David Quinn The Irish Independent Tuesday May 22nd 2007
Precisely this issue was brought into sharp focus right at the start of the election campaign when news of Miss D broke, namely the 17-year-old in the care of the Health Service Executive, who discovered she was pregnant with an anencephalic child - that is, a child with a major part of its brain missing.
Miss D decided she wanted to end her pregnancy, and just under two-thirds of the Irish people agree that she has a right to do so.
What the question doesn't ask is whether they believe she should have the right to an abortion under these circumstances in this country. Presumably they do.
Fianna Fail and Fine Gael have made their position on abortion clear in this election. Neither will legislate for it if elected.
This appears to put them out of step with most Irish people.
The consolation for both of them is that, because they have the same policy, neither is in a position to gain votes at the expense of the other.
On the other hand, Labour might because it is prepared to introduce legislation that would give substance to the X case of 1991.
This would allow abortions to take place in Ireland where a woman is diagnosed as suicidal.
However, and this can be easily missed from any analysis, the specific case of Miss D would not have been covered by X case-style legislation.
In order for a future Miss D to have an abortion here, a new constitutional referendum would be required to clear the way.
This is because the Constitution at present allows for abortion only when the life of the mother is at serious risk.
Miss D's life was not at risk and Judge Liam McKechnie in the High Court praised her for not pretending she was suicidal so that she would fall under the X case requirements.
The question, then, is whether the Irish people want another abortion referendum. As recently as 2002 they narrowly rejected an attempt to rescind the X case. What would happen if the Miss D case was put before them?
On the strength of the Irish Independentopinion poll, a constitutional amendment based around this case would pass. But as we know, such a referendum would be extremely heated and probably, in practice, closely fought.
So this is probably the main reason politicians are shying away from the issue.
We can call it cowardice or we can call it prudence, but we the voters, every bit as much as they the politicians, must decide whether we really want another abortion referendum.
-
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Political Failure Leaves Epic Storm Brewing
The Irish Independent Tuesday May 22nd 2007
The aim was to make it easier to warn the public and reduce confusion about the type of storm that lay ahead.
Every year, a potential list of names is prepared for the forthcoming hurricane season.
And the names, which follow an alphabetic sequence, are recycled every six years unless they cause considerable death and destruction, in which case they are never used again.
Ireland's failure to deal with abortion is a hurricane waiting to happen.
Every year, we avoid the onslaught of a domestic storm by directing ill winds and tides (almost 7,000 women a year) onto British shores.
Then we bury our heads in the sand and hope the storm clouds stay away.
But every few years, Ireland finds itself at the eye of an epic abortion storm; sucked into an intractable political, legal and moral vortex with international condemnation swirling around.
We also give our hurricanes names. X, A, B, C, and recently, the two D's.
The alphabetic roll call of women who have fought the State at home and abroad are an indictment on the Government's inexcusable failure to legislate in the wake of the 1992 X case which legalised abortion in this country.
In 1983, the electorate voted to copperfasten the rights of the unborn by making them equal to that of its mother.
It was intended to introduce an absolute ban on abortion into the Constitution with the aim of preventing politicians or the courts from ever liberalising abortion. It backfired spectacularly.
The pro-life lobby's worst fears came to pass when a 14-year-old rape victim was granted permission to travel to England for an abortion.
In X, the Supreme Court ruled that where there was a risk to the life (including suicide), as distinct from the health of the mother, abortion was legal in this country.
It left for another day the plight of mothers whose unborn babies had abnormalities that rendered them unviable or condemned to death upon birth.
X was granted permission to travel amid a public outcry about the inhumanity of Ireland's restrictive abortion regime.
What should have happened after the X ruling - and later the C case - was the implementation of a legal framework to specify under what conditions abortions could be carried out in this country.
But in the 15 years post-X political leaders have failed to legislate for that ruling or resolve the conflicts between ardent pro-choice and pro-life forces.
And despite today's poll supporting abortion in Irish hospitals for women whose foetus has no chance of survival outside the womb, they have no intention of addressing the issue anytime soon.
Ireland is by no means unique in its struggle to deal with crisis pregnancies. Worldwide, an estimated 46 million abortions are carried out each year. Some 20 million of these are illegal resulting in the deaths of around 70,000 women.
The gap between Irish abortion theory and practice has the country on permanent storm-alert.
The Irish sea and cheap flights may act as a levee to withstand a few more storms, but levees break and someday we will have to face up to the aftermath of atrocious political failure to get our own house in order.
-
The aim was to make it easier to warn the public and reduce confusion about the type of storm that lay ahead.
Every year, a potential list of names is prepared for the forthcoming hurricane season.
And the names, which follow an alphabetic sequence, are recycled every six years unless they cause considerable death and destruction, in which case they are never used again.
Ireland's failure to deal with abortion is a hurricane waiting to happen.
Every year, we avoid the onslaught of a domestic storm by directing ill winds and tides (almost 7,000 women a year) onto British shores.
Then we bury our heads in the sand and hope the storm clouds stay away.
But every few years, Ireland finds itself at the eye of an epic abortion storm; sucked into an intractable political, legal and moral vortex with international condemnation swirling around.
We also give our hurricanes names. X, A, B, C, and recently, the two D's.
The alphabetic roll call of women who have fought the State at home and abroad are an indictment on the Government's inexcusable failure to legislate in the wake of the 1992 X case which legalised abortion in this country.
In 1983, the electorate voted to copperfasten the rights of the unborn by making them equal to that of its mother.
It was intended to introduce an absolute ban on abortion into the Constitution with the aim of preventing politicians or the courts from ever liberalising abortion. It backfired spectacularly.
The pro-life lobby's worst fears came to pass when a 14-year-old rape victim was granted permission to travel to England for an abortion.
In X, the Supreme Court ruled that where there was a risk to the life (including suicide), as distinct from the health of the mother, abortion was legal in this country.
It left for another day the plight of mothers whose unborn babies had abnormalities that rendered them unviable or condemned to death upon birth.
X was granted permission to travel amid a public outcry about the inhumanity of Ireland's restrictive abortion regime.
What should have happened after the X ruling - and later the C case - was the implementation of a legal framework to specify under what conditions abortions could be carried out in this country.
But in the 15 years post-X political leaders have failed to legislate for that ruling or resolve the conflicts between ardent pro-choice and pro-life forces.
And despite today's poll supporting abortion in Irish hospitals for women whose foetus has no chance of survival outside the womb, they have no intention of addressing the issue anytime soon.
Ireland is by no means unique in its struggle to deal with crisis pregnancies. Worldwide, an estimated 46 million abortions are carried out each year. Some 20 million of these are illegal resulting in the deaths of around 70,000 women.
The gap between Irish abortion theory and practice has the country on permanent storm-alert.
The Irish sea and cheap flights may act as a levee to withstand a few more storms, but levees break and someday we will have to face up to the aftermath of atrocious political failure to get our own house in order.
-
Majority Favour 'Selective' Abortion
Majority favour 'selective' abortion, says poll /The Irish Independent
By Dearbhail McDonald and Michael Brennan Tuesday May 22 2007
The findings show that the vast majority of the electorate support the recent decision to allow Miss D - a 17-year-old girl whose foetus had the fatal brain condition, anencephaly - to leave the country for an abortion.
Miss D has returned home to Ireland following her termination, a traumatic medically-induced labour that lasted over the course of five days in a British clinic.
Last night the teenager, who supports a change in the law that would allow rape victims and women carrying a non-viable foetus to terminate their pregnancy in Ireland, welcomed the public endorsement of her "distressing" decision.
"I am very happy that people feel that way," she told the Irish Independent. "It [the induced labour] was very emotional, but I feel I have got closure now," she added.
The new poll findings indicate a deep unease among voters at the failure of the Government to legislate in the wake of the 1992 X case ruling, which made abortion legal in Ireland in limited circumstances, including where a mother is suicidal.
Some 64pc of voters said they were in favour of abortion in cases where the foetus would not survive outside the womb.
A quarter of those polled said they are against abortion in such circumstances.
Slightly more than one in 10 voters (11pc) were undecided or held no opinion on the divisive issue.
It appears all of the main political parties have misread the public's mood on the issue.
When contacted by the Irish Independent last night, all of the parties said they would not be prepared to legislate for abortion in cases where the foetus would definitely not survive after birth.
Despite claims by Fine Gael party leader Enda Kenny that, if elected, his party will not legislate on the abortion issues highlighted by the X case, four out of 10 Fine Gael voters support the extension of the controversial Supreme Court ruling.
Yesterday Mr Kenny said the party had no intention of legislating for abortion.
"This is not a matter which was discussed with Labour," he said, adding: "I do not favour legislation for abortion - that is my position."
When questioned about the Miss D case, Mr Kenny said more could be done to deal with crisis pregnancies in terms of information, counselling and support.
Despite that fact that Labour is in favour of introducing legislation to allow abortion in Ireland based on the X Case, the party said that legislating for the specific circumstances that featured in the Miss D case could pose "constitutional difficulties".
Fianna Fail, the Progressive Democrats, the Greens and Sinn Fein also said they would not be prepared to legislate for abortion in the circumstances which led to the Miss D trial.
Those aged between 18 and 24 were most supportive of liberalising our strict abortion laws to cater for abortions to be carried out in Irish hospitals where the foetus would not survive outside the womb.
Three out of four in this age group supported such a move, as did 69pc of those aged between 25 and 54.
By Dearbhail McDonald and Michael Brennan Tuesday May 22 2007
The findings show that the vast majority of the electorate support the recent decision to allow Miss D - a 17-year-old girl whose foetus had the fatal brain condition, anencephaly - to leave the country for an abortion.
Miss D has returned home to Ireland following her termination, a traumatic medically-induced labour that lasted over the course of five days in a British clinic.
Last night the teenager, who supports a change in the law that would allow rape victims and women carrying a non-viable foetus to terminate their pregnancy in Ireland, welcomed the public endorsement of her "distressing" decision.
"I am very happy that people feel that way," she told the Irish Independent. "It [the induced labour] was very emotional, but I feel I have got closure now," she added.
The new poll findings indicate a deep unease among voters at the failure of the Government to legislate in the wake of the 1992 X case ruling, which made abortion legal in Ireland in limited circumstances, including where a mother is suicidal.
Some 64pc of voters said they were in favour of abortion in cases where the foetus would not survive outside the womb.
A quarter of those polled said they are against abortion in such circumstances.
Slightly more than one in 10 voters (11pc) were undecided or held no opinion on the divisive issue.
It appears all of the main political parties have misread the public's mood on the issue.
When contacted by the Irish Independent last night, all of the parties said they would not be prepared to legislate for abortion in cases where the foetus would definitely not survive after birth.
Despite claims by Fine Gael party leader Enda Kenny that, if elected, his party will not legislate on the abortion issues highlighted by the X case, four out of 10 Fine Gael voters support the extension of the controversial Supreme Court ruling.
Yesterday Mr Kenny said the party had no intention of legislating for abortion.
"This is not a matter which was discussed with Labour," he said, adding: "I do not favour legislation for abortion - that is my position."
When questioned about the Miss D case, Mr Kenny said more could be done to deal with crisis pregnancies in terms of information, counselling and support.
Despite that fact that Labour is in favour of introducing legislation to allow abortion in Ireland based on the X Case, the party said that legislating for the specific circumstances that featured in the Miss D case could pose "constitutional difficulties".
Fianna Fail, the Progressive Democrats, the Greens and Sinn Fein also said they would not be prepared to legislate for abortion in the circumstances which led to the Miss D trial.
Those aged between 18 and 24 were most supportive of liberalising our strict abortion laws to cater for abortions to be carried out in Irish hospitals where the foetus would not survive outside the womb.
Three out of four in this age group supported such a move, as did 69pc of those aged between 25 and 54.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
A Question Of Life And Death- The Economist
A question of life and death May 17th 2007
From The Economist print edition
The struggle between “pro-choice” and “pro-life” forces around the world
The scan showed the four-month-old fetus had anencephaly, a rare, incurable condition; the baby would be born without a scalp or most of its brain. It could live only a few days. The mother, an unmarried 17-year-old known as Miss D, wanted an abortion. But in her native Ireland, abortion is banned unless the mother's life is at risk. The health authorities would not let her leave the country for a termination. On May 9th Ireland's High Court ruled that Miss D should be allowed to go to Britain to have the procedure. The unborn baby's “right to life”, enshrined in the constitution, did not take precedence over Miss D's right to travel, it suggested.
On the same day, Pope Benedict, starting his first visit to Latin America, reiterated the Vatican's deep opposition to abortion: the politicians in Mexico City who had just voted to legalise the practice were excommunicating themselves, he said. This was “not something arbitrary”, but part of long-established canon law.
At the other end of the debate over abortion is China, where the practice is controversial not because it is banned but because it is obligatory—for mothers whose pregnancy violates strict curbs on family size. News came this week of a father who was fined 600,000 yuan ($78,000) for breaking the “one-child” policy, which came into force in 1979. Meanwhile, in the United States, abortion promises once again to be a big issue in the next presidential race. Rudy Giuliani, the Republican front-runner, is struggling to avoid alienating conservative voters with his mildly “pro-choice” line.
Four decades after controversy over abortion and the law began to sweep the world, the battle between the “pro-lifers” and “pro-choicers”—with its heady mix of sex, religion and morality—rages on. Supporters of easier access to legal abortion say that despite reversals in some places, and staunch resistance in others, their cause is advancing. According to the New York-based Centre for Reproductive Rights, over 60% of the world's 6.5 billion people now live in countries where abortion is generally allowed. Just a quarter live in states where it is generally banned.
