: Jordan, para. 46, U.N. Doc. CRC/C/JOR/CO/4-5 (2014).
 CRC Committee, Concluding Observations: Namibia, para. 57(a), U.N. Doc. CRC/C/NAM/CO/2-3 (2012); (“The State party’s punitive abortion law and various social and legal challenges, including long delays in accessing abortion services within the ambit of the current laws for pregnant girls. In this regard, the Committee notes with concern that such a restrictive abortion law has led adolescents to abandon their infants or terminate pregnancies under illegal and unsafe conditions, putting their lives and health at risk, which violates their rights to life, to freedom from discrimination, and to health”).
 See, for example, CAT Committee, concluding observations on Paraguay, UN Doc. CAT/C/PRY/CO/4-6 (2011), https://www.atlas-of-torture.org/en/document/wgc9npwq5oqbwn0115ib2o6r (accessed September 29, 2020); CAT Committee concluding observations on Peru, UN Doc. CAT/C/PER/CO/5-6 (2013), https://www.atlas-of-torture.org/en/document/ox69in6s8y7cw9zwrw32wewmi?page=1 (accessed September 29, 2020); Human Rights Committee (HRC) concluding observations on El Salvador, UN Doc. CCPR/C/SLV/CO/7 (2018), https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CCPR%2fC%2fSLV%2fCO%2f7&Lang=en (accessed September 29, 2020).
 Paulina del Carmen Ramírez Jacinto v. Mexico, Friendly settlement, Petition 161-02, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 21/07, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.130, doc.22 rev.1 (2007).
 American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Adolescence, The Adolescent’s Right to Confidential Care When Considering Abortion, 2017, https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/139/2/e20163861 (accessed September 24, 2020); Stanley K. Henshaw and Kathryn Kost, “Parental Involvement in Minors’ Abortion Decisions,” Family Planning Perspectives, September 1992, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kathryn_Kost/publication/21729897_Parental_Involvement_in_Minors%27_Abortion_Decisions/links/54d4e6380cf25013d02a1fbc/Parental-Involvement-in-Minors-Abortion-Decisions.pdf (accessed September 24, 2020); Zabin LS, Hirsch MB, Emerson MR, Raymond E., “To whom do inner-city minors talk about their pregnancies? Adolescents’ communication with parents and parent surrogates,” Family Planning Perspectives, 1992, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1526270/ (accessed September 24, 2020); Hasselbacher LA, Dekleva A, Tristan S, Gilliam ML, “Factors influencing parental involvement among minors seeking an abortion: a qualitative study,” American Journal of Public Health, November 2014, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4202942/ (accessed September 24, 2020).
 Lawrence B. Finer, et al., “Timing of steps and reasons for delays in obtaining abortions in the United States,” Contraception, vol. 74 (2006), June 2006, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16982236/ (accessed September 29, 2020), pp. 334-344.
 See International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted December 16, 1966, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966), 999 U.N.T.S. 171, entered into force March 23, 1976, art. 19(2); American Convention on Human Rights, (“Pact of San José”), adopted November 22, 1969, O.A.S. Treaty Series No. 36, 1144 U.N.T.S. 123, entered into force July 18, 1978, art. 13(1).
 See International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, article 2(2). See also CESCR General Comment No. 14 on the right to the highest attainable standard of health, UN Doc. E/C.12/2000/4 (2000); and CESCR General Comment No. 22 on the right to sexual and reproductive health, UN Doc. E/C.12/GC/22 (2016).
 The Committee on the Rights of the Child has recommended that states adopt “[a]ge-appropriate, comprehensive and inclusive sexual and reproductive health education, based on scientific evidence and human rights standards and developed with adolescents, [as] part of the mandatory school curriculum and reach out-of-school adolescents. Attention should be given to gender equality, sexual diversity, sexual and reproductive health rights, responsible parenthood and sexual behaviour and violence prevention, as well as to preventing early pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections.” Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 20 (2016) on the implementation of the rights of the child during adolescence, UN Doc. CRC/C/GC/20 (2016), https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CRC%2fC%2fGC%2f20&Lang=en (accessed September 29, 2020), para. 61; Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 22 on the right to sexual and reproductive health, UN Doc. E/C.12/GC/22 (2016), https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=E%2fC.12%2fGC%2f22&Lang=en (accessed September 29, 2020), para. 9.
 Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 20 (2016) on the Implementation of the Rights of the Child During Adolescence, para. 59.
 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted December 10, 1948, G.A. Res. 217A(III), U.N. Doc. A/810 at 71 (1948), art. 12; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), adopted December 16, 1966, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966), 999 U.N.T.S. 171, entered into force March 23, 1976, art. 17; and Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), adopted November 20, 1989, G.A. Res. 44/25, annex, 44 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 167, U.N. Doc. A/44/49 (1989), entered into force September 2, 1990, art. 8.
 UN General Assembly, The right to privacy in the digital age, U.N. Doc. A/RES/71/199 (2017), 5(g). UN Human Rights Council, The right to privacy in the digital age, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/RES/42/15 (2019), 6(h).
