The Protection of Maternity in the European Union

On October 15, 2025, the European Federation “One of Us” organized a conference at the European Parliament titled “Real Choice Means Real Support.”

This event brought together nearly 300 participants: members of civil society, representatives of organizations, and young citizens from 17 member states of the European Union (“EU”). Eight Members of the European Parliament from the EPP (European People’s Party) and ECR (European Conservatives and Reformists) political groups also spoke at this meeting.

The aim of this conference was to give a platform to women who have experienced a difficult pregnancy or an abortion, to allow them to make their voices heard and to highlight that behind the decision to have an abortion there is often a situation of social, material, or psychological vulnerability that can influence the course of a pregnancy. The testimonies gathered all pointed to the same conclusion: the lack of psychological, material, and medical support systems for pregnant women in vulnerable situations leads many of them to view abortion not as a free choice, but as a default option.

Among the women who agreed to share their stories, Charlène, a French woman, recounted the pressures she faced.

At the age of 27, Charlène discovered she was facing an unplanned pregnancy. She wished to continue the pregnancy, especially since she was already a mother. Her partner, however, constantly pressured her to have an abortion. Seeking outside support, she consulted a doctor in the presence of her partner. The doctor reacted with incomprehension to her desire to continue the pregnancy. Charlène thus encountered a moral judgment rather than professional help.

She then turned to a marriage and family counseling center affiliated with the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF). She hoped to find a neutral third party there who could facilitate dialogue with her partner and clarify her options. However, according to her account, the support she received was quite the opposite: whenever she mentioned the “baby on the way,” the professionals retorted that it was merely a “cluster of cells.” A psychologist at the center even took the initiative to schedule an appointment for an abortion, “just in case” she might give in.

Despite this pressure, Charlène resisted and refused to take the preparatory abortion pill. However, the marital pressure reached its peak when her partner forced the abortion pill into her mouth. The abortion took place under circumstances in which the conditions for free and informed consent appeared to be seriously compromised.

The consequences for her mental health were severe: a breakup with her partner, a deep depressive episode, followed by a long recovery. Now married and the mother of three children, she states: “One can only learn to live with it,” a phrase that reflects the indelible scars left by this experience.

At the European Parliament, Charlène delivered a powerful message:

“In Europe, a woman who says ‘I don’t want an abortion’ must be protected.”

This statement highlights a paradox in European health and women’s rights policies: while abortion is presented as a right grounded in individual freedom, women who choose not to have one often find themselves lacking adequate support. The lack of material support (housing, income, employment) and psychological support (non-directive counseling, a listening ear) can, in certain situations, concretely reduce women’s ability to make a fully free and informed choice.

Charlène’s case is not an isolated one. According to the 2015 VIRAGE survey (Violence and Gender Relations) and the 2000 Enveff national survey, physical violence is reported in 3 to 8% of pregnancies. This rate is estimated to be three to four times higher in cases of pregnancy not desired by the partner.

This reality is also evident in the available data. According to an IFOP (French Institute of Public Opinion) survey conducted for Family Planning in September 2024, 29% of women who had undergone an abortion reported feeling some form of pressure to make that decision during their discussions with a healthcare professional.

These data reveal the extent of an overlooked reality: pregnancy is a period of heightened vulnerability to domestic violence, and women who wish to continue a pregnancy against their partner’s will are exposed to a specific risk.

This finding underscores the full significance of current European law. Directive (EU) 2024/1385 of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating violence against women and domestic violence, adopted on the basis of Articles 82(2) and 83(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), expressly refers to forced abortion as a form of violence against women, together with other serious forms of gender-based violence such as rape, stalking, forced sterilization, and female genital mutilation.

Recital (3) of this directive states that these acts constitute “a violation of fundamental rights such as the right to human dignity, the right to life, and the right to personal integrity.” Recognizing forced abortion as a form of violence against women highlights the importance of developing appropriate prevention and support mechanisms for women who may face such pressures.

This is why Charlène submitted a petition to the European Parliament in January 2026, registered under number 0194/2026. The petition submitted by Charlène has three objectives.

First, it calls on the European Commission to examine the feasibility of pilot programs or targeted initiatives aimed at strengthening medical, psychological, and social support for pregnant women, particularly those in vulnerable or high-risk situations. This request is in line with the objectives set forth in Article 33 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which states that “The protection of the family shall be ensured in the legal, economic, and social spheres.” Although the Charter does not establish an autonomous competence for the Union, it must guide the Commission’s actions in the implementation of its existing programs. Specifically, such initiatives could take the form of housing assistance, maternity counseling services, dedicated helplines, or funding for organizations providing birth support.