It is 12 years since the so-called Beijing Platform, signed by 189 states, urged a review of all laws that punish women for having abortions. Since then, 18 countries have made it easier for women to obtain a termination. But in at least four countries—America, Russia, Hungary and Poland—things have become more restrictive (with limits on the time, grounds or method), while another two, Nicaragua and El Salvador, have banned the practice outright. More than 50 countries now allow abortion virtually on demand up to at least the 12th week of pregnancy; some (including Britain) permit it up to 24 weeks, and some (like parts of China) have no time limit.
But for those who agree with a formula coined by Bill Clinton—that abortion should be “safe, legal and rare”—the world is still far from ideal. Of a total of 46m abortions thought to be carried out each year (more than one in four pregnancies are terminated), some 20m are illegal, resulting in the death of around 70,000 women a year, according to the World Health Organisation. Abortion is either banned outright or is confined to cases of rape, incest or risk to the mother's life across most of the Muslim world, Catholic Latin America and Africa.
Although China reports 7m abortions a year (the real figure is much higher), it does not have the world's highest rate. That place is held by Romania, where some three-quarters of pregnancies are terminated (the same ratio as in New York City and Shanghai). Russia, the first country to allow abortion (in 1920), comes second with two in three pregnancies terminated. Rates are high across the former Soviet block, with the termination of more than one in two pregnancies in most countries.
In the United States, Australia, Canada, Britain and most of the rest of western Europe, around 15-25% of pregnancies are terminated. In India, an estimated 6.4m abortions take place every year (most involving female fetuses), representing one in four pregnancies. In many African and Muslim countries the rate is probably less than 5%, says William Robert Johnston, an American pundit. But he notes that data are elusive, and that the link between law and reality is often tenuous.
Indeed, some of the world's highest abortion rates are to be found in Latin America, where it is all but outlawed. The Mexican legislators who voted to decriminalise abortion cited the brutal effects of this gap between theory and practice: an estimated 5,000 women die in Latin America every year from botched back-street or self-administered abortions; a further 800,000 have to be treated in hospital.
In the same spirit, Brazil's new health minister has called for a “wide-ranging debate” on abortion, despite the opposition of two-thirds of Brazilians to any change. The pope's visit and the Mexican move have exposed strong feelings on both sides. Most Colombians, Mexicans and Chileans oppose legalising abortion. But in Argentina, where perhaps four in ten pregnancies are illegally ended, over 75% say it should be legal in some cases.Like the Catholic church, Islam regards life as sacred from conception. But unlike the Vatican, Muslim thinkers tend to calibrate the gravity of the “sin” according to the timing—early abortions are viewed less seriously. Most Muslim countries outlaw the practice unless the mother's life is at risk; but Turkey and Tunisia allow abortion on demand during the first ten weeks or three months respectively.
In some countries, judges are stepping in. In May last year Colombia's Constitutional Court ruled that an outright ban on abortion was unconstitutional; it must be allowed in cases of rape, incest, severe deformity and danger to maternal health. In November, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights said Nicaragua's total ban violated a woman's basic rights. And this March, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that governments must make it possible for women to have access to abortion, where it is legal.
As many states make abortion easier, America may be moving the other way. Last month the Supreme Court upheld a federal law, passed in 2003, banning “partial-birth” abortions, a late-term procedure involving the piercing of a fetus's skull. Some hope, and others fear, this could be a prelude to the overthrow of Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling that has given America one of the strongest legal rights to abortion in the world. If that decision is quashed, abortion could be criminalised in about 30 states. Polls suggest that about half America's voters would approve.
http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9205883
From The Economist print edition
The struggle between “pro-choice” and “pro-life” forces around the world
The scan showed the four-month-old fetus had anencephaly, a rare, incurable condition; the baby would be born without a scalp or most of its brain. It could live only a few days. The mother, an unmarried 17-year-old known as Miss D, wanted an abortion. But in her native Ireland, abortion is banned unless the mother's life is at risk. The health authorities would not let her leave the country for a termination. On May 9th Ireland's High Court ruled that Miss D should be allowed to go to Britain to have the procedure. The unborn baby's “right to life”, enshrined in the constitution, did not take precedence over Miss D's right to travel, it suggested.
On the same day, Pope Benedict, starting his first visit to Latin America, reiterated the Vatican's deep opposition to abortion: the politicians in Mexico City who had just voted to legalise the practice were excommunicating themselves, he said. This was “not something arbitrary”, but part of long-established canon law.
At the other end of the debate over abortion is China, where the practice is controversial not because it is banned but because it is obligatory—for mothers whose pregnancy violates strict curbs on family size. News came this week of a father who was fined 600,000 yuan ($78,000) for breaking the “one-child” policy, which came into force in 1979. Meanwhile, in the United States, abortion promises once again to be a big issue in the next presidential race. Rudy Giuliani, the Republican front-runner, is struggling to avoid alienating conservative voters with his mildly “pro-choice” line.
Four decades after controversy over abortion and the law began to sweep the world, the battle between the “pro-lifers” and “pro-choicers”—with its heady mix of sex, religion and morality—rages on. Supporters of easier access to legal abortion say that despite reversals in some places, and staunch resistance in others, their cause is advancing. According to the New York-based Centre for Reproductive Rights, over 60% of the world's 6.5 billion people now live in countries where abortion is generally allowed. Just a quarter live in states where it is generally banned.
It is 12 years since the so-called Beijing Platform, signed by 189 states, urged a review of all laws that punish women for having abortions. Since then, 18 countries have made it easier for women to obtain a termination. But in at least four countries—America, Russia, Hungary and Poland—things have become more restrictive (with limits on the time, grounds or method), while another two, Nicaragua and El Salvador, have banned the practice outright. More than 50 countries now allow abortion virtually on demand up to at least the 12th week of pregnancy; some (including Britain) permit it up to 24 weeks, and some (like parts of China) have no time limit.
But for those who agree with a formula coined by Bill Clinton—that abortion should be “safe, legal and rare”—the world is still far from ideal. Of a total of 46m abortions thought to be carried out each year (more than one in four pregnancies are terminated), some 20m are illegal, resulting in the death of around 70,000 women a year, according to the World Health Organisation. Abortion is either banned outright or is confined to cases of rape, incest or risk to the mother's life across most of the Muslim world, Catholic Latin America and Africa.
Although China reports 7m abortions a year (the real figure is much higher), it does not have the world's highest rate. That place is held by Romania, where some three-quarters of pregnancies are terminated (the same ratio as in New York City and Shanghai). Russia, the first country to allow abortion (in 1920), comes second with two in three pregnancies terminated. Rates are high across the former Soviet block, with the termination of more than one in two pregnancies in most countries.
In the United States, Australia, Canada, Britain and most of the rest of western Europe, around 15-25% of pregnancies are terminated. In India, an estimated 6.4m abortions take place every year (most involving female fetuses), representing one in four pregnancies. In many African and Muslim countries the rate is probably less than 5%, says William Robert Johnston, an American pundit. But he notes that data are elusive, and that the link between law and reality is often tenuous.
Indeed, some of the world's highest abortion rates are to be found in Latin America, where it is all but outlawed. The Mexican legislators who voted to decriminalise abortion cited the brutal effects of this gap between theory and practice: an estimated 5,000 women die in Latin America every year from botched back-street or self-administered abortions; a further 800,000 have to be treated in hospital.
In the same spirit, Brazil's new health minister has called for a “wide-ranging debate” on abortion, despite the opposition of two-thirds of Brazilians to any change. The pope's visit and the Mexican move have exposed strong feelings on both sides. Most Colombians, Mexicans and Chileans oppose legalising abortion. But in Argentina, where perhaps four in ten pregnancies are illegally ended, over 75% say it should be legal in some cases.Like the Catholic church, Islam regards life as sacred from conception. But unlike the Vatican, Muslim thinkers tend to calibrate the gravity of the “sin” according to the timing—early abortions are viewed less seriously. Most Muslim countries outlaw the practice unless the mother's life is at risk; but Turkey and Tunisia allow abortion on demand during the first ten weeks or three months respectively.
In some countries, judges are stepping in. In May last year Colombia's Constitutional Court ruled that an outright ban on abortion was unconstitutional; it must be allowed in cases of rape, incest, severe deformity and danger to maternal health. In November, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights said Nicaragua's total ban violated a woman's basic rights. And this March, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that governments must make it possible for women to have access to abortion, where it is legal.
As many states make abortion easier, America may be moving the other way. Last month the Supreme Court upheld a federal law, passed in 2003, banning “partial-birth” abortions, a late-term procedure involving the piercing of a fetus's skull. Some hope, and others fear, this could be a prelude to the overthrow of Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling that has given America one of the strongest legal rights to abortion in the world. If that decision is quashed, abortion could be criminalised in about 30 states. Polls suggest that about half America's voters would approve.
http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9205883
Friday, May 18, 2007
Who Can Judge A Woman Seeking An Abortion? and Ruling Was Not A Victory For The Unborn Child
18 May 2007 Letters in the Irish Examiner
Who can judge a woman seeking an abortion?
It is difficult to believe we are still at a time when a young woman has to prostrate herself in front of the courts and the media in order to travel to another country to obtain an abortion. Abortion is not an easy decision for any woman to make. It is a decision agonised over, cried over, sometimes regretted and sometimes it brings relief. It is very often an action taken and lived with entirely alone. One’s own emotional responses to abortion, however, are irrelevant. If a woman chooses to undertake the journey across the water to seek an abortion, who am I or you to say it is wrong or right?
Neither you nor I can live her life; we will not have to live with the consequences of her actions; we have not had her life experience. What then gives us the right to tell her what she can and cannot do? When will we stop exporting 6,000 Irish women each year, palming off our problems on other jurisdictions while we continue to bury our heads in the sand? When will we stop treating Irish women as if they are incapable of making their own decisions?
When will Irish women be allowed to make choices for themselves? Canvassers are calling to our doors and leaflets and pamphlets are falling through our letterboxes on a daily basis, begging us to vote back into power parties that have failed Irish women consistently in this regard. Not only have they failed women, they have failed our society. They have failed partners, lovers and husbands. They have failed children. They have failed us all. When they call to our doors we should ask what are they going to do about Irish women’s right to choose abortion?’
Beth Wallace Bealad Rossmore Clonakilty Co Cork
Ruling was not a victory for the unborn child
IT’S ironic that your editorial (May 10) in relation to the ‘D’ case judgement was entitled ‘Ruling is a victory for humanity’. Ironic because it obviously wasn’t a victory for the humanity of the unborn child. The judge ruled that the right to travel took precedence over the right of the unborn in the constitution. This seems strange given that he was referring to the right to life of the unborn child. How can a right to travel take precedence over the right to life?
You also rebuke successive governments for failing to legislate for abortion, as do other commentators on this issue in the Irish Examiner. Yet opinion polls have consistently shown the majority of Irish people are pro-life. International trends show that other countries are increasingly rethinking this issue as the scientific evidence for the humanity of the unborn becomes undeniable. Young obstetricians in Britain, for example, are objecting to having to perform abortions.
In America the banning of partial-birth abortions confirms a reversal of attitudes on this issue. The damaging psychological effects of abortion are well-documented, yet none was mentioned in your commentaries. For example, a recent Finnish study by a social scientist, who also happens to be a supporter of abortion, found a suicide rate seven times higher for women who had abortions compared to those who gave birth. All of these factors should be taken into consideration in any truthful assessment of this issue.
Michael O’Driscoll John Paul II Society 154 Blackrock Road Cork
Who can judge a woman seeking an abortion?
It is difficult to believe we are still at a time when a young woman has to prostrate herself in front of the courts and the media in order to travel to another country to obtain an abortion. Abortion is not an easy decision for any woman to make. It is a decision agonised over, cried over, sometimes regretted and sometimes it brings relief. It is very often an action taken and lived with entirely alone. One’s own emotional responses to abortion, however, are irrelevant. If a woman chooses to undertake the journey across the water to seek an abortion, who am I or you to say it is wrong or right?
Neither you nor I can live her life; we will not have to live with the consequences of her actions; we have not had her life experience. What then gives us the right to tell her what she can and cannot do? When will we stop exporting 6,000 Irish women each year, palming off our problems on other jurisdictions while we continue to bury our heads in the sand? When will we stop treating Irish women as if they are incapable of making their own decisions?
When will Irish women be allowed to make choices for themselves? Canvassers are calling to our doors and leaflets and pamphlets are falling through our letterboxes on a daily basis, begging us to vote back into power parties that have failed Irish women consistently in this regard. Not only have they failed women, they have failed our society. They have failed partners, lovers and husbands. They have failed children. They have failed us all. When they call to our doors we should ask what are they going to do about Irish women’s right to choose abortion?’
Beth Wallace Bealad Rossmore Clonakilty Co Cork
Ruling was not a victory for the unborn child
IT’S ironic that your editorial (May 10) in relation to the ‘D’ case judgement was entitled ‘Ruling is a victory for humanity’. Ironic because it obviously wasn’t a victory for the humanity of the unborn child. The judge ruled that the right to travel took precedence over the right of the unborn in the constitution. This seems strange given that he was referring to the right to life of the unborn child. How can a right to travel take precedence over the right to life?
You also rebuke successive governments for failing to legislate for abortion, as do other commentators on this issue in the Irish Examiner. Yet opinion polls have consistently shown the majority of Irish people are pro-life. International trends show that other countries are increasingly rethinking this issue as the scientific evidence for the humanity of the unborn becomes undeniable. Young obstetricians in Britain, for example, are objecting to having to perform abortions.
In America the banning of partial-birth abortions confirms a reversal of attitudes on this issue. The damaging psychological effects of abortion are well-documented, yet none was mentioned in your commentaries. For example, a recent Finnish study by a social scientist, who also happens to be a supporter of abortion, found a suicide rate seven times higher for women who had abortions compared to those who gave birth. All of these factors should be taken into consideration in any truthful assessment of this issue.
