Pro-life leader warns against IVF for lesbian couples, single mothers

Miriam Sciberras warns embryo freezing could be prelude to abortion, claims local pro-life opposition to embryo freezing 'based on science, not religion' 

Life Network chairperson Miriam Sciberras (Photo: Ray Attard)
Life Network chairperson Miriam Sciberras (Photo: Ray Attard)

The leader of a pro-life movement has vehemently rejected proposals that would open up IVF for lesbian and single mothers, warning that it would fly in the face of the right of children to two biological parents. 

“Every child, even from adoption success stories, want to know who their biological parents are,” Life Network chairperson Miriam Sciberras said on Monday night’s edition of Reporter. “This is something inbuilt within us, and intentionally creating orphans denies the right of children to grow up with their biological parents.”

IVF is currently only permitted for heterosexual couples in stable relationships, but Prime Minister Joseph Muscat plans to extend the service to lesbian couples and single mothers, which would effectively allow sperm donation. 

Sciberras – a dentist with a MA degree in bioethics – sounded warning bells over this proposal that she claimed runs counter to natural law. Indeed, she reiterated her opposition against a law passed last year that allows gay couples in civil unions to adopt children. 

“Adults are free to live their lives as they wish, and indeed I have no problem with civil unions, but children should not be placed in the middle,” she said. “We shouldn’t play around with childrens’ rights. Natural law states that a male and a female are required to create a baby; that’s not discrimination, but nature.”

‘Embryo freezing could be prelude to abortion’

Sciberras has been vociferous in her opposition to legal proposals that would allow embryo freezing, and has indeed said that her organisation would seek an abrogative referendum to annul such changes.

“We are not opposed to people having babies, but the current IVF law works just fine,” she said, citing a recent Church-commissioned study that demonstrated that the introduction of embryo freezing is “scientifically unnecessary”.

“What therefore is the aim behind freezing embryos, behind freezing human lives?”

The proposed law will increase the number of eggs that can be fertilized, from two to five eggs, and a maximum of two embryos will be able to be implanted in the mother’s womb at one go. If these five eggs produce more than two embryos, the remainder will be frozen to be re-used for the couple for another cycle. Unused embryos will be offered for adoption.

However, Sciberras warned that embryo freezing will impact the way Maltese society views life, which could ultimately pave the way towards the legalisation of abortion.

Host Saviour Balzan argued that embryo freezing - as a prelude to the creation of life - is the polar opposite to abortion, and recounted how campaigners had warned in 2011 that the legalisation of divorce could also lead to abortion.

“Abortion is never introduced suddenly, and is always preceded by step-by-step changes in society’s attitudes,” Sciberras responded. “Malta currently protects babies from conception, which is why there’s no immediate fear of abortion. Introducing embryo freezing will challenge the value of life in the country.”

‘Arguments against embryo freezing scientific, not religious’

In a rally against embryo freezing last month, Life Network brought over Gianna Jessen – a prominent American anti-abortion activist who was born during a failed abortion attempt.

In a speech to the crowds in Valletta, Jessen called on the people of Malta to “fight now as this evil is at your doorstep and must be stopped”.

“From where I come from, I tell you that you must fight with love, grace, forgiveness, and fearless conviction in the face of death,” she had said. “Despite the unpopularity of it, the only way to defeat death is through Jesus Christ.”

Citing Jessen’s speech, Balzan quizzed Sciberras whether the local pro-life movement is mixing religious and ethical arguments in their opposition to embryo freezing. However, the Life Network chairperson said that Jessen was speaking in her own personal capacity and that her organisation’s official stance is to only employ scientific, legal and ethical arguments.

“Science is our greatest weapon, and science is clear in that life start from conception,” she said. “So long as science tells us that, then nobody has the right to place life in a freezer.”