i) “The matter that is the purpose of this application for amparo […] is subject to the inexorable rhythm of a biological process; namely, the pregnancy of [B., so that] it has been necessary to accumulate some procedural stages in order to ensure promptness in the substantiation of this amparo”; ii) “The constitutional analysis requested by the petitioner owing to the possible conflict between her rights to life and health, on the one hand, and the right to life of the unborn child that she carries in her womb, on the other hand, will require weighing these elements, and will be designed to determine a balance between the exercise of her rights and the exercise of the rights of the unborn child or, otherwise, to establish which of them should prevail”; iii) “The purpose of the dispute submitted to the consideration of this Chamber consists in determining whether the defendant authorities failed to provide [B.] in an opportune manner with the appropriate and necessary treatment for her condition, causing an increase in the deterioration of her health and, thereby, the imminent danger of the loss of her physical existence, in violation of the content of the fundamental rights to life and to health”; iv) “A constitutional perspective does not allow for an interpretation of human life as an absolute and unlimited right, such that – in this case – the unborn child would be recognized to have a superior and more important right compared to the mother, because this would support depersonalization and disregard for the rights of the pregnant woman”; v) “The recognition of human life from the moment indicated by the Constitution requires the State, as the principal entity obligated under the Constitution, to ensure its protection, and to ensure the design, creation and implementation of the appropriate and necessary public policies, mechanisms and procedures – institutional, legal, technical, etc. – to provide the mother-child duo with equal opportunities to enjoy this fundamental right”; vi) “Furthermore, the international legal human rights instruments ratified by El Salvador – specifically the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Arts. 6(1) and 7), the American Convention on Human Rights (Arts. 4(1) and 5(1)), and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (Preamble, Arts. 6(1) and 6(2)) – do not demand that the State guarantee an absolute and unconditional protection of incipient life; to the contrary, their systematic interpretation reveals the need, in specific cases, to weigh the right to life of each element of the mother-child duo”; vii) “Regarding the specific content of the right to health, constitutional case law […] has developed three essential aspects or elements that comprise its sphere of protection: (i) the adoption of measures to conserve the right to health, because health requires both the active and the passive protection of the State against the external risks that might endanger it; thus it is necessary to implement measures that, from the positive perspective, are intended to prevent any situations that harm this right, or to re-establish this condition and, from the negative perspective, implement measures that avoid the perpetration of any action that may impair it; (ii) medical assistance, because every person should be guaranteed the possibility of the availability of and access to the system or network of health care services, and (iii) supervision of health care services, which entails the creation of the institutions and mechanisms that supervise and monitor the safety and hygiene of health-related professional activities”; viii) “The contents of the above-mentioned medical records reveal that the patient has received medical assistance and treatment in the National Maternity Hospital on 9