An ominous resolution – Tonio Borg

An ominous resolution – Tonio Borg

The EU cannot interfere on matters such as abortion

Poland was recently at loggerheads with the European Union. It was objecting to a new mechanism which permitted the withdrawal of EU funds to countries that do not abide by the rule of law.

Thankfully, Poland finally yielded and now the mechanism, with certain safeguards, will be launched. A country cannot abuse of its sovereignty in rule of law matters while belonging to the Union, benefitting from its membership but ignoring its values.

This mechanism could be a lifesaver for any country whose government tries to cross the red lines of what it is allowed to do.

What is, however, perturbing is that in the midst of this crisis, the European Parliament passed a controversial, even though non-binding, resolution which condemned Poland because its Constitutional Court has ruled that the right to life protects even unborn children who are physically or mentally deformed or disabled.

The charge against Poland was that “many pregnant women who have been informed that there is a high probability of the foetus having a severe and irreversible abnormality or an incurable disease have had their access to legal abortion restricted”.

It then “strongly condemned the Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling and the setback to women’s sexual and reproductive rights in Poland”. It also affirmed that “the ruling puts women’s health and lives at risk”. It even assumed that wilful termination of a pregnancy is a fundamental right although no European instrument of law recognises such right.

This resolution, even though not binding, is astounding. Since when is the apex court of an EU member state subject to criticism for its judgments on matters which are outside the powers and jurisdiction of the EU organs such as abortion?

In fact, European commissioners have repeatedly made it clear that, according to the principle of subsidiarity, abortion and euthanasia are matters to be dealt with by the member states themselves. Some allow them. Others, like Poland and Malta, are vehemently against.

The government cannot cajole the Catholic vote on the one hand and allow its pundits and MEPs to encourage the introduction of abortion in Malta– Tonio Borg

This intrusion on the subsidiarity principle and the margin of appreciation, which each member state enjoys in such matters, was conveniently forgotten by the European Parliament. It is appropriate to recall that, during the negotiations leading to Malta’s accession to the Union, the Fenech Adami government had managed to include a protocol in the Treaty of Accession to the effect that, even though the current legal position is that the EU cannot interfere in such matters as abortion, Malta retained the right that, should the rules change, it remains the arbiter to decide whether to introduce the wilful termination of a woman’ pregnancy in Maltese law.

Now for the rules to change, one needs the unanimous decision of the member states. Yet, to be doubly sure, a Nationalist government insisted on including such a protocol.

It is sad to note that out of six Maltese MEPs, only two, namely Nationalist MEPs Roberta Metsola and David Casa, voted against the EP resolution. Even though the official position of the current Labour government, as expressed by the prime minister, is that the current administration is against the introduction of abortion, two Labour MEPs, in Pilate-like fashion, washed their hands of the issue and actually abstained on a resolution condemning a country for restricting abortion.

Another Labour MEP did not turn up for the vote. But, worse than that, one Labour MEP, Cyrus Engerer, voted in favour. In his considered opinion, the selection of healthy unborn children and the elimination of the unhealthy ones in their mother’ womb could actually be even considered as a human right, an evil that could be one day be taken as laudable and morally right.

He stated that “the ruling of October 22 by Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal to make abortion illegal in cases involving severe and irreversible foetal defects “puts women’s health and lives at risk”, 

Besides, the inertia, and, in one case, the outright approval, regarding the resolution by Labour MEPs has created a dangerous precedent for Malta whose laws are in line with the ruling of the Polish Constitutional Court.

We inevitably shudder when we read about the extermination of disabled, deformed or abnormal human beings during the last World War by totalitarian regimes in pursuit of the superior race doctrine.  Still, it seems that some of us find nothing objectionable if such human beings are exterminated before they are born. They style themselves pro-choice but the only persons who have no choice at all are the unborn.

This is similar to a recent boast by one member state that practically there were no longer any children born with Down Syndrome in its territory, not because a cure was found for such condition but because all unborn children showing signs of such condition were eliminated before having the chance of being born!

It is useless paying only lip service to the right to life. The right to life needs to be defended every day. The government cannot cajole the Catholic vote on the one hand and allow its pundits and MEPs to encourage the introduction of abortion in Malta.

Tonio Borg is former European Commissioner.

 

Ref: This is a timesofmalta.com opinion piece

https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/an-ominous-resolution-tonio-borg.839705#.X977ob14ooQ.whatsapp

2020 a year of Significant Pro-Life Victories for Right To Life UK

2020 a year of Significant Pro-Life Victories for Right To Life UK

Right To Life UK has had a challenging and busy year, with the abortion lobby attempting to exploit the COVID-19 crisis at every step to seek changes to abortion legislation and policy.

Right To Life UK have been able to put up a strong fight every time they have attempted to advance their campaign in Parliament, the media and amongst the wider public.

Alongside this, we have been able to secure a number of key victories and achievements, here are the main achievements:

1. Defeat of major attempt to introduce extreme abortion law to England and Wales

In July the abortion lobby staged a major attempt to introduce an extreme abortion law to England and Wales by hijacking the Domestic Abuse Bill.

The attempt to hijack the UK Government’s flagship Domestic Abuse Bill with two extreme abortion proposals failed, in a major pro-life victory.

To put in perspective how embarrassing a defeat on this amendment would have been for the abortion lobby, if they had taken the amendment through to a vote and lost, this would have been the first time that a pro-abortion amendment or Bill had been defeated in a vote in UK history.

Thank you to the thousands of people that rallied friends and family to email their MPs. MPs received more emails ahead of this vote than they have ever received ahead of an abortion vote.

Thank you also to our supporters who gave so generously to enable us to have the resources in place to run a very large campaign against these amendments.

We spent 18 months preparing for this battle. This project has included building a large network of relationships with active pro-life MPs in Parliament. This helped to ensure that there was a very strong case made to the Speaker from this network of pro-life MPs to identify the most extreme abortion amendment as out of scope, and to help mobilise MPs across Parliament against the remaining abortion amendment.

Alongside this, we worked to place a large number of positive pro-life articles in the mainstream media to provide the right momentum in the public eye for our side over this period.

The final key component has been building a very large base of grassroots supporters in every constituency in the country. This meant that when we asked people like you to email their MPs, it became crystal clear that a large number of people in their constituencies did not want these extreme changes.

None of this would have been in place in order to help achieve this amazing victory without your generous financial support. Thank you.

2. Continued strong opposition to assisted suicide

We have taken the strategic, media and digital expertise that we built up from working with a large group of allies to defeat the Marris Assisted Suicide Bill, to continue to ensure assisted suicide is not legalised.

The decisive win has meant that it has been difficult for the assisted suicide lobby to bring forward legislation on this issue. They have therefore been working quietly behind the scenes to try and grow their numbers ahead of another attempt to change the law. During 2020 we have focused on defensive work in Westminster to help limit their advance.

