Pro-choice activists slam judge’s ‘deeply patronising’ Andrea Prudente comments
Saying that Prudente was ‘used’ by activists is an insult to her intelligence, NGOs argue
Pro-choice activists have reacted angrily to a court ruling stating Andrea Prudente was “used” by activists to further their agenda, slamming the judge’s “deeply patronising” comments.
Last week, judge Miriam Hayman ruled that Prudente did not have her rights violated when doctors refused to terminate her pregnancy after she suffered a ruptured membrane while on holiday in Malta.
The judge said Prudente had been “used by so-called pro-choice people” to further their call for Malta’s abortion laws to be scrapped, “without taking into account her emotional state”.
She argued that Prudente had been “subjected to fear and strong emotional pressure” throughout the ordeal.
Ruling is ‘a stain on women’s rights’
In separate statements on Monday, pro-choice activist groups took exception to the judge’s comments.
Voice for Choice expressed its “profound outrage and dismay,” describing the ruling as “a stain on women’s rights and reproductive healthcare in Malta”.
The ruling “serves only to reinforce the state oppression, medical misogyny and degrading treatment” faced by pregnant people.
The NGO said it was “utterly appalled” by the “deeply patronising assertion that Andrea Prudente was ‘used’ by pro-choice activists”.
The judge’s claim is “a gross insult to her (Prudente’s) intelligence and autonomy,” Voice for Choice said, adding that treating “her trauma as mere manipulation strips her entirely of her agency”.
Voice for Choice said the ruling “deliberately ignores global medical science,” including submissions by the International Federation for Gynaecology and Obstetrics showing the elevated risk of deadly infection in cases such as Prudente’s.
“Instead of listening to the world's top medical experts, the judge used Andrea's ability to survive an emergency flight to Spain as twisted ‘proof’ that her life was never in danger,” the NGO argued.
The ruling “reinforces a culture of oppression” in which “a woman’s life, health and voice are secondary to Malta’s so-called public morals or religious ideology,” it added.
“Women must literally be at death’s door before they are deemed worthy of receiving life-saving termination care,” Voice for Choice said of the ruling’s implications.
In a similar statement, Doctors for Choice said Prudente and her partner “are now being insulted by the very justice system that was supposed to vindicate them”.
“The pro-choice movement will not be silenced by judicial attempts to undermine our credibility or the autonomy of the women we support,” the NGO said, vowing to “continue to fight unapologetically for the decriminalisation of abortion”.