Student Koen van den Berk, who only arrives later when the demonstrators are already at Luna, also does not receive a friendly welcome. “I wanted to start a conversation with one of the demonstrators, but then another guy came up to me and firmly asked, ‘How does it feel defending the killing of babies?’”

Van den Berk did not give up, however, and eventually started a conversation with the other demonstrators. Talking amid all the commotion was not easy, but according to him they still managed to have a fairly substantive exchange about when life begins – at the conception or later. “Unfortunately, the discussion couldn’t go much further, because the group left.”

Freedom of expression

Aside from the short conversation between Van den Berk and the demonstrator, who had also briefly spoken to a female counter-protester, there is little room for dialogue. Both groups mainly try to shout each other down. 

Seppe van Loo, who acts as spokesperson for the activist group TFP Student Action Europe, believes the counterprotest restricts his right to freedom of expression. “They are preventing us from making our voices heard. I would like to debate them, but they’re not open to it.” Behind him, a loudspeaker carried by one of his fellow demonstrators blares: “You survived abortion. Where’s your tolerance. Hypocrites.”

According to Van Loo, the pro-life movement is gaining momentum. “We want to contribute to that.” Earlier in the day, the activist group had also visited the university in Nijmegen, and it has previously demonstrated in The Hague and Utrecht. In September last year, the group protested in Leiden. Following that protest, MP Sarah Dobbe of the Socialist Party asked parliamentary questions about the demonstration.

Misinformation

Dobbe’s questions mainly concerned the misinformation the group was said to be spreading. Flyers that the demonstrators also attempted to distribute in Eindhoven claimed, among other things, that abortion is unsafe and increases the risk of breast cancer, referring to a study from the nineties.

‘That is not correct,’ then-State Secretary for Youth, Prevention and Sport Judith Tielen said in her response to the parliamentary questions. ‘The Dutch Society of Abortion Doctors has confirmed to me that the information in the leaflet does not correspond in any way with the current medical and scientific consensus,’ she wrote.

The State Secretary also called it concerning and undesirable that incorrect health information about abortion is being spread. By the end of 2026, at her request, Fiom and Rutgers were expected to present evaluated interventions and communication strategies to counter the spread of misinformation.

Not stopping

By the end of the demonstration, counter-protester O’Neill does not intend to leave it at that. She plans to speak with the university about the demonstration and hopes to prevent something like this from happening again, although the university itself has limited influence over such situations. When the demonstrators leave at the end of the afternoon, she climbs onto a raised platform to thank everyone. “We shouldn’t stop here. The university should have a say in what happens on campus. Hopefully we can make our voices heard.”

The Executive Board finds it bitter that people would come to demonstrate against a right that is so fundamental and such a major achievement of women’s emancipation, spokesperson Ivo Jongsma said. According to him, the demonstration does not align with the university’s core values. “We therefore understand that members of our community took offense at this demonstration and that our community responded with a countervoice. However, we cannot and do not want to ban demonstrations like this.” Demonstrators are allowed space on campus, within the agreed rules, even if the university does not identify with the message being expressed, Jongsma added. The university has also posted the response on intranet.