Michael O’Driscoll John Paul II Society 154 Blackrock Road Cork
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Ah, The Joys Of Knowing That You're Always Right
Irish Independent Tuesday May 15th 2007
Ah, the joys of knowing that you're always right by Ian O'Doherty
One of the interesting scabs reopened by the Ms D debate has been the bafflement felt by many people at the utter refusal of some religious people to even consider the possibility that it might actually be a kindness - rather than a mere convenience - to terminate the pregnancy of a foetus which will be ultimately born without a brain.
An interesting example of this mentality arrived in the ISpy inbox yesterday, and sat there smugly until it was eventually opened. And these are its words of wisdom: "Isn't more natural to let nature take its course? Who knows, the child might not be as badly affected as the medics predict."But even if the child is going to die, then after the natural term, he or she will die naturally without the recourse of some 'surgeon' tearing it to pieces limb from limb... how sick is that.
Women have the right to be protected from abortion, as have their children."Since when does killing innocent and defenceless children become merely an option, a choice? God have mercy on us all."And these are interesting points, so let's deal with them. Should we just let nature take its course?Applying that logic, the last Pope would have been dead 10 years sooner had his medical team not done so much to stop nature taking its course.
And as for "protecting women from abortion", the last time any of us heard a man talking about protecting women from making their own decisions came from the Taliban. Not that there's much difference between that lot and some of the more excitable fundamentalists
Ah, the joys of knowing that you're always right by Ian O'Doherty
One of the interesting scabs reopened by the Ms D debate has been the bafflement felt by many people at the utter refusal of some religious people to even consider the possibility that it might actually be a kindness - rather than a mere convenience - to terminate the pregnancy of a foetus which will be ultimately born without a brain.
An interesting example of this mentality arrived in the ISpy inbox yesterday, and sat there smugly until it was eventually opened. And these are its words of wisdom: "Isn't more natural to let nature take its course? Who knows, the child might not be as badly affected as the medics predict."But even if the child is going to die, then after the natural term, he or she will die naturally without the recourse of some 'surgeon' tearing it to pieces limb from limb... how sick is that.
Women have the right to be protected from abortion, as have their children."Since when does killing innocent and defenceless children become merely an option, a choice? God have mercy on us all."And these are interesting points, so let's deal with them. Should we just let nature take its course?Applying that logic, the last Pope would have been dead 10 years sooner had his medical team not done so much to stop nature taking its course.
And as for "protecting women from abortion", the last time any of us heard a man talking about protecting women from making their own decisions came from the Taliban. Not that there's much difference between that lot and some of the more excitable fundamentalists
Migrant Women’s Grim Choice On Abortion - Letter in the Irish Examiner
Letter to the Editor-The Irish Examiner- Thursday May 17th
RECENT events make it clearer than ever that we need politicians to commit themselves to providing clear legal protection for women faced with crisis pregnancies by setting a timetable for legislation to underpin the ‘X’ judgement, to deal humanely with the issue of foetal abnormality and ultimately to call a referendum to remove the eighth amendment to the constitution.
Each year around 6,000 Irish women are forced to add to the trauma and expense of pregnancy termination by travelling abroad, often alone. Those are the ones who have the means and freedom to travel — the Women’s Health Council has expressed concern to the HSE about “migrant women accessing unsafe ‘backstreet’ abortions due to the legislative ban on abortions in Ireland and the fact that because of their precarious residence status, many women are afraid to travel … Many ethnic minority women find themselves in situations of isolation, poverty and exploitation. Many women might have been infected with STIs, including HIV, through sexual violence or may even be pregnant through rape”.
I am sickened to learn what these poor women are going through. In the past couple of years there has been actual and anecdotal evidence of women accessing backstreet abortion in Ireland. At least the clinics abroad make the procedure as safe as possible and patients are tended with expert care and understanding. I used to consider how dreadful it must be for people who lived elsewhere, in the developing world for example, and how terrible it must have been in days gone by.
In my ignorance I had not spared a thought for our immigrants going through the dangerous, painful nightmare of backstreet abortions on Irish soil because they are unable to leave the country. It is time for our politicians to wake up to reality. Denying women the right to make their own choices does not make the termination of pregnancies go away, either in the UK or here in our own back streets.
Nicola french Davis, Georges Quay, Cork
RECENT events make it clearer than ever that we need politicians to commit themselves to providing clear legal protection for women faced with crisis pregnancies by setting a timetable for legislation to underpin the ‘X’ judgement, to deal humanely with the issue of foetal abnormality and ultimately to call a referendum to remove the eighth amendment to the constitution.
Each year around 6,000 Irish women are forced to add to the trauma and expense of pregnancy termination by travelling abroad, often alone. Those are the ones who have the means and freedom to travel — the Women’s Health Council has expressed concern to the HSE about “migrant women accessing unsafe ‘backstreet’ abortions due to the legislative ban on abortions in Ireland and the fact that because of their precarious residence status, many women are afraid to travel … Many ethnic minority women find themselves in situations of isolation, poverty and exploitation. Many women might have been infected with STIs, including HIV, through sexual violence or may even be pregnant through rape”.
I am sickened to learn what these poor women are going through. In the past couple of years there has been actual and anecdotal evidence of women accessing backstreet abortion in Ireland. At least the clinics abroad make the procedure as safe as possible and patients are tended with expert care and understanding. I used to consider how dreadful it must be for people who lived elsewhere, in the developing world for example, and how terrible it must have been in days gone by.
In my ignorance I had not spared a thought for our immigrants going through the dangerous, painful nightmare of backstreet abortions on Irish soil because they are unable to leave the country. It is time for our politicians to wake up to reality. Denying women the right to make their own choices does not make the termination of pregnancies go away, either in the UK or here in our own back streets.
Nicola french Davis, Georges Quay, Cork
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Crisis Pregnancy Agency Letter In Todays Irish Independent and Irish Examiner
Letter to the Irish Independent Tuesday May 15th.
HELP FOR THE GIRL IN CRISIS
As the Government body that was set up to address the issue of crisis pregnancy in Ireland, the Crisis Pregnancy Agency welcomes the judgement of Mr Justice Liam McKechnie, where he firmly and unequivocally held that the most crucial aspect of the Miss D case was to establish what course of action was in the best interests of the welfare of the girl.
The Crisis Pregnancy Agency, one of whose aims is to reduce the number of women who opt for abortion, believes that it is imperative for women experiencing crisis pregnancy to be referred to high quality, state-funded, free, non-judgmental crisis pregnancy counselling services.
Good quality crisis pregnancy counselling can reduce the sense of panic for a woman in a time of crisis in her life and can provide her with services and supports that will be of help to her. A woman who experiences a crisis pregnancy has an immediate need for psychological support and medical attention. She may also have longer-term needs for practical information on the supports available to her.
For a woman who decides to travel outside the state for an abortion is it important for her to know that on her return to Ireland she can access a range of state funded post abortion services including post termination counselling and post termination medical check-ups. These services are funded by the Crisis Pregnancy Agency and are free to all women who avail of them.
KATHARINE BULBULIA, CRISIS PREGNANCY AGENCY, CAPEL STREET D1
Letter in the Irish Examiner Tuesday May 15th 2007
D CASE A WELCOME JUDGEMENT
AS the Government body set up to address the issue, the Crisis Pregnancy Agency (CPA) welcomes the judgement of Mr Justice Liam McKechnie where he unequivocally held that the most crucial aspect of the ‘D’ case was to establish what course of action was in the best interests of the welfare of the girl.
The CPA, one of whose aims is to reduce the number of women who opt for abortion, believes it is imperative for women experiencing crisis pregnancy to be referred to high-quality, State-funded, free, non-judgmental crisis pregnancy counselling services. Good quality crisis pregnancy counselling can reduce the sense of panic for a woman in a time of crisis in her life and can provide her with services and supports that will be of help to her.
A woman who experiences a crisis pregnancy has an immediate need for psychological support and medical attention. She may also have longer-term needs for practical information on the supports available to her.
For a woman who decides to travel outside the State for an abortion, it is important for her to know that on her return to Ireland she can access a range of State-funded post-abortion services, including post-termination counselling and medical check-ups. These services are funded by the CPA and are free to all women who avail of them.
The agency has committed to developing best practice guidelines for the counselling and medical professions which come into contact with women and their partners in cases where a foetal abnormality has been diagnosed. These guidelines are particularly necessary in cases where abortion is being considered and will help professionals working in the area to support women and their partners going through this traumatic experience. This can be a very lonely time and access to high-quality support and medical advice is one of the means that care can be provided.
Katharine Bulbulia, Chairperson, Crisis Pregnancy Agency, 89-94 Capel Street, Dublin 1
HELP FOR THE GIRL IN CRISIS
As the Government body that was set up to address the issue of crisis pregnancy in Ireland, the Crisis Pregnancy Agency welcomes the judgement of Mr Justice Liam McKechnie, where he firmly and unequivocally held that the most crucial aspect of the Miss D case was to establish what course of action was in the best interests of the welfare of the girl.
The Crisis Pregnancy Agency, one of whose aims is to reduce the number of women who opt for abortion, believes that it is imperative for women experiencing crisis pregnancy to be referred to high quality, state-funded, free, non-judgmental crisis pregnancy counselling services.
Good quality crisis pregnancy counselling can reduce the sense of panic for a woman in a time of crisis in her life and can provide her with services and supports that will be of help to her. A woman who experiences a crisis pregnancy has an immediate need for psychological support and medical attention. She may also have longer-term needs for practical information on the supports available to her.
For a woman who decides to travel outside the state for an abortion is it important for her to know that on her return to Ireland she can access a range of state funded post abortion services including post termination counselling and post termination medical check-ups. These services are funded by the Crisis Pregnancy Agency and are free to all women who avail of them.
KATHARINE BULBULIA, CRISIS PREGNANCY AGENCY, CAPEL STREET D1
Letter in the Irish Examiner Tuesday May 15th 2007
D CASE A WELCOME JUDGEMENT
AS the Government body set up to address the issue, the Crisis Pregnancy Agency (CPA) welcomes the judgement of Mr Justice Liam McKechnie where he unequivocally held that the most crucial aspect of the ‘D’ case was to establish what course of action was in the best interests of the welfare of the girl.
The CPA, one of whose aims is to reduce the number of women who opt for abortion, believes it is imperative for women experiencing crisis pregnancy to be referred to high-quality, State-funded, free, non-judgmental crisis pregnancy counselling services. Good quality crisis pregnancy counselling can reduce the sense of panic for a woman in a time of crisis in her life and can provide her with services and supports that will be of help to her.
A woman who experiences a crisis pregnancy has an immediate need for psychological support and medical attention. She may also have longer-term needs for practical information on the supports available to her.
For a woman who decides to travel outside the State for an abortion, it is important for her to know that on her return to Ireland she can access a range of State-funded post-abortion services, including post-termination counselling and medical check-ups. These services are funded by the CPA and are free to all women who avail of them.
The agency has committed to developing best practice guidelines for the counselling and medical professions which come into contact with women and their partners in cases where a foetal abnormality has been diagnosed. These guidelines are particularly necessary in cases where abortion is being considered and will help professionals working in the area to support women and their partners going through this traumatic experience. This can be a very lonely time and access to high-quality support and medical advice is one of the means that care can be provided.
Katharine Bulbulia, Chairperson, Crisis Pregnancy Agency, 89-94 Capel Street, Dublin 1
Pro-Life Campaign Comments on Miss D Case- May 2nd
Responding to the High Court challenge by a minor in care seeking leave to travel for an abortion to the UK , Dr Berry Kiely of the Pro-Life Campaign said:
Every unborn child has a unique worth and dignity and is entitled to protection. This is so even where the child has a physical or mental disability.
The notion that abortion is the compassionate solution in this case is mistaken. There is a growing body of evidence showing the long-term negative effects of abortion on women. The minor at the centre of the case is entitled to be made fully aware of the possible consequences of going through with an abortion.
If society decides to end the lives of children based on their disability, it undermines their right to equal respect. A truly life-affirming society, should give all positive supports to mothers and families of disabled children, not just during pregnancy, but throughout their children's lives.
Every unborn child has a unique worth and dignity and is entitled to protection. This is so even where the child has a physical or mental disability.
The notion that abortion is the compassionate solution in this case is mistaken. There is a growing body of evidence showing the long-term negative effects of abortion on women. The minor at the centre of the case is entitled to be made fully aware of the possible consequences of going through with an abortion.
If society decides to end the lives of children based on their disability, it undermines their right to equal respect. A truly life-affirming society, should give all positive supports to mothers and families of disabled children, not just during pregnancy, but throughout their children's lives.
Belfast Telegraph- May 1st- Ahern Says He Has No Plans To Amend Abortion Legislation
From Belfast Telegraph dated May 1st 2007
Ahern says he has no plans to amend abortion legislation
The Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, has said he has no plans to amend Ireland's legislation on abortion in light of the latest challenge being taken in the High Court.Mr Ahern was responding to questions about Miss D, who is seeking permission to travel to England to terminate her pregnancy.The 17-year-old, who is in state care, is four months pregnant with a child that cannot survive due to a brain defect.
Mr Ahern said today that the case was sad and he hoped the teenager would be treated compassionately.However, he also said he had no intention of changing the law to clarify the uncertainty that currently exists in relation to abortion.
Children's Minister Brian Lenihan, meanwhile, said no opposition party had come up with any better solution than the constitutional amendment rejected by the electorate in 2002.
Elsewhere, Labour Party leader Pat Rabbitte said today that he hoped Miss D would be allowed travel to Britain for a termination and it was his party's policy to draw up new legislation on abortion.