Second, the petition calls on the European Commission to review existing funding instruments and policy communications (notably the European Social Fund Plus and the EU4Health program) to verify, on the one hand, whether they effectively prioritize support for maternity, and, on the other hand, whether their implementation creates indirect pressures that push women toward abortion, and to assess the extent to which these instruments effectively address the needs of women wishing to continue their pregnancies, particularly when they are in situations of social or economic vulnerability.

Third, the petition reaffirms the principle of the Union’s neutrality in its actions and funding priorities, in line with the principle of subsidiarity. In accordance with this principle, the European Union must ensure that it maintains a balanced and non-directive approach in the use of its financial instruments when they concern areas falling primarily within the competence of the Member States, in this case abortion. On the other hand, it is incumbent upon the Union to ensure an environment conducive to the exercise of all rights, including the right to carry a pregnancy to term.

Petition No. 0194/2026 has been declared admissible by the European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions. It has the support of several political groups, notably the European People’s Party (EPP), the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), Patriots for Europe (PfE), and Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN).

At a meeting of the Committee on Petitions on 23 June 2026, Charlène will be heard by MEPs and the petition will be examined. It is then expected to be referred to the relevant committees, notably the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs (LIBE) and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM).

The European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ) supports this initiative, as it calls on the institutions of the European Union to examine the conditions under which existing instruments could contribute, in accordance with the Union’s competences, to strengthening support for pregnant women in vulnerable situations.

I. Union Competences and Legal Bases

A. The “My Voice My Choice” Precedent: A Decisive Argument

Before outlining the legal bases specific to Petition No. 0194/2026, it is essential to recall the European Commission’s communication of February 26 2026.

On that date, the European Commission published its response to the European Citizens’ Initiative “My Voice My Choice” (reference C(2026)3225), which called for the creation of a financial mechanism to facilitate access to abortion throughout the Union. This initiative had gathered more than 1.1 million signatures. The Commission stated that it was “not necessary to propose a new legal instrument,” as “EU support can already be provided relatively quickly by Member States that wish to do so under existing instruments,” notably the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+), which has a budget of 142.7 billion euros for the 2021–2027 period.

This communication has two significant implications.

First, it confirms that the regulation of abortion falls primarily within the competence of the Member States. The Commission is not proposing any new binding instrument, but is limited to interpreting existing funding programs.

Second, the Commission explicitly acknowledges the possibility of mobilizing the ESF+ to fund services related to pregnancy termination. It therefore becomes politically essential that this same instrument can be used to fund support programs for women who choose to carry their pregnancies to term.

Petition No. 0194/2026 does not call for any regulatory change: it simply requests that a symmetrical interpretation of the Structural Funds be applied to benefit maternal health and the protection of vulnerable pregnant women.

B. EU Competences Regarding Maternity Support

The EU’s action in support of maternity falls within a dual framework of competences derived from the Treaties: public health and social policy.

On the one hand, Article 168 TFEU provides that the Union “shall complement and support national health policies,” offering a legal basis for psychological support for pregnant women in vulnerable situations and the promotion of maternal health. On the other hand, the Union may adopt measures to support maternity by exercising its competence in the field of social policy. In particular, Article 153 TFEU allows the Union to support and complement the actions of Member States, notably in the areas of gender equality in the labor market and the protection of workers.

It is precisely on this foundation of social policy that the Union’s secondary legislation affecting maternity protection is based. Thus, Directive 92/85/EEC on the safety and health of pregnant workers at work explicitly recognizes in its Annex I “the health of pregnant women and the unborn child" as an interest to be protected at the European level. In the same vein, Directive (EU) 2019/1158 on work-life balance for parents and caregivers, adopted on the basis of Article 153 TFEU, confirms the Union’s concrete commitment to supporting women in their maternal role and in balancing their family life.

The application of these directives is reinforced by the consistent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). In its judgment C.D. (March 18 2014, C-167/12), the Court formally recognized that pregnancy and maternity constitute specific situations involving particular vulnerability and constraints, justifying appropriate protection. Furthermore, the attention paid by the Union’s legal order to the protection of human life in its earliest stages of development was illustrated in the judgment Brüstle v. Greenpeace (18 October 2011, C-34/10), where the Court acknowledged that the protection of human dignity could justify strict limitations on the use of human embryos in patent law, without thereby prejudging the legal status of the embryo in other areas of law.

