The Dublin Catholic Archdiocese has accused the Irish Family Planning Association of misrepresenting the comments of Archbishop Desmond Connell on contraception. "The archbishop in no way suggested that children who have been `planned' are not infinitely loved by their parents, as the IFPA press release of March 3rd stated", said Father John Dardis, the archbishop's spokesman, in a statement issued late last night.
Father Dardis was responding to criticism of Archbishop Connell's speech at St Patrick's College, Maynooth, on Tuesday night and his subsequent interview on RTE's Morning Ireland yesterday.
Father Dardis said the archbishop had spoken about in vitro fertilisation, surrogate motherhood, genetic engineering and cloning. He had expressed "concern that the child resulting from such techniques `can begin to look more and more like a technological product'. "
The archbishop had also "raised the question that this problem may not be altogether absent in the practice of family planning". Nevertheless, there was "no question of such children not being loved or being less loved".
However, "regardless of whether the method used is artificial or natural, if the mentality of planning takes over from the idea of a child as a loving gift from God, then the problems the archbishop talks about are liable to occur", Father Dardis said.
This was "very far removed" from the position the Irish Family Planning Association had accused the archbishop of holding, he added.
Archbishop Connell is "extremely sensitive to the needs of married people," according to Father Dardis. "He is aware that problems exist in marriages and is convinced that marriage is the bedrock of Irish society and must be supported. It is in this light that his concerns and comments should be read and with a sense of his positive appreciation of children, of married couples and of his deep respect for the sacrifices that they make in order to bring up children and devote themselves to them over many years".
Father Dardis said 30 years ago contraception was seen as "potentially liberating" and its non-availability was perceived to be the problem. "Now it's the availability of contraception that many people, including women, see as problematic, since contraception freely available can give the impression that sexual activity can be engaged in without consequences. This can put pressure on women, and indeed men, to have a sexual relationship. This is particularly true for younger people," he said. Earlier yesterday, Archbishop Connell's speech was criticised by a number of groups, but defended by those campaigning against abortion.
The chairwoman of the National Women's Council, Ms Noreen Byrne, said there was no evidence to suggest the process of using contraceptives to plan a family led to unhappy, resentful children. "Dr Connell's remarks are an outrage and are highly insulting to parents and children in families where couples have chosen to plan their family," she said.
Referring to the archbishop's contention that women are "dishonoured" by contraception, she said: "The fact is that feminists and other women fought very hard for access to contraception in Ireland in order to give them some control over their lives.
"Thousands of Irish women use contraception and experience no sense of dishonour in the freedom it affords them in planning their families, their lives and their careers."
Referring to reproductive technology, she said Dr Connell revealed a lack of understanding and concern for couples who had fertility problems.
The Irish Family Planning Association described his statements as "misplaced, unbalanced and offensive".
Its chief executive, Mr Tony O'Brien, said: "It is extraordinary to hear a leading cleric resorting to fiction in an attempt to justify the teachings of the Catholic hierarchy. To suggest that children who have been `planned' are not intrinsically loved by their parents is a fantasy, gratuitously offensive and without any basis.
"These comments also show how little Dr Connell understands the lives of ordinary people or the mechanisms of family planning. Family planning involved taking measures to avoid pregnancy. When a couple no longer wish to avoid pregnancy, they stop taking these measures."
However, the anti-abortion organisation, Family and Life, welcomed the statement. "It's a great exposition of the church's position in relation to children and to women," said Mr David Manly, a researcher with the group.
"The child as a product is the effect of contraception. That's bad for the born and bad for those who don't get born. Contraception is bad for women. As Dr Connell says, they are expected to be readily available and if they conceive, the blame for their misfortune is attributed to them. I would add that then they are pushed off for an abortion."
Asked if he understood how people were offended by the suggestion that planned children ended up unhappy and resentful, he said: "That is not easy to tie down. They have to think about it. The whole attitude, that if you think you can control everything you think you have the right to control everything, leads to consumerism in relation to children."
Ms Helen Keogh, the Progressive Democrat Senator, said the archbishop's suggestion that the relationship between a child and its parents was profoundly altered if the child is planned through the use of contraception "is insensitive in the extreme, and is in danger of creating new categories and new labels."
Editorial comment: page 17