In mid-September, the New York Times published an article entitled “In Poland, Testing Women for Abortion Drugs Is a Reality. It Could Happen Here,” in which the author, Patrick Adams, portrays Poland as a country that fanatically suppresses pro-abortion demonstrations, threatens protestors with imprisonment, and carries out modern-day witch hunts for women suspected of using abortion pills. Such a narrative fits perfectly with the author’s clearly pro-abortion views and the context of the current battle in the United States over the abortion pill, even if it has little to do with reality on the ground in Poland. In pursuit of his aims, Adams fails to mention the following relevant facts which add important context to the situation he purports to describe.
The impact of the 2020 Constitutional Tribunal ruling
The beginning of the NYT article falsely claims that the Polish Constitutional Tribunal had “effectively ended legal abortion in the country.” In fact, abortion remains legal in Poland in two cases: when the life and health of the woman are endangered, and when the pregnancy is the result of a crime. Moreover, the mother is never held criminally responsible for an abortion, even an illegal one. In fact, the penal policy is directed against the providers of abortion, not its victims. It is absolutely no surprise that abortion ‘on demand’ is illegal in Poland, as the Constitutional Tribunal ruled in 1997 that “the democratic rule of law places the human being and its highest good as the supreme value. In a democratic state governed by the rule of law, one such good is life, which must remain under constitutional protection at every stage of its development.” Thus, ever since Poland became a democratic state after the fall of the communist regime, the principle of the legal protection of human life has been legislatively established, of which the legal prohibition of abortion (with the above-mentioned exceptions) is an expression and logical consequence. The verdict of the Constitutional Tribunal of 22 October 2020 is merely a further confirmation of the principles elaborated above.
The long-standing legal principles are also true in the case of the trial of a pro-abortion activist in Poland on charges of aiding and abetting an abortion. Any criticism of such a state of affairs must be based on ignorance of well-established Polish law, which clearly stipulates the illegality of such actions as a matter of criminal conduct. It is interesting to note that no other crime committed in the land on the banks of the Vistula arouses so much interest and emotion overseas as aiding and abetting abortion. Quite apart from the fact that the shape of Polish abortion law is a purely domestic matter, as is the question of the distribution of abortion pills, it is curious that there should be so much interest in this issue in a country as far away as the United States.
The Wroclaw researchers
In his article, Adams criticises, among other things, a discovery made by a group of researchers at the Department of Forensic Medicine at the Wroclaw Medical University and the Institute of Toxicological Research in Poland, described in a November 2022 publication in the journal Molecules. The discovery itself was a new method for detecting residues of mifepristone (the main ingredient in abortion pills) in human blood. Adams mentions that the motivation of the Polish scientists was to counter the public health threat posed by the circulation of abortion pills on the black market. However, he comments that “It is difficult to see how this form of testing has any medical or public health value, given the well-documented safety and efficacy of abortion pills.” This is a question worth investigating, one which has become the backdrop for research by Polish scientists, and the supposedly safe self-managed abortions.
According to the published research, the detection of mifepristone metabolites in the blood was carried out in the context of a shocking event that took place in a Polish hospital. A young woman arrived at the hospital with a dead foetus, claiming to have had a miscarriage. However, as she eventually testified, she had actually taken abortion pills that she had bought on the internet, after which she gave birth to a stillborn child. The scientific publication in question described the child’s post-mortem as follows:
Physique appropriate to foetal age. Weight: 286 g, length: 26 cm, gender: female. The dimensions indicated 20-21 weeks of gestation. The autopsy revealed that the foetal cardiovascular function was intact during the labour, and therefore the foetus appeared to be alive at that time. … Extensive haemorrhages were found within the placenta, possibly indicating placental abruption.
These facts, which Adams omits, support the observations of the Wroclaw researchers that one of the most dangerous methods of abortion, apart from the use of pills of unknown origin, is for a woman “inducing the abortion by herself at home without medical supervision or specialist care.” Women who perform such abortions often need emergency medical attention and end up in hospitals.
The U.S. government’s National Library of Medicine website lists a number of possible serious side effects of mifepristone: foetal death, anaphylactic reactions, toxic epidermal necrolysis, angioedema, and teratogenesis, as well as numerous moderate and mild side effects. Although this is quite an extensive list, it should not be forgotten that the other active ingredient in abortion pills, misoprostol, also has its own health consequences. Given the severity of the risks, there can be no justification for the claim that these products can be safely taken by women without medical supervision, even if that claim is made by the World Health Organisation, FDA, or other such organisations. Above all, however, it must be remembered that the officially accepted ‘medical’ purpose of abortion pills—the termination of pregnancy—is in practice tantamount to the death of the foetus (a human being at the prenatal stage of development), which is itself listed as a serious side effect of mifepristone in the National Library of Medicine. Despite the fact that ethical issues are often overlooked in the abortion pill debate, its distribution is banned in some countries with good reason.
