#EmbrijunWieħedMinna

 

[huge_it_videogallery id=”15″]

 

#EmbrijunWieħedMinna

 

[huge_it_videogallery id=”14″]

 

To help infertile couples in Malta have children, a radical change to the local embryo protection law, including more embryo freezing and gamete donation, is being proposed by the government.

Besides the great ethical and social considerations involved, the possible involuntary killing of many embryos, through thawing, immediately comes to mind. It is the termination of human life at its very beginning. The new law should continue to avoid this probability.

Couples in this position should be informed and helped by the government, through the new law, to increase the chances of getting pregnant by using the natural method of fertility. This consists in eliminating stress as much as possible. Stress has been proven, scientifically, to be a major contributor to infertility.

The government should also inform infertile couples that if they are having trouble conceiving, they should know there are lifestyle factors that affect fertility and that smoking, drinking or medication can be the cause of infertility.  

It should also inform infertile couples that in some instances, the cause of infertility is poor sperm quality, which cannot be treated directly.  

There are, however, great natural remedies to promote healthier sperm production, function and viability by mitigating the damage from external factors.

In the amended law, infertile couples should be informed also that naturally supplying the body with the extra nutrients it needs during pregnancy can greatly improve fertility, and that beginning this as soon as possible will give the body the best chance of becoming fertile.

The law should also show that a change in lifestyle can help a great deal, as well as adhering to a proper diet. This service is being promoted and developed in Malta based on the UK model by the Malta Unborn Child Movement (MUCM) with the help of nutritionists and dieticians, who can suggest a balanced diet and nutritional supplements as major facilitators. 

Psychologists can help as well.

In connection with these changes to the law, Health Minister Chris Fearne has proposed a period of consultation which is very short and should be extended. 

He also should find the time to listen to the advice of nutritionists, dietitians and psychologists, among others, and make provisions in the law accordingly.  

The success rate of treating infertility using IVF and embryo freezing is around 25 per cent practically everywhere in the world, aside from the much higher physical, emotional and financial cost. IVF users describe “the stress, pain and suffering that all the families going through the IVF route experience”.

The government should consider the natural method to treat infertility more seriously before pushing IVF, embryo freezing and gamete donation much further through very risky legislation.

Not to mention the commodification, and commercialisation, of early human life, which, abroad, is already rife. 

Fearne should be congratulated for affirming that “the use of any technology to discover, pre-implantation, whether an embryo has chromosomal defects will not be allowed, nor will the selection of embryos according to gender, and cloning will remain illegal”.

On the other hand, Malta  has to unfreeze the mentality, on a national level, that the only solution to infertility is IVF and embryo freezing, with the multiple risks of killing embryos, very early human life, in the process.

Infertile couples should be guided by the government to go for the natural method to treat infertility. The MUCM is doing that. The success rate of the natural method is 80 per cent, which is very good compared to IVF and embryo freezing.

This holds for gamete donation and surrogacy, proposed also in the new law. 

Considering that Fearne, who is piloting the changes to the embryo protection law, has decided to keep the same name for that law, he should consider very seriously including also the natural method to fertility in the proposed reconstructed law, so that he will really be safeguarding, as he claims, “the most precious of rights – the right to life”.

Tony Mifsud is coordinator of the Malta Unborn Child Movement.

#EmbrijunWieħedMinna

[huge_it_videogallery id=”13″]

The government has just published the amendments to the Embryo Protection Act with the sole aim of not only dismantling this Act and the protection of human life that it provides, but also aims to create a gross travesty of fundamental human rights in general. From what Health Minister Chris Fearne said in Parliament on presentation of the first reading of the Bill, he has done as his colleague Helena Dalli has so ineptly declared, and taken us all to be fools by creating some silly narrative about some persons’ rights. These not only are not even fundamental rights but also are no rights at law or in reason, at all.

The right to life of every human being at the stage of early development is going to be dismantled by allowing embryo freezing with one-time narrative for the gullible. Embryo freezing is a threat to human life on two counts. First, the actual freezing process destroys many of them; secondly, not all are used with the eventual build-up of a parallel frozen humanity which presents an ethical conundrum with what to do with them, which is usually disposing of them by letting them die by thawing. There are over two million frozen embryos in the world today. A parallel humanity in limbo even though the Catholic Church has dispensed with the metaphysical version! The reality is that our pregnancy rate with egg freezing rather than embryo freezing is giving us equitable results as those abroad so that this change is highly questionable. Prima facie, the right to life of a human being is being threatened here for some other questionable rights.