We have also faced an onslaught of activity from the assisted suicide lobby targeting the Royal Colleges, British Medical Association etc. to attempt to get them to drop their opposition to assisted suicide. This tactic is being used as it will make it easier for the assisted suicide lobby to pass legislation introducing assisted suicide if it does not face opposition from the medical establishment. We have been working with allied organisations to block these attempts.

In 2021, we expect the assisted suicide lobby to make a new attempt to introduce assisted suicide and continue their work to move the Royal Colleges from their current stance of opposing assisted suicide. We will be working hard to oppose them at every step along the way and will need your help with contacting MPs and other activities.

3. Abortion (Cleft Lip, Cleft Palate and Clubfoot) Bill launched

Currently abortion is allowed up to birth for babies with disabilities including cleft lip, cleft palate and club foot.

This year a cross-party group of MPs from the three largest parties in the UK Parliament have brought forward the Abortion (Cleft Lip, Cleft Palate and Clubfoot) Bill to raise the profile of this issue in Parliament. This Bill would change the law to clarify that cleft palate, cleft lip and club foot are not grounds for abortion in the UK.

This Bill seeks to address the disability discrimination inherent in our abortion law: currently abortion is permitted beyond the 24-week standard limit (which is already far beyond the time limit in most European countries of 12 weeks) to birth if a baby is diagnosed with a cleft lip, cleft palate, or club foot – all of which can be treated with surgery and therapy following birth.

Alongside the launch of the Bill, we worked with people with these conditions and their families to launch the Stand Up and Smile campaign to raise the profile of this issue outside Parliament.

As a result of the campaign, thousands of people have written to their MP asking them to support the Bill and a large number of MPs have signed an Early Day Motion supporting the Bill. The Bill has also been covered extensively by the mainstream media including articles in The Guardian, The Times and the Mail on Sunday.

The Bill is due for a second reading on 21 March 2021. We will be in contact ahead of then with details on how you can help build further support for a law change in this important area.

4. New digital news platform launched and now the most visited pro-life website in Europe

We have just launched our Right To Life News digital news platform. This has been launched so that we can reach a far wider audience of people with pro-life news that will keep people informed and help change even more hearts and minds on life issues.

Our website is already the most viewed pro-life website in Europe and the fourth most viewed pro-life website in the world – and this digital news platform has been built to enable us to reach even more people. 

Our digital team has spent a number of months building the platform from the ground up so that it provides visitors with the world-class user-driven design experience that they would expect from a platform run by a major global media outlet. We have also designed the platform so that it is easily viewable across desktop, mobile and tablet, as increasing numbers of people are accessing content on their mobile phones and tablet devices. 

We are concerned that some media outlets are moving to position themselves as journalists ‘campaigning’ for abortion access; the most recent example being the changes to the Guardian’s guidelines on how they report on abortion, a move which follows long-term bias from the BBC in their language guidelines. If this trend continues, it will become increasingly difficult for the mainstream public to be informed on the pro-life side of debates on issues such as abortion.

Right To Life News ensures that we have a platform where reliable pro-life news is accessible to everyone in the UK and beyond – and that we are not limited by what editors in major newspapers choose to publish. 

Thank you to the many supporters who have regularly used the news service and shared the articles: you have played a big part in making this news service a success. 

This is only the beginning. In 2021 we will be rolling out further plans to increase the number of people we are reaching through the news service. This includes the further roll-out of our syndication programme, where we form relationships with media outlets and allow them to republish our articles free of charge. This has already enabled our articles to be republished by a number of major media outlets with very large audiences – this all helps to ensure we reach many more people and change many more hearts and minds on life issues.

5. Growing network of MPs and peers to further our proactive political strategy

In the run up to the General Election at the end of last year, we ran the Vote for Both Lives campaign, a major initiative that we rolled out throughout the country in the lead up to election day.  The campaign resulted in hundreds of thousands of emails being sent to MP candidates along with people visiting their candidates in person to encourage them to sign the Both Lives Pledge.

Over 200 MP candidates signed the Both Lives Pledge making a commitment to support pro-life legislation in this parliament.

This election campaign has meant that there are a number of new MPs who have committed to support pro-life legislation in this parliament. The campaign was also part of a wider shift in the make-up of parliament, which saw a large number of pro-abortion MPs either step down or lose their seats.

This left us with a new parliament with considerably better numbers in place to fight the push from the abortion lobby to introduce extreme abortion legislation along with a larger team of pro-life MPs to support positive pro-life legislation that is brought forward during this new parliament.

In 2020, our Public Affairs team has worked to offer support to the large number of new pro-life MPs who entered Parliament after the General Election, and grow their network further.

This has built on the already large number of MPs and Peers we have a direct relationship with, and has enabled us to work with them to defeat the introduction of an extreme abortion law to England and Wales along with a number of other initiatives.

This work ensures that life issues stay on the agenda in Parliament and that we are building a better political situation for the unborn child and pregnant women.

6. Shining a light on the millions spent from the UK’s international aid budget on abortion

Over the year, we have been working to expose the enormous amount of international aid funding that is going from the UK to provide abortion services in developing countries.

This work has focused on putting pressure from within Parliament on the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office on this issue. We have also helped raise the issue in the mainstream media so that the wider public is aware of the negative impact that this spending is having in developing countries.

The biggest single donor to international abortion giant Marie Stopes International (now rebranded as MSI Reproductive Choices) is the UK taxpayer, through the UK international aid funding that is given to the organisation each year. UK international aid funding is also given to a number of other organisations that provide abortions in developing countries and lobby Governments to introduce extreme abortion legislation to these countries.

Attempts backed by international abortion organisations to introduce extreme abortion legislation to Kenya and Malawi have thankfully both been stalled in 2020 due to strong opposition.

In 2021, we expect there to be many more challenges on this front. MSI Reproductive Choices has set a goal of vastly increasing the number of abortions that it is performing in developing countries over the next ten years – and the new US adminstration is likely to reverse the previous administration’s restrictions on funding abortions overseas. 

This will mean that international abortion providers will likely see a large increase in the amount of funding they receive to spend on abortion along with lobbying teams dedicated to attempting to change legislation on abortion in developing countries.

7. Our digital strategy is changing even more hearts and minds of a new generation online

In 2020 we have worked on growing our digital strategy to reach an even larger audience online with smart, relevant and viral-focused content.

Our social media channels across Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, Pinterest, LinkedIn and TikTok have reached a new generation of people on a massive scale allowing us to reach tens of millions of people across these platforms during the year.

We have further built our in-house capability to produce world-class digital content – all of this has been produced in-house for a fraction of the cost of hiring leading agencies.

Alongside our social media strategy, we have further developed our website with a focus on making it the go-to tool that any member of the public can use to easily contact their MPs and access the latest information on life issues.

