62 some of them had norms applicable to more specific cases, 255 even norms that regulated consent in cases of female sterilization.256 199. The Court notes that domestic laws have considered different elements of informed consent, but, in 2000, they generally agreed that this must be prior, free and informed. Regarding access to information, the States have considered that there are different ways of classifying how information should be provided to the patient; namely, this should be full, clear, informed, autonomous, necessary and adequate, allowing for understanding and awareness. 257 The Court notes that, in 2000, the requirement for written consent was not included in the laws of all the States; nevertheless, it was included in those of Argentina, Honduras, Peru and Uruguay. Argentina required written consent in damaging procedures;258 Honduras required this in order to submit to scientific research; 259 Peru requested it to apply special treatments, conduct unsafe tests or perform procedures that could affect the patient mentally or physically, 260 and Uruguay required it to authorize the use of a person’s corpse for scientific purposes.261 In addition, in the specific case of informed consent for female The laws of Barbados referred to informed consent in cases of termination of pregnancy; the laws of Panama and Brazil applied specifically to sterilization, and Brazil also had a law that recognized the right to free family planning without any form of coercion; the Honduran law applied to scientific research, and the Jamaican law referred to cases of sterilization but was applicable to a single health center. In this regard: (i) Barbados: Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1983, article 8(1); (ii) Brazil: 1988 Federal Constitution, article 226(7), and articles 4 and 10 of Law No. 9,263 of January 1996, which developed article 226(7)of the Federal Constitution; article 10, paragraph II.6 also indicated that “[c]onsent expressed during changes in the capacity for discernment under the influence of alcohol, drugs, altered states of emotion or temporary or permanent mental disability shall not be considered an expression of will pursuant to § 1”; (iii) Honduras: Health Code, Decree No. 65-91, August 6, 1991, articles 10 and 176; (iv) Jamaica: informed and written consent voluntary female sterilization dates from 1989. The Glen Vincent Fertility Management Unit drew up a memorandum with standards for cases in which a woman desired to submit to tubal ligation which indicates that: “[w]omen who have had more than two children may elect to submit to tubal ligation. To this end, they shall receive appropriate counselling and sign a specific form of consent prior to the procedure.” Memorandum, Fertility Management Unit - Glen Vincent H/C, Abortion Policy Review Advisory Group Final Report, May 2, 1989, p. 26, and (v) Panama: Law No. 48 which permits sterilization, May 1941, articles 3 and 8. Although this law differentiates between voluntary, necessary, eugenic and emergency sterilization, article 8 suggests that sterilization was applicable in most cases following a written request signed by the interested party and the authorization of a medical board. The Court underlines that this law was derogated by Law 7 of March 5, 2013. 255 The countries that have a law on informed consent in the case of female sterilization are: (i) Argentina: the Reproductive Health and Responsible Procreation Act, Law No. 418, enacted by the City of Buenos Aires in June 2000, article 3(c), and Resolution No. 2492/2000, Surgical procedure for tubal ligation: terms and conditions for its implementation in the province’s public hospitals, adopted by the province of Mendoza in October 2000, article 1; (ii) Bolivia: Bolivian Health standards NB–SNS–04–97 (“Voluntary surgical contraception for women at high reproductive risk”), approved by Secretariat Resolution No. 0/408 of August 4, 1997, and Bolivian Health standards MSPS-98 (“Voluntary surgical contraception. Bilateral tubal occlusion in cases of reproductive risk”) adopted by Ministerial Resolution No. 0517 of November 17, 1998; (iii) Brazil: Law No. 9,263 of January 1996, which developed article 226(7) of the Federal Constitution; (iv) Chile: Resolution No. 2,326 which establishes guidelines for health services relating to female and male sterilization, adopted by the Ministry of Health on November 30, 2000, in force since February 2001, articles 2, 3, 4 and 6; (v) Costa Rica: Reproductive Health Decree No. 27913-S of 1999, article 5(d); (vi) Jamaica: Memorandum, Fertility Management Unit - Glen Vincent H/C, Abortion Policy Review Advisory Group Final Report, May 2, 1989; (vii) Mexico: General Health Act, amendment of June 1991, article 67(3); (viii) Panama, Law No. 48 permitting sterilization, May 1941, and (ix) Peru: General Health Act, Law No. 26842 of 1997, article 6; Regulations for the Family Planning Program of the Ministry of Health, 1999, paragraph (g) of Section G entitled “Female voluntary surgical contraception,” stresses that care must be taken in the cases of postpartum women who have not given their prior consent; Manual of standards and procedures for activities of voluntary surgical contraception (AQV), pp. 7 to 11; Law on the National Population Policy, Legislative Decree No. 346, articles 3 and 28. In the year 2000, some of these norms only permitted sterilization in certain cases, either for medical reasons or because women had a sufficient number of children, but not as a contraception method to regulate fertility. However, the Court notes that, in recent years, the laws have included female sterilization as an option that can be freely chosen from among the different birth control methods. 256 The laws of Brazil even granted a period of reflection to take a decision. Cf. Article 10 of Law No. 9,263 of January 1996, which established 60 days of reflection before undergoing sterilization. 257 258 Cf. Article 19(3) of the Law on the Exercise of Medicine, Odontology and Ancillary Activities, Law No. 17,132 of 1976. 259 Cf. Article 176 of the Health Code, Standard No. 65-91 of 1991. 260 Cf. Article 27 of the General Health Act, Law No. 26842 of 1997. 261 Cf. Article 1 of the Organ and Tissue Transplant Act, Law No. 14,005 of 1971.