The myth of safe abortion
It is significant that a discovery made by Polish researchers almost a year ago is only now in the spotlight of the U.S. media. This sudden attention comes at a time when a battle is being waged in the America to maintain the current status of the mifepristone abortion pill, after a group of doctors and anti-abortion organisations filed a lawsuit against the FDA last year, demanding that the pill be withdrawn from the market as unsafe and inadequately approved. Although the case is yet to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, it is already generating a great deal of controversy as a result of a surprising ruling by a Texas judge, and it is likely to increase the activity of the abortion lobby, which is the main beneficiary of the status quo.
In Poland, one strategy of the various anti-life groups is to create fear, a method perfectly aligned with the narrative of the alleged persecution of women and mass testing for abortifacient residues in their blood. Adams’ article fails to mention that the analytical techniques for quantifying mifepristone itself are not new; rather, much more complicated tests have long been carried out on plasma and serum samples. Polish scientists have developed a method to facilitate toxicological testing using small amounts of blood from dead infants, miscarried foetuses, and placentas which are secured during prosecutors’ investigations, of the sort that are routinely carried out in countries where self-induced pharmacological abortion is not a crime, but is illegal. The studies demonstrate that the newly developed method is fast, simple, inexpensive, and does not require large amounts of environmentally harmful organic solvents. Furthermore, in addition to forensic studies, the method is suitable for assessing the pharmacokinetics, toxicology, bioavailability, and clinical pharmacology of mifepristone in future studies. In other words, it is a useful new tool for studying the properties of this substance. It is a pity that Adams did not mention any of these details, since they may be relevant to the ongoing battle in the U.S. to maintain the availability of mifepristone at current levels.
Polish law and science are rising to the challenge of fulfilling two directives of the international human rights system: the protection of every child “before as well as after birth” in both the Declaration of the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the defence of the right to the highest standard of healthcare for every mother.
Polish Research and the Fight Over the Abortion Pill
Liudmila Fadzeyeva / Shutterstock.com
In mid-September, the New York Times published an article entitled “In Poland, Testing Women for Abortion Drugs Is a Reality. It Could Happen Here,” in which the author, Patrick Adams, portrays Poland as a country that fanatically suppresses pro-abortion demonstrations, threatens protestors with imprisonment, and carries out modern-day witch hunts for women suspected of using abortion pills. Such a narrative fits perfectly with the author’s clearly pro-abortion views and the context of the current battle in the United States over the abortion pill, even if it has little to do with reality on the ground in Poland. In pursuit of his aims, Adams fails to mention the following relevant facts which add important context to the situation he purports to describe.
The impact of the 2020 Constitutional Tribunal ruling
The beginning of the NYT article falsely claims that the Polish Constitutional Tribunal had “effectively ended legal abortion in the country.” In fact, abortion remains legal in Poland in two cases: when the life and health of the woman are endangered, and when the pregnancy is the result of a crime. Moreover, the mother is never held criminally responsible for an abortion, even an illegal one. In fact, the penal policy is directed against the providers of abortion, not its victims. It is absolutely no surprise that abortion ‘on demand’ is illegal in Poland, as the Constitutional Tribunal ruled in 1997 that “the democratic rule of law places the human being and its highest good as the supreme value. In a democratic state governed by the rule of law, one such good is life, which must remain under constitutional protection at every stage of its development.” Thus, ever since Poland became a democratic state after the fall of the communist regime, the principle of the legal protection of human life has been legislatively established, of which the legal prohibition of abortion (with the above-mentioned exceptions) is an expression and logical consequence. The verdict of the Constitutional Tribunal of 22 October 2020 is merely a further confirmation of the principles elaborated above.
The long-standing legal principles are also true in the case of the trial of a pro-abortion activist in Poland on charges of aiding and abetting an abortion. Any criticism of such a state of affairs must be based on ignorance of well-established Polish law, which clearly stipulates the illegality of such actions as a matter of criminal conduct. It is interesting to note that no other crime committed in the land on the banks of the Vistula arouses so much interest and emotion overseas as aiding and abetting abortion. Quite apart from the fact that the shape of Polish abortion law is a purely domestic matter, as is the question of the distribution of abortion pills, it is curious that there should be so much interest in this issue in a country as far away as the United States.