These texts and decisions establish a clear normative precedent: the Union has already deemed it legitimate to act to protect pregnant women. There is therefore an institutional paradox that the Committee on Petitions cannot ignore: a pregnant woman is rigorously protected by European law in her workplace, but no comparable mechanism is in place to safeguard her freedom not to have an abortion when she is subjected to external pressure or extreme precariousness.

In exercising these sectoral competences derived from the Treaties and secondary legislation, the Union’s institutions are required to respect and promote the standards of protection established by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (Article 51(1) of the Charter). In accordance with Article 51(2), the Charter “shall not create any new competence or task for the Union.” While the Charter cannot in itself serve as the basis for autonomous action by the Union, it must imperatively guide the interpretation and implementation of existing instruments. This is precisely what Charlène’s petition calls for: ensuring that Union policies are structured around this protective framework.

In this regard, Article 33, paragraph 1, of the Charter provides that “the protection of the family shall be ensured in the legal, economic, and social spheres.” This textual requirement is inseparable from the other fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter that apply during maternity:

Article 1, which states that “human dignity is inviolable. It must be respected and protected.”

Article 3, which recognizes the right to physical and mental integrity and requires respect for free and informed consent.

Article 7, concerning the right to respect for private and family life, implying that women may exercise their choices regarding motherhood free from pressure or violence.

Article 10, on freedom of conscience, implying respect for the will of pregnant women to continue their pregnancies.

When a pregnant woman faces economic hardship, situations of violence, or pressures likely to impair her ability to exercise her choices freely, the implementation of EU programs (particularly health and social programs) must be guided by these imperatives of dignity, integrity, and the protection of family life.

C. Existing financial instruments: resources already available to support motherhood

The European Union has numerous financial instruments available to support motherhood, without the need to create new ones.

The European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) (governed by Regulation (EU) 2021/1057) is the Union’s main instrument for investing in human capital and supporting the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights. With a budget of over 142.7 billion euros for the 2021–2027 period, its scope covers projects promoting employment, education, social inclusion, and the fight against poverty. Its management is primarily shared between the European Commission and the Member States, which have discretion in allocating funds.

As we have seen, the Commission itself acknowledged, in its response to the “My Voice My Choice” initiative, that the ESF+ could be used to fund health services, including abortion. The regulations governing the ESF+ and the EU4Health program allow, within the framework of their respective objectives, for the funding of projects related to social inclusion, public health, and the reduction of inequalities. In this context, it is clear that actions supporting pregnant women in vulnerable situations may, subject to the priorities defined by the Member States and the Commission, fall under these instruments.

Furthermore, the ERDF (European Regional Development Fund) explicitly supports “information and health promotion activities targeting vulnerable populations” as well as “support for the development of community-based health facilities.” These objectives are directly compatible with projects supporting maternity care at the local and regional levels. The Committee on Petitions could therefore also invite the ERDF managing authorities to mobilize these funds for this purpose.

The EU4Health program (governed by Regulation (EU) 2021/522) is the Union’s largest health program, with a budget of 5.3 billion euros for the period 2021–2027.

Its objective is to improve and promote health in the Union, strengthen health systems, and combat cross-border health threats. The Union already funds projects directly related to maternity care under this framework.

As an example of a relevant project, the “Mind the Mum” initiative, co-funded by the EU4Health program from October 2024 to September 2027, aims to improve perinatal mental health by developing tools and interventions to support mothers. Its goal is to better understand the prevalence of perinatal issues, train healthcare professionals, and promote supportive policies. This project exemplifies what the EU can achieve when it chooses to do so, but it remains an isolated effort. This is why the petition calls for systematic and widespread action, rather than one-off projects.

Finally, the MOM (Maternity Opportunities and Mainstreaming) program, funded by Erasmus+, demonstrates that the EU is willing to fund projects that highlight motherhood in its many dimensions, including as a vehicle for skill-building and women’s empowerment. This program, implemented in several Member States, confirms that European funding for maternity support is not an ideologically peripheral issue, but an already existing institutional reality.

II. Complementing and strengthening EU action

A. The need for more targeted support for pregnant women in vulnerable situations

The existence of these financial instruments is not enough. They must also be effectively geared toward supporting motherhood, which is clearly not the case overall today.

The European report MMM State of Motherhood in Europe 2024, based on a survey of 9,600 mothers in eleven EU member states, reveals that over 67% of mothers in Europe report feeling mentally overwhelmed. This prevalence reaches 81% in Portugal. This phenomenon is particularly pronounced among single mothers and those in low-income brackets—precisely the women most at risk of having an abortion by default or under material duress. The problem is therefore structurally European, not specifically national.