 UN Human Rights Council, Accelerating efforts to eliminate violence against women and girls: preventing and responding to violence against women and girls in digital contexts, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/RES/38/5 (2018), para. 3.
 Human Rights Watch interview with Hawon Jung, Former Journalist with Agence France-Presse, Seoul, Korea, September 18, 2019.
 CEDAW Committee, General Recommendation No. 33 on Women’s Access to Justice, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/GC/33 (August 3, 2015).
 Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences on online violence against women and girls from a human rights perspective, para. 52.
 CEDAW Committee, General Recommendation No. 35 on Gender-Based Violence against Women, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/GC/35 (July 26, 2017); and UN General Assembly, The right to privacy in the digital age, U.N. Doc. A/RES/71/199 (2017), 5(g).
 Karen Gilchrist, “These millennials are reinventing the multibillion-dollar education industry during coronavirus,” CNBC, June 8, 2020, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/edtech-how-schools-education-industry-is-changing-under-coronavirus.html (accessed September 24, 2020); Lexi Sydow, “Mobile Minute: Global Classrooms Rely on Education Apps As Remote Learning Accelerates,” App Annie blog post, April 8, 2020, https://www.appannie.com/en/insights/mobile-minute/education-apps-grow-remote-learning-coronavirus/ (accessed September 24, 2020).
 Neha Dewan, “How Covid led Byju’s to add 20 million new users in less than four months,” Economic Times, August 7, 2020, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/startups/newsbuzz/how-covid-led-byjus-to-add-20-million-new-users-in-less-than-four-months/articleshow/77408672.cms (accessed September 24, 2020); Manish Singh, “Mary Meeker’s Bond backs Indian online learning startup Byju’s, Tech Crunch, June 26, 2020, https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/25/mary-meekers-bond-invests-in-indian-online-learning-giant-byjus/ (accessed September 24, 2020); “The Global Unicorn Club,” CB Insights, September 2020, https://www.cbinsights.com/research-unicorn-companies (accessed September 24, 2020).
 Welsch Government Digital Learning for Wales press release, “Hwb Additional Services for EVERY learner,” March 20, 2020, https://hwb.gov.wales/news/article/76979aea-3819-42e9-9c10-121e907ef922 (accessed September 24, 2020); State of Connecticut Executive Order No. 71, Protection of Public Health and Safety During Covid-19 Pandemic and Response–Municipal Operations and Availability of Assistance and Healthcare, March 10, 2020, https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/Office-of-the-Governor/Executive-Orders/Lamont-Executive-Orders/Executive-Order-No-7I.pdf#page=6 (accessed September 24, 2020).
 Human Rights Watch interview with teacher, central Iowa, United States, June 18, 2020.
 Human Rights Watch interview with teacher, Dallas, Texas, United States, June 8, 2020.
 Convention on the Rights of the Child, September 2, 1990, ratified by Argentina December 4, 1990, arts. 16 & 40(2)(b)(vii).
 See “Directive (EU) 2016/800 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on procedural safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings,” Official Journal of the European Union, May 21, 2016, http://db.eurocrim.org/db/en/doc/2500.pdf (accessed May 22, 2020), art. 14; Government of Argentina, State Party Report to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, CRC/C/8/Add.17, December 22, 1994, https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6af730.html (accessed May 22, 2020), para. 191.
 The municipal government accelerated passage of the legislation that enabled the adoption of the SRFP, passing it as a resolution rather than a law and bypassing public debate. See Resolución 398/MJYSGC/19, approved April 24, 2019, https://documentosboletinoficial.buenosaires.gob.ar/publico/ck_PE-RES-MJYSGC-MJYSGC-398-19-5604.pdf (accessed June 12, 2020) and Dave Gershgorn, “The U.S. Fears Live Facial Recognition. In Buenos Aires, It’s a Fact of Life,” March 4, 2020, https://onezero.medium.com/the-u-s-fears-live-facial-recognition-in-buenos-aires-its-a-fact-of-life-52019eff454d (accessed June 2, 2020).
 The adolescent fertility rate, defined as the number of pregnancies per 1,000 girls and young women ages 15 to 19, was 96.1 in the Dominican Republic in 2017. Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), Health Information Platform for the Americas (PLISA), “Core Indicators, Indicator Profiles, Adolescent Fertility Rate (Births/1,000 women aged 15-19),” 2017, http://www.paho.org/data/index.php/en/indicators/visualization.html (accessed June 1, 2020).
 De la Torre, V., Castello, P., & Cevallos, M. R., Vidas robadas: entre la omisión y la premeditación. Situación de la maternidad forzada en niñas del Ecuador, 2016, Quito: Fundación Desafío, http://repositorio.dpe.gob.ec/handle/39000/2410 (accessed October 7, 2020); Pulitzer Center, The Consequences of Ecuador’s Abortion Ban, n.d., https://pulitzercenter.org/projects/consequences-ecuadors-abortion-ban (accessed October 7, 2020).
 Ibid., arts. 276 & 422.
 Case on file with Human Rights Watch.