The rights of children are also being put on the line with the allowing of gamete (egg and sperm) donation to both homosexual and heterosexual couples. This is because children are going to become a commodity, a commercial good to be dispensed with at will rather than children brought up in the security of a loving family. Children will be donated at will to other couples who might or might not look after them well. The reality is that not only will children be commodified as a good now, but they will lose a very important right, which is so eloquently stated in the Charter of (Fundamental) Children’s Rights, the right to an identity, foremost among which is that of a genetic identity. Like back in Roman times, children will lose their rights and become like slaves in a commercial market if not on the rubbish or prostitution heaps! Although the minister has stated that no fees will be charged for these “goods”, there will be no way of actually controlling this, and these “children goods” will, as usual, go to the unofficial highest bidder through unofficial alleyways which are impossible to control.

Neo-slavery is not only a present danger to children but also to women who, with the introduction of surrogacy, will also become commodified goods on the commercial market. They will be used and disposed of as needed according to the needs of the market at an undisclosed price, which price can, again, never be controlled and which can be paid back in several ways. The European Parliament and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe have both passed resolutions on surrogacy, which for this government seem to have remained simply resolutions in ink! Usually it is the poorest women in society that end up prey to the needs of other ‘wealthier’ members, again creating a further dispatching of the dignity of women, who not only have their body used to make others happy, but end up having to counter and forego their own maternal instincts in the process. God only knows what will happen to these children born through surrogacy if they might have disabilities and abnormalities. The world already has a tendency to put down these children with disabilities by exterminating and disowning them when they belong to the very people who produced them, because said children are not ‘perfect’, let alone when these children become products to third parties on the human commodity circus.

It is good that the state helps infertile parents have children. However, there are limits to this help and these limits are reached when the fundamental rights of others are breached by the action of individuals and the state. Since the law has not yet been published, and here I am limiting myself to what the minister said, there are probably other threats to fundamental rights being breached by the new law. I hope that the parties in Opposition will have the courage to reject this bill with the legal opposition they are capable of, putting up an effective resistance rather than appear to be complicit in this travesty for simple populist reasons. NGOs have a role here too. If the Bill presented actually becomes law, then it should be challenged in our Law Courts. Our Constitution still gives citizens fundamental rights which cannot be written away by a government which being at the pinnacle of power, believes it can manipulate things infinitely and trample on people’s rights and in an act of arrogance literally throw out the baby with the bath water!

Dr Asciak is Senior Lecturer II in the Institute of Applied Science at MCAST

Sunday, April 15, 2018, 07:28 by Keith Micallef

A medical professor who had been involved in the drafting of the existing IVF legislation has branded proposed changes to it as “chilling” and “irresponsible”.

University of Malta lecturer Prof. Pierre Schembri Wismayer gave this scathing review when asked for his reaction to the government’s plans from a medical perspective.

In 2012 he had been involved in the consultation held in the run-up to the drafting of the Embryo Protection Act which regulates IVF.

He summed up his assessment of the proposed changes as tantamount to a document prepared over the weekend by somebody high on energy drinks.

“If such proposals were put forward in an exam paper, the candidate would have surely failed,” he said.

Among the proposed changes, embryo freezing and adoption are arguably the most controversial.

Prof. Schembri Wismayer noted that obliging couples who are interested in IVF treatment to give their consent to embryo adoption was probably a first. 

“It is as if they are being blackmailed to give away their own embryos for adoption in case these are not required.”

Adoption, he said, might sound like a good compromise to avoid embryo destruction but in reality such a course of action would open a can of worms.

“No couple will be interested in adopting an embryo. People are being deceived,” he said.

“A gay couple would rather use their own egg or sperm to have half of the baby’s genetic composition rather than adopt an embryo belonging to third parties with no sense of belonging whatsoever,” he added. 

Moreover, he noted that embryologists would be selecting the “best two” embryos out of the permitted five for IVF treatment to have a higher probability of success.

