We spent some days in Poland last month. Krakow. And it was cold. Compared to Ireland, very cold.
Outside our accommodation a thin layer of snow on a shed roof and atop an adjacent wall remained all week. It didn’t melt. The temperature didn’t reach above zero during that time.
Even well wrapped up in overcoat, hat, scarf and gloves we felt cold. So, we wonder, how an infant would survive if left out in that harsh climate. Poorly, if at all.
Mercifully, in Poland many convents are reviving a custom that dates back to medieval times, by providing shelter for otherwise unwanted and abandoned babies.
The “Window of Life,” originally called a foundling wheel, and also known as a baby hatch, is an incubator accessible from the street where an unwanted child, or one for whom its mother is unable to provide adequately, can be left in a warm, safe environment, under the benevolent care of the nuns.
| Window of Life in Poland |
The concept originated in Medieval Europe, under the influence of the moral precepts of the Church.
And so much does protection of the weak conform to natural law that the custom has been adopted by many cultures – even some with no roots in Christian civilisation.
A baby receives medical attention, food and shelter. And the mother can keep her anonymity if she so wishes.
So, all is resolved. Everyone should be happy with this merciful solution to the age old problem of child abandonment.
However, not everyone is happy with Windows of Life. Rather than showing gratitude for the charitable motives that inspire the custom, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), in a letter to the Polish government, demanded that the Windows of Life be eliminated.
A demand from this committee, or any other branch of the U.N. for that matter, is like the demand of an ill-tempered child for more television viewing time or more ice cream – of itself impotent, but too often heeded out of weakness on the part of the demandee.
Dysfunctional, desperate for relevance, the U.N. has neither the right nor the authority to make such demands. But it makes them anyway.
Fortunately the recently elected Polish government displays little deference towards transnational bodies that interfere in the internal affairs of its country.
Within a few days of assuming office the new government left EU institutions and a Europhile media apoplectic with rage because of its clear indication that it would work for Polish interests – as it was elected to do.
That is an impressive example for some future Irish government to follow. But don’t hold your breath.
Still, we must wonder what hatred inflames the soul of any person or group that would abolish the last safe refuge of an abandoned child.
Would the U.N. committee prefer if the child were abandoned to die of hypothermia?
So it seems.
It is beyond callous. It is diabolical.
Does the committee offer any alternative solution to the abandonment of children?
No. But, concomitant with its demand to abolish the Windows of Life, its demand on Poland to liberalise its abortion laws provides a clue as to UNCRC’s motives.
How will more abortion solve the problem of abandoned children?
It won’t.
Will it even alleviate the problem?
Obviously not.
In a similar demand made a few years ago to the Czech Republic to abolish baby hatches, the U.N. committee cited the right of a child to an identity. So, if we understand them correctly, a baby has a right to his or her identity, but not a right to life.
Since the UNCRC seems to think it better to kill the child than to save it without an identity, does that mean that it will demand, in future, that the identity of aborted babies be respected?
In other words will the UNCRC insist that those who died from abortion get individual graves instead of their dead bodies being dumped as medical waste or used to fuel hospital heating systems?
The real problem that the UNCRC seems to have with Windows of Life is that they provide an alternative to abortion.
Their very existence undermines many of the arguments used by pro-abortionist activists.
Windows of Life clearly diminish the concept of an unwanted child.
With their kind and merciful welcoming of life they show up the abortion industry for its cruelty.
They ensure that the care of a child is never beyond what is possible.
They spare the mother – juvenile, unwed or otherwise – of shame and embarrassment.
It is the pro-abortion lobby that is left with shame. And now the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child joins them.
Perhaps this is why they are determined to rid the earth of this charitable and pious custom – because it makes them look bad by contrast. Perhaps it even troubles their consciences.
The UNCRC and other UN bodies have made similar demands on Ireland. Will our government show similar resolve to that of Poland? Or will they show obsequious deference in the face of international demands?
We would be surprised to find anything other than the latter from our present government. But maybe we can elect one in the future that will show leadership and strength.
Meanwhile we wonder how the Irish government will fare under interrogation by the UNCRC tomorrow.
