When life begins

In his letter published on January 9, Carmel Sciberras states that there is “overwhelming scientific evidence” to suggest that life begins at conception. As a doctor, allow me to clarify a few points.

First of all, what definition do we use for ‘life’? Many would agree that for something to be considered ‘alive’ it needs to be organised into one or more cells – the basic unit of life – and display some sort of metabolism. This means that an unfertilised egg is just as alive as a fertilised one.

If we use fertilisation – the point where an egg gains additional genetic material and becomes diploid – as the point at which a new human life begins, then how does this explain cases where one fertilised egg produces two embryos, which develop into identical twins?

Going by the theory that life begins at fertilisation, it would mean that each twin is only half a person and we know that this is not the case.

It is also a fact that most new embryos fail to implant in the uterus and, therefore, die. To consider this a loss of a person’s life is clearly far-fetched.

The question of where legal protection for the unborn should begin is not something that can be answered scientifically because the development of a new human being is a gradual process and not something that happens instantaneously.

We need to accept that there are varying degrees of right to life, which increase the more the foetus develops. Many people would agree that aborting a viable near-term foetus is worse than aborting an embryo in the first few weeks of pregnancy.

A right to life granted to an embryo or foetus will inevitably impinge on the right of women to control their bodies, their own lives and their futures.

It is for this reason that in most countries there are gestational limits up to which an abortion can be performed on demand – to balance the rights of the pregnant woman with those of an unborn foetus in the later stages of pregnancy.

Pregnant women must not be left out of the equation. I believe the real reason why abortion is completely banned in Malta is not because of a preference to the rights of the unborn but because no consideration is given to the rights of pregnant women.

Christopher Barbara, Doctors for Choice – Naxxar

Shambolic service

On January 11, I had to phone 112 for an ambulance because my sister was referred to hospital by our GP due to severe abdominal pain. I phoned at 11.27am and the call was answered after two minutes. I was told the call is being transferred to the ambulance service.

There was no reply after six minutes on the line.

I phoned again and, once again, after five minutes there was no answer from the ambulance service. In fact, when the phone had been ringing for five minutes, I got an engaged tone. I phoned again the third time and the same happened, no answer after two minutes on hold.

My sister, who was in severe pain, was cramped into our small car to be taken to the emergency department at Mater Dei Hospital by us.

She was actually diagnosed with an active haemorrhage in her abdomen and required urgent surgical intervention. 

I raised this case with the local health authorities and I was informed that the 112 ambulance service made a call back to the telephone number of the incoming telephone call at 11.43, that is 16 minutes after the original 112 ambulance service call.

The local ambulance service has seriously failed in its duty of care towards a patient who required its service as a matter of urgency.

This is an utter disgrace of a non-service.

Salvator Camilleri – Siġġiewi

Letters to the editor should be sent to editor@timesofmalta.com. Please include your full name, address and ID card number. The editor may disclose personal information to any person or entity seeking legal action on the basis of a published letter.