“This means that the rest, which will be frozen, will in actual fact be less healthy embryos. This will further reduce the chance of these embryos being adopted.” 

Regardless, of these considerations, Prof. Schembri Wismayer warned that there would still be the risk of frozen embryos being destroyed, as statistically one in every three dies in the thawing process.

The expert also subscribed to concerns that embryo adoption opened up the possibility, albeit a remote one, of persons being in a relationship with their own siblings without their knowledge.

“Much depends on the safeguards in place to ensure that the same person can only donate sperm or eggs once in their life. In this respect, the Bill says very little on the checks and balances which will be in place,” he says.

Another major concern raised was on the level of screening to be carried out on donors to detect certain hereditary diseases such as thalassemia, which is common in Malta.

“At present tests are carried out on both partners if it transpires that one of them suffers from it, and if they both test positive, their children are highly likely to suffer as well. In this case such screening cannot be carried out since the donor’s identity will be anonymous.  How will these diseases be screened? Will this result in genetic testing?” he questioned.

The Bill also says that when they turn 16, children born from an adopted embryo may check the medical records of the parents in case of serious diseases.

“How will they be able to do so if the records will be kept anonymous?” he asked again.

On the other hand, he argued that banning anonymous donors might then pose the problem of putting off anyone interest in donating their sperm or eggs.

There are also issues over surrogacy in cases where children are born with certain conditions like Downs’ Syndrome. Prof. Schembri Wismayer warns that there have been cases abroad where the prospective parents have refused them.

“Yet, it is being proposed to introduce surrogacy through a legal notice, not even a proper legislation,” he noted.

“IVF is being handled in the most irresponsible manner. This is not some controversy over fuel pump policy. We are dealing with human life here.  The very idea of enacting such a law in just a fortnight is chilling. It beggars belief that such a Bill has been presented in the first place to legislators,” he said.

Ref: https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20180415/local/ivf-law-drafter-slams-new-bill-as-chilling.676362?utm_source=tom&utm_campaign=top5&utm_medium=widget

Aħna l‑Maltin għandna għożża għall‑ulied u għall‑ħajja sa mit‑tnissil tagħha. Din hi ħaġa pożittiva ħafna li nixtiequ ninkoraġġixxu bis‑sħiħ. Nuru għalhekk l‑apprezzament tagħna għall‑isforzi li jsiru biex il‑koppji li ma jistgħux ikollhom tfal jingħataw għajnuna xierqa u f’waqtha.

Fl‑istess waqt, hu b’dispjaċir li qrajna emendi proposti għall‑Att dwar il‑Protezzjoni tal‑Embrijuni.

Jidher li l-emendi proposti jmorru kontra l‑għan prinċipali tal‑liġi preżenti, li kien li jassisti koppji li qegħdin f’relazzjoni stabbli biex jista’ jkollhom tarbija. S’issa l‑liġi kienet tipproteġi d‑dinjità tal‑embrijun sa mill‑bidu nett tal‑ħajja umana u tassigura li t‑tarbija titwieled b’omm u b’missier.

Bl‑emendi proposti, dan jispiċċa. It‑tarbija ssir oġġett li qiegħed hemm biss biex jissodisfa x‑xewqa ta’ ħaddieħor. Kull min irid tarbija, hu min hu u hi min hi, jista’ jaħdem biex joħloq waħda, u dan il‑liġi tbierku. Meta l‑liġi tintroduċi l‑possibbiltà ta’ donaturi anonimi taċ-ċelloli għat-tnissil, is‑self tal‑ġuf bis‑surrogazzjoni u l‑iffriżar tal‑embrijuni – dan kollu jagħmel mit‑tarbija oġġett ta’ produzzjoni.

Hu ta’ tħassib serju li b’dawn l‑emendi jista’ jkun hemm tfal li qatt ma jafu min hi l‑omm naturali tagħhom jew il‑missier naturali tagħhom, min huma ħuthom, il‑kuġini, iz‑zijiet u n‑nanniet proprji tagħhom. Il‑liġi l‑ġdida qed toħloq orfni ġodda, u dan bi pjan. Diġà hi sitwazzjoni ta’ uġigħ kbir meta t‑tfal, għal xi raġuni jew oħra, ma jkollhomx il‑grazzja tat‑trobbija minn omm u missier. Imma li liġi toħloq sitwazzjonijiet ġodda bħal dawn, u li tkabbar id‑diskriminazzjoni bejn it‑tfal,  inissel tħassib kbir.