Ahern says he has no plans to amend abortion legislation
The Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, has said he has no plans to amend Ireland's legislation on abortion in light of the latest challenge being taken in the High Court.Mr Ahern was responding to questions about Miss D, who is seeking permission to travel to England to terminate her pregnancy.The 17-year-old, who is in state care, is four months pregnant with a child that cannot survive due to a brain defect.
Mr Ahern said today that the case was sad and he hoped the teenager would be treated compassionately.However, he also said he had no intention of changing the law to clarify the uncertainty that currently exists in relation to abortion.
Children's Minister Brian Lenihan, meanwhile, said no opposition party had come up with any better solution than the constitutional amendment rejected by the electorate in 2002.
Elsewhere, Labour Party leader Pat Rabbitte said today that he hoped Miss D would be allowed travel to Britain for a termination and it was his party's policy to draw up new legislation on abortion.
Monday, May 14, 2007
Abortion Rights UK Welcomes Irish Abortion Ruling
Abortion Rights UK welcomes Irish abortion ruling
Abortion Rights UK welcomes the Irish abortion ruling to allow ‘Miss D’ to travel to Britain for a termination. The circumstances surrounding this tragic case highlight the anachronism and inequity of the Irish law. Ireland has one of the harshest abortion laws in Europe, one affording equal legal status to the pregnant woman and the foetus and allowing abortion only to save the life of the woman.
Only Malta has tighter legislation - criminalising all abortion – followed by Poland where since 1993 women’s abortion rights have been severely curtailed.
Anne Quesney, Director of Abortion Rights said: ‘Forcing a woman to carry an intolerable pregnancy to term is inhumane and unacceptable and no woman should ever have to face such cruel situation. But invoking ‘Miss D’s right to travel circumvents the burning issue at stake here. It is time for Ireland to move into the 21st century and legalise abortion’.
Abortion Rights UK is actively supporting the Safe and Legal in Ireland campaign, which is harnessing growing support for liberalisation.
Abortion Rights UK welcomes the Irish abortion ruling to allow ‘Miss D’ to travel to Britain for a termination. The circumstances surrounding this tragic case highlight the anachronism and inequity of the Irish law. Ireland has one of the harshest abortion laws in Europe, one affording equal legal status to the pregnant woman and the foetus and allowing abortion only to save the life of the woman.
Only Malta has tighter legislation - criminalising all abortion – followed by Poland where since 1993 women’s abortion rights have been severely curtailed.
Anne Quesney, Director of Abortion Rights said: ‘Forcing a woman to carry an intolerable pregnancy to term is inhumane and unacceptable and no woman should ever have to face such cruel situation. But invoking ‘Miss D’s right to travel circumvents the burning issue at stake here. It is time for Ireland to move into the 21st century and legalise abortion’.
Abortion Rights UK is actively supporting the Safe and Legal in Ireland campaign, which is harnessing growing support for liberalisation.
There's A Welcome There For You.... In The Dark Ages
Ian O'Doherty The Irish Independent Monday May 14th 2007
There's no doubt that this is the best time to be living in Ireland. And, every now and then, we can be forgiven for assuming that we really have moved on from the grim, monochromatic hell-hole that was Ireland in the past.
I often find it amusing that when I talk to my younger brother and sister about the Ireland I grew up in during the 1980s, they look at me as if I'm mad. But last week, my brother Daniel and sister Katie, 21-year-old twins who grew up in a different, more confident Ireland saw a disturbing snapshot of what this country was like before they arrived on the scene.
It's not just that some official in the HSE tried to stop a young woman from travelling abroad by contacting both the Gardai and the passport office in an effort to prevent Ms D from leaving the jurisdiction.
It's not even that this poor young woman had to go through the indignity of a court case merely to ascertain that she could travel like a normal person.
It was, in fact, the cranks, weirdoes, religious zealots and morons who gathered outside the courts to hassle and barrack her. And that was what shocked my younger siblings so much.
Friends of mine who were in and around the Four Courts last week say that it was like a timewarp straight back to the 1980s. As Ms D - a young woman desperately in need of support and sympathy - entered the court, the so called "pro-life" brigade swarmed around to insult and threaten her.
One woman of my acquaintance was told by some of these charming people that Ms D was nothing more than a murderer.
The people from groups like Choice Ireland, who had arrived to show support for Ms D and her predicament, were insulted and threatened. And, not surprisingly, the usual suspects were there.
I recognised, for instance, one former Youth Defence apparatchik - a man who once threatened with me with physical violence and boasted that he knew where I lived after I interviewed him a few years ago - leading the cavalcade of hate, just like the bad old days.
In fact, it seemed that all the old faces from the dark days of the Irish abortion debates had once more crawled out of the woodwork, ready to try to force their obnoxious beliefs down our throats.
But if these lunatics and their feeble protests proved anything, it was how utterly callous and cruel the so called "pro-life" brigade can be. Although I do accept totally that people of good conscience can disagree on abortion.
When I was asked during a radio interview a few years ago about whether I would be happy to see a loved one or girlfriend of mine have an abortion I answered the only truthful way I could - I simply don't know. I am honestly conflicted.
Which means, as a man, that I should not try and force my own beliefs onto any woman. It really is that simple. Ultimately, it is not my choice.
But what shames the "pro-life" mob, no matter how worthy their arguments might be in theory, was the fact that they were protesting against a girl terminating the pregnancy of a child who will die shortly after being born.
And it's this fact alone which highlights the moral bankruptcy of these people. Can you honestly, with your hand on your heart, tell a young woman that she should carry to full-term a baby which will die when she delivers it? How sick is that?
Thankfully, the courts came to the right decision and the girl is allowed to travel and do the right thing.
But if the whole sorry saga proved one thing, it was this - the lunatics haven't gone away, and given half a chance they would drag us back to the sick, bad old days of dear, pious Ireland.
Perish the thought.
There's no doubt that this is the best time to be living in Ireland. And, every now and then, we can be forgiven for assuming that we really have moved on from the grim, monochromatic hell-hole that was Ireland in the past.
I often find it amusing that when I talk to my younger brother and sister about the Ireland I grew up in during the 1980s, they look at me as if I'm mad. But last week, my brother Daniel and sister Katie, 21-year-old twins who grew up in a different, more confident Ireland saw a disturbing snapshot of what this country was like before they arrived on the scene.
It's not just that some official in the HSE tried to stop a young woman from travelling abroad by contacting both the Gardai and the passport office in an effort to prevent Ms D from leaving the jurisdiction.
It's not even that this poor young woman had to go through the indignity of a court case merely to ascertain that she could travel like a normal person.
It was, in fact, the cranks, weirdoes, religious zealots and morons who gathered outside the courts to hassle and barrack her. And that was what shocked my younger siblings so much.
Friends of mine who were in and around the Four Courts last week say that it was like a timewarp straight back to the 1980s. As Ms D - a young woman desperately in need of support and sympathy - entered the court, the so called "pro-life" brigade swarmed around to insult and threaten her.
One woman of my acquaintance was told by some of these charming people that Ms D was nothing more than a murderer.
The people from groups like Choice Ireland, who had arrived to show support for Ms D and her predicament, were insulted and threatened. And, not surprisingly, the usual suspects were there.
I recognised, for instance, one former Youth Defence apparatchik - a man who once threatened with me with physical violence and boasted that he knew where I lived after I interviewed him a few years ago - leading the cavalcade of hate, just like the bad old days.
In fact, it seemed that all the old faces from the dark days of the Irish abortion debates had once more crawled out of the woodwork, ready to try to force their obnoxious beliefs down our throats.
But if these lunatics and their feeble protests proved anything, it was how utterly callous and cruel the so called "pro-life" brigade can be. Although I do accept totally that people of good conscience can disagree on abortion.
When I was asked during a radio interview a few years ago about whether I would be happy to see a loved one or girlfriend of mine have an abortion I answered the only truthful way I could - I simply don't know. I am honestly conflicted.
Which means, as a man, that I should not try and force my own beliefs onto any woman. It really is that simple. Ultimately, it is not my choice.
But what shames the "pro-life" mob, no matter how worthy their arguments might be in theory, was the fact that they were protesting against a girl terminating the pregnancy of a child who will die shortly after being born.
And it's this fact alone which highlights the moral bankruptcy of these people. Can you honestly, with your hand on your heart, tell a young woman that she should carry to full-term a baby which will die when she delivers it? How sick is that?
Thankfully, the courts came to the right decision and the girl is allowed to travel and do the right thing.
But if the whole sorry saga proved one thing, it was this - the lunatics haven't gone away, and given half a chance they would drag us back to the sick, bad old days of dear, pious Ireland.
Perish the thought.
We Need Closure On Abortion
Sarah Carey The Sunday Times Sunday May 13th 2007
I thought I understood the law on abortion until the Miss D case was decided last week. Its complexities have left me utterly confused, although that appears to place me in the same boat as many of Ireland's finest legal minds.
Following Justice Liam McKechnie's judgment, the law appears to be this: the right to life of the unborn cannot interfere with the right to travel for an abortion. This means that any pregnant woman, even a teenager in the care of the state, must be allowed to leave a country for an abortion regardless of the circumstances.
The woman might need the abortion because her life is at risk, or because her baby is unviable, or even if it was conceived under astrological conditions. Doesn't matter: not only can she go, but if any agency or officer of the state tries to uphold the right to life of the unborn child by stopping her, they will lose their case in court and may even get a slap on the wrist from the judge for trying.
It seems official now- Ireland has state sanctioned abortion on demand provided it takes place in England. And whose fault is this? By delicious irony, the pro-life movement's. This whole sorry mess started in 1983, when the Garret Fitzgerald-led government rejected the wording of a referendum on abortion proposed by Fianna Fáil. Peter Sutherland, the attorney general, warned Fitzgerald and his cabinet that the amendment was flawed on several counts, one of which was that it could actually enshrine the right to an abortion in the constitution.
A bitter debate ensued during which Fine Gael was accused of trying to introduce abortion into Ireland. The amendment passed, and the X case in 1992 proved Sutherland right. The subsequent referendums on travel and information all arose from this foolish 'pro-life' amendment in 1983.
So let's summarise the political position today: Labour is the only party willing to commit to legislate for abortion in this country. Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil have specifically stated they have no plans to provide legislation. The Progressive Democrats and the Green Party have no policy at all, and Sinn Féin has issued a statement that includes key words such as 'compassion' but says nothing about plans to legislate.
Sinn Féin says the decision rests with the woman, but given its distinct lack of enthusiasm for legislation, the pregnant woman's decision appears to incorporate deciding whether to fly Aer Lingus or Ryanair to London.
Who can blame the parties for their lily-livered approach? We get the politicians we deserve, and they address the issues that we ask them to. If Irish people really wanted to sort out abortion once and for all, then politicians would jump to it. Instead the political consensus is on the status quo.
Here's what that means: every year, women in their thousands should buy cheap airline tickets and should slip off to Britain to deal with their unseemly little problems. When they come back, they shoulde keep quiet so we can pretend that there's no abortion in Ireland. And if any complicated cases come to court, could pregnant women please, unlike the uncooperative Miss D, pretend they are suicidal? Then the campaigners on either side can sit back and shriek about the disgrace of it all. If you're pro-life it's a disgrace that judges are bringing in abortion. If you are pro-choice, it's a disgrace that that women are being forced into court. Everyone else is spared the challenge of working out a position in a logical manner. Logic is only tenuously linked to the abortion issue.
I met a political canvasser yesterday who was delighted that Enda Kenny would n't try to introduce abortion into Ireland, but she was worried abour Labour. Doesn't she get it? Are these pro-lifers so blinded by their passion that they cannot see that we already have abortion? Do they really believe that taking the life of an unborn child in England rather than Ireland somehow negates the act? But because these hysterics shouts loudest, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are afraid of them.
The time has come for political action and we are all going to have to be sensible about it. Labour's policy is the one that I favour. It is commited to bringing forward legislation to provide for the termination of pregnancy where there is a risk of serious injury to the woman, or a threat to her life (including suicide), and where foetal abnormality is such that the foetus will never be born alive (like Miss D's case). I firmly believe a majority of people in the country would agree to abortion in these circumstances.
Legislating for the circumstances outlined by Labour is sensible and the least that the women of Ireland deserve. Irish women who discover that their baby cannot live or that their own health is dangerously at risk should not have to sneak over to England, like thieves in the night, in order to have terminations. Indeed, in 2002, the masters of three main maternity hospitals agreed that terminations in cases like Miss D's should be available in Ireland.
In order for these proposals to have some hope of being passed in the Dáil, however, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael would have to change their positions. Perhaps an election win might give Enda Kenny some confidence on the issue. But Fianna Fáil has been in power for 13 of the 15 years since the X case and refused to bring in legislation. So their policy seems to be to do nothing when in power and to oppose legislation when not.
It's easy to blame the HSE for Miss D's problems, but if we don't ask our politicians to provide legislation, then her plight is our fault.
There is no point complaining about the trauma this 17-year-old suffered unless those with a liberal attitude to abortion demand legislation. Thousands of women in Ireland have had abortions. Other women should be capable of putting themselves in their shoes. All those women have husbands and boyfriends and friends. Where are their voices?
Down the pub grumbling about the HSE and Ms D, clearly, and not on the streets pushing our politicians off the fence.
I thought I understood the law on abortion until the Miss D case was decided last week. Its complexities have left me utterly confused, although that appears to place me in the same boat as many of Ireland's finest legal minds.
Following Justice Liam McKechnie's judgment, the law appears to be this: the right to life of the unborn cannot interfere with the right to travel for an abortion. This means that any pregnant woman, even a teenager in the care of the state, must be allowed to leave a country for an abortion regardless of the circumstances.
The woman might need the abortion because her life is at risk, or because her baby is unviable, or even if it was conceived under astrological conditions. Doesn't matter: not only can she go, but if any agency or officer of the state tries to uphold the right to life of the unborn child by stopping her, they will lose their case in court and may even get a slap on the wrist from the judge for trying.
