135 doctors sign judicial protest requesting changes to abortion laws

Pro-life doctors warn that protest wants to give ‘carte blanche’ for abortion

A judicial protest seeking change to abortion laws in Malta was presented in court on Monday, signed by 135 doctors, with pro-life doctors arguing that it seeks to give a “carte blanche” on abortions to take place.

A statement issued by one of the signatories of the judicial protest, Professor Isabel Stabile, said that last week, Malta failed Andrea Prudente, a US citizen, who had visited

Malta while pregnant.

Andrea became trapped in the country after her waters broke at 16 weeks. The placenta was detaching from her womb and no fluid was left, which meant that there was no reasonable hope that the fetus would survive, the statement said. She was also at risk of a life-threatening infection, for as long as the pregnancy continued. Had this happened practically anywhere else but Malta, Prudente would have been given the option by doctors to terminate the pregnancy, and safeguard her health. However, this cannot happen in Malta because abortion is illegal under all circumstances.

She could only continue the pregnancy under the watchful eyes of doctors, and suffer through the ongoing risk of infection. Flying to another country on a commercial flight was not an option due to the high risk of a medical emergency in-flight. Fortunately, her private insurance deemed the risks to Andrea’s life in Malta unacceptable, and organised, as well as facilitated transfer by air ambulance to another country that does not limit women’s right to health and life, the statement said.

“This exact same medical scenario happens to an estimated two to three women per year in Malta”, the statement said.

Most women living here do not have private insurance, in order to help them evacuate so as to get their much-needed treatment abroad. Our laws are neglecting these women, risking their lives needlessly. Last week, Malta also failed a profession, the statement said.

“Medical teams had their hands tied when they were unable to offer Prudente the care she needed, according to researchbased evidence. Health professionals in the US advised Andrea to ask for a termination of pregnancy, but providing this care under current law would have put both woman and doctor liable to a prison sentence. Instead, legally mandated conservative management followed”, it continues.

“Doctors in Malta refuse to accept this legal situation. Within just four days, 135 doctors have signed a judicial protest, asking for a review of our blanket ban on abortion care. Among us are specialists in obstetrics and gynaecology, family medicine, psychiatry, paediatrics, and more. The overwhelming sentiment behind this demand is empathy”, the statement adds.

Stabile said that their responsibility towards their patients demands that they try to treat conditions before they become unstable and life-threatening.

“In cases of complicated pregnancy, abortion may be required to protect a woman’s physical and mental health. We are submitting this judicial protest so as to safeguard persons who may fall pregnant, as well as the doctors taking care of them. Patients in Malta deserve access to the highest standards of medical care possible, in line with international recommendations such as those of the WHO, FIGO, and RCOG”, Stabile added.

“We hope that the laws created in the 1850s will be reconsidered and updated to allow evidencebased practice, without condemning public citizens and their doctors to criminality”, the statement said.

Doctors for Life reacts

In a reactionary statement, Doctors for Life said that they have become aware of the content of a judicial protest regarding abortion, to be submitted on Monday by Stabile in the name of a number of doctors.

The association expressed it’s concern on two primary points.

The first is that, “the judicial protest is not requesting a refinement of the law so that it is more explicit in permitting therapeutic abortions covered by double effect, ensuring that doctors can perform delivery of the foetus for women in life threatening conditions. (This is the current practice already, and legal experts consider this to be permissible by the law in it’s current form). Instead the judicial protest is requesting that article 243 is removed entirely, therefore allowing any doctor or practitioner to perform any kind of abortion for any reason.”

The second was that they found it to be, “lamentable that doctors signing the form to include their names were not automatically shown the judicial letter itself, or a full explanation of what would be specifically requested. The judicial protest letter was still being drafted whilst signatures were being collected, and was not even ready by the last day of signature collection. This means that doctors signing the judicial letter may not actually be in agreement with such a drastic change in the law, which is much broader than required to address the issues pertinent to this case.”