This year, within hours of a key development in Parliament, thousands of emails have been able to be sent directly to MPs. This ensures that MPs are aware that there is a very large and active grassroots movement in their constituencies who are pro-life and care about how their MPs vote on these issues.

The feedback we have had from MPs has been overwhelmingly positive as they have felt that there is real momentum for positive pro-life change from within their constituencies.

8. Our media strategy continues to help shape the mainstream media narrative on life issues

Concrete policy change on life issues can only happen in conjunction with wider cultural change outside parliament.

A key part of our work to change the wider culture on these issues is ensuring that pro-life messaging is heard in the mainstream media on a regular basis, and is supporting positive changes that are being brought forward in parliament.

In 2020 we have further grown our media reach with a big focus on getting positive pro-life messaging regularly featured in the mainstream media.

Our focus on mainstream media has been so important because this allows us to reach a large middle ground of people on this issue, with a focus on areas where research shows the majority of people are very open to seeing a positive political and cultural change to our abortion laws.

Wherever possible, we have ensured that the spokespeople we use as the voice on these issues in the media are most likely to connect with mainstream audiences. This has included women who have been personally affected by abortion, people with disabilities and medical experts.

9. Our education & training programmes are developing a new generation of pro-lifers

We have continued our work to develop a new generation of pro-lifers who are equipped to effectively communicate an evidence-based case for positive change on life issues.

This includes our Media and Communications Training Programme which provides young pro-lifers with an understanding of key pro-life issues and the ability to communicate these issues in the media. The programme equips participants with the necessary skills and techniques to deliver strong interviews, control difficult and hostile questions and to deliver an authentic perspective on life issues. 

Our Internship Programme has been designed to introduce student right-to-lifers and new graduates to the world of the right-to-life movement and its work across the media, politics, education and grassroots engagement. In 2020 we have seen more of our graduates go on to a number of important roles in a variety of sectors. 

Together with our wider digital outreach, these programmes work to enable us to educate and develop a new movement of young people who are passionate about achieving positive change on life issues. In 2021 we will be expanding our education and training programmes further.

Ref: www.rightolife.co.uk 

Leaving the sex field blank – Tonio Fenech

Leaving the sex field blank – Tonio Fenech

I am caught between two minds pondering on a proposal announced by the government in Bill 170, clause 22, which allows parents to leave the sex field blank on the birth registration when the gender of the child is unclear.

Presented as an important change, what is unclear to me is whether the “undeclared” classification will be applied when, biologically, the sex of the child is in doubt, as in the case of intersex, or whether parents will be allowed to leave it empty even when the sex of the child is clear.

The intersex case

I am not professionally competent to say if this will help intersex people but I tried to understand the challenges faced by these people before forming an opinion.

Intersex is a biological reality that affects between 0.05 per cent and 0.7 per cent of children, according to the UN Human Rights office. It is when a child is born with variations in sex characteristics, including chromosomes, gonads, sex hormones or genitals that do not fit the typical definitions for male or female bodies. 

Mauro Cabral, for Global Action for Trans Equality (GATE), an intersex person himself, during the Intersex Awareness Day of 2016 stated that “intersex people are not a natural third sex, we don’t have a third gender by definition, and leaving a blank sex assignment at birth is not the way to ‘create justice’ for us. We need to stop approaching intersex issues as if they were trans issues.

“Some trans people use intersex as a way of explaining who they are or to make sense of their bodies or identities. By doing this, intersex becomes just another way of saying trans. However, intersex is not about being trans, queer or non-binary: it’s about bodies and what happens to people who are born with them. We need to stop instrumentalising intersex to speak our truth as trans people”. 

What Cabral proposed was to dismantle binary ideas about bodies and body shaming.  

While I would join an initiative to fight body shaming, I cannot agree that in order to solve the challenges of intersex people we need to also deny human nature and the remaining 99.3 per cent labelled ‘binary’. Male and female are not an offence to intersex people, as people with eyesight are not offensive to the visually impaired.  We are simply born different; solutions should focus on inclusion, not elimination of who the rest are.

(Trans) gender ideology

A recent article in Times of Malta, ‘Will children choose their gender now?’ (November 30), defended this amendment as it fosters “a wider acceptance of gender fluidity and/or non-heteronormative sexuality in local culture”, assuring readers that this amendment is harmless since “if a child is assigned a gender at birth they may later choose to change when they become an adult”; consequently, we should not find it difficult to allow parents to leave the sex identification blank.  

Frankly, I find this argument twisted because an adult changing his or her gender classification is no justification for leaving a child genderless until adult age.

I do not think anyone’s children should become a social experiment called ‘gender fluidity’

The gender fluidity theory suggests that gender is not fixed and, basically, today I may feel a man, tomorrow a woman and the week after a man again and so we should use neutral pronouns and classifications to allow for this fluidity.

The Times of Malta article tries to support the theory by quoting the American Psychological Association that defines sex as “assigned at birth, one’s biological status as either male or female” while gender as “socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women”.

However, this definition is not about gender fluidity but the distinction between sex and our gender roles within society, for example, the rightful claim of women that sex should not impose some stereotype gender roles, like women are housewives while men are the breadwinners.

So-called research quoted from a Jung Journal article defining gender fluidity as “an alternative to binary (male and female) gender identities” is becoming more common. Seriously?  The Jung Journal is not a scientific journal but a website in its own words of “a beautiful international quarterly publication offering feature articles, reviews, interviews, poetry and art”.    Not much of science or research.

I wrote this article because I do not think anyone’s children should become a social experiment called ‘gender fluidity’ that can damage those children that society should protect.

The study ‘Sexuality and Gender, Findings from the Biological, Psychological,and Social Sciences’ by Lawrence S. Mayer and Paul R. McHugh, both senior scholars in the Department of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, which reviewed over 500 scientific articles, concluded that while gender dysphoria can start at the age of two to four, of those that pass through it, 80 to 90 per cent return to their original gender by the time they reach adolescence.   

They further claim that the hypothesis that a person might be “a man trapped in a woman’s body” or “a woman trapped in a man’s body” is not supported by scientific evidence. 

Transgender people today have the right to change their sex classification with significant ease. Confusing children before they even learn how to walk is wrong. Leaving sex blank for sexually-defined children will only impose confusion where there was none, with possible serious psychological and physical irreparable damage.

While questioning children should be assisted professionally and with sensitivity, too early affirmation is harmful to a child when research shows that 90 per cent of these children return to their original gender by adolescence.   

Tonio Fenech is a former Minister

This is a www.timesofmalta.com opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/leaving-the-sex-field-blank-tonio-fenech.839198?fbclid=IwAR3cSgTMndz82dZlRGtEv-07HRkjGrrPL3kD7tzZI3Emo7XPfeYUekskGGc

Prominent House of Lords Member Speaks Out Against Dangerous DIY Abortion

Prominent peer speaks out against ‘dangerous’ DIY home abortion scheme

A prominent member of the House of Lords has called on the Government to stop the provision of ‘DIY’ home abortions, which she says have “proven to be so dangerous”.