L‑ulied huma għeżież u ma ħaqqhomx hekk. Jistħoqqilhom li jkunu mħarsa fil‑ħtiġijiet fiżiċi, emozzjonali, psikoloġiċi, morali u spiritwali tagħhom. Huma l‑ġenerazzjonijiet futuri li jkollhom jaħsdu dak li qed jinżera’ llum.

Tħassibna ħafna wkoll il-proposta li l-iffriżar tal-embrijuni ser jibda jsir b’għażla. Hemm ħafna problemi etiċi oħra assoċjati ma’ dan fosthom il‑periklu li embrijuni ffriżati jibqgħu ma jiġux adottati għax ma jridhom ħadd. Dawn it‑trabi mnissla mit‑teknoloġija jistgħu — tort tal‑bniedem — qatt ma jaraw id‑dawl.

L‑appell tagħna jmur lejn dawk li għandhom ir‑responsabbiltà għal din il‑liġi biex verament iħarsu l‑ħajja u d‑dinjità umana u ma jagħmlu xejn li jkasbar id‑drittijiet tal‑ulied.

✠ Charles J. Scicluna                                                     ✠ Mario Grech
     Arċisqof ta’ Malta                                                                Isqof ta’ Għawdex

Ref: http://thechurchinmalta.org/mt/posts/76280/stqarrija-tal-isqfijiet-maltin-dwar-l-att-li-jemenda-l-att-dwar-il-protezzjoni-tal-embrijuni

Il-Fondazzjoni favur il-Ħajja u l-Familja, Life Network Foundation Malta, tinsab ferm preokkupata blemendi proposti lill-Att dwar il-Protezzjoni tal-Embrijun u tiġbed l-attenzjoni għas-sitt punti li joħorġu mill emendi:

1. L-istess isem: L-Att dwar il-Protezzjoni tal-Embrijun
Filwaqt li l-isem ta’ dan l-Att baqa’ l-istess, il-liġi preżenti tikkunsidra d-drittijiet tal-ġenituri prospettivi u l-embrijun uman. Fl-abbozz, id-drittijiet tal-ulied li jitwieldu minn din it-teknoloġija la huma ikkunsidrati u lanqas meqjusa.

2. Jidher ċar li hemm logħba fil-lingwaġġ użat u logħba bid-definizzjonijiet. Il-kelma “donazzjoni” – tfisser “att ta ġenerosità li tgħin lil ħaddieħor”, per eżempju – li taghti xi ħaġa, xi oġġett fis-sens ta’ karita, flus, kilwa. F’dan l-abbozziżda, mhux qed nitkellmu dwar ċelloli kwalunkwe iżda gameti – bajda tal-mara u sperma tar-raġel.
Ma’ dawn il-gameti hemm assoċjati obbligazzjonijiet u responsabilitajiet serji ħafna, fosthom ilmaternità u l-paternità. Ħadd ma jista’ jagħmel donazzjoni ta’ maternità u paternità biex joħloq wild li lanqas biss jieħu responsabilità tiegħu jew irid ikun jafu.
Dan l-abbozz jagħmilha legali li wieħed jabdika mir-responsabilitajiet u obbligi dovuti lil kull wild. B’donazzjoni tal-gameti anonima wieħed jiċħad l-ulied li bioloġikament huma tiegħu b’għażla.

3. Il-dinjità u d-drittijiet tal-embrijun uman mhedda Hawn eżempju ċar ta’ kemm il-liġi tagħmel oġġett minn ħajja ġdida fil-bidu tagħha. Aħna nagħtu oġġetti mhux ulied, trabi mhux imwielda jew embrijuni.

