Morning after pill discussions draw to a close, crowd too large to be allowed in
The Joint Social, Family and Health Committee consultation meetings on the exhaustive morning after pill (MAP) debate has come to a close this evening with a large number of contributors, most of which against the introduction of the MAP. This meeting drew the largest audience so far with members of the public even having to be denied access due to lack of space.
The meeting was kicked off by the National Council of Women who said that, as an organisation, they are neither in favour nor against the MAP considering, they said, the number of conflicting studies lead to uncertainty. “It is the right of all women to know exactly what collateral any contraceptive decision can have on the body,” said the Council saying that clear cut education is the way to go in the case of approval of MAP.
The Council’s main worry is that introducing the MAP on the premise that there are other pills which have the same effect without properly considering the idea of harming an embryo at any state is a slippery slope. The organisation, which repeatedly made it clear that they are pro-life, said that it could lead to changes to the Embryo Protection Act being altered.
In reaction, this evening’s Chair, Dr Etienne Grech said that the six papers which the committee have show that there is absolutely no proof that the morning after pill interferes with implantation in the case of fertilisation.
The Malta Confederation of Women’s Organisations said that their position is in favour of the MAP because if there are other methods of contraception which work in the same way, then why isn’t medication which is safer, less expensive, more accessible and quicker readily available yet? There was no discussion as to when life starts, but the Confederation insisted that it is the right of both men and women to have this contraceptive available.
When it was mentioned as a last resort to rape, Health Committee member PL MP Deo Debattista retorted, much to the exasperation of most present that any woman can claim rape in order to gain access to the pill. Minister Helena Dalli visibly reacted to this comment by removing her glasses and grasping her forehead.
Meanwhile a number of women who were beckoned in the Women for Women Facebook group to attend the meeting in the name of women’s rights to the MAP to be introduced weren’t allowed to go into the Parliament building. Sources told TMI that they weren’t allowed due to space limitations after the room was already over-populated by visitors and lobbyists. The women chose instead to sit outside in a silent protest to the fact that the issue is still being discussed.
The Life Network Foundation, representing three heavily pro-life organisations, quoted a number of studies which they claimed proved that the MAP is 100% abortive. They also used conflicting statistics to drive their point home, with varying reactions from the Committee Members, most of whom doubting the validity of the Foundation’s claims.
Health Minister Chris Fearne reacted to these claims by asking one of the members how she, a dentist, became an expert on the subject after a mere three weeks reading up on it.
The main argument which the Foundation made was that the variations from 50 per cent to 98 per cent effectivity of the MAP depending on which paper you read is a testament to the pills working in ways which are not being described clearly. “It is obvious that there are other reasons for the pill to give such a high success rate.”
The Ta’ Kana Movement’s arguments that any doubt of the effects of the pill should always lean towards the risks of it being abortive also proved enough for Mr Fearne to comment saying that their arguments of “guilty until proven innocent” are invalid.
This was followed up by the Malta Unborn Child Movement who also took the stance of proving something which isn’t, rather than focusing on evidence of what is. They challenged the Committee and anyone listening to prove that the MAP is not abortive, rather than focusing on the studies which prove it is contraceptive.
Dr Charles Pace, speaking as a lawyer, said that it is very difficult to reach a conclusion considering the complexity of the issue at hand, but he stated that there is not enough scientific evidence and not enough education about the potential effects for the pill to be considered viable.
Green Party representatives spoke in favour of the MAP saying that all indications lean towards it stopping fertilisation, and they will stick to that point. They then spoke about the social implications of sexual health and education which is still rife with stigma, finally ending their intervention once again with the concept of the MAP being a last resort in the case of the heinous act of rape.
A call for further education was also reiterated as, according to the Green Party, MAP users tend to already know of the implications and the effects whereas there are a large number of women who have no idea about contraceptives in general, be it due to poverty or lack of education in general. This needs to be tackled.
Jean Pierre Fava, a scientist speaking in his own personal capacity reiterated what he had said in a much criticised article in The Malta Independent on Sunday claiming that comparing the MAP and abortive drugs show an alarming amount of similarities. “If it walks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, then it is a duck.”
The Nisa Laburisti representative, Nikita Zammit Alamango said that she is severely disappointed that this debate is still raging on, stating that there wouldn’t be anything close to this if it were another contraceptive for men. We shouldn’t be taking so long on this, she said, we should be working on finding new contraceptives to add to the market instead. “Every minute we take to postpone this further is another minute of women suffering.”