In a recent article, Baroness Philippa Stroud criticised the Government for introducing a dangerous and harmful ‘DIY’ home abortion concession as part of efforts to ‘Protect the NHS’ during the COVID-19 pandemic. She said that the decision to allow ‘pills-by-post’ or ‘at home’ abortion represents “the largest change to abortion law since 1967 and was done without any parliamentary scrutiny or public consultation”.

“The measures allow consultations with a single doctor or nurse over the phone, after which both sets of abortion pills (one mifepristone/six misoprostol) are sent to the patient’s home for a woman to effectively perform a DIY abortion, up until 10 weeks gestation”.

In March, just a week after the beginning of lockdown, Secretary of State for Health, Matt Hancock confirmed that there were no plans to change the abortion law as part of the COVID-19 response. However, as Baroness Stroud points out, these reassurances were quickly forgotten as the Government U-turned to allow ‘DIY’ home abortion throughout the pandemic, despite the Health Minister Lord Bethell admitting in the House of Lords that “it is not right to rush through this type of change in a sensitive area such as abortion without adequate parliamentary scrutiny.”

 Unintended consequences

“It is difficult to quantify the number of complications that have arisen from these pills, such as incomplete abortion and continued bleeding, due to insufficient data collection of patients receiving the pills, but Freedom of Information (FOI) requests have revealed the aftermath from the pills-by-post process to include sepsis, hemorrhaging, embolisms, renal failure and trauma to pelvic organs, among other medical complications”, she said.

The limit for ‘DIY’ home abortion is supposed to be 10 weeks gestation. As the abortion provider BPAS states, one week’s difference, from less than 9 weeks gestation to a 9-10 week gestational age more than doubles the risk of an incomplete abortion from 3% to 7%.

Baroness Stroud highlighted that “there are at least 52 cases officially reported to the Department of Health and Social Care of women who were provided pills-by-post beyond 10 weeks gestation, including one case where the unborn child was at 28 weeks gestation (beyond the legal limit)”.

A leaked email from a Regional Chief Midwife at NHS England and NHS Improvement concerning the “escalating risks” around ‘DIY’ home abortion revealed that one woman was able to receive abortion pills at 32 weeks pregnant and mentions “3 police investigations […] linked to these incidents”, one of which is a murder investigation “as there is a concern that the baby was live born” after a woman used the ‘DIY’ home abortion service.

 “Threat to vulnerable women and girls”

Alongside the medical complications of ‘DIY’ home abortion, the Baroness decried the potential for abuse and coercion, which becomes difficult to detect without in-person consultation.

She noted: “This poses a threat to vulnerable women and girls who are at risk from an abusive partner, sex-trafficking or child-sex abuse, as the home abortion could be used by their abusers as a means to more easily cover up trafficking or abuse scandals”.

 “Proven to be so dangerous”

Despite Government guidance encouraging people to attend medical appointments in person during lockdown, such access to physical healthcare has not been applied to ‘DIY’ home abortion, thereby leaving vulnerable women and girls to fend for themselves in their own homes.

As Baroness Stroud powerfully concludes, “it is crucial that the Government reverses these damaging concessions that were made at the beginning of the pandemic that have proven to be so dangerous, and restores protections for women during these unprecedented times, and reverses the concessions for at-home abortions”.

Right To Life UK’s spokesperson, Catherine Robinson said:

“The pre-COVID abortion law in England and Wales, although certainly a very bad and dangerous law, did at least provide some minimal protections against forced abortions and ensured at least a minimum of post-abortion care. Once abortion pills are sent in the post, no one can be certain who takes them and at what stage of pregnancy. The potential for complications and abuse is extensive especially considering that thousands of  women have procured an abortion via this method”.

“Baroness Stroud is absolutely right to call on the Government to rescind this appalling law, which was introduced with no parliamentary scrutiny and next to no discussion. The concern that abortion access be expanded at all costs is once again on clear display. The abortion providers distributing this pill and knowing the many risks involved are showing how little they actually care for women, let alone their unborn children”.

 

This is a www.righttolife.org.uk opinion piece

Ref: https://righttolife.org.uk/news/prominent-peer-speaks-out-against-dangerous-diy-home-abortion-scheme

Brave pregnant mother with cancer refuses abortion and delays treatment

Brave mother with cancer refuses abortion and delays treatment, given all clear

A 21-year-old mum who delayed cancer treatment rather than have an abortion has now been given the all clear.

Ellie Whittaker from Chesterfield was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s Lymphoma in October 2019 while she was also 16 weeks pregnant. Ellie was told that chemotherapy to treat the cancer could harm her unborn baby, so her doctors told her she should have an abortion.

 “I don’t regret my decision and I’d make the same one again given the choice.”

Ellie refused to have an abortion and decided to delay chemotherapy until after her daughter was born.

‘The doctor advised I have an abortion because cancer treatment could cause problems for the baby. There was no way I was going to give her up so I chose to delay it.’

‘I pushed the cancer as far from my mind and focused on Connie – I couldn’t wait to be a mum.

Her daughter, Connie, was born on 18th March 2020, and by that time the cancer had progressed. Ellie started treatment almost immediately after the birth.

She said: ‘I tried to spend as much time with Connie as I could before I started. I remember crying and thinking I wouldn’t be able to be there for her.

‘I knew the chemotherapy would take its toll.

‘But when they scanned me the cancer had progressed to stage three – it had spread to my stomach and spleen.’

The all clear

Ellie underwent 12 gruelling rounds of chemotherapy between March and September before doctors finally gave her the all clear in October 2020.

“I’m so pleased it’s gone and I can focus on being a mum.”

“Connie’s an amazing baby – she started teething and trying to sit-up. She’s the quietest baby and sleeps through the night. I wouldn’t change her for the world.”

 Pressured to have an abortion

Women are advised or even pressured to have abortions for many different reasons. They are often pressured to have an abortion if doctors think their child might be disabled. 

In 2017, a damning report from the UK’s Care Quality Commission (CQC) accused Marie Stopes International (now MSI Reproductive Choices) of paying staff bonuses for persuading women to have abortions.

In October of this year, a nurse in the UK said she was left fearing for her life and needing emergency surgery after MSI Reproductive Choices denied her proper counselling and pressured her to take abortion pills at home, rather than under the supervision of a doctor in a clinic.

Right To Life UK’s spokesperson, Catherine Robinson, said: “It’s wonderful that Ellie is now free of chemotherapy and her daughter is healthy. It’s so encouraging to see this brave mother refuse an abortion despite potential risks to her own health.”

