Where there is life...

Some months ago, the government announced its intention to entrench anti-abortion legal provisions in the Constitution and asked organisations to support the proposal. The idea had been presented to the government at the beginning of the year by pro-life lobby group Gift of Life. Spokesman Paul Vincenti tells Cynthia Busuttil that although the move will not stop women from having abortions overseas, the possibility that Malta may legalise abortion in the coming years would become more difficult.

Abortion is already illegal in Malta, so what will the entrenchment of the provisions in the Constitution change?

There is no guarantee that abortion will remain illegal under the current system and the law can be changed by the government, irrespective of whether people agree or not.

A major problem is that once abortion is legalised in a country, it is very hard to remove. Currently the law in the United Kingdom allows abortions to take place when the foetus is up to 24 weeks old but they want to reduce the termination date to 20 weeks. It is the doctors who are pushing for this change because they are realising that more and more babies are surviving when they're younger than 22 weeks. But it is not easy. Once you get abortion, you're in trouble.

By the same argument, why not entrench every law in the Constitution?

The protection of human life is already in the Constitution but not that of the unborn child. Why should the Constitution protect our life but not of an unborn child?

As Gift of Life we never went into how the life of the unborn child should be protected by the Constitution. When we made the proposal last January, we never suggested that the law is lifted word for word and inserted in the Constitution and we did not have any say in the way it was done.

There is now a public debate as to whether this is the right way or not. We personally believe it is an acceptable way. If it needs to be tweaked because the Labour Party feels it ought to be looked at better, studied or altered, we are not against that at all.

This issue transcends politics. It is a matter of conscience. Every member of Parliament should be allowed to vote as he feels and it should not be the case that the political parties take a stand as to how their members should vote. The MLP has still not adopted an official stand regarding the proposed constitutional entrenchment. I understand the party needs to discuss the issue but we cannot wait forever.

Entrenching anti-abortion provisions in the Constitution will not stop women going abroad to have an abortion. Does Gift of Life believe the law should change, making it illegal for women to go abroad and have an abortion?

We never got into the issue of women going abroad and the entrenchment was never intended to stop women from going abroad to have an abortion. It was solely meant to prevent abortion from being legalised in Malta and although entrenchment does not mean abortion will never be legalised in Malta it does make it a little more difficult to do so.

When we address the issue of women going abroad for an abortion we must never condemn or accuse them because the majority of them are going through a real trauma and are not just using abortion as some sort of contraception with no responsibility whatsoever.

On the other hand, nor am I saying that those who have an abortion are responsible people. However, they do need a helping hand and a friendly ear. Sometimes they need an explanation of what abortion is. At times they are not even aware that life begins at conception, that at three to four weeks the child has a heart and a primitive streak (the beginnings of the child's nervous system). Even though some doctors have deduced that since this is primitive it is not as important as our nervous system, we cannot discriminate against a human life at any stage of development.

Would keeping abortion illegal be putting women's lives at risk because of a greater chance they would have to have an abortion in insecure clinics?

In the late 1960s, Bernard Nathanson was one of the leaders of the pro-choice movement in the United States. The movement inflated the figures of illegal abortions performed in the US from close to 100,000 to one million and said that about 10,000 women were dying from illegal abortions annually, although the actual figure was between 200 and 250. Nobody asked any questions and abortion was eventually legalised.

Today Dr Nathanson is no longer pro-choice but has become pro-life. He now admits he was part of a group of people who misinformed and led the authorities to introduce abortion. Although today he is fighting to reverse the legalising of abortion, it is not easy.

Using the argument that abortion should be legalised because there are many back street abortions is to me an incongruent way of thinking. If something is wrong, this will not be made right by being legalised. The mere fact that something is technically or scientifically allowed does not mean it is morally correct.

Women who want to have an abortion and can afford going abroad will still do so. Couldn't this lead to class distinction?

The embryo has no choice, so I do not look at it as discrimination against the woman but discrimination against the child who cannot plead with his mother not to kill him. What about discrimination against that life? Hardly any abortions take place before four weeks but most of them take place from six weeks upwards when the child is fully developed. It sucks its thumb and feels pain.

Do you think fewer women would have an abortion if there was less stigma attached to single mothers, especially very young ones?

I think there is no longer a stigma, even though this used to exist. Malta has evolved in that sense and you see many more single mothers today. I believe the government should do more to help single mothers, for example by offering them housing. But then one has to be careful that Malta does not become like the UK where women get pregnant in order to get housing.

I think we need to tackle the problem of abortion at the grassroots, with the parents and the whole family. There is the need for more communication and more awareness and education about sex and related diseases.

Do you think more education about the use of contraceptives would cut the number of abortions?

In the UK they found that ever since they introduced free contraception for young people, the number of abortions actually increased. I do not think it is a question of the contraceptive not working but more an issue of the young people not using them. When the experts looked into it, they found that young people were at a very frivolous and adventurous stage in their lives and many times the male did not want to wear a condom, with the female feeling pressured to accept this. As a result, abortion was being used as a form of contraception.

Would you accept abortion if the mother's life is at risk?

These are difficult cases and at the end of the day it is the mother who has to choose because ultimately it might be a choice between life and death for her. A typical example is an ectopic pregnancy - when an embryo starts growing inside the mother's fallopian tube instead of the uterus - which could cost the life of both the mother and the child. To me that is a case when an intervention is trying to save a life and the removal of an ectopic pregnancy is not considered an abortion but a medical intervention. However, even then I believe the woman must have the final say.

What is the Gift of Life's view regarding in-vitro fertilisation?

We never took a stand in favour of or against IVF. We are concerned about the way human life is being treated. Whatever legislation is enacted, it must completely protect the life which is in vitro. After that, when it is implanted in the mother's womb, it is in nature's hands.

The questions as to how many embryos should be implanted should be left in the hands of the experts. An attitude that an embryo is a commodity and that one can implant as many as one wants is wrong because human lives cannot be treated like that. They cannot be created like objects on an assembly line in a factory with the extras being discarded.

Do you agree with the adoption of embryos?

No, I do not agree that human life can simply be overproduced in excess when there are so many children who can be adopted, especially in Malta. But the adoption process here is very difficult. Adoption laws and regulations need to be revised by the authorities. Although it seems there are more children who can be adopted than parents willing to adopt, the prospective parents are having to go through a very long and laborious process.

I understand that screening of the couple is important and it is imperative to have a process which ensures the family is able to look after the child. But things can be made easier. For example, I know a couple who adopted one child and have become a wonderful family. Now they want to adopt another child but have found out they will have to go through the screening process all over again. I think this is insane.

What other plans does Gift of Life have?

We are hoping to set up an educational and support network to educate people - not just women - on the consequences of sexual behaviour. We will be conducting a series of lectures and seminars, both in schools and in the community. We want to tackle the problem of sexual disease because we are not only here to speak about abortion. Sexually transmitted diseases can harm the mother and can also cause miscarriages later on.

The aim is for the network to be launched this winter. We already have someone sponsoring us with copies of The Silent Scream. We want to make sure that as many people as possible see this film so that they know what goes on when an abortion is done. If we manage to stop one woman from going ahead with an abortion that it already good. Most women who become pregnant and decide to keep the child are surprised with how much they end up loving that child.