The Supreme Court of Justice of Mexico declared that it is improper and unjustified to prohibit the marriage or cohabitation of a person with another person who suffers from a chronic, incurable, or contagious disease.

In ruling on a petition for Amparo in review by a person who had been denied such right, the First Chamber of the Court considered that the decision to enter into a marriage under the aforementioned conditions only corresponds to the person who may suffer such risk, and therefore any absolute impediment is unjustified.

The justices of the chamber resolved that the best way to protect the health of those who wish to enter into a marriage or cohabitation is not to prohibit access to such family institution in the face of the existence of a chronic, incurable, or hereditary disease.

Rather than prohibiting such measures, they emphasized, it is necessary to provide information so that the person who wishes to marry or enter into a cohabitation under such circumstances, is properly informed to make his or her decision.

In its decision, the First Chamber of the highest court held that the right to health should not be understood as a right to be healthy, but rather as the possibility of enjoying the highest possible level of physical and mental health, which depends, among other things, on receiving correct and timely information.

In addition, the right to health is related to the right to free development of personality, since it entails making decisions without unjustified controls or impediments, which implies the freedom that every person has to control his or her health and body, without suffering interference.