“Sadly, in this case the doctors are endorsing a form of twisted logic that says: ‘Better to have an abortion than risk harming the baby.’ In reality of course, nothing could harm the baby more than ending his or her life through abortion.”

 

This is a www.righttolife.org.uk opinion piece

Ref: https://righttolife.org.uk/news/brave-mother-with-cancer-refuses-abortion-and-delays-treatment-given-all-clear?fbclid=IwAR1DS2aIqPo-6-QmpjP7X964swO_YdBSY5lQr8HBZehW8Cg87wySXRcaa88

Pro-Life People Will Sing Christmas Carols at Abortion Clinics to Save Babies, Share Christ

Pro-Life People Will Sing Christmas Carols at Abortion Clinics to Save Babies, Share Christ

With messages of hope and life, pro-life advocates plan to sing Christmas carols outside abortion facilities all across the country this December.

The Christian Post reports the “Peace in the Womb” caroling project has been going on for seven years, and, through their singing and encouragement, pro-lifers have helped save unborn babies from abortion.

“More than any other factor, it’s fear that drives a woman to seek abortion. Fear for her future, fear of giving birth, even fear over her partners’ reaction to her pregnancy,” said Eric Scheidler, executive director of the Pro-Life Action League, in a statement. “These fears have been compounded by the COVID pandemic and resulting economic downturn.”

Though participation in pro-life sidewalk advocacy is down due to the coronavirus, Scheidler said pro-lifers in dozens of cities still plan to participate this year.

“So far, the number of locations is a little bit down this year because some places, particularly hard-hit states, we’ve had some of our leaders decide to either scale down the event or postpone it or wait until next year,” he told the Christian Post.

Follow LifeNews on the Parler social media network for the latest pro-life news!

He said they hope the Christmas carols will plant a seed in women’s minds that there is hope for them and their babies and there is forgiveness for those seeking abortions.

“It’s particularly sort of horrifying to think of a woman seeking an abortion at this time of year, when all of us are putting together Christmas lists and praying in preparation for Christmas and reflecting on the beauty of Mary and Joseph saying yes to our Lord and becoming parents, even in trying circumstances,” Scheidler told One News Now.

“Our mission is to bring the light of the incarnation, the light of the birth of Christ to this place of despair,” he added.

Though the carolers sometimes face “very aggressive” pro-abortion counter-protesters, he said they know that they are making a difference for life. He told the Post that, during one event in Jacksonville, Florida, a mother and daughter who came for an abortion heard the Christmas carols and had a change of heart.

“ … when they heard that we were there singing Christmas carols trying to appeal to the moms to choose life, the mom and daughter left the abortion clinic and then the pro-lifers followed up and found out that the girl had absolutely chosen to keep her baby,” Scheidler said.

Find a list of events here.

 

This is a www.lifenews.com opinion piece

Ref: https://www.lifenews.com/2020/12/11/pro-life-people-will-sing-christmas-carols-outside-abortion-clinics-to-save-babies/

Morning After Pill Charades

Morning After Pill Charades

The morning after pill can be abortifacient and women need to know the truth.

I read the article by Isabel Stabile, published on TMIS of Sunday, 6 December, and as a researcher and gynecologist in the field, I must answer in the interest of correct consumer information to the Maltese citizens.

I base my reply quoting the Official Assessment Reports on EllaOne by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) itself. It is pertinent to note that we are speaking of two very different drugs mentioned as Morning after pill, each having a completely different mode of action. These are Levonogestrel (morning after pill) and Ella One (five days after pill).

From the studies presented, it is clear that Levonogestrel (LNG) is unable to prevent or delay ovulation; however, it leads to a shortened or inadequate corpus luteum that does not allow the endometrium to prepare for implantation. The diagram below, from a study by Brache et al, confirms that compared to the placebo, Levonogestrel does not prevent ovulation. The data is presented and shared by EMA itself in its EPAR (European Public Assessment Report) on EllaOne page 9 and updated yearly; last update being on 20 May.

The EMA shows officially that LNG does not work by affecting ovulation and is placebo-like in the fertile days, when fertilization is possible. In spite of this, the EMA presents LNG as an ovulation-inhibitor. Why?

EllaOne (ulipristal acetate, UPA) can prevent implantation and also terminate ongoing pregnancies. “Ulipristal acetate prevents progesterone from occupying its receptor, thus the gene transcription normally turned on by progesterone is blocked, and the proteins necessary to begin and maintain pregnancy are not synthesized.” (EMEA 2617/87/2009, Page 8: 2.3). On page 10 of the same document, it goes on to say that: “The ability of Ulipristal Acetate (UPA) to terminate pregnancy was investigated. Ulipristal, mifepristone and lilopristone were approximately equipotent” further confirming that it can terminate an ongoing pregnancy.

The science and the marketing of the morning after pill (MAPs) are diametrically opposed. The consumer can easily be misled into thinking that the MAPs are “normal” contraceptives when in fact they can be and are anti-implantation drugs and EllaOne can likely interrupt ongoing pregnancies.

Women who would be reluctant to take any medicinal that could endanger their embryo’s life should have access to the correct information and biological processes taking place in their body. The law in Malta protects the embryo from conception. Professionals can also have a conscientious objection to referral and/or supply of such medicinals.

In her article, Stabile also emphasised the relevance of the SPC. Have a look at the image below taken from page 41 of the same 2009 EMA Assessment Report: the highlighted sentences: “Omit any sentence in the SPC and the PL suggesting that the product could be used as an abortifacient”, “Pregnancy should be excluded before EllaOne is administered” and “Contraindication: Pregnancy”, speak volumes.

Furthermore, the European Medicines Authority in the Assessment Report EMA/73099/2015 on page 35, reports that during the evaluation process of the ellaOne registration dossier, the company, HRA-Pharma, was “requested to study any potential off-label use of ellaOne, in particular during pregnancy, possibly as an abortifacient. No such clinical studies were performed with Ulipristal-Acetate and it is therefore left as an unknown, whether it is possible to use it for abortion”. This notwithstanding, at the end of the 2015 AR, EMA presented ellaOne once again as an anti-ovulatory drug and made it “not subject to medical prescription”.

EllaOne does not prevent ovulation in the most fertile days and yet over 80% of expected pregnancies do not appear clinically. The drug does not allow endometrial maturation, so necessary for the embryo to implant. This leads to the embryo losing his or her life.

EllaOne and Levonogestrel are being sold over the counter and without prescription to young adults and women who think that they are using contraceptives that are safe. No advice is obligatory as to the side effects that these medicinals can have on their health, especially with recurrent use of EllaOne. In fact, Esmya, a medicine containing the same active ingredient, ulipristal acetate, has been withdrawn from clinical use due to a direct relationship between UPA and severe liver injuries, including liver transplantation. A case of severe DILI (Drug Induced Liver Injury) occurred after an UPA consumption, not greater than the dosage in one-two tablets of EllaOne, and EllaOne, unlike Esmya, can be self-administered repeatedly, without any medical surveillance.