• Fl-abbozz insibu li “ġenitur prospettiv” tfisser kwalunkwe persuna irrispettivament millġeneru jew orjentazzjoni sesswali…”
Hawn spiċċa l-kunċett li t-tarbija għandha dritt ikollha omm u missier u li kemm jista’ jkun, tkun taf lill-ġenituri bioloġiċi tagħha u titrabba minnhom, dritt li nsibuh ukoll fil-Konvenzjoni tad-Drittijiet tat Tfal.
• Iddaħħal il-kunċett ta’ single mothers by choice u unknown fathers by choice kif ukoll
posthumous conception L-aħjar interessi tat-tfal huma injorati għal kollox. Fejn qabel din kienet u għadha problema soċjali li l-gvern għaliha jipprovdi l-għajnuna, issa ser issir għażla! Inoltre, dan ifisser li l-materjal ġenetiku ser ikun jista’ jintuża wara l-mewt ta’ xi ġenitur.
• Il-kliem “omm”, “missier” jew “koppja mara u raġel” huma eliminati u minflok iddaħħlu
ġenitur/ġenituri prospettivi meta huwa fatt bioloġiku li biex tinħoloq ħajja ġdida għandek
bżonn tal-isperma tar-raġel u l-bajda tal-mara.
• Il-kelma “embrijun” hija ħafna drabi sostitwita mill-kliem “bajda fertilizzata”.
Din hi logħba bil-kliem. Fix-xjenza nsibu “bajda” u “sperma”. Malli l-bajda tiġi fertilizzata ma tibqax tissejjaħ bajda għaliex issa saret entità ġdida, organiżmu ġdid.
Ħadd ma jaddotta bajd fertilizzat. Jaddottaw embrijuni umani. Meta nużaw il-kelma “bajda
fertilizzata” nkunu qed nippruvaw innaqqsu valur minn dan il-ħolqien ġdid, tarbija, tifel jew tifla.
L-embrijun mhux oġġett imma ħajja ġdida. Min jirrikorri għall-IVF, ikollu embrijuni trasferiti fil-ġuf, mhux oġġetti. Ma jitwildux oġġetti iżda tfal.

4. Embryo cryo-preservation (freezing) huwa ppreżentat bħala għażla u mhux eċċezzjoni lill ġenituri prospettivi. Hemm attentat biex jidher li dan ser isir fl-aħjar interess tagħhom meta huwa tant evidenti li dan mhux il-każ. L-iffriżar ser jiddaħħal biex jagħmel oġġett mill-embrijun fil-maġġor parti tal-każijiet. Ser jirriżulta f’għażla ta l-ahjar embrijuni u ‘stockpiles’ ta’ “surplus embryos”. Ħajjithom titpoġġa f‘futur inċert u riskjuż. Ma jitħallewx ikomplu jgħixu, jistgħu jagħmlu snin fil-friża bir-riskju li ħafna jitilfu ħajjithom. U dan biex ngħidu li kull min jixtieq tarbija issa ser naghtuh ċans.

5. Anonymous gamete donation tidħol b’emenda ta’ żewġ kelmiet –Insibu fl-Art. 3(a) tal-abbozz: “prokreazzjoni assistita b’mod mediku u donazzjoni ta’ gameti” Dan meta nafu kemm hemm problemi etiċi assoċjati ma’ din il-prattika. It-tfal għandhom dritt ikunu jafu l-identità taghhom, il-ġenetika tagħhom, l-istorja tagħhom. Tfal li twieldu minn din il-prattika
jitkellmu u jgħidu kemm iħossuhom imweġġa’ li d-drittijiet tagħhom huma injorati.
Fl-Ingilterra, donor-concieved Joanna Rose fetħet kawża li rebħet u sussegwentement, id-donazzjoni anonima tal-bajda u l-isperma fl-Ingilterra saru pprojbiti. U aħna Malta nħossuna li nistgħu ninjoraw id-dritt tat-tfal li jitwieldu minn dawn il-prattiċi.
Reġistru li huwa marbut b’anonimità u li jagħti biss informazzjoni medika jekk ikun il-każ, mhux ta’għajnuna ghal dawn it-tfal u l-mistoqsija dwar l-identità tagħhom. Kif ser ikunu jafu li għandhom ħuthom fil-każ ta’ ġuvni jew tfajla li jagħtu donazzjoni u wara jkollhom l-ulied bioloġiċi tagħhom?

