European Court Orders Pro-Life Poland to Compensate Mom Who Was Denied Abortion
At first, one might think that the Polish government is the victim here. Just examine the way that the woman who brought the case forward is portrayed:
Poland’s current laws only allow for the unborn child to be killed in its mother’s womb in cases of rape, when the child is seriously malformed, and when the health of the mother would be in grave danger were she to carry the child to full term.
Tysiac claims that in 2000 she found out that she was pregnant with her third child. At that time, according to her complaint, she was warned by numerous doctors that her pregnancy and delivery of another child could result in a deterioration of her myopic eye condition.
She further claims that the gynecologist that she saw destroyed her abortion referral saying that her health was not in serious danger and her condition did not warrant an abortion under Polish law.
Tysiac also claims that, after delivering her child, she suffered what was diagnosed as a retinal hemorrhage which rendered her “significantly disabled” and in fear of going blind. Tysiac, who raises her three children on her own, receives a monthly disability pension of 140 euros.
While technically correct - an assertion made in court in such a case is a "claim" that must then be substantiated by evidence - the constant use of the word claim implies a doubtfulness that is not borne out by the court's findings.
In a BBC article on the same story, we learn a slightly different view:
Alicja Tysiac's eyesight worsened drastically after she had her third baby and she fears she may go blind.
The 35-year-old mother was refused an abortion despite warnings that having a baby could make her go blind.
Now, one might look at it and say that the plaintiff was not mortally at risk by bearing her child - the worst that might happen is she would lose her eyesight. (I don't know about you, but I value my eyesight quite highly, thank you very much!)
The Lifesite article goes on to further distort (and attempt to discredit the suit itself) by stating:
A typical strategy for abortion advocates has long been to use emotion generating hard cases, (often falsified, as in the two Supreme Court cases that legalized abortion on demand in the US) to open a wedge that inevitably leads to full abortion on demand.
Ah - so suddenly Roe v. Wade was "falsified"? BullFeathers.
In a follow-up story on Lifesite we learn:
Kowalewska said that the decision ignores Polish law and effectively pits the Court of Human Rights against the right to life. In the Tysiac case, no medical specialist, either gynaecologist, or oculist, qualified her state of health for abortion under Polish law.
The only possible conclusion that a rational human being can derive from this is that woman should not have sex unless they plan to get pregnant. And if that pregnancy leaves them disabled in some capacity, well, too bad.
The "Forced Birth" crowd really doesn't give a damn about anything but imposing their morality upon others. Even at the price of bodily harm to the mothers whom they claim to value so very much.