The scientifically correct information regarding the mechanism of action of these drugs must be available to our politicians, decision-makers, doctors, chemists and other professionals and last but not least to the women consuming these pills. Their rights and freedom of informed choice are being deliberately thwarted. Women are being deceived. They are being informed that ovulation will be prevented after taking Emergency Contraceptives, but, on the contrary, they can ovulate and can conceive, but their offspring dies as these drugs inhibit implantation. Healthwise they are completely unaware of the severe drug induced liver injury (DILI) potentially due to Ulipristal acetate.

For further information on toxicity and on the mechanism of action, please see, respectively: Ulipristal Acetate and liver-injuries: while Esmya is revoked, EllaOne is allowed in repeated self-administrations possibly exceeding UPA toxic-dosing with Esmya. Mozzanega B. J Hepatol 2020 Nov. 30; S0168-8278(20)33828-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2020.11.041. 

UPA and LNG in emergency contraception: the information by EMA and the scientific evidences indicate a prevalent anti-implantation effect. Mozzanega B, Nardelli GB. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2019; 24(1):4-10. doi: 10.1080/13625187.2018.1555662. Epub 2019 Jan. 18

Further scientific papers are available on http://www.sipre.eu in Italian or English

Related article – http://staging-lifenetwork.stagingcloud.co/ulipristal-acetate-and-liver-injuries-by-bruno-mozzanega-md/

Bruno Mozzanega, Dept SDB (Woman’s and Child’s Health), University of Padua (I)

 

This is a www.independent.com.mt opinion piece

Ref: https://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2020-12-13/newspaper-opinions/Morning-After-Pill-charades-6736229383

 

Ectopic Pregnancy: The Truth

Ectopic Pregnancy: The Truth

by Klaus Vella Bardon 

In their increasingly aggressive campaign to promote abortion, Doctors for Choice again claimed that the criminal code has no provision for abortion under any circumstance, not even when a woman’s life is imminently at risk of death as a result of a pregnancy.

To prove their point, they stoop to any level and are now exploiting a relatively recent case of ectopic pregnancy.

An ectopic pregnancy is a non-viable pregnancy that occurs outside of the uterine cavity, most commonly in the fallopian tube.

As a pro-life activist, I checked the facts with the help of an expert of how this condition is treated in Malta

I was informed that there are basically three ways to deal with an ectopic pregnancy and that saving the mother is the top priority.

One either waits, or one treats the case medically, or, thirdly, as a last resort, it is removed surgically.

As in all sound medical practice, invasive treatment is kept to a minimum in the interest of the patient’s well-being.

Usually, unless otherwise indicated, the mother is kept under strict observation and, often, the body solves the problem on its own, unassisted medically.

The second line of treatment is the medical option where the drug methotrexate, that cuts short the pregnancy, is administered.

The use of methotrexate is also not so straightforward as its side effects and contraindications have to be taken into account. Yet, even here, one has to weigh the risks of taking methotrexate when the risk of surgery is higher.

Once the specialist treating the mother decides medically that the patient needs methotrexate, the decision is final.

There are formulary drugs and non-formulary drugs. Formulary are easily accessible, one just needs to prescribe them, like paracetamol or certain antibiotics.

Non-formulary are more difficult to access, not for ethical reasons but because of logistical and safety issues.

Being a dangerous non-formulary drug, methotrexate needs to be signed off by the specialist/consultant and head of department, then sent to the pharmacy where the drug is prepared and finally forwarded for its administration. The whole process takes time and some delay is inevitable as the use of drugs that carry certain grave risks must be controlled.

It is about time that the pro-abortion lobbyists make a serious attempt to respect the facts. We all have a very serious obligation to ensure that the public is given the truth, especially about such life and death matters.

Sadly, again and again, ethics is not the forte of the so called ‘pro-choice’ brigade.

It is profoundly unjust and dishonest that they grasp and manipulate any extreme case they can find in order to justify their false claim that anti-abortion laws place pregnant women at risk.

Klaus Vella Bardon – Balzan

_________________________________________________________________

It is disingenuous and entirely wrong for the self-styled “doctors for choice” to use the case of an unfortunate woman who suffered the traumas of an ectopic pregnancy as a “trojan horse” attempt at changing Malta’s abortion laws.

This poor lady (assuming the account in the Times of Malta is accurate) appears to have suffered additional distress as a result of what appears to have been bureaucratic delay in being given the correct treatment for her serious and potentially life-threatening problem, which is always to end the pregnancy. This case, in itself, establishes the fact that Malta’s abortion laws have nothing to do with the difficulties encountered and I cannot fathom how anyone could claim otherwise.

It should be evident that the solution to prevention of a similar future occurrence of this most regrettable incident must surely lie in modifying or speeding up the procedures already in place to ensure expeditious delivery of necessary treatment. I fail to see why the laborious process of parliamentary legislation should be required to achieve this desirable outcome.

There has never been any controversy about the need to terminate ectopic pregnancies. No pro-life institution, government or Church has ever challenged this fact.

Abortion, on the other hand, almost invariably involves the deliberate ending of a healthy, viable pregnancy. It is rarely carried out for what might be termed ‘good medical reasons’, the usual situations being ‘domestic arrangements’ or ‘economic hardship’. The minority associated with abuse/assault/foetal abnormality create tremendous difficulty all round as they are, inevitably, tragic situations to which there is no ‘happy or easy’ solution.

Malta’s would-be abortionists might like to ask themselves to explain the schizophrenic approach like-minded clinicians adopt towards pregnancy. If the baby is wanted, the foetus is happily referred to as ‘your baby/little boy/little girl’; on the other hand, if unwanted, it remains an ‘it’ and is treated like an unwanted wart, to be disposed of expeditiously.

Whither the Hippocratic oath, which, for thousands of years, included the line “I will not administer a pessary to a woman to induce an abortion”, until the evermore utilitarian approach the human race has adopted towards life led to its removal in around 1970?

Anton Borg – Gloucestershire, UK

 

This is a www.timesofmalta.com opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/letters-to-the-editor-december-10-2020.837920

Ulipristal Acetate and liver-injuries by Bruno Mozzanega MD

Ulipristal Acetate and liver-injuries:

while Esmya is revoked, EllaOne is allowed in repeated self-administrations possibly exceeding UPA toxic-dosing with Esmya. – Bruno Mozzanega, MD – Assistant Professor Dept Woman’s and Child’s Health, University of Padua (Italy)

To the Editor of Journal of Hepatology,

Ulipristal Acetate (UPA), an antagonistic Selective Progesterone-Receptor Modulator (SPRM), is the active-principle of two drugs: Esmya and ellaOne. While Esmya for fibroid treatment has been revoked because of severe liver-injuries, the emergency-contraceptive EllaOne is allowed in repeated self-administrations possibly exceeding UPA toxic-dosing with Esmya.

