On ddl deposited by Maurizio Gasparri to amend Article 1 of the Civil Code and introduce the recognition of the legal capacity of the conceived "with the aim of preventing voluntary abortion in any form, legal or clandestine" at least three things can be said.
The first: it is highly unlikely that the bill will reach the parliamentary chambers. The immediate consequence of its approval would be substantial inapplicability of law 194 because abortion would in fact amount to murder. None of the majority forces -according to the repeated statements of the leaders- intend to change the law regulating the voluntary termination of pregnancy. Gasparri's move should therefore be understood as a spite in extremis to Meloni and as an eagerness to reappear in the media following the snub of not being considered for nominations to the House and Senate.
But other things are important.
The conceived cannot be defined as a legal person simply because it is not really a person; in essence, it will not be an individual until it can live independently outside the womb (new perinatal medical technologies can now allow a foetus delivered after five months' gestation to survive, but not before this date). For the foetus to be defined as human life, therefore, it needs the mother to agree to carry the pregnancy. If this does not occur due to the most varied circumstances, there is in fact no possibility of new life. This is a fact that can be debated and reasoned about, and that makes the dating of the beginning of life problematic, taking it outside the law, but one fact remains: you can't disregard that which starts a life without coercing the woman understanding it as a container mute and passive, the Grail of patriarchy.
Hence a paradoxical identity of views among pro-life fundamentalists, determined to disempower women by understanding them as a container and not as a subject free to choose ('we prevent them from doing so', clarified ex-senator Pillon) and the users and promoters of uterus for rent, in which the woman's part is that of a mere 'oven', deprived by contract of any freedom to decide for herself and her unborn child. Old patriarchs the former, neo-patriarchs the latter, including those gay associations that in their Pride marches claim the right to a womb in exchange for money: how does it feel to be on the same side as the pro-lifers (and vice versa)?
Marina Terragni