By linking abortion to both human rights and health, the draft European Parliament resolution comes very close to claiming that abortion is itself a fundamental human right.

The European Parliament recently dealt with a draft resolution on ‘sexual and reproductive health’ covering a wide variety of issues. Implementing measures on some of the issues, which included sexual violence on women, would be just. However, the resolution included some very controversial issues which led the European Parliament to decide by 351 votes to 319 to send it back to committee for revision.

Resolution (no. 1) “reaffirms that health is a fundamental human right indispensable for the exercise of other human rights”. While stressing (no. 32) that “in no case must abortion be promoted as a family planning method” (sic), the resolution recommends (no. 34) that “as a human rights and public health concern, ...abortion services should be made legal, safe and accessible to all within the public health system...”. By linking abortion to both human rights and health (a fundamental human right) the resolution comes very close to claiming that abortion is itself a fundamental human right.

The explanatory statement ac­companying the resolution notes that in certain countries, as many as 70 per cent of gynaecologists and 40 per cent of anaesthesiologists are refusing to perform abortions, citing conscientious objections. As a result, the resolution (no. 35) calls on member states to “regulate and monitor the use of conscientious objection in the key professions”, so as to circumevent ‘practical barriers’ such as ‘the abuse of conscientious objection’ (Motivation U).

In a courageous minority opinion, Anna Zaborska challenged what she called this “non-binding resolution” purporting to establish abortion as a right: “No international legally-binding treaty, nor the European Court of Human Rights, nor customary international law can accurately be cited as establishing or recognising such a right”.

On the contrary, Zaborska recalls: “the European Court of Justice confirms (C-34/10) that any human ovum once fertilised constitutes a human embryo which must be protected”.

If health is a fundamental human right, this applies even more strongly to life itself

Four brief observations are called for: a) The EU committee that drafted this resolution sadly made absolutely no reference to the unborn child. If health is a fundamental human right without which other rights cannot be exercised, this applies even more strongly to life itself, without which there would be no health. Where there is a pregnancy, the issue in not the health of the mother alone: one must guarantee the wellbeing of both the mother and her unborn child, who has a right to have his or her life respected.

b) Gynaecologists and anaesthesiologists in Europe, for reasons of conscience, are increasingly refusing to perform abortions. The resolution sees this as an ‘abuse’. But with so many objecting on ethical grounds, rather than try to discipline them, is it not wiser to ask whether, perhaps, they are not ethically right to object to abortion?

c) Reacting to the draft resolution, the Commission of EU Bishops’ Conferences stressed human dignity and the right to life, which is absolute. It added that “the EU should respect and not interfere with decisions that do not fall under its competence”.

EU treaties provide that health policy and medical services fall under individual states’ competence: so nothing in the area of health can be imposed on member states by the European Parliament .

d) As regards abortion, Malta is in a special position. It is the only EU country where abortion is illegal in all circumstances. Furthermore, our Parliament’s exclusive competence on this issue is enshrined in the accession documents, thanks to our Church and civil leaders’ foresight at the time. It is hoped that we may go on being the country in Europe that recognises unreservedly that the unborn foetus is human and alive.

For Christians, the sacredness of life from the moment of conception is affirmed, for instance, when we say that he or she is a child of God for whom Christ died and rose.

For both reason and Christian faith, the foetus growing in the womb is not merely a potential human but a human with potential.

Fr Robert Soler is a member of the Society of Jesus.