The Institute for Legal Culture Ordo Iuris made a announcement on Friday to the territory Attorney's Office in Wrocław about suspected drug offences. Gizela Jagielska and medical personnel of the Regional Hospitals squad in Oleśnica.
At the same time, the Chief Ombudsman of Professional work received a complaint from the Ordo Iuris Institute against the aforementioned doctor, together with a request for the immediate suspension of her right to practice the profession. The case concerns the circumstances of abortion revealed by the doctor herself in the media in the 26th week of pregnancy, resulting in the birth of a surviving child, left without medical assistance until death.
Both the announcement to the prosecutor's office and the complaint to the medical authority are based, among others, on the content of an interview with the drug published on 15 May 2025. High Obcaseswhere the doctor reveals:
"There was a brief minute erstwhile we did not usage potassium chloride. I had 1 abortion like this in Week 26. [...] I will say this: neither I nor any of my staff would always want to participate in anything like this again.”
The next part of the discussion describes the course of specified procedures:
“The kid is born and we wait for him to die. Of course, we supply him with a palliative procedure. But that situation has only confirmed to us that we cannot do so. That is not why women come to us.”
It follows from the doctor’s own account that there was a situation in which the unborn kid was not given any action to save his life. Instead, only palliative measures were taken, alternatively appropriate for terminal patients whose life cannot be extended by any available means. In the case of an premature premature of 26 weeks of pregnancy, which, as Jagielska herself points out, was born alive, the abandonment of any medical intervention could mean an intentional vulnerability to painful death as a consequence of respiratory distress.
The Ordo Iuris Institute finds this highly unethical and legally unacceptable, which fulfils the characteristics of the offence of not granting assistance to a individual in immediate danger of life (Article 162(1) of the Code) and the vulnerability of the individual on whom the work of care has been imposed to the failure of life (Article 160(2) of the Code). At the same time, it was stressed that in the case of the birth of a surviving child, regardless of the circumstances, it has the full rights of the human individual and must be treated as a patient requiring treatment in accordance with current medical knowledge.
The Institute points out that in the event of termination of pregnancy after the 22nd week of pregnancy, it is the work of a doctor to conduct – according to recommendations of the Polish Society of Gynecologists and Obstetricians – an immediate notification of a neonatologist, a specialist, who should be ready to assist the born newborn. However, the interview shows that specified aid has not been taken. The newborn was only covered by the alleged ‘palliative procedure’, which in this context meant waiting for him to die.
The Ordo Iuris Institute comments unequivocally:
“If it is simply a drug, Jagielska talks about specified events in public, it means being convinced of her impunity. As a society, we cannot accept a situation in which a doctor waits for a newborn to die and then talks about it in the media. specified persons should not prosecute the profession of a doctor, even temporarily – therefore, for the time of proceedings we request that the right to exercise the profession be suspended by the medicine. Jagielska, which can be done by both the prosecutor and the medical authority.”
The Institute besides stresses that this is not the only controversial issue active in the drug. In April this year, the media reported on the kid killed in the womb by the drug. I usage a jagielski injection of potassium chloride into the heart.
In this case, as argued by Ms Magda Majkowska, manager of the Center for Process Intervention and associate of the Board of the Ordo Iuris Institute, we have dealt not so much with abortion as with murder.
The doctor herself, in an interview with Channel Zero quoted in both the announcement to the Public Prosecutor's Office and in the complaint to the Chief Ombudsman of Professional Responsibility, claimed that:
‘[...] We can't confuse abortion and pregnancy. Abortion This is abortion resulting in a dead birth or miscarriage, yes, that is. It's not the end of a pregnancy in a week or so with a surviving baby, due to the fact that it's absolutely not the same..’
As she explained in an analysis published in May R. Katarzyna Gęsia, manager of the Center for Medical Law and Bioethics of the Ordo Iuris Institute, under Polish law, the specified right to interrupt pregnancy does not give him the right to actively kill the kid or not to give him medical assistance.
The complaint to the Chief Ombudsman of Professional work indicated that the medicine was working. Jagielska violated a number of fundamental principles of the profession of doctor, including the work to defend the patient's life and health, regardless of his age, phase of improvement or circumstances of birth. Quoted in the complaint, the Code of Medical Ethics states explicitly that a doctor cannot usage his cognition in a way contrary to his vocation, and salus aegroti suprema lex esto “The good of the sick with the highest law” should be the overarching rule of any clinical decision.
"We cannot leave this substance unanswered. We request that disciplinary proceedings be initiated, that the profession be suspended, and that all those who have calmly watched the kid die in torment. Gizela Jagielska should not prosecute the profession of doctor in specified circumstances – neither now nor in the future", the Ordo Iuris Institute emphasizes.
== sync, corrected by elderman ==