6. Dekriminalizazzjoni ta’ surrogacy altruistika
Dan il-kunċett huwa ġdid – tarbija tinġarr fil-ġuf ta’ mara li ma tkunx ser trabbi t-tarbija. Din tagħti ttarbija lil min ikun ser irabbiha kif titwieled. Ix-xjenza tgħallimna li l-bonding mal-omm bioloġika tibda malli t-tarbija tibda tikber fil-ġuf . It-tarbija fil-ġuf ta’ ommha tħoss l-emozzjonijiet tal-omm u tagħraf leħinha. Is-surrogacy iċċaħħad lit-tarbija minn dan, fost affarijiet oħra. Il-kunċett ta’ surrogacy jagħmel ukoll mill-mara surrogata oġġett. Il-movimenti feministi ma jaqblux ma dan.

7. Kawżi legali – hemm l-impressjoni li l-Awtorità ser issolvi l-problemi etiċi u legali kollha li
ser joħloq dan l-abbozz. X’ser jiġri fil-każijiet ta’ separazzjoni u kwistjonijiet ta’ ownership talembrijuni? Kif jidher, l-emendi proposti jinjoraw kompletament id-drittijiet tat-tfal li jitwieldu minn din it-teknoloġija, filwaqt li joħolqu problemi etiċi u legali għall-ġenituri prospettivi.

Dr Miriam Sciberras BChD (Hons) MA Bioethics
Chairman Life Network Foundation Malta
www.staging-lifenetwork.stagingcloud.co

Being the PRO of the Ministry for European Affairs and Equality, the over-reaction of Paula Cauchi to the stand of the Times of Malta in defending marriage and the family is predictable.

What is also predictable is her use of ridiculous slogans such as reactionary and populist so as to denigrate fundamental values that the Times of Malta rightly defends.

Quite probably, the government is irked by the fact that this newspaper is alert and able to expose its dishonest and Machiavellian tactics in order to curry favour with the LGBTIQ lobby. The concluding statement in the editorial of February 6 says that a government should administer for the common good and not for interest groups that could keep it in power. It hits the nail on the head and says it all.

Also, no doubt the editorial (March 26) referring to Helena Dalli’s behaviour at the UN where she bragged about fooling the electorate over the intended implications of equality, must be doubly galling. The editorial exposes changes being imposed top downwards on an unsuspecting and indolent electorate is anything but democratic and in the country’s interest.

No amount of statistics and high-sounding words can change the truth about man and woman. Neither the Labour Party nor the Nationalist Party created the reality that the human family is based on the free and responsible commitment of a man and a woman to live together in a relationship open to life.

By their very nature, homosexual relationships are sterile, so any claims to equality are totally misplaced. Lesbian or homosexual acts can never be equivalent to sexual activity between a man and woman.

As written in a brilliant essay on ‘Gay Marriage’ published in the New Oxford Review in 2012, Monica Migliorino Miller said: “Legal recognition of homosexual bonds as marital bonds ultimately means that gender, human sexuality, being a husband or a wife, motherhood and fatherhood have no objective moral meaning.

“This also means that the family itself has no objective moral meaning. The moral law rooted in nature is completely dissolved. There would no longer be any natural familial moral bonds, thus no longer any natural moral ties and thus no innate moral responsibilities arising from the very nature of the family.”

Sadly, the state we are in is rooted in the trivialisation of sex initiated by the culture of contraception over 50 years ago that has led to rampant promiscuity, widespread infidelity, the general lowering of morality and the loss of respect for women fuelled by pornography that has reduced them to being treated as glorified soft toys, instruments of selfish enjoyment rather than as beloved companions.

The fact that more and more people endorse the current state of affairs and that all our MPs with the solitary principled exception of Edwin Vassallo voted in favour of the so called ‘equality’ agenda, does not change the truth by one iota.

Cauchi, in a cheap attempt to mock the truth, chose to quote Marine Le Pen who rightly echoed timeless realities when she warned that any law on same-sex marriage would “undermine the very foundations of our civilisation and the structures that protect family life”.

The not-so-subtle orchestrated campaign to introduce abortion follows the same deceitful pattern adopted on ‘gay rights’. The introduction of the abortive morning-after pill under the guise of it being falsely portrayed as a contraceptive is a case in point.

The loyal readers of the Times of Malta thank it for its repeated editorial stand in its spirited defence of the common good by defending life and the family, the institution that is the only guarantor of freedom and democracy.