Press & Media Release

23rd June 2023

Why Are the Movements That Are Supposed to Be in Favour of Life Celebrating the New Government Pro-Abortion Amendments That Have Just Been Issued?

The Maltese Society for Christian Civilisation — Pro Malta Christiana disassociates itself from the sentiments expressed by associations in Malta which are supposed to be pro-life on the proposed amendments to bill number 28 and which will be introduced as law to facilitate abortion as announced by the Government.

The new amendments put forward by the Government now provide the facility to have an abortion that:

1. Leave a window open for introducing abortion for reasons of “mental health” if a “complication” could lead to death.
   • Why did mental health become a valid condition that can lead to abortion and the killing of a child?
   • Why is there this correlation between “mental health” and “a complication” under these new proposals?
2. Allow for an abortion when, in the opinion of a doctor who will perform the medical intervention, the baby has not yet reached a period of so called “viability”. The definition given by the Government for such a “viability period” is the point in the pregnancy where the baby is able to live outside the mother’s womb according to “current medical practices”.
   • Why was this clause introduced that can potentially exclude a baby being helped to live outside the womb by artificial means?
   • Could it be the case that these new legislative proposals may lead to certain artificial means of life support for a new born baby no longer being recognised in the future by current medical practices?
3. Opens up an alternative scenario where an abortion is permissible in a case where in the opinion of a medical team of three medical practitioners — two of them being either gynecologists or obstetricians — the baby has not yet reached the period of “viability” and cannot be born according to the current standards of the medical profession.
   • Why are there two alternative scenarios where either one or three doctors can decide the future of a child with apparently equal standing?
   • Why can a single doctor decide the fate of a baby under the new proposals?
   • Why is the alternative scenario of a team of three doctors only an alternative to the first scenario?
   • Who decides which scenario to apply for a decision on the baby’s fate, that of a single doctor or that of three doctors?
   • If one or two doctors from the team of three oppose the medical intervention that leads to an abortion, will the abortion still take place under these new legal proposals?

The biggest scandal, which should be obvious, is that certain organisations that are supposed to be in favour of life have already stated publicly that the present law already gives guarantees for the health of the mother in these situations. And yet they saw fit to propose legal amendments to the existing law which they themselves claimed were not necessary.

As an association of Catholic inspiration, Pro Malta Christiana maintains that as a result of the government’s new proposals, abortion will be made easier because the penalties that were a deterrent have been removed, a window has been opened as to who and where the abortion can take place and we have now embarked upon a process of normalising the practice of a heinous crime through which the lives of the innocent will be lost.

At this critical juncture, Pro Malta Christiana appeals to pro-life associations to desist from further giving the false impression that a victory for life has been achieved, but understand that it is these new amendments that must be resisted with all their might.

Karmenu Borg
Public Relations Officer
Maltese Society for Christian Civilisation — Pro Malta Christiana