At the national level, the data confirm this social phenomenon. According to a study by the Directorate for Research, Studies, Evaluation, and Statistics (DREES), single women are 37% more likely to have an abortion than women in relationships, and those in the poorest 10% are 40% more likely than those in the richest 10%.

These figures show that abortion is, to a significant extent, the result of a lack of support, emotional isolation, or economic insecurity—far from being a purely voluntary choice. An IFOP survey conducted in 2020 confirms this:

nearly half of the women surveyed identified financial circumstances as the main factor influencing their decision. Finally, the 2025 IFOP survey indicates that 91% of women report that this experience leaves emotional scars that are difficult to cope with, while 65% of citizens believe that society should do more to help women avoid having to resort to abortion.

These data fully corroborate the conclusions of the European Commission’s communication of June 7, 2023, on a comprehensive approach to mental health (COM(2023) 298 final), which explicitly recognizes that “everyone has the right to access preventive healthcare” and that strengthening the mental health of vulnerable populations is a priority for the Union.

These findings suggest that the specific needs of pregnant women in vulnerable situations deserve greater consideration in the implementation of existing instruments. The Union has legal bases and financial tools that could contribute to this objective. Petition No. 0194/2026 specifically calls on the European institutions to examine the extent to which these instruments could be mobilized more explicitly for the benefit of these women.

B. What the Union can do: legislative and policy instruments

Beyond funding, the Union has four categories of instruments to address the petition’s requests without encroaching on Member States’ competences.

An extension of the protective measures under Directive (EU) 2024/1385, based on Article 83 of the TFEU concerning crime prevention and victim protection, could encourage a more consistent criminal-law approach to coercion aimed at terminating a pregnancy across the Member States.

A recommendation—non-binding but carrying significant political weight—could urge Member States to develop national maternity support programs, train healthcare professionals in a non-directive approach, and ensure that pregnant women receive comprehensive information on continuing the pregnancy and related support services.

An amendment to the ESF+ Regulation during the next programming period could explicitly include support for maternity as a priority objective, alongside the existing objectives of employment and social inclusion. This limited and targeted amendment would be sufficient to redirect a portion of the fund’s 142.7 billion euros toward projects supporting pregnant women in precarious situations.

A resolution by the European Parliament, a direct expression of the political will of the citizens’ representatives, could call on the European Commission to launch a targeted call for projects under EU4Health, modeled on the “Mind the Mum ” project but on a European scale. This resolution would be the immediate political signal that vulnerable women are waiting for.

The adoption of these four instruments is politically realistic and can be encouraged by the Committee on Petitions.

___________

Sources and References

Conference

- European Federation One of Us, conference “Real Choice Means Real Support,” European Parliament, Brussels, 15 October 2025.

European Union law:

- Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Articles 82, 83, 153, 168

- Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Articles 1, 3, 7, 10, 33, and 51

- Directive 92/85/EEC on the safety and health of pregnant workers

- Directive (EU) 2024/1385 on combating violence against women and domestic violence

- Directive (EU) 2019/1158 on work-life balance for parents and caregivers

- Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 establishing the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+)

- Regulation (EU) 2021/522 establishing the EU4Health program for 2021–2027

- Regulation (EU) 2021/1058 on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)

- CJEU, October 18, 2011, Brüstle v. Greenpeace, C-34/10

- CJEU, March 18, 2014, C.D., C-167/12

Institutional documents:

- European Commission, Communication C(2026)3225 of 26 February 2026 in response to the ECI “My Voice My Choice”

- European Commission, COM(2023) 298 final of 7 June 2023, Communication on a Comprehensive Approach to Mental Health

EU-funded projects:

- “Mind the Mum” project, reference 101161382, EU4Health funding, October 2024 – September 2027, budget: €586,036.87, coordinated by the European Health and Digital Executive Agency (HaDEA)

- MOM (Maternity Opportunities and Mainstreaming) project, Erasmus+ funding

Studies and surveys:

- DREES, studies on the social determinants of abortion in France

- VIRAGE 2015 survey (Violence and Gender Relations) and Enveff 2000 survey (violence against women in France)

- IFOP, 2020 survey on the motivations for seeking an abortion

- IFOP, 2024 survey on pressures during abortion

- IFOP, 2025 survey on the post-abortion experience (same)

- Make Mothers Matter (MMM), State of Motherhood in Europe: Survey Report 2024 (9,600 mothers, 11 EU countries)