More than 100 academics show support for abortion amendment

Academics with counter-petition in support of abortion amendment: ‘Opposing this legislation or further restricting it puts women’s lives and health at higher risk’

More than 100 academics are supporting the abortion amendment, Bill No. 28
More than 100 academics are supporting the abortion amendment, Bill No. 28

More than 100 academics are supporting the abortion amendment being debated in parliament but argue this is “the bare minimum” to safeguard women’s lives and health.

The petition signed by the 105 academics in support of Bill No. 28 responds to a similar petition signed by 81 academics against the proposed law.

“We support the Bill as it currently stands. Opposing this legislation or further restricting it puts women’s lives and health at higher risk,” the 105 academics said.

The Bill supporters shot down the assertion made by their colleagues that the inclusion of ‘health’ as an exception opened the door to abortion on demand as happened in the UK.

“We note that the wording of the UK Act is very different from the wording proposed by the government of Malta… the UK legislation requires doctors to weigh the risks after considering various factors but unlike the current proposal by the Maltese government, it does not require there to be ‘medical complications’ nor does it require a pregnant woman’s health to be ‘in grave jeopardy’,” the Bill supporters said.

They also commented on the concerns raised over the terminology used in the proposed Bill, which does not conform to the current wording in the Criminal Code, which was written in 1874.

The current law uses the words ‘procure her own miscarriage’ and ‘woman with child’, while the Bill uses the words ‘termination of pregnancy’ and ‘pregnant woman’ respectively.

“The existing legislation was written in 1874 and has not changed since, thus the terminology in the original legislation is archaic… thus we support the current terminology used in the Bill and if anything, it is the original legislation that should be amended,” the petition reads.

The academics said that standard operating procedures to offer clarity on what ‘grave jeopardy’ refers to should be part of medical protocols rather than be included in the Criminal Code.

They also defended the notion that mental health must never be excluded from the overall assessment of the health status of a patient.