ESMYA – Micronized-UPA, 5mg-tablets in blisters of 28. It was taken daily for three to six months to treat uterine fibroids, after EMA (European Medicines Agency) authorization in 2012. It needed medical prescription and treatment was supervised by experienced doctors. It reduced progesterone-induced fibroid growth.

Due to the appearance of serious liver injuries in 8 Esmya-treated patients, the EMA Pharmacovigilance-Risk-Assessment-Committee (PRAC) started an evaluation (EMA/791062/2017) [1] that concluded that UPA had a possible role in injuries. EMA recommended measures to minimize the risk (EMA/355940/2018) [2]: contraindication if liver problems; information to patients; liver-tests before, during and after treatment; repeated courses only to inoperable women.

On September 4th 2020, a further review by EMA-PRAC confirmed that UPA 5mg can cause liver injury, including the need for liver transplantation. Since it was not possible to identify which patients were most at risk or measures that could reduce the risk, the PRAC concluded that the risks outweighed its benefits and Esmya should not be marketed in the EU (EMA/455818/2020) [3].

The strict post-marketing surveillance made it possible to link Esmya-administration to side-effects. The time from Esmya first-intake to hepatic failure ranged from few days to six months [4].

ELLAONE – Micronized-UPA, 30mg single-dose tablets, authorized for emergency contraception.

Both the 2018 and 2020 EMA-PRAC Reports on Esmya-related risk 2,3 specify that with ellaOne there is no concern about liver injury.

When the Members of EMA-CHMP (Committee-Human-Medicinal-Products) recommended ellaOne for marketing-authorization in 2009, they acknowledged that UPA accumulates in tissues, with a high tissue-to-plasma ratio (EMEA/261787/2009,page 13) [5]. They acknowledged that repeated UPA-administrations (even scheduled monthly) lead to a progressive accumulation in the liver, eventually resulting in liver-toxicity. Consequently, EMA-CHMP authorized single-dose administration and warned against repeated self-administration.

However, in 2015 this scenario changed: the EMA-CHMP removed the warning against repeated self-administration and made ellaOne-supply “not subject to medical prescription” (EMA/73099/2015) [6]. Since then, the repeated self-administration of ellaOne in the same cycle is allowed and suggested as safe, without any medical supervision.

Up-to-date, no cases of hepatotoxicity have been reported after single-dose administration of ellaOne; however, the patient 2 in Meunier’s series [4] evidenced severe liver injury after taking Esmya (UPA 5mg) for 3 days (15mg=half ellaOne) to 26 days. Women on Esmya-treatment were strictly surveilled, while those taking ellaOne are unidentified: eventual adverse events could hardly be attributable to an undocumented drug-self-administration.

Indeed, liver-toxicity seems due to UPA-accumulation, while circulating levels of either UPA or its metabolites [7] have no impact on safety. The life-threatening DILI (drug-induced-liver-injury), including autoimmune hepatitis, associated with UPA in post-marketing surveillance may be partially explained by UPA physiochemical (high lipophilicity) and pharmacokinetic (hepatic metabolism, long half-life, inhibition of liver transporters, reactive metabolite formation) features [8].

The most challenging form of DILI is the so-called idiosyncratic one: it is unpredictable, usually unrelated to the dose and is characterized by a variable onset-time. DILI is an important public health issue: not only it strengthens the importance of the post-marketing phase, when urgent withdrawal sometimes occurs for rare unanticipated liver-toxicity, but also shows the imperfect predictivity of pre-clinical models and the lack of validated biomarkers beyond traditional, non-specific, liver-function tests [9].

The removal of the warning against repeated use was requested and obtained by HRA-Pharma, basing on HRA2914-554 Study (Report-pages 6-9) [6] that examined the effect of repeated administration of ellaOne on ovulation, menstrual cycle and safety. EllaOne was given weekly (Q7D, twelve women) or every 5 days (Q5D, eleven women) for 8 consecutive weeks since the first day of the menstrual cycle. No safety-issues emerged for those 23 women, suggesting that, should ellaOne be used more than once in the same cycle, the safety profile is similar to that for a single administration [6]. The repeated self-administration of EllaOne in the same cycle was authorized as safe [6].

Overlooking the fact that almost every woman had normal ovulations during the repeated self-administration of ellaOne, officially presented as anti-ovulatory [10], the total UPA-dosing for women was 270mg in Q7D and 360mg in Q5D. These amounts are presented as safe, but are equal to or greater than Esmya-dosing in the same 8 weeks, UPA 280mg: the UPA-dosing leading two patients to liver transplantation [4]; besides, the single UPA-bolus to liver was six time-higher than with Esmya.

The burden of DILI is likely underestimated: clinical trials are usually underpowered to identify rare idiosyncratic events and most data come from post-marketing retrospective studies. DILI occurs only in a small fraction of exposed-subjects [9]: with UPA the percentage was 1/10.000: 8 out of 80.0000 Esmya-patients, but ellaOne is taken by millions of women every year and repeated-self-administration cannot be quantified. EllaOne is not subject to medical prescription, so no data are available for post-marketing evaluation.

Liver-toxicity due to Esmya-administration were still unreported in 2015, when the EMA-CHPM removed the warning against the repeated self-administration of ellaOne, but nowadays it seems difficult to state that ellaOne-self-administration is always safe. The PRAC-EMA assessed definitively that UPA has a direct responsibility in inducing liver-injuries 2,3. Besides, it is commonly known that ellaOne can be taken repeatedly by millions of women whenever unprotected-sex-intercourse recurs, in whichever period of the cycle (ellaOne Package-Leaflet). In the light of the above, it is easy to argue that repeated self-administration can lead to a total UPA-intake even exceeding the UPA-amounts responsible of the dramatic DILI officially 2,3 attributed to Esmya. As well, it is easy to argue that nothing can either discourage or only restrict ellaOne-repeated self-administration: not only women are not informed about its risks, but, furthermore, they are reassured that even closely-repeated self-administrations are as safe as a single-tablet self-administration [6].

The overall metabolic impact of Ulipristal and/or its side-effects are still unknown. EllaOne frequent self-administration for subsequent contraceptive-emergencies is authorized as a correct and safe behaviour, but is likely to present a danger, in the absence of medical supervision, due to the progressive UPA-accumulation in the liver.

CONCLUSIONS

The repeated-self-administration of ellaOne, micronized-UPA 30mg, likely can be associated with hepatotoxicity in unaware women. However, further investigations are required to understand the underlying pharmacological mechanisms, to define the UPA-toxic-thresholds and to assure women the best protection.

