Morning after pill
The Confederation has taken a firm stance against expanding access to emergency contraception and indicated it will vote against the government amendment on this issue. In the PAP Studio, a spokesperson for the bloc reinforced that position, tying the stance to broader concerns about access to abortion and the potential social impact. [citation]
Days earlier, the Sejm received a government draft amendment to the Pharmaceutical Law. The proposed changes would alter the current rule that the morning-after pill requires a prescription, a policy that has been in place since July 2017. [citation]
The amendment would make the morning-after pill available to individuals aged 15 and over without a physician’s prescription in many circumstances. The Confederation spokesperson explained that the party would oppose such changes, highlighting safety concerns and the need to carefully consider the implications for young users. [citation]
According to the spokesperson, a 15-year-old may not fully grasp the consequences of taking emergency contraception. Beyond ideological questions, the spokesperson pointed to the drug’s action profile and potential side effects as reasons for caution. [citation]
In discussing these issues, the spokesperson noted that the Confederation club would vote against the proposal, reflecting a broader view that access to hormonal contraception should be balanced with protection of health and informed consent. [citation]
Against abortion
The spokesperson was also asked to weigh in on two abortion bills that will be debated in the Sejm. These measures, proposed by the Left and the Citizens’ Coalition, aim to liberalize abortion regulations up to the twelfth week of pregnancy. The Confederation reiterated its commitment to protecting life from conception and opposed treating abortion as a routine option. The party stressed that liberalization would run counter to its core stance on the sanctity of life and urged lawmakers to resist proposals that would broaden access. [citation]
The spokesperson stated that the Confederation would vote against both abortion projects, aligning the party with its foundational position on fetal life protection. [citation]
Polish abortion policy has evolved in recent years, following a 1993 framework and subsequent constitutional interpretations. A 2020 Constitutional Court ruling prompted changes to the grounds for termination, particularly regarding severe fetal impairment or life-threatening conditions. The court determined that certain grounds for abortion were unconstitutional, a decision that sparked public demonstrations and heated political debate. The new legal landscape remains contested and continues to provoke discussion about the balance between individual rights and the protection of life. [citation]
Further commentary on the topic highlighted tensions around how health care institutions manage abortion procedures and the responsibility of medical staff to comply with national law while addressing public concerns. Debates also touched on the proper role of government in regulating reproductive health services and the ethical considerations that accompany attempts to adjust long-standing protections. [citation]
In this landscape, public discussions often feature calls to preserve faith-based and cultural values while ensuring that health services operate within the law and with respect for patient safety. Observers note that the trajectory of these policies will depend on the outcomes of parliamentary votes, coalition dynamics, and ongoing conversations about how best to support women, families, and healthcare professionals. [citation]