It seems official now- Ireland has state sanctioned abortion on demand provided it takes place in England. And whose fault is this? By delicious irony, the pro-life movement's. This whole sorry mess started in 1983, when the Garret Fitzgerald-led government rejected the wording of a referendum on abortion proposed by Fianna Fáil. Peter Sutherland, the attorney general, warned Fitzgerald and his cabinet that the amendment was flawed on several counts, one of which was that it could actually enshrine the right to an abortion in the constitution.
A bitter debate ensued during which Fine Gael was accused of trying to introduce abortion into Ireland. The amendment passed, and the X case in 1992 proved Sutherland right. The subsequent referendums on travel and information all arose from this foolish 'pro-life' amendment in 1983.
So let's summarise the political position today: Labour is the only party willing to commit to legislate for abortion in this country. Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil have specifically stated they have no plans to provide legislation. The Progressive Democrats and the Green Party have no policy at all, and Sinn Féin has issued a statement that includes key words such as 'compassion' but says nothing about plans to legislate.
Sinn Féin says the decision rests with the woman, but given its distinct lack of enthusiasm for legislation, the pregnant woman's decision appears to incorporate deciding whether to fly Aer Lingus or Ryanair to London.
Who can blame the parties for their lily-livered approach? We get the politicians we deserve, and they address the issues that we ask them to. If Irish people really wanted to sort out abortion once and for all, then politicians would jump to it. Instead the political consensus is on the status quo.
Here's what that means: every year, women in their thousands should buy cheap airline tickets and should slip off to Britain to deal with their unseemly little problems. When they come back, they shoulde keep quiet so we can pretend that there's no abortion in Ireland. And if any complicated cases come to court, could pregnant women please, unlike the uncooperative Miss D, pretend they are suicidal? Then the campaigners on either side can sit back and shriek about the disgrace of it all. If you're pro-life it's a disgrace that judges are bringing in abortion. If you are pro-choice, it's a disgrace that that women are being forced into court. Everyone else is spared the challenge of working out a position in a logical manner. Logic is only tenuously linked to the abortion issue.
I met a political canvasser yesterday who was delighted that Enda Kenny would n't try to introduce abortion into Ireland, but she was worried abour Labour. Doesn't she get it? Are these pro-lifers so blinded by their passion that they cannot see that we already have abortion? Do they really believe that taking the life of an unborn child in England rather than Ireland somehow negates the act? But because these hysterics shouts loudest, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are afraid of them.
The time has come for political action and we are all going to have to be sensible about it. Labour's policy is the one that I favour. It is commited to bringing forward legislation to provide for the termination of pregnancy where there is a risk of serious injury to the woman, or a threat to her life (including suicide), and where foetal abnormality is such that the foetus will never be born alive (like Miss D's case). I firmly believe a majority of people in the country would agree to abortion in these circumstances.
Legislating for the circumstances outlined by Labour is sensible and the least that the women of Ireland deserve. Irish women who discover that their baby cannot live or that their own health is dangerously at risk should not have to sneak over to England, like thieves in the night, in order to have terminations. Indeed, in 2002, the masters of three main maternity hospitals agreed that terminations in cases like Miss D's should be available in Ireland.
In order for these proposals to have some hope of being passed in the Dáil, however, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael would have to change their positions. Perhaps an election win might give Enda Kenny some confidence on the issue. But Fianna Fáil has been in power for 13 of the 15 years since the X case and refused to bring in legislation. So their policy seems to be to do nothing when in power and to oppose legislation when not.
It's easy to blame the HSE for Miss D's problems, but if we don't ask our politicians to provide legislation, then her plight is our fault.
There is no point complaining about the trauma this 17-year-old suffered unless those with a liberal attitude to abortion demand legislation. Thousands of women in Ireland have had abortions. Other women should be capable of putting themselves in their shoes. All those women have husbands and boyfriends and friends. Where are their voices?
Down the pub grumbling about the HSE and Ms D, clearly, and not on the streets pushing our politicians off the fence.
The Giants of Mediocrity Are Left To Slug It Out
In an article in the Sunday Independent, May 13th 2007, Alan Ruddock writes about the forthcoming TV debate between Bertie Ahern, leader of Fianna Fail and Enda Kenny of Fine Gael to be held this coming Thursday night on RTE television as part of Ireland's general election.
Referring to the issue of abortion-
'Which of the two men is best placed to quell unrest in the public service, yet at the same time drive through the essential reforms to make it more efficient? Which man will be tougher on crime, but equally trusted not to destroy our civil liberties in the process? And which of them has the strength of character to make difficult decisions in the broader national interest?
Depressingly the indications are that both will fail any critical test. Ahern is a serial avoider of difficult decisions, and it has been his timidity and fear of confrontation that has created the bloated and unreformed colossus that masquerades as our 'public service' sector. Ahern's fear of tough decisions has also meant that he fails on basic legislative duties too.
Promised and essential legislation to deal with the fall-out from our abortion referenda has been ducked for five years; bad laws on statutory rape survive because he could not bring himself to call a referendum; libel laws remain unreformed, despite any number of false starts.
The list of legislative failure rooted in political cowardice is long and igmoninious. Kenny, though, promises more of the same, and has already assured the Irish Catholic that he, too, will consciously avoid his democratic duty and will fail to legislate on abortion. If he is prepared to ignore abortion, then you can be sure that he will find plenty more tough decisions to avoid. '
Referring to the issue of abortion-
'Which of the two men is best placed to quell unrest in the public service, yet at the same time drive through the essential reforms to make it more efficient? Which man will be tougher on crime, but equally trusted not to destroy our civil liberties in the process? And which of them has the strength of character to make difficult decisions in the broader national interest?
Depressingly the indications are that both will fail any critical test. Ahern is a serial avoider of difficult decisions, and it has been his timidity and fear of confrontation that has created the bloated and unreformed colossus that masquerades as our 'public service' sector. Ahern's fear of tough decisions has also meant that he fails on basic legislative duties too.
Promised and essential legislation to deal with the fall-out from our abortion referenda has been ducked for five years; bad laws on statutory rape survive because he could not bring himself to call a referendum; libel laws remain unreformed, despite any number of false starts.
The list of legislative failure rooted in political cowardice is long and igmoninious. Kenny, though, promises more of the same, and has already assured the Irish Catholic that he, too, will consciously avoid his democratic duty and will fail to legislate on abortion. If he is prepared to ignore abortion, then you can be sure that he will find plenty more tough decisions to avoid. '
Social Worker For Miss D Was Acting 'On Legal Advice'
MAEVE SHEEHAN The Sunday Independent May 13th 2007
THE Health Service Executive has defended its handling of the Miss D case in the wake of severe criticisms from a High Court judge for trying to stop a pregnant teenager from travelling for an abortion.
As the girl at the centre of the abortion controversy spoke about her ordeal this weekend, the health authority insisted that it was acting on legal advice throughout the saga. The HSE was criticised by the High Court for calling in the gardai and for intervening with the Passport Office to impede her plans.
Miss D, who is 17 and in the care of the HSE, sought an abortion on learning that her baby suffered from a fatal brain disorder. She took High Court action after the HSE threatened to restrain her by force if necessary.
Last week, Judge Liam McKechnie ruled that there was nothing to stop Miss D from travelling abroad for an abortion. Instead she had to endure a protracted and unnecessary legal wrangle in the High Court.
Now Miss D has disclosed in an interview in the Irish Independent that she does not intend to have an abortion after all, because she doesn't want to put her baby through it. Instead she plans to have her baby induced.
"There were pictures of babies who had been aborted and I didn't like the way it was done. My baby deserves more than that - so I am going to be induced and I will get to hold my baby. I'll go through labour like a normal woman. If it breathes when it comes out, I will be able to get a birth certificate."
The girl said she was angry with the HSE for putting her under pressure when she revealed she wanted to have an abortion.
"Who are these people in the court room that can make my decision. It is my body. They [the HSE] don't own my body. I own my body. I was angry over the way the HSE were treating me. I was nothing," she said.
"They were talking all over me and I had no say in anything that happened, anything at all. I was just told what to do and I just had to do it. It should have been the other way around."
On learning of her baby's fatal brain condition, anencephaly, Miss D told her social worker that she intended to have an abortion. The HSE sought to stop her from travelling for an abortion without its consent, telling her it would use force to restrain her. The social worker wrote to gardai, saying they "must" stop her. The HSE also wrote to the passport office saying it had not consented to her application for a passport, a fact it failed to disclose until later in the court hearing.
When the girl went to the High Court, the HSE changed position dramatically, saying that it wasn't opposed to the girl travelling for an abortion after all - if the District Court allowed it. But its failure to apply to the District Court was one of Judge McKechnie's key criticisms of the HSE.
On Wednesday the High Court then ruled that there was no law preventing Miss D from travelling. Mr Justice Liam McKechnie said the case should never have been brought in the first place.
Miss D told the Irish Independent this weekend: "They could have sorted it out more quietly and then I wouldn't have been dragged to court."
The HSE said this weekend that a social worker who asked gardai to restrain the girl from travelling an abortion abroad was acting on legal advice. The HSE, which has offered to pay for Miss D's abortion, is now conducting a review of its handling of the latest abortion controversy.
"The HSE intended to make an application to the District Court on 27th April 2007. However, there was no sitting scheduled in the District Court until the following Tuesday, 1st May. Then on Monday 30th April, an application was made to the High Court on behalf of Miss D and commenced the following day," it said.
THE Health Service Executive has defended its handling of the Miss D case in the wake of severe criticisms from a High Court judge for trying to stop a pregnant teenager from travelling for an abortion.
As the girl at the centre of the abortion controversy spoke about her ordeal this weekend, the health authority insisted that it was acting on legal advice throughout the saga. The HSE was criticised by the High Court for calling in the gardai and for intervening with the Passport Office to impede her plans.
Miss D, who is 17 and in the care of the HSE, sought an abortion on learning that her baby suffered from a fatal brain disorder. She took High Court action after the HSE threatened to restrain her by force if necessary.
Last week, Judge Liam McKechnie ruled that there was nothing to stop Miss D from travelling abroad for an abortion. Instead she had to endure a protracted and unnecessary legal wrangle in the High Court.
Now Miss D has disclosed in an interview in the Irish Independent that she does not intend to have an abortion after all, because she doesn't want to put her baby through it. Instead she plans to have her baby induced.
"There were pictures of babies who had been aborted and I didn't like the way it was done. My baby deserves more than that - so I am going to be induced and I will get to hold my baby. I'll go through labour like a normal woman. If it breathes when it comes out, I will be able to get a birth certificate."
The girl said she was angry with the HSE for putting her under pressure when she revealed she wanted to have an abortion.
"Who are these people in the court room that can make my decision. It is my body. They [the HSE] don't own my body. I own my body. I was angry over the way the HSE were treating me. I was nothing," she said.
"They were talking all over me and I had no say in anything that happened, anything at all. I was just told what to do and I just had to do it. It should have been the other way around."
On learning of her baby's fatal brain condition, anencephaly, Miss D told her social worker that she intended to have an abortion. The HSE sought to stop her from travelling for an abortion without its consent, telling her it would use force to restrain her. The social worker wrote to gardai, saying they "must" stop her. The HSE also wrote to the passport office saying it had not consented to her application for a passport, a fact it failed to disclose until later in the court hearing.
When the girl went to the High Court, the HSE changed position dramatically, saying that it wasn't opposed to the girl travelling for an abortion after all - if the District Court allowed it. But its failure to apply to the District Court was one of Judge McKechnie's key criticisms of the HSE.
On Wednesday the High Court then ruled that there was no law preventing Miss D from travelling. Mr Justice Liam McKechnie said the case should never have been brought in the first place.
Miss D told the Irish Independent this weekend: "They could have sorted it out more quietly and then I wouldn't have been dragged to court."
The HSE said this weekend that a social worker who asked gardai to restrain the girl from travelling an abortion abroad was acting on legal advice. The HSE, which has offered to pay for Miss D's abortion, is now conducting a review of its handling of the latest abortion controversy.
"The HSE intended to make an application to the District Court on 27th April 2007. However, there was no sitting scheduled in the District Court until the following Tuesday, 1st May. Then on Monday 30th April, an application was made to the High Court on behalf of Miss D and commenced the following day," it said.
HSE May Appeal Part Of Miss D Ruling
The Irish Times Friday May 9th 2007
The Health Service Executive (HSE) is still considering the possibility of appealing aspects of the Miss D judgment, due to its possible implications for children in State care. Carl O'Brien and Alison Healy report.
The ruling, which granted a 17-year-old girl in care the right to travel to the UK for an abortion, has cast doubt on the HSE's authority to act in the place of parents on behalf of hundreds of children who are the subject of interim care orders.
In particular, senior officials are concerned that older children in care who want an abortion may not need a District Court order to travel abroad.
In a statement yesterday, the HSE said that it would examine the legal implications in terms of the HSE's duties and responsibilities under childcare legislation.
In addition, it said that it would carefully study the judgment of the High Court to see what changes, if any, may be required in its procedures and practices for dealing with such cases.
Meanwhile, solicitor and children's law expert Geoffrey Shannon said that the Miss D judgment was unlikely to cause chaos for children in care and its implications should be not exaggerated.
He insisted that the ruling would not lead to children in care leaving the country whenever they felt like it. "Let's not overly exaggerate the significance of this case," he said, adding that the HSE still had the power to act in place of the parent on behalf of children under 16.
Questions did arise for mature minors, children aged between 16 and 18, whether they were in care or not, Mr Shannon said.
"There's always been a twilight zone for children aged 16 and 17. A child has rights and, as the State argued, those rights are not delivered to them by courier on their 18th birthday. Miss D was 17 and we see that Miss D had actually quite significant rights."
