Sir, – The right to travel for terminations is a constitutionally entrenched right that is given precedence over the right to the life of the unborn. Our laws actively encourage women to choose a termination elsewhere and deprive more vulnerable women of that choice. It is pro-choice in that it is predicated on two choices, the first being choosing to travel for those so able. The alternative is to abolish the pretence that this restriction makes any logical sense. – Yours, etc,
BRIAN DINEEN,
Clontarf,
Dublin 3.
Sir, – Maybe the "aggression and extremism" noted by Maria Mhic Mheanmain (September 16th) of pro-choice protesters is down to said protesters being denied their basic human right of bodily autonomy? Just a thought. – Yours, etc,
JILL MURRAY,
Headford, Galway.
Sir, – The case made for abortion in recent articles and letters in The Irish Times appears to come down to three basic arguments. The first is that we are not being not sufficiently modern. This concern is not without merit. It is always valuable to benchmark practices against international norms. However, accepting that we should take account of the principles of other nations, is not the same as saying we should blindly follow them. As a mature, independent state, we have to make our own decisions.
The second argument is that many who have the resources may travel for an abortion despite the ban. This point is pragmatic, and not without compassion, but the unreflective urge to bow to the inevitable lacks an appreciation of the value in positively reaching principles that have been argued for, and found worth upholding. If anything should be a matter of principle rather than expediency, it is the right to life.
The third argument is based on the very important principle that humans should be free to exercise control over decisions about their own bodies. Recent history provides ample evidence of severe gender-based abuses of this right, and some pro-choice advocates are keen to portray the ban on abortion in this light. But there are limits to our freedoms and rights which have nothing to do with human rights abuses: some are imposed by nature; some are agreed amongst ourselves, especially if exercising a right for ourselves trespasses on the rights of another.
Pregnancy is very much about a woman’s body, and the growth of the foetus brings significant limitations to her freedom. But it is also indisputable that an abortion procedure is primarily about and directed towards the foetus. To make the case that a woman having a right to make decisions about her own body means that she should be entitled to choose to have an abortion, it must be shown that the foetus does not have any competing rights which might limit this choice. None of the three arguments make any attempt to do this. – Yours, etc,
COLIN WALSH,
Templeogue,
Dublin 6W.
Sir, – I note Seamus McKenna's plea for a "highly restrictive abortion regime" here (September 18th). I wonder if he has ever investigated the situation in Britain where, on paper, grounds for abortion are quite restrictive, but we all know that in practice this most definitely is not so. Around 200,000 abortions are carried out there annually. Is he seriously suggesting that all those could be considered as "warranted"? – Yours, etc,
MARY STEWART,
Ardeskin, Donegal.
Sir, – May I draw attention to the constant use of the term “social issue” in reference to abortion. Whereas this procedure obviously has a social (societal) implication, abortion deals with what is certainly a moral issue as well. The adjective “social” is not synonymous with the term “moral”.
Surely in discussing the fraught topic of abortion, the latter word is the more correct and valid term to describe the issue in question. For whatever reason, it would seem to have been largely either ignored or suppressed by so many of your correspondents. – Yours, etc,
TOM STACK,
Milltown,
Dublin 6.
Sir, – The experience of the vast majority of the thousands of women who have accessed the Irish Family Planning Association's pregnancy counselling service is one of relief. They are not ashamed. By telling their stories, Róisín Ingle (September 12th) and Tara Flynn (September 14th) have done women in Ireland who have taken the same decision about unplanned pregnancies a great service. – Yours, etc,
EVELYN GERAGHTY,
Director of Counselling,
Irish Family Planning
Association,
Solomons House,
Pearse Street,
Dublin 2.