I refer to the article by Juan Ameen titled “Life from conception might be too restrictive” (TMIS, 10 September). It seems that a sizeable number of doctors are against protecting human life from conception. However, as no precise number is given and none of these doctors are mentioned by name; the impression one gets is that either they have informed your newspaper that they wish to remain anonymous, or that this was an opinion based on conjecture.

We are left wondering who these medical professionals are, who apparently believe that protecting human life from conception may be a step too much. What exactly is their argument or possible agenda that warrants not protecting life from conception?

The protection of human life from conception poses no threat to the IVF process if all embryos fertilised in-vitro are implanted in the mother’s womb, and if there is no unnecessary freezing of “excess” embryos.

Miscarriages were mentioned as a seemingly major issue, which this proposal affects. We completely fail to understand how a law that protects human life from conception adversely affects miscarriages? Is it being implied that by protecting human life from conception, miscarriages or “natural abortions” will become an offence?

Ectopic pregnancies were mentioned as a possible reason for these doctors not being in favour of protecting human life from conception. If that is their concern, then they simply have not understood that Maltese law banning abortion, which has been around for decades, has never been used to incriminate a doctor who has caused an indirect abortion by intervening in the case of an ectopic pregnancy – a pregnancy occurring outside the womb which, if left unattended, would not survive in any case and could be life-threatening to the mother. How is it that all of a sudden these doctors are now worried about being indicted when in fact, nothing in the law, which they refer to, will be changed?

To protect human life from its most delicate stage at conception is an obligation, not a choice; especially for us doctors whose very ethos is the protection of human life. We cannot conveniently treat human life at conception as though it is an optional reality.

As the matter is a very serious one, a clarification would probably be the most respectful thing to do in regard of the unborn child, whose life it is we are debating after all.

Karen Vincenti

Gift of Life Foundation