He also pointed out that, from the age of 16, a child had the right to make decisions on medical treatment.
The issue affected a very small number of children, he said. Of the 5,330 or so children in care, just "a small fraction, perhaps less than 10 per cent" were aged 16 or 17.
Minister for Justice Michael McDowell welcomed the fact that the High Court had found "a humane and common-sense solution". He said that the court ruling supported his view that the gardaà were not a group of people who could be deployed to keep people in Ireland in such circumstances. "I'm glad to see that the High Court judge echoed my view in this regard," he added.
Asked if something should be done to ensure that a similar case would not arise again, he said: "If you're suggesting that we're going to at this stage start discussing the abortion issue in the context of the general election - I'm not going to do that."
Dr Declan Keane, master of the National Maternity Hospital in Holles Street, told RTÉ yesterday that there was "a strong cohort" of obstetricians who believed that terminations should be carried out in this country if the baby had absolutely no chance of life outside the womb.
The Health Service Executive (HSE) is still considering the possibility of appealing aspects of the Miss D judgment, due to its possible implications for children in State care. Carl O'Brien and Alison Healy report.
The ruling, which granted a 17-year-old girl in care the right to travel to the UK for an abortion, has cast doubt on the HSE's authority to act in the place of parents on behalf of hundreds of children who are the subject of interim care orders.
In particular, senior officials are concerned that older children in care who want an abortion may not need a District Court order to travel abroad.
In a statement yesterday, the HSE said that it would examine the legal implications in terms of the HSE's duties and responsibilities under childcare legislation.
In addition, it said that it would carefully study the judgment of the High Court to see what changes, if any, may be required in its procedures and practices for dealing with such cases.
Meanwhile, solicitor and children's law expert Geoffrey Shannon said that the Miss D judgment was unlikely to cause chaos for children in care and its implications should be not exaggerated.
He insisted that the ruling would not lead to children in care leaving the country whenever they felt like it. "Let's not overly exaggerate the significance of this case," he said, adding that the HSE still had the power to act in place of the parent on behalf of children under 16.
Questions did arise for mature minors, children aged between 16 and 18, whether they were in care or not, Mr Shannon said.
"There's always been a twilight zone for children aged 16 and 17. A child has rights and, as the State argued, those rights are not delivered to them by courier on their 18th birthday. Miss D was 17 and we see that Miss D had actually quite significant rights."
He also pointed out that, from the age of 16, a child had the right to make decisions on medical treatment.
The issue affected a very small number of children, he said. Of the 5,330 or so children in care, just "a small fraction, perhaps less than 10 per cent" were aged 16 or 17.
Minister for Justice Michael McDowell welcomed the fact that the High Court had found "a humane and common-sense solution". He said that the court ruling supported his view that the gardaà were not a group of people who could be deployed to keep people in Ireland in such circumstances. "I'm glad to see that the High Court judge echoed my view in this regard," he added.
Asked if something should be done to ensure that a similar case would not arise again, he said: "If you're suggesting that we're going to at this stage start discussing the abortion issue in the context of the general election - I'm not going to do that."
Dr Declan Keane, master of the National Maternity Hospital in Holles Street, told RTÉ yesterday that there was "a strong cohort" of obstetricians who believed that terminations should be carried out in this country if the baby had absolutely no chance of life outside the womb.
Teenager Is Being Treated 'Like A Witch From Salem'
Anne-Marie Walsh Irish Independent Friday May 9th 2007.
A MOTHER who faced a similar ordeal to Miss D six years ago said the teenager's predicament was like something from 'Salem'.
Deirdre de Barra referred to the US town, famous for its witch hunts in 1692, while commenting on the situation regarding the abortion of foetuses that cannot survive.
She said she resented the fact that she also had to leave Ireland to have an abortion when she discovered she was carrying a foetus that would die within days of birth.
The mother-of-two strongly influenced public opinion in the run up to the 2002 abortion referendum when she went public about her difficult pregnancy in a letter to a newspaper.
Yesterday she said all the political parties had ignored the issue of such pregnancies. "When you think about it, she is being sent away," she said.
"This is a very progressive country and we are listening to election manifestos every day. Not one of the political parties has taken a stand on this."
She said the type of publicity that surrounded Miss D's case was the reason she did not seek any remedy in the Irish courts.
"It's always been the belief that if any measure of abortion was allowed in this country then it would open up the floodgates," she said.
"These things can be very tightly controlled. There are chromosomal abnormalities incompatible with life. There are conditions like that of Miss D's case. It can be very tightly controlled and it's unfortunate that organisations that have vested interests put these arguments forward.
""Political parties take positions on abortion completely ignoring an area like this," she added.
A MOTHER who faced a similar ordeal to Miss D six years ago said the teenager's predicament was like something from 'Salem'.
Deirdre de Barra referred to the US town, famous for its witch hunts in 1692, while commenting on the situation regarding the abortion of foetuses that cannot survive.
She said she resented the fact that she also had to leave Ireland to have an abortion when she discovered she was carrying a foetus that would die within days of birth.
The mother-of-two strongly influenced public opinion in the run up to the 2002 abortion referendum when she went public about her difficult pregnancy in a letter to a newspaper.
Yesterday she said all the political parties had ignored the issue of such pregnancies. "When you think about it, she is being sent away," she said.
"This is a very progressive country and we are listening to election manifestos every day. Not one of the political parties has taken a stand on this."
She said the type of publicity that surrounded Miss D's case was the reason she did not seek any remedy in the Irish courts.
"It's always been the belief that if any measure of abortion was allowed in this country then it would open up the floodgates," she said.
"These things can be very tightly controlled. There are chromosomal abnormalities incompatible with life. There are conditions like that of Miss D's case. It can be very tightly controlled and it's unfortunate that organisations that have vested interests put these arguments forward.
""Political parties take positions on abortion completely ignoring an area like this," she added.
Dissenting Patients Opt To Leave Pro-Abortion Consultant's Care.
Anne-Marie Walsh Irish Independent Friday May 9th 2007.
A LEADING obstetrician has revealed that three patients asked to leave his care yesterday when he went public about his views on abortion.
Dr Declan Keane said they contacted Holles Street Hospital and asked to switch consultants after hearing him support terminations in situations like that of Miss D.
The Master of the National Maternity Hospital said he believed the majority of the more than 104 obstetricians that worked in Ireland would support abortion where a foetus could not survive. But he said many of the consultants were reluctant to speak out about their views.
Consultants at all the country's maternity hospitals, including The Coombe, St Munchin's, and Cork University Hospital, were contacted by the Irish Independent yesterday.
All were unavailable for comment except Dr John Morrison at NUI Galway. He agreed most obstetricians would support a termination in cases of "lethal foetal malformation".
Dr Keane was one of three masters, as well as Michael Geary at the Rotunda and Sean Daly at The Coombe, who made their views public before the last referendum. Their statement was critical in swaying voters from passing a referendum that would have removed the risk of suicide as a grounds for a lawful termination here.
"Nothing gets this country going more than the question of abortion," said Dr Keane. "I think these patients' decisions to leave my care is a reactive thing, and I can understand that as abortion is a highly divisive issue. Three patients rang up to switch their doctor. I was told two wanted to change to other consultants. There are always patients who don't agree with you.
"It's difficult to know exactly how many obstetricians would support abortion in these circumstances as there has never been a straw poll, but I would say there is probably a majority.
"It's very divisive but I think there's a strong cohort of obstetricians in this country who certainly agree in conditions where the baby has no possibility of living life outside the womb, and there are very few of these conditions. There is a handful, of which anencephaly is one. We should be looking at ways of dealing with that in this country."
He insisted abortion in such cases would not lead to a free-for-all where women might abort babies when a scan showed they had a minor disability, such as a cleft palate.
A LEADING obstetrician has revealed that three patients asked to leave his care yesterday when he went public about his views on abortion.
Dr Declan Keane said they contacted Holles Street Hospital and asked to switch consultants after hearing him support terminations in situations like that of Miss D.
The Master of the National Maternity Hospital said he believed the majority of the more than 104 obstetricians that worked in Ireland would support abortion where a foetus could not survive. But he said many of the consultants were reluctant to speak out about their views.
Consultants at all the country's maternity hospitals, including The Coombe, St Munchin's, and Cork University Hospital, were contacted by the Irish Independent yesterday.
All were unavailable for comment except Dr John Morrison at NUI Galway. He agreed most obstetricians would support a termination in cases of "lethal foetal malformation".
Dr Keane was one of three masters, as well as Michael Geary at the Rotunda and Sean Daly at The Coombe, who made their views public before the last referendum. Their statement was critical in swaying voters from passing a referendum that would have removed the risk of suicide as a grounds for a lawful termination here.
"Nothing gets this country going more than the question of abortion," said Dr Keane. "I think these patients' decisions to leave my care is a reactive thing, and I can understand that as abortion is a highly divisive issue. Three patients rang up to switch their doctor. I was told two wanted to change to other consultants. There are always patients who don't agree with you.
"It's difficult to know exactly how many obstetricians would support abortion in these circumstances as there has never been a straw poll, but I would say there is probably a majority.
"It's very divisive but I think there's a strong cohort of obstetricians in this country who certainly agree in conditions where the baby has no possibility of living life outside the womb, and there are very few of these conditions. There is a handful, of which anencephaly is one. We should be looking at ways of dealing with that in this country."
He insisted abortion in such cases would not lead to a free-for-all where women might abort babies when a scan showed they had a minor disability, such as a cleft palate.
HSE To Probe Handling Of Miss D Case
Dearbhail McDonald Irish Independent Friday May 9th 2007.
AN inquiry has been launched by the HSE into its handling of the Miss D abortion case.
But the agency has refused to disclose whether it is paying for the termination despite concerns by the girl's mother that the family are unable to fund it.
The internal review follows criticism of the HSE by a High Court judge who ruled that Miss D, whose baby has a fatal brain condition, can travel to the UK for an abortion.
Sources close to the HSE say the agency is reeling from the severity of the remarks by Judge Liam McKechnie.
The internal review is likely to focus on:
* The HSE's protocols for dealing with such cases and information relayed between key staff, such as social workers and senior managers
* Any legal advice received prior to court proceedings taken by Miss D and whether the HSE was advised to communicate with gardai and the Passport Office in a bid to stop her travelling
* Why the HSE did not seek directions from the District Court immediately when notified of Miss D's intention to travel
* Why a guardian was not appointed to represent her legal interests.
During the 10-day legal saga, the court heard that the girl was told by the HSE that she could not travel to the UK for an abortion and could be restrained, by force if necessary, if she tried.
This claim was not pursued during the €1m action, but Judge McKechnie said the board had no right to restrict her travel and was critical of the manner in which it dealt with the crisis.
In particular, the judge criticised the actions of a HSE social worker who wrote to gardai instructing them that Miss D must be prevented from travelling.
The gardai said they could not and would not do this.
The judge also criticised the "unacceptable failure" to disclose until later in the court hearing that the HSE had contacted the Passport Office after Miss D told her social worker she intended applying for a passport.
The HSE was also criticised for trying to "shoehorn" Miss D into an X Case-type situation although it had no evidence she was suicidal.
Last night the HSE suggested the legal system was to blame. It said it was at all times anxious to act in Miss D‘s best interests and said the lack of legal clarity regarding travel forced it to seek legal advice.
"This advice considered that an Order of the District Court was necessary," said a HSE spokesperson.
"The HSE acted in accordance in what they believed to be the correct course of action in terms of the constraints imposed on us.
"We will be examining the legal implications in terms of the HSE's duties and responsibilities under childcare legislation and will continue to offer Miss D care and emotional support which it is in a position to make available."
AN inquiry has been launched by the HSE into its handling of the Miss D abortion case.
But the agency has refused to disclose whether it is paying for the termination despite concerns by the girl's mother that the family are unable to fund it.
The internal review follows criticism of the HSE by a High Court judge who ruled that Miss D, whose baby has a fatal brain condition, can travel to the UK for an abortion.
Sources close to the HSE say the agency is reeling from the severity of the remarks by Judge Liam McKechnie.
The internal review is likely to focus on:
* The HSE's protocols for dealing with such cases and information relayed between key staff, such as social workers and senior managers
* Any legal advice received prior to court proceedings taken by Miss D and whether the HSE was advised to communicate with gardai and the Passport Office in a bid to stop her travelling
* Why the HSE did not seek directions from the District Court immediately when notified of Miss D's intention to travel
* Why a guardian was not appointed to represent her legal interests.
During the 10-day legal saga, the court heard that the girl was told by the HSE that she could not travel to the UK for an abortion and could be restrained, by force if necessary, if she tried.
This claim was not pursued during the €1m action, but Judge McKechnie said the board had no right to restrict her travel and was critical of the manner in which it dealt with the crisis.
In particular, the judge criticised the actions of a HSE social worker who wrote to gardai instructing them that Miss D must be prevented from travelling.
The gardai said they could not and would not do this.
The judge also criticised the "unacceptable failure" to disclose until later in the court hearing that the HSE had contacted the Passport Office after Miss D told her social worker she intended applying for a passport.
The HSE was also criticised for trying to "shoehorn" Miss D into an X Case-type situation although it had no evidence she was suicidal.
Last night the HSE suggested the legal system was to blame. It said it was at all times anxious to act in Miss D‘s best interests and said the lack of legal clarity regarding travel forced it to seek legal advice.
"This advice considered that an Order of the District Court was necessary," said a HSE spokesperson.
"The HSE acted in accordance in what they believed to be the correct course of action in terms of the constraints imposed on us.
"We will be examining the legal implications in terms of the HSE's duties and responsibilities under childcare legislation and will continue to offer Miss D care and emotional support which it is in a position to make available."
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Abortion Should Remain Illegal Says Pregnant Teen- But Law 'Needs To Be Changed' For Dire Circumstance
Dearbhail McDonald The Irish Independent Saturday May 12th 2007
But law 'needs to be changed' for dire circumstance
ABORTION laws must be changed here - but abortion on demand should remain illegal, Miss D said yesterday.
The 17-year-old told the Irish Independent she should be allowed to have her medically-induced abortion in this country.
"The laws need to be changed. I don't think that abortion should be allowed unless it is for the right reasons like really bad abnormalities, if there is no life guaranteed.
"There should be allowed to be abortions for that and rape cases should be looked at as well."
She said women should not be allowed to have abortions on demand here.
"I don't think a woman should be allowed to abort a baby just because she doesn't want it, because there is adoption available.
"There are people out there who can't have children.
"And who is to say that my fertility won't go. I'm not guaranteed."
Miss D also believes it's a woman right to make the decision whether she wants to have an abortion.
"It's a woman's choice," she said. "Who are all these people in the courtroom thinking they can make my decision?
"It's my body. It's not the social worker's body, or the HSE's body. They don't own my body, I own my body." The 17-year-old also said she should be able to have her procedure here.
"I should be able to have it in Ireland," she said. "It would have really helped. But it would take a long time for that to happen with politics and all the law and that stuff."
She also told how she had never believed in abortion but felt she was left with little choice when she discovered that her baby would not survive for more than three days after birth.
"I never believed in abortions, ever, but I never knew of stuff like this.
"On the day of the scan when I was walking out of the room. I said: 'So I'll have to get an abortion' and I walked out.
"And I sort of left it like that. I thought that was my only option. I was thinking how are they supposed to leave this baby inside me? I won't be able to deal with that."
Miss D said she decided to have a medically- induced procedure - where a woman gives birth to the foetus - after she went on the internet to research abortion
"I changed my mind because I went on the internet and typed in abortion.
"And pro-life came up on the screen and there was pictures of babies who had been aborted and I didn't want that, my baby deserved to live, it deserved more than that."
But law 'needs to be changed' for dire circumstance
ABORTION laws must be changed here - but abortion on demand should remain illegal, Miss D said yesterday.
The 17-year-old told the Irish Independent she should be allowed to have her medically-induced abortion in this country.
"The laws need to be changed. I don't think that abortion should be allowed unless it is for the right reasons like really bad abnormalities, if there is no life guaranteed.
"There should be allowed to be abortions for that and rape cases should be looked at as well."
She said women should not be allowed to have abortions on demand here.
"I don't think a woman should be allowed to abort a baby just because she doesn't want it, because there is adoption available.
"There are people out there who can't have children.
"And who is to say that my fertility won't go. I'm not guaranteed."
Miss D also believes it's a woman right to make the decision whether she wants to have an abortion.
"It's a woman's choice," she said. "Who are all these people in the courtroom thinking they can make my decision?
"It's my body. It's not the social worker's body, or the HSE's body. They don't own my body, I own my body." The 17-year-old also said she should be able to have her procedure here.
"I should be able to have it in Ireland," she said. "It would have really helped. But it would take a long time for that to happen with politics and all the law and that stuff."
She also told how she had never believed in abortion but felt she was left with little choice when she discovered that her baby would not survive for more than three days after birth.
"I never believed in abortions, ever, but I never knew of stuff like this.
"On the day of the scan when I was walking out of the room. I said: 'So I'll have to get an abortion' and I walked out.
"And I sort of left it like that. I thought that was my only option. I was thinking how are they supposed to leave this baby inside me? I won't be able to deal with that."
Miss D said she decided to have a medically- induced procedure - where a woman gives birth to the foetus - after she went on the internet to research abortion
"I changed my mind because I went on the internet and typed in abortion.
"And pro-life came up on the screen and there was pictures of babies who had been aborted and I didn't want that, my baby deserved to live, it deserved more than that."
Miss D: My Story
Coverage from print media from Friday and over the weekend will be posted on this blog on Monday May 14th. We post today's exclusive report from the Irish Independent.
Miss D: my story
Dearbhail McDonald The Irish Independent Saturday May 12th 2007
'I'll bury my child here. I have clothes bought for my baby. I'll be pregnant next year'
THE pregnant teenage girl at the centre of the Miss D controversy last night exclusively told the Irish Independent her extraordinary story and spoke of her plans for the future.
In a remarkable account of how she took on the State, including the Health Services Executive, the courageous 17-year-old tells how:
* She will be medically induced rather than having a surgical abortion. This means she will give birth to her baby - even though she knows it will die within days.
* She will bring her baby home to be buried in Ireland.
* Hearing her life story exposed in court "destroyed her".
She also tells of her delight at discovering she was pregnant, her horror at the news that her baby would not survive and her disgust at the way she was treated by the HSE and social workers.
And how she was totally against abortion until she found out her baby suffered from anencephaly, a disease which meant it would be born with part of its brain missing.
Miss D, who is in care, this week won a High Court battle to allow her to travel abroad for an abortion.
The HSE had tried to stop her from travelling and was sharply criticised by the judge for the way it dealt with the case.
A social worker had even told gardai to stop her from travelling - an act the High Court said had no foundation in the law.
In an emotional interview, Miss D says she is looking forward to having the inducement so she will be able to hold her baby in her arms and say goodbye.
She also tells how:
* She would love to have a baby "tomorrow" and plans to get pregnant next year.
* She will buy dolls clothes for the baby's burial.
* The couple had chosen the names of the baby.
* She will always see the baby as her first child.
She says how she wasn't planning to get pregnant but when she did, she was shocked but delighted.
"I was a bit scared and worried but then after a few days I started getting excited and planning my future with him (her boyfriend).
"We were planning to get our own house at the end of the month," she said yesterday.
They were about to buy a car and had a buggy, clothes and toys bought for the baby - the family's first grandchild.
"We just wanted to be set up as a family . . . til we heard the news," she said.
It was her 17th birthday when she got the scan at which she discovered the devastating news.
"I just went crazy and I ran out of the hospital. I didn't even want to hear the information about the illness," she said through tears.
"It was like God had given up on me."
She went on to say how she thoroughly researched the condition on the internet, hoping to find a cure.
But the images she saw of the disease "killed me, I had nightmares for a few nights after that. It was like a freak show".
It was then she seriously started researching abortion options and came across pro-life websites.
"There were pictures of babies who had been aborted and I didn‘t want that, my baby deserved to live, it deserved more than that." It was then she decided to have the baby medically induced which means she will give birth to the child which she believes is a girl. She hopes to be able to get a birth cert and bring her home to be buried.
She wants to have the burial in Ireland so "I don't forget that it is my child. And to my next child, I want to tell my child it did have a brother or sister."
However, she said she wished she did not have to travel to have the procedure but wanted to have it in Ireland.
She called for abortion laws in Ireland to be changed but abortion on demand should remain illegal.
"I don‘t think that abortion should be allowed unless it is for the right reasons like really bad abnormalities; if there is no life guaranteed. There should be allowed to be abortions for that and rape cases should be looked at as well."
But women should not be allowed to abort just because she doesnt want the baby.
She also spoke of her shame at going through the court case but said she was determined to be there every day.
"It destroyed me."
When I sat in the court room and I heard my mother's name being brought up in it, and my overdose that no one knows about, absolutely nobody except the two families, that killed me. 'Cos a lot of people from my town know who I am and that kills me."
She said the court case was the worst feeling - "it was the shame".
Miss D also revealed that she had her last scan on Tuesday of this week. "I cried my eyes out. I was very shook up. My baby still looks like my baby except for the head. Everything from the neck down is perfect."
She added that if it was not for the public, she did not think she would have been able to cope.
"A lot of papers said nice things about me and I really appreciate that. I thought I was going to get knocked down for doing what I was doing. I didn't think people would understand.
Miss D: my story
Dearbhail McDonald The Irish Independent Saturday May 12th 2007
'I'll bury my child here. I have clothes bought for my baby. I'll be pregnant next year'
THE pregnant teenage girl at the centre of the Miss D controversy last night exclusively told the Irish Independent her extraordinary story and spoke of her plans for the future.
In a remarkable account of how she took on the State, including the Health Services Executive, the courageous 17-year-old tells how:
* She will be medically induced rather than having a surgical abortion. This means she will give birth to her baby - even though she knows it will die within days.
* She will bring her baby home to be buried in Ireland.
* Hearing her life story exposed in court "destroyed her".
She also tells of her delight at discovering she was pregnant, her horror at the news that her baby would not survive and her disgust at the way she was treated by the HSE and social workers.
And how she was totally against abortion until she found out her baby suffered from anencephaly, a disease which meant it would be born with part of its brain missing.
Miss D, who is in care, this week won a High Court battle to allow her to travel abroad for an abortion.
The HSE had tried to stop her from travelling and was sharply criticised by the judge for the way it dealt with the case.
A social worker had even told gardai to stop her from travelling - an act the High Court said had no foundation in the law.
In an emotional interview, Miss D says she is looking forward to having the inducement so she will be able to hold her baby in her arms and say goodbye.
She also tells how:
* She would love to have a baby "tomorrow" and plans to get pregnant next year.
* She will buy dolls clothes for the baby's burial.
* The couple had chosen the names of the baby.
* She will always see the baby as her first child.
She says how she wasn't planning to get pregnant but when she did, she was shocked but delighted.
"I was a bit scared and worried but then after a few days I started getting excited and planning my future with him (her boyfriend).
"We were planning to get our own house at the end of the month," she said yesterday.
They were about to buy a car and had a buggy, clothes and toys bought for the baby - the family's first grandchild.
"We just wanted to be set up as a family . . . til we heard the news," she said.
It was her 17th birthday when she got the scan at which she discovered the devastating news.
"I just went crazy and I ran out of the hospital. I didn't even want to hear the information about the illness," she said through tears.
"It was like God had given up on me."
She went on to say how she thoroughly researched the condition on the internet, hoping to find a cure.
But the images she saw of the disease "killed me, I had nightmares for a few nights after that. It was like a freak show".
It was then she seriously started researching abortion options and came across pro-life websites.
"There were pictures of babies who had been aborted and I didn‘t want that, my baby deserved to live, it deserved more than that." It was then she decided to have the baby medically induced which means she will give birth to the child which she believes is a girl. She hopes to be able to get a birth cert and bring her home to be buried.
She wants to have the burial in Ireland so "I don't forget that it is my child. And to my next child, I want to tell my child it did have a brother or sister."
However, she said she wished she did not have to travel to have the procedure but wanted to have it in Ireland.
She called for abortion laws in Ireland to be changed but abortion on demand should remain illegal.
"I don‘t think that abortion should be allowed unless it is for the right reasons like really bad abnormalities; if there is no life guaranteed. There should be allowed to be abortions for that and rape cases should be looked at as well."
But women should not be allowed to abort just because she doesnt want the baby.
She also spoke of her shame at going through the court case but said she was determined to be there every day.
"It destroyed me."
When I sat in the court room and I heard my mother's name being brought up in it, and my overdose that no one knows about, absolutely nobody except the two families, that killed me. 'Cos a lot of people from my town know who I am and that kills me."
She said the court case was the worst feeling - "it was the shame".
Miss D also revealed that she had her last scan on Tuesday of this week. "I cried my eyes out. I was very shook up. My baby still looks like my baby except for the head. Everything from the neck down is perfect."
She added that if it was not for the public, she did not think she would have been able to cope.
"A lot of papers said nice things about me and I really appreciate that. I thought I was going to get knocked down for doing what I was doing. I didn't think people would understand.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Statement of Catholics for a Free Choice President Jon O'Brien on the Irish High Court's Ruling Allowing Young Woman to Travel Abroad to Obtain an Abo
Statement of Catholics for a Free Choice President Jon O'Brien on the Irish High Court's Ruling Allowing Young Woman to Travel Abroad to Obtain an Abortion
Wednesday May 9th 2007.
Washington, DC -- Today, the Irish high court stated that a 17-year-old woman was able to leave the country to terminate her pregnancy. The young woman, known as "Miss D," is 18 weeks pregnant with a fetus with a severe brain defect.Jon O'Brien, president of Catholics for a Free Choice , said, "Right-thinking people around the world will welcome the decision today that allows a young woman to finally exercise her right to choose and have control over her own body. However, the case highlights--not for the first time--that something is very wrong in Ireland when it comes to women's rights.
What should have been a straightforward private process between Miss D and her doctors has instead evolved into a media circus involving the press, the courts and various government agencies. The genesis of this saga clearly lies with the refusal of several governments to legislate on a series of amendments to the Irish constitution, starting in 1983. Rather than resolve the situation, they have instead created a hypocritical world in which Irish women are forced to go abroad to deal with a health issue that rightly should be addressed in their home country with proper support, compassion and understanding. Importantly, the constitutional amendments have not done an iota to reduce the need for abortion or address the real life situations that women face.
"The indignity that Miss D was forced to go through could have been avoided if Irish politicians had the courage to legislate as they are supposed to do. So long as Irish politicians--of all parties--continue to bury their heads in the sand and fail to take action, Irish women will continue to suffer these tragedies. The issue of abortion is not going away and needs to be addressed in a mature way that takes into account the needs and differing beliefs of all people living in Ireland. It would be novel to see some real political leadership on addressing these needs."
Wednesday May 9th 2007.
Washington, DC -- Today, the Irish high court stated that a 17-year-old woman was able to leave the country to terminate her pregnancy. The young woman, known as "Miss D," is 18 weeks pregnant with a fetus with a severe brain defect.Jon O'Brien, president of Catholics for a Free Choice , said, "Right-thinking people around the world will welcome the decision today that allows a young woman to finally exercise her right to choose and have control over her own body. However, the case highlights--not for the first time--that something is very wrong in Ireland when it comes to women's rights.
What should have been a straightforward private process between Miss D and her doctors has instead evolved into a media circus involving the press, the courts and various government agencies. The genesis of this saga clearly lies with the refusal of several governments to legislate on a series of amendments to the Irish constitution, starting in 1983. Rather than resolve the situation, they have instead created a hypocritical world in which Irish women are forced to go abroad to deal with a health issue that rightly should be addressed in their home country with proper support, compassion and understanding. Importantly, the constitutional amendments have not done an iota to reduce the need for abortion or address the real life situations that women face.
"The indignity that Miss D was forced to go through could have been avoided if Irish politicians had the courage to legislate as they are supposed to do. So long as Irish politicians--of all parties--continue to bury their heads in the sand and fail to take action, Irish women will continue to suffer these tragedies. The issue of abortion is not going away and needs to be addressed in a mature way that takes into account the needs and differing beliefs of all people living in Ireland. It would be novel to see some real political leadership on addressing these needs."
HSE to examine 'Miss D' Court Ruling.
Irish Times Breaking News
Last Updated: 10/05/2007 18:10
HSE to examine 'Miss D' court ruling
Elaine Edwards
The Health Service Executive (HSE) has said it will examine the legal implications of yesterday's 'Miss D' High Court judgment and will see what changes may be required in its own procedures and practices in dealing with such cases.
The health body also defended its handling of the case and said it took what it believed to be the "correct course of action" in terms of the constraints imposed on it by law in relation to the girl, who was in its care.
It had originally told the young woman involved in the case she could not travel for an abortion without its consent and that she could be constrained, by force if necessary, if she attempted to do so.
In a statement, the HSE said it would continue to offer the 17-year-old girl who had sought the right to travel to Britain for an abortion, "care and emotional support which it is in a position to make available".
"The HSE will carefully study the judgment of the court to see what changes, if any, may be required in our procedures and practices for dealing with such cases," the statement said.
"The HSE were at all times anxious to act in Miss D's best interest and from the outset made every effort in terms of how her welfare could best be protected having due regard to legal consequences.
Given the lack of legal clarity in this country regarding travel for abortion, the HSE had sought legal advice.
"This advice considered that an order of the District Court was necessary. The HSE acted in accordance in what they believed to be the correct course of action in terms of the constraints imposed on us by law."
Minister for Health Mary Harney said today she does not believe the issue of legislating on the subject of abortion will be revisited for a long time to come.
Reacting to the High Court judgment yesterday in the 'Miss D' case, Ms Harney said a referendum held on the issue in 2002 had been "fair and balanced and reasonable" and was defeated by the people.
The 17-year-old woman in the 'Miss D' case had sought the right to travel to Britain for an abortion. She is carrying a foetus that has a brain-stem abnormality called anencephaly, which means her baby would not live for more than a number of days after birth.
Asked today whether she believed whichever party or parties were in government after the election would now have to legislate on the abortion question, Ms Harney said: "We had a referendum a few years ago which I think was fair and balanced and reasonable and it was defeated by the people.
"And in this debate, it tends to be dominated by extremes on both sides. I do not believe for the foreseeable future we will have legislation in this area, for one simple reason. I don't see how any government could seek to legislate for when somebody might, or might not, be suicidal."
Ms Harney said she was not aware that any of the parties in the general election were making the question of legislation on abortion an issue in their manifestos.
The Minister said she believed it would be "impossible" to bring in legislation to take account of [the X-case] situation where a woman was suicidal.
"I have heard no lawyer, no political party that has told me and nobody has every told me how they could [formulate] legislation for those circumstances.
"I think it would be impossible, quite honestly. I think...this debate is dominated by extremes on both sides. We are quite a bit away from having legislation in this area in Ireland - that's my honest view. I don't know of anyone that's committing themselves to doing it."
Ms Harney said there were restrictions on what could be done because of the Constitution.
"And when we sought to change the Constitution and put in place a [reasonable] approach, it was defeated. It was a very heated debate. When that was defeated, I remember saying at the time that we are a decade away from revisiting this matter again.
"I believe that to be the case...I believe it will be quite some time before any government will revisit that issue again."
In the short term, the Minister said, the Department of Health is preparing legislation with regard to IVF treatment and that, in itself, would be a major and "sensitive" piece of legislation.
Last Updated: 10/05/2007 18:10
HSE to examine 'Miss D' court ruling
Elaine Edwards
The Health Service Executive (HSE) has said it will examine the legal implications of yesterday's 'Miss D' High Court judgment and will see what changes may be required in its own procedures and practices in dealing with such cases.
The health body also defended its handling of the case and said it took what it believed to be the "correct course of action" in terms of the constraints imposed on it by law in relation to the girl, who was in its care.
It had originally told the young woman involved in the case she could not travel for an abortion without its consent and that she could be constrained, by force if necessary, if she attempted to do so.
In a statement, the HSE said it would continue to offer the 17-year-old girl who had sought the right to travel to Britain for an abortion, "care and emotional support which it is in a position to make available".
"The HSE will carefully study the judgment of the court to see what changes, if any, may be required in our procedures and practices for dealing with such cases," the statement said.
"The HSE were at all times anxious to act in Miss D's best interest and from the outset made every effort in terms of how her welfare could best be protected having due regard to legal consequences.
Given the lack of legal clarity in this country regarding travel for abortion, the HSE had sought legal advice.
"This advice considered that an order of the District Court was necessary. The HSE acted in accordance in what they believed to be the correct course of action in terms of the constraints imposed on us by law."
Minister for Health Mary Harney said today she does not believe the issue of legislating on the subject of abortion will be revisited for a long time to come.
Reacting to the High Court judgment yesterday in the 'Miss D' case, Ms Harney said a referendum held on the issue in 2002 had been "fair and balanced and reasonable" and was defeated by the people.
The 17-year-old woman in the 'Miss D' case had sought the right to travel to Britain for an abortion. She is carrying a foetus that has a brain-stem abnormality called anencephaly, which means her baby would not live for more than a number of days after birth.
Asked today whether she believed whichever party or parties were in government after the election would now have to legislate on the abortion question, Ms Harney said: "We had a referendum a few years ago which I think was fair and balanced and reasonable and it was defeated by the people.
"And in this debate, it tends to be dominated by extremes on both sides. I do not believe for the foreseeable future we will have legislation in this area, for one simple reason. I don't see how any government could seek to legislate for when somebody might, or might not, be suicidal."
Ms Harney said she was not aware that any of the parties in the general election were making the question of legislation on abortion an issue in their manifestos.
The Minister said she believed it would be "impossible" to bring in legislation to take account of [the X-case] situation where a woman was suicidal.
"I have heard no lawyer, no political party that has told me and nobody has every told me how they could [formulate] legislation for those circumstances.
"I think it would be impossible, quite honestly. I think...this debate is dominated by extremes on both sides. We are quite a bit away from having legislation in this area in Ireland - that's my honest view. I don't know of anyone that's committing themselves to doing it."
Ms Harney said there were restrictions on what could be done because of the Constitution.
"And when we sought to change the Constitution and put in place a [reasonable] approach, it was defeated. It was a very heated debate. When that was defeated, I remember saying at the time that we are a decade away from revisiting this matter again.
"I believe that to be the case...I believe it will be quite some time before any government will revisit that issue again."
In the short term, the Minister said, the Department of Health is preparing legislation with regard to IVF treatment and that, in itself, would be a major and "sensitive" piece of legislation.
Abortion Issue Will Not Be Revisited- Mary Harney
Irish Times Breaking News 5.13pm Thursday May 10th 2007.
Abortion issue will not be 'revisited'
Elaine Edwards
Minister for Health Mary Harney has said she does not believe the issue of legislating on the subject of abortion will be revisited for a long time to come.
Reacting to the High Court judgment yesterday in the 'Miss D' case, Ms Harney said a referendum held on the issue in 2002 had been "fair and balanced and reasonable" and was defeated by the people.
The 17-year-old woman in the 'Miss D' case had sought the right to travel to Britain for an abortion. She is carrying a foetus that has a brain-stem abnormality called anencephaly, which means her baby would not live for more than a number of days after birth.
Asked today whether she believed whichever party or parties were in government after the election would now have to legislate on the abortion question, Ms Harney said: "We had a referendum a few years ago which I think was fair and balanced and reasonable and it was defeated by the people.
"And in this debate, it tends to be dominated by extremes on both sides. I do not believe for the foreseeable future we will have legislation in this area, for one simple reason. I don't see how any government could seek to legislate for when somebody might, or might not, be suicidal."
Ms Harney said she was not aware that any of the parties in the general election were making the question of legislation on abortion an issue in their manifestos.
The Minister said she believed it would be "impossible" to bring in legislation to take account of [the X-case] situation where a woman was suicidal.
"I have heard no lawyer, no political party that has told me and nobody has every told me how they could [formulate] legislation for those circumstances.
"I think it would be impossible, quite honestly. I think...this debate is dominated by extremes on both sides. We are quite a bit away from having legislation in this area in Ireland - that's my honest view. I don't know of anyone that's committing themselves to doing it."
Ms Harney said there were restrictions on what could be done because of the Constitution.
"And when we sought to change the Constitution and put in place a [reasonable] approach, it was defeated. It was a very heated debate. When that was defeated, I remember saying at the time that we are a decade away from revisiting this matter again.
"I believe that to be the case...I believe it will be quite some time before any government will revisit that issue again."
In the short term, the Minister said, the Department of Health is preparing legislation with regard to IVF treatment and that, in itself, would be a major and "sensitive" piece of legislation.
Abortion issue will not be 'revisited'
Elaine Edwards
Minister for Health Mary Harney has said she does not believe the issue of legislating on the subject of abortion will be revisited for a long time to come.
Reacting to the High Court judgment yesterday in the 'Miss D' case, Ms Harney said a referendum held on the issue in 2002 had been "fair and balanced and reasonable" and was defeated by the people.
The 17-year-old woman in the 'Miss D' case had sought the right to travel to Britain for an abortion. She is carrying a foetus that has a brain-stem abnormality called anencephaly, which means her baby would not live for more than a number of days after birth.
Asked today whether she believed whichever party or parties were in government after the election would now have to legislate on the abortion question, Ms Harney said: "We had a referendum a few years ago which I think was fair and balanced and reasonable and it was defeated by the people.
"And in this debate, it tends to be dominated by extremes on both sides. I do not believe for the foreseeable future we will have legislation in this area, for one simple reason. I don't see how any government could seek to legislate for when somebody might, or might not, be suicidal."
Ms Harney said she was not aware that any of the parties in the general election were making the question of legislation on abortion an issue in their manifestos.
The Minister said she believed it would be "impossible" to bring in legislation to take account of [the X-case] situation where a woman was suicidal.
"I have heard no lawyer, no political party that has told me and nobody has every told me how they could [formulate] legislation for those circumstances.
"I think it would be impossible, quite honestly. I think...this debate is dominated by extremes on both sides. We are quite a bit away from having legislation in this area in Ireland - that's my honest view. I don't know of anyone that's committing themselves to doing it."
Ms Harney said there were restrictions on what could be done because of the Constitution.
"And when we sought to change the Constitution and put in place a [reasonable] approach, it was defeated. It was a very heated debate. When that was defeated, I remember saying at the time that we are a decade away from revisiting this matter again.
"I believe that to be the case...I believe it will be quite some time before any government will revisit that issue again."
In the short term, the Minister said, the Department of Health is preparing legislation with regard to IVF treatment and that, in itself, would be a major and "sensitive" piece of legislation.
Doctor Calls For Abortion Law Change
RTE BREAKING NEWS
Doctor calls for abortion law change Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:47
The Master of the National Maternity Hospital, Dr Declan Keane, has called for the law to be changed to allow abortions to take place in Ireland where the foetus has no chance of living outside the womb.
He was speaking on RTÉ Radio's Morning Ireland following a High Court decision yesterday.
Yesterday the High Court allowed a 17-year-old girl, whose unborn baby has been diagnosed with the brain condition anencephaly, to travel to the UK for a termination.
Advertisement
Dr Keane said there were a handful of conditions which were incompatible with life, and anencephaly was one of these.
He said it would be preferable to be allowed to carry out the abortion in Ireland, because of the lack of post mortem facilities in many abortion facilities abroad.
Dr Keane said if the operations were carried out here, then post abortion counselling could also be offered.
He said his hospital sees between four to six cases of anencephaly each year.
Half of the women carried the baby to term, the other half sought a termination, he added.
Morning Ireland: Dr. Declan Keane, Master of the National Maternity Hospital, Holles Street, discusses the implications of anencephaly
Morning Ireland: Geoffrey Shannon, child law expert, says the case was never about abortion, but centred on the law concerning child care
Morning Ireland: Deirdre de Barra, who found herself in a similar situation at the time of the referendum in 2002, says she feels the greatest sympathy for Miss D
Story from RTÉ News: http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0510/abortion.html
Doctor calls for abortion law change Thursday, 10 May 2007 15:47
The Master of the National Maternity Hospital, Dr Declan Keane, has called for the law to be changed to allow abortions to take place in Ireland where the foetus has no chance of living outside the womb.
He was speaking on RTÉ Radio's Morning Ireland following a High Court decision yesterday.
Yesterday the High Court allowed a 17-year-old girl, whose unborn baby has been diagnosed with the brain condition anencephaly, to travel to the UK for a termination.
Advertisement
Dr Keane said there were a handful of conditions which were incompatible with life, and anencephaly was one of these.
He said it would be preferable to be allowed to carry out the abortion in Ireland, because of the lack of post mortem facilities in many abortion facilities abroad.
Dr Keane said if the operations were carried out here, then post abortion counselling could also be offered.
He said his hospital sees between four to six cases of anencephaly each year.
Half of the women carried the baby to term, the other half sought a termination, he added.
Morning Ireland: Dr. Declan