The Wroclaw researchers
In his article, Adams criticises, among other things, a discovery made by a group of researchers at the Department of Forensic Medicine at the Wroclaw Medical University and the Institute of Toxicological Research in Poland, described in a November 2022 publication in the journal Molecules. The discovery itself was a new method for detecting residues of mifepristone (the main ingredient in abortion pills) in human blood. Adams mentions that the motivation of the Polish scientists was to counter the public health threat posed by the circulation of abortion pills on the black market. However, he comments that “It is difficult to see how this form of testing has any medical or public health value, given the well-documented safety and efficacy of abortion pills.” This is a question worth investigating, one which has become the backdrop for research by Polish scientists, and the supposedly safe self-managed abortions.
According to the published research, the detection of mifepristone metabolites in the blood was carried out in the context of a shocking event that took place in a Polish hospital. A young woman arrived at the hospital with a dead foetus, claiming to have had a miscarriage. However, as she eventually testified, she had actually taken abortion pills that she had bought on the internet, after which she gave birth to a stillborn child. The scientific publication in question described the child’s post-mortem as follows:
These facts, which Adams omits, support the observations of the Wroclaw researchers that one of the most dangerous methods of abortion, apart from the use of pills of unknown origin, is for a woman “inducing the abortion by herself at home without medical supervision or specialist care.” Women who perform such abortions often need emergency medical attention and end up in hospitals.
The U.S. government’s National Library of Medicine website lists a number of possible serious side effects of mifepristone: foetal death, anaphylactic reactions, toxic epidermal necrolysis, angioedema, and teratogenesis, as well as numerous moderate and mild side effects. Although this is quite an extensive list, it should not be forgotten that the other active ingredient in abortion pills, misoprostol, also has its own health consequences. Given the severity of the risks, there can be no justification for the claim that these products can be safely taken by women without medical supervision, even if that claim is made by the World Health Organisation, FDA, or other such organisations. Above all, however, it must be remembered that the officially accepted ‘medical’ purpose of abortion pills—the termination of pregnancy—is in practice tantamount to the death of the foetus (a human being at the prenatal stage of development), which is itself listed as a serious side effect of mifepristone in the National Library of Medicine. Despite the fact that ethical issues are often overlooked in the abortion pill debate, its distribution is banned in some countries with good reason.
The myth of safe abortion
It is significant that a discovery made by Polish researchers almost a year ago is only now in the spotlight of the U.S. media. This sudden attention comes at a time when a battle is being waged in the America to maintain the current status of the mifepristone abortion pill, after a group of doctors and anti-abortion organisations filed a lawsuit against the FDA last year, demanding that the pill be withdrawn from the market as unsafe and inadequately approved. Although the case is yet to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, it is already generating a great deal of controversy as a result of a surprising ruling by a Texas judge, and it is likely to increase the activity of the abortion lobby, which is the main beneficiary of the status quo.
In Poland, one strategy of the various anti-life groups is to create fear, a method perfectly aligned with the narrative of the alleged persecution of women and mass testing for abortifacient residues in their blood. Adams’ article fails to mention that the analytical techniques for quantifying mifepristone itself are not new; rather, much more complicated tests have long been carried out on plasma and serum samples. Polish scientists have developed a method to facilitate toxicological testing using small amounts of blood from dead infants, miscarried foetuses, and placentas which are secured during prosecutors’ investigations, of the sort that are routinely carried out in countries where self-induced pharmacological abortion is not a crime, but is illegal. The studies demonstrate that the newly developed method is fast, simple, inexpensive, and does not require large amounts of environmentally harmful organic solvents. Furthermore, in addition to forensic studies, the method is suitable for assessing the pharmacokinetics, toxicology, bioavailability, and clinical pharmacology of mifepristone in future studies. In other words, it is a useful new tool for studying the properties of this substance. It is a pity that Adams did not mention any of these details, since they may be relevant to the ongoing battle in the U.S. to maintain the availability of mifepristone at current levels.
Polish law and science are rising to the challenge of fulfilling two directives of the international human rights system: the protection of every child “before as well as after birth” in both the Declaration of the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the defence of the right to the highest standard of healthcare for every mother.
READ NEXT
Guarantee of Unhappiness
Are Net Zero’s Days Numbered?
Erdogan’s Hour of Triumph