Malta court dismisses case that sought to end country's pro-life laws

The Maltese Constitutional Court on July 1 upheld the country's pro-life protections in its ruling against American tourist Andrea Prudente, who claimed that her fundamental rights were violated in 2022 after she was denied an abortion.

Key Takeaways:

• A constitutional court in Malta has dismissed a case brought by Andrea Prudente, who claimed her fundamental rights were violated when she was denied an abortion while visiting the country in 2022.

• Prudente received medical treatment when she began experiencing pregnancy complications, but doctors refused to kill her child through induced abortion. Those doctors later testified that Prudente's life was not in danger, and her baby may have survived if given the chance.

• Prudente traveled to Spain for an abortion, and then filed a lawsuit seeking to derail Malta's pro-life protections.

• In its ruling, the court dismissed the case and upheld the current law, which protects nearly all preborn children from abortion. The court also stated that Prudente was "used by so-called pro-choice individuals" who exploited the case to try and dismantle the law.

The Background:

Prudente was 16 weeks pregnant and visiting Malta on a "babymoon" in June 2022 when she began prematurely bleeding. She received treatment at Mater Dei Hospital, where doctors were actively monitoring her condition and administering antibiotics. Despite receiving medication to prevent miscarriage, her water broke and her placenta became partially detached.

Prudente then insisted that her life was at risk and she needed an abortion. Her doctors refused, maintaining that the intentional killing of her child was not necessary. Eventually, she traveled to Spain where she aborted her child.

After Prudente filed her lawsuit, the doctors who treated her testified that she never needed an abortion — and that her baby may have survived, if given the chance.

A Never Before Seen Look At Human Life In The Womb | Baby Olivia

The Details:

In the ruling dismissing Prudente's case, Judge Miriam Hayman rejected Prudente's claim that her life was at risk, and said she received appropriate medical treatment while visiting the country. Hayman also said Prudente was “used by so-called pro-choice individuals,” who exploited the case to try and dismantle the country's protections for preborn human beings.

Hayman said:

“Through her own research, and undoubtedly because she was spoken to by pro-choice – ergo pro-abortion – doctors, the plaintiff was terrified that she would die of septicaemia if an intervention to terminate her pregnancy did not happen. Through Google and through the information she was receiving, the poor mother was subjected to fear and strong emotional pressure that either the baby is removed from her or she dies.

A priori, the court has no issue with declaring that this woman was used by so-called pro choice individuals, so that, without considering her emotions and the father’s, present the most extreme legal changes that they desire. She played ball to their beliefs.”

In addition to dismissing Prudente's lawsuit, Hayman ordered her to pay all legal costs associated with the case.

The Bottom Line:

The ruling marks a win for preborn children in Malta, who have been at risk thanks to abortion advocates who are looking for any angle possible to undo the country's pro-life protections.