KATHRYN MULREADY,
Sir, - How are we going to survive the next three weeks as the Government tells us every day how pro-life it is? How does that square with a judge in the High Court regularly asking why is there no place of safe keeping for a troubled child before him? Why did Kathryn Sinnot have to go to the courts to get justice for her son? Why do the organisations for the mentally and physically handicapped have to lobby politicians all the time to get what is rightfully theirs?
When this referendum is over, we then have to face, in another few weeks, a general election, when politicians will promise us sincerely that they care about us and our issues. Let's hope we can see through the hypocrisy. - Yours, etc.,
KATHRYN MULREADY,
Drumcondra,
Dublin 9.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - How can Ivana Bacik (February 9th) claim that the abortion referendum, if passed, will be "dangerous and anti-women"? On the contrary, if passed, it will give protection to the unborn, and as we all know, a woman's life is never in danger because of her pregnancy as she will always receive the best possible medical assistance should any problem arise.
The reason why the majority of the women who go to Britain to end their babies' lives do so is because another baby would be "inconvenient" - and has nothing to do with their life being in danger.
Why are you, Ivana, Liz McManus and many, many more so concerned about women and their "right to choose" and show no concern whatsoever for the unborn who end up in incinerators? Have they no rights at all? Contrary to what people say pro-life people are not hypocrites - abortion is the same sad act, whether carried out in Ireland or abroad, but we cannot prevent people travelling abroad. However, we can say no to abortion here. So let's vote Yes to the referendum and save babies' lives. - Yours, etc.,
F. McCOY,
Monkstown,
Co Dublin.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - In an otherwise excellent report on the Doctors for Choice organisation (February 11th) Declan Fahy states as fact the Government's misleading statement on the effect of the proposed 25th Amendment to the Constitution Bill on current medical practice.
The Government claims the proposal will enshrine current medical practice whereas the contrary is in fact the case. Currently, Irish doctors can and do terminate pregnancies each year to save the lives of pregnant women where the risk is a physical one. Normally these terminations take place in maternity hospitals, but in an emergency, where necessary to prevent an immediate risk of death, it would be permissible for a doctor to perform a termination in a GP's surgery, a woman's own home or in an ambulance on the way to a hospital.
If the Government's proposal is passed, terminations may only take place in "approved places"; there is no exception for emergencies, despite Opposition pleas during the Oireachtas debate on the proposal. Accordingly, in an emergency situation where it is not possible to get to an approved place a doctor will have the choice of letting a woman die or risking a 12-year jail sentence for himself or herself and the patient, if remedial action is taken. - Yours, etc.,
SÉ D'ALTON,
Palmerston Road,
Dublin 6.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - Over the next few weeks many of us will agonise as to which side of the referendum campaign the balance of compassion lies. Amidst the confusion there are a few small pockets of certainty. Pressure groups like the Alliance for Choice, Doctors for Choice and some elements of the Labour Party, who would like to see us mimic here in Ireland the abortion landscapes of Britain and the US, are adamant that this referendum proposal must be defeated. If abortion is ever to be as freely available here as it is in the UK and limited only by the choices of individual women, it is imperative that the No vote wins the day.
We have no control over the abortion laws in Britain. But how anyone can believe that its abortion rates mark it out as one of the great compassionate nations of the world, defies reason. Or, that allowing 7,000 abortions to take place each year in Irish hospitals would somehow constitute a great victory for our mothers, sisters, wives and girlfriends.
In the referendum package that is being put before us we have a chance, unique I believe in the history of abortion, to freely choose as a people a proposal that is more compassionate, radical and visionary than anything I have heard from those who have nothing to offer but abortion. I'll be voting Yes. - Yours, etc.,
BRENDAN CONROY,
Windy Arbour,
Dublin 14.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - Bertie Ahern and his Government appear intent on portraying this referendum as a choice between voting for or against abortion. This is patently untrue.
We are being asked to vote on whether or not we as a society will continue to permit suicidal women to have abortions where to do otherwise could result in their death. This is the law as it stands.
If we vote Yes to the referendum, as the Government is urging us to do, we preclude suicide as a ground for abortion. This will ensure that certain women's lives will be put in jeopardy and that once again we will be faced with the horrific spectre of cases similar to those of X and C. In addition, a clear message will be sent to Irish women that once they become pregnant their right to life becomes qualified as compared to that of women who are not pregnant. Meanwhile, the 7,000 plus women a year who make the trip to Britain will continue to do so.
If we vote No to the referendum the law as enshrined in the X case will continue to obtain so that abortion will continue to be outlawed in this country except where there is a threat to the life of the pregnant woman.
Again the 7,000 women who travel to England each year will continue to make this journey, but at least we will have assured women that we as a society are prepared to vindicate their right to life as being more substantial than that of a foetus where their respective rights to life are in direct conflict and a choice between them has to be made if both are not to risk death.
When you consider what we are being asked to vote upon and the consequences that a Yes vote would have, it is laughable that Bertie Ahern should assert that by passing this referendum we will ensure that women "get best medical practice" which in turn will "protect their lives". This is grossly and unforgivably misleading. The opposite is in fact true.
In light of this fact and in light of the fact that it has emerged that Micheál Martin, the Minister for Health, somewhat incredibly failed to consult the Women's Health Council, (the statutory body specifically established to be consulted by the Minister for Health on all aspects of women's health) on the referendum and that the Irish division of the Royal College of Psychiatrists is now asserting that its position on the suicide issue has been misrepresented, a misrepresentation which is contained in the Government's Green Paper on Abortion, it is difficult not to question Bertie Ahern's and Micheál Martin's commitment to the promotion and protection of women's welfare and lives. One wonders whether perhaps political exigencies dictate that they pander to those elements of the anti-abortion movement on whose support they rely?
For women to vote Yes in this referendum would be akin to turkeys voting for Christmas. Vote No. - Yours, etc.,
SARAH HARTE,
Leinster Road,
Rathmines,
Dublin 6.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - Liz McManus's statement that this amendment would "be dangerous to the right to life of Irish women" is clearly erroneous.
Is there not a obvious link between Ireland's best medical care for pregnant women and the absence of abortion? A Yes vote to this amendment will copperfasten current medical practice which draws a clear distinction between intentional abortion and necessary medical treatment of the mother where everything practicable must be done to save the life of the child. Such practice has ensured that women's health in pregnancy will never be compromised.
Labour's attempt to politicise this issue neither leads to a reasoned or rational debate. This is too important an issue to be made into a political ball game.
We must remember that the 7,000 women going to England for abortions go as a result of adverse social conditions due to society's abdication of its responsibilities. We need to provide real alternatives to women in crisis pregnancy by providing the positive conditions required for a woman in such circumstances: this referendum achieves just that.
We should learn from the mistakes made in other countries. The fact that in Britain 29 per cent of pregnancies are aborted is not something that should be overlooked. A Yes vote will ensure that the right to life of the mother and the child are protected. - Yours, etc.,
UNA CASSIDY,
Leopardstown Avenue,
Blackrock,
Co Dublin.