Thousands of protestors flooded the streets of Poland’s cities after an almost total abortion ban was adopted by Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal on Oct. 22. Given the anger exhibited by Poland’s many pro-choice advocates, as well as the extensive history of the uselessness of anti-abortion laws, it is unlikely this act of legislation will achieve the abortion-free country it hopes to create.
The 2020 ban tightened the country’s already strict abortion legislation, ruling that abortions based on a fetus’s birth defect would become illegal. Since this reason is the leading cause of abortion in the country, the argument has been presented that this will act as a preventative measure, ‘saving’ what many within the country believe is a viable life (based mostly on Catholic ideas of human life beginning at conception).
It must first be recognized that Poland was not always anti-abortion. A historically liberal country in its legislation on reproductive rights (particularly after becoming a satellite state of the Soviet Union in the post-WWII era), it wasn’t uncommon to see a woman from Sweden traveling to Poland for an abortion after it was legalized in 1932.
However, this communist legislation was not based on women’s rights, but rather an effort to ensure that women wouldn’t create a feminist movement themselves, rendering it a temporary right at risk of being taken away as the result of a regime change. While there may have been ulterior motives, this liberal legislation was ultimately beneficial for women, especially when compared to the future bans on abortion. On June 4, 1989, communism in Poland came to an end, and with it, the attacks on women’s reproductive rights began.
Under the influence of the Roman Catholic Church, nearly all government hospitals stopped performing abortions—gynecologists still performing them were attacked and threatened. In 1993, an official ruling was adopted that made Poland’s abortion laws the strictest in Eastern Europe. These laws only allowed abortion in cases of fetal defects, a risk to the woman’s health, incest, or rape and caused nearly 99 per cent of citizens’ abortions to be performed outside of the country—with almost 150,000 others illegally performed each year within the country. The new law seeks to ban abortion in cases of fetal defects as well.
The statistics speak for themselves. Women are already willing to seek abortions in other countries, or illegally in Poland. This number will only grow with the new ban.
The only thing anti-abortion legislation succeeds in is putting women’s health at risk. Poor women in particular are victimized by anti-abortion legislation, as they are unable to travel to a country in which their pregnancies can be terminated safely. Instead, they will receive backroom abortions—illegal abortions often performed with crude medical supplies—putting their health in jeopardy.
The only country in the European Union that has stricter abortion laws than Poland is Malta. Malta is the only country in the EU that bans abortion with absolutely no exceptions—not even for rape or the health of the mother. As most women seek safe abortions outside of the country, COVID-19 has trapped them and caused more women to terminate their pregnancies illegally and unsafely. More than 22,000 women die from unsafe and illegal abortions each year globally. Restrictions, such as those in Malta and Poland—which will become even stricter—contribute to these unnecessary and easily-prevented deaths.
Additionally, it is important to note that even abortion legislation is often not formally enforced—especially in the United States.
Alabama, in particular, has a lengthy history of anti-abortion bills introduced throughout its legislature. In 2019, the state announced its Human Life Protection Act, which gained attention as one of the most restrictive legislation enactments on abortion the country has seen in the 21st century. This ban directly contradicted Roe v. Wade and banned all abortions in the state unless the mother’s health was at serious risk.
That said, the bans in both Alabama and Poland have something in common: both were blocked. The Alabama law, specifically, was overruled after pro-choice organizations sued the state.
Similarly, a federal American judge blocked a Georgia bill in July that sought to ban most abortions after a doctor is able to detect a heartbeat at around six weeks). The judge blocked the bill as it violated the 14th amendment and the rights established by Roe v. Wade in 1973. While these laws may eventually resurface, for now these experiences serve as examples of how willing and able both the people and the legal system itself are to thwart pro-life legislation—whether it be before or after it is introduced.
As legislation on abortion continues to change in an ever-modernizing world, we must remember that anti-abortion legislation does not stop abortion. When it is passed, it forces women to seek illegal abortions and favours those in a stronger socio-economic positions, who will simply seek them elsewhere. When it is introduced, it is often cast aside by pro-choice supporters—who will never stop fighting for fundamental reproductive rights.
If pro-lifers were truly pro-life, they would work to avoid putting mothers’ lives at risk and recognize the crucial role abortion plays in women’s health.
Featured graphic by Etta Gerrits.