Information to women and to the Medical Community seems mandatory to preserve women’s health.

REFERENCES

  1. EMA/791062/2017 – https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/referral/esmya-article-20-procedure-review-started_en.pdf

View in Article 

  1. EMA/355940/2018 – https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/referral/esmya-article-20-procedure-esmya-new-measures-minimise-risk-rare-serious-liver-injury_en.pdf

View in Article 

  1. EMA/455818/2020 – https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/referral/ulipristal-acetate-5mg-medicinal-products-article-31-referral-prac-recommends-revoking-marketing_en.pdf

View in Article 

  1.  
  • Meunier L.
  • Meszaros M.
  • Pageaux G.P.
  • Delay J.M.
  • Herrero A.
  • Pinzani V.
  • et al.

Case Report. Acute liver failure requiring transplantation caused by ulipristal acetate.

Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2020; 44 (Epub 2020 Mar 4): e45-e49https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinre.2020.02.008

View in Article 

  1. EMEA/261787/2009 – https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/assessment-report/ellaone-epar-public-assessment-report_en.pdf

View in Article 

  1. EMA/73099/2015 – https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/variation-report/ellaone-h-c-1027-ii-0021-epar-assessment-report-variation_en.pdf

View in Article 

  1.  
  • Pohl O.
  • Osterloh I.
  • Gotteland J.P.

Ulipristal acetate – safety and pharmacokinetics following multiple doses of 10–50 mg per day.

Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics. 2013; 38: 314-320

View in Article 

  1.  
  • Gatti M.
  • Poluzzi E.
  • De Ponti F.
  • Raschi E.

Liver Injury with Ulipristal Acetate: Exploring the Underlying Pharmacological Basis.

Drug Saf. 2020 Aug 3; (Online ahead of print)https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-020-00975-8

View in Article 

  1.  
  • Raschi E.
  • De Ponti F.

Strategies for Early Prediction and Timely Recognition of Drug-Induced Liver Injury: The Case of Cyclin- Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibitors.

Front. Pharmacol. 2019; 10: 1235https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2019.01235

View in Article 

  1.  
  • Mozzanega B.
  • Nardelli G.B.

UPA and LNG in Emergency Contraception: the information by EMA and the Scientific Evidences indicate a prevalent anti-implantation effect.

Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2019; 24 (10.1080/13625187.2018.1555662. Epub 2019 Jan 18): 4-10

View in Article 

Article Info

Publication History

Accepted: November 24, 2020

Received in revised form: November 23, 2020

Received: September 23, 2020

Publication stage

In Press Journal Pre-Proof

Footnotes

I declare no conflict of interest, neither any financial support

Identification

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2020.11.041

Copyright

© 2020 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

ScienceDirect

Access this article on ScienceDirect

This is a Journal-of-hepatology.eu letter to the editor piece  

Ref: https://www.journal-of-hepatology.eu/article/S0168-8278(20)33828-9/fulltext#%20

‘Covid-19 saved a lot of babies’: Women’s shelter

‘Covid-19 saved a lot of babies’: Women’s shelter

During the months when the Coronavirus pandemic was at its peak, Dar T’ghanniqa T’Omm (Mother’s Embrace Home) received a number of calls from both local and foreign women, overwhelmed and panicked when they found out they were pregnant.

To contain the spread of the pandemic, flights were suspended from 21 March up until 1 July, leaving women who found themselves in an unwanted pregnancy feeling concerned, panicked and alone.

During that period, the women’s shelter received nearly 80 calls from women coming from different backgrounds and situations needing support and reassurance. “We received all kinds of calls; including mothers who gave birth but had no more money because they had been made redundant, so we would provide them with food and support. There were also women who had unplanned pregnancies and were not sure what the next steps were,” said Christie.

She explained that, during COVID-19, many mothers felt stressed and in a state of shock when they found out they were pregnant. “We were there for these mothers every step of the way. We supported them, accompanied them to any appointments they had, we just wanted to make sure that the mothers felt safe.”

The helpline also received calls from women who were considering an abortion. “We always leave the decision up to the mother; we never tell them what to do or judge them. Our councillors speak to these women to see what they need and how we can help, but at the end it is always up to the mother to decide.”

She explained that some women, and also men, call the helpline after the abortion has taken place. “We have received calls from men, some of whom felt guilty for pushing their partner to have an abortion, or who needed support themselves after their partner had an abortion. Whatever the case, we support them, and our councillors help them to grieve and come to terms with their guilt.”

We go through the whole journey with these mothers

The shelter, which was set up back in 2018, is run by Life Network Malta, a pro-life NGO, which welcomes women and mothers experiencing crisis pregnancies. The shelter currently hosts five mothers.

Christie explained that the Foundation began receiving a number of calls from mothers who needed help and that at the time there was no specific shelter which helped homeless pregnant women who are more likely to have an abortion. “We had mothers who would want to carry out their pregnancy but were scared of losing their accommodation, or else mothers who were kicked out by their parents who disapproved of the pregnancy. We are there to help them and provide the support they and their child need.”

She said that mothers who come to the shelter not only find a roof over their head but also are provided with the support and information they need as new mothers. She explained that she, volunteers and councillors work together to provide the mothers with a caring support system. “We become a family, we help the mothers throughout their journey and the shelter is run in a household manner.”

The volunteers and councillors provide the mothers with the necessary life skills, such as time and money management. “We even help them send CVs … whatever we can do we help them as much as possible.”

Christie recalls how, during COVID-19, the mothers had to remain inside the shelter and how one mother had to go into labour on her own in the hospital. “Unfortunately, we had to cut down the amount of volunteers coming in but we continued counselling sessions online or over the phone; we never stopped.” She said that she kept going to the shelter because she realised that the mothers felt lonely at times and the staff came up with different activities to do inside during that time.

The shelter also donated to 38 families in need. It provided food, baby milk, nappies, clothes and other items which mothers might need.

Anti-human rights? We support a mother to give birth to her child

In recent news, Voice for Choice, a pro-choice NGO working for reproductive rights have expressed its disappointment that the government donated €130,000 to Dar Tghannieqa T’Omm. “By providing funds to LifeNetwork Malta, the government is supporting an anti-human rights agenda, and this is completely unacceptable,” it said.

When asked for her opinion on the comment, Christie asked how a Foundation which is supporting a mother can be anti-human rights. “All I can say is how am I, or the Foundation, who are supporting a mother to give birth to her child, anti-human rights? If that child is not born, then they are not obliged to any of the rights we keep fighting for.”

Christie highlighted that the extra funding donated by the government will help pay for care workers to come and stay at the home during the week. Funding will also help with keeping up maintenance of the house, and providing a better programme for the mothers.

This is a independent.com.mt opinion piece

Ref: https://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2020-07-12/local-news/Covid-19-saved-a-lot-of-babies-Women-s-shelter-6736225085