Polish Media Texts

This is a translation of the original Polish article, which can be found here. The translation is unauthorised, and is provided for educational, informational and non-commercial purposes only'

Setting the anti-abortion bill straight

Wojciech Teister, Gość Niedzielny

In the media and social networks a number of lies about the anti-abortion draft bill have been disseminated. In this way, opponents of expanding the protection of life are trying to fight to prevent the authors of the citizens’ initiative collecting an appropriate number of signatures. Let us calmy confront the main objections to the text of the draft bill.

Objection No. 1: The bill imposes the effective prohibition of prenatal screening, as the entry on prenatal screening has disappeared from the bill and in the explanation of the draft it is said that such tests will no longer be justified.

Reality: Section 3.6 of the explanatory memorandum of the bill abrogates the provision on prenatal screening from the abortion act, and emphasises that, after the amendment of the law, the specific provision will lose justification, but only with reference to this bill, because the basis for abortion resulting from such diagnostics disappears. Simultaneously, in the same point of the explanatory memorandum the authors of the draft bill highlight the significance of prenatal screening as a form of medical diagnostics and the patient’s right to have this kind of test: “Notwithstanding the above, access to prenatal screening is guaranteed by legislation regulating access to medical services, and the inclusion of these norms in the (anti-abortion) act constitutes unnecessary superfluum”.

Personally, I know gynaecologists who are opponents of any kind of abortion but strongly recommend prenatal screening, on the grounds that it enables doctors to diagnose some defects at the initial stages of development and implement appropriate treatment.

Objection No. 2: The new law forces women to put their lives at risk as it requires pregnancies to be brought to term, even if they may result in the death of the mother and the fetus. 

Reality: This is untrue. According to the proposed amendment to the law, such an obligation does not exist. There is a wide variety of medical treatments which aim at saving the lives of pregnant women, even if their side effects may involve the death of the fetus. This is clearly underlined in the justification of the project and such a possibility derives from the constitution – there is a conflict between the equivalent rights (the right to life) of two individuals equally protected by the law: the mother and the child. However, the advisability of particular medical treatments aimed at saving the mother’s life is highlighted. The regulation only excludes the possibility of the preventive killing of one person in order to save the life of another. If a fetus dies as a result of actions taken to save mother’s life, the case is not subject to any criminal proceedings, since it is not an abortion. The whole argument that the regulation condemns a mother to death is greatly exaggerated hysteria. 

Objection No. 3: Women who miscarry naturally will be dragged through the courts. Prosecutors will probe whether the mother unintentionally committed a crime – perhaps she was overworked, did not get enough sleep, did not care for her health, or went for a bike ride – and will be threatened with three years’ imprisonment. 

Reality: The aforementioned objection is another misrepresentation. It is true that the amendment of the law in article 152 section 2 provides for a three-year prison sentence for involuntary manslaughter of the fetus; however, in section 6 of the same article, the authors of the project state that “a mother who perpetrates the act specified in section 2 is not punishable” if, for example, she miscarries due to “lack of sleep or riding a bike” – in other words, if the miscarriage occurs involuntary. Besides, in Poland there is a principle of the presumption of innocence.

Objection No. 4: The perinatal mortality of the children of expectant parents will increase, as many medical conditions cannot be diagnosed in advance due to a lack of prenatal diagnosis.

Reality: Prenatal diagnosis is not going to be prohibited. What is more, the authors of the bill underline that access to such diagnostics is guaranteed by Polish law (see: explanation of the objection No. 1). 

The struggle of the pro-abortion community and supporters of the current compromise, aimed at torpedoing the proposal to expand the protection of the lives of unborn children, continues, and is not limited to protests organised in churches. Of course, everyone has the right to their own views on the bill, and to have doubts about it; however, in order to do so, they should be acquainted with reliable information. One may wonder if the provision for punishing women in the case of intentional abortion is right, or whether it can be criticised and even be amended while under consideration by committee. But let it be fair criticism, not a lowbrow manipulation. While reading opinions on the content of the citizens’ project, one should consult the source first – read the draft bill and its justification. 

I kindly ask all people of good will to share this text, in order to set straight at least some of the inaccuracies circulating in the public sphere.

Translated by: Guziak Alicja Nykaza Jolanta Turska Patrycja