(Adds National Council of Women's statement)
Two organisations have expressed alarm and disappointment at a proposal to freeze human embryos.
The Gift of Life Foundation said it was alarmed and deeply disappointed at the apparent foregone conclusions of the Prime Minister regarding the review of the Embryo Protection Act.
Malta Today reported on Sunday that the PM will ‘forge ahead' and ‘is resolute to introduce embryo freezing’.
"The ramifications of this proposal to freeze human embryos go far beyond what may initially seem like a genuine proposal to improve success rates to help infertile couples.
"One has to ask whether the Prime Minister, who repeatedly claims to be pro-life, has indeed considered the full impact of what he is suggesting," the foundation said.
"Treating the embryo as a commodity severely devalues human life deserving of the utmost respect from conception. The Prime Minister is thus knowingly hastening what can only be a natural consequence, the legalization of abortion," it added.
It noted that Dr Muscat suggested that the fate of surplus frozen embryos whose parents do not wish to have implanted or offered for adoption will be decided by a judge following a court application by the Embryo Protection Authority.
"Will it be unlawful for these unused embryos to be killed and disposed of? If not, what other options are there given that one cannot force a woman to have these implanted," the foundation asked.
"As a result of embryo freezing, there is no doubt that Malta will face the huge ethical and moral dilemma that all other countries who went down the embryo freezing path are now experiencing. That is, the stockpiling of hundreds of unused embryos. It is known that prospective parents desire to have their own child through IVF and do not want to adopt unused embryos for many reasons.
"Complicating things further, it is also known that the biological parents of frozen embryos often refuse to give their embryos up for adoption, routinely opting instead to have their embryos frozen continuously, destroyed or sold on for scientific research. Consequently, all the unborn, not just those created through IVF, are relegated to a status equivalent to just another product devoid of rights and dignity."
The foundation said the pro-abortion movement promotes exactly this same utilitarian outcome - a culture that insists that unborn human life only has any value if its mother chooses to want it.
"Why is Joseph Muscat then so urgently hastening towards a pro-abortion culture if he claims to be personally and represent a party that is pro-life?"
The foundation also noted comments by Dr Muscat yesterday . He had, it said,justified the need for embryo freezing claiming that this was ‘cutting edge technology’ which would improve the success rate of IVF treatment.
"We view this is an attempt at misguiding the public. According to the Government’s very own statistics, Malta, where we only freeze the female egg and not embryos, enjoys a comparable, and at times, a better success rate for IVF treatment when compared to other European countries who have embryo freezing. What’s more, egg freezing or ‘vitrification’ as it is known, is in fact more cutting edge that the older embryo freezing method.
"We ask the Prime Minister to therefore come clean about what is truly motivating him to so resolutely want to introduce such an appalling wholly offensive practice which will subtly usher in the legalization of abortion in Malta? The Prime Minister had previously reassured the pro-life movement in meetings, that he and the labour party were pro-life. We reach out to him to demonstrate this in practice.
"The proposal to freeze human embryos is a deep severe affront to us all. It carries grave adverse consequences for the respect and dignity of all human life most urgently the unborn.
"Sadly, it seems that Malta is now on the cusp of attempting to legalise abortion.
"We are appealing to Maltese citizens without exclusion, groups, institutions, particularly pro-life politicians, who are the guardians of human rights, to now stand on the right side of history, each according to their values, resources, gifts and abilities, in a resolute defence of our unborn," the foundation said.
Unborn child legislation should not to be changed - National Council of Women
The National Council of Women also said it was very concerned with the "arbitrary way in which the Prime Minister has expressed himself, imposing his opinion on the future of the Embryo Protection Act, which not only reflects lack of scientific knowledge but also indiscriminately ignores the right to life of the unborn child".
Such a position coming from the PM himself is unprecedented, the NCW said.
It said it was confounding as to why everyone kept insisting on calling the Embry Protection Act, the IVF law, since the law itself spoke about embryo protection.
"Shall the name of the law itself be changed to relate more to the rights of a couple to have a child, rather than the rights of the embryo itself? Is this what is actually being proposed?
"The law itself would be turned upside down since the embryo’s rights would become secondary with the couple being advanced to the right in achieving what they want, irrespective of the rights of the embryo," it said.
The NCW said that questions as to what would happen to the frozen embryos if the couple decided that these were no longer required, were of grave concern.
"The legal implications are far reaching and one just cannot remove the rightful ownership of one parent if the other is no longer interested in the embryo. How will this situation be resolved?
"Are we saying that we shall now create a bank of embryos for heterosexual or gay female couples to pick and choose from? Will there be a time limit as to how long the embryos will remain frozen?
"What will happen if the embryos are unwanted? Will they be discarded? This is a far cry from embryo protection legislation."
The NCW said that while everyone had a right to an opinion and everyone seemed to have a right to one thing or another, this did not mean that to obtain that right one must tread over someone else’s right, in this case the right of a voiceless being, the human embryo.
"It is vital that this law remains unchanged. Otherwise it will open a can of worms. Anonymous sperm or egg donation deprives children of knowing their biological mother or father deliberately denying them knowing their roots and identity."
It said there was no need to have routine freezing of embryos. In the case of oocyte vitrification, there would never arise the need to decide about the fate or ownership of a frozen embryo or for the Embryo Protection Authority to be burdened with such a huge responsibility.
"The Embryo Protection Act fulfils its role and should not be tampered with," the NCW insisted.
See blog at http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20150908/blogs/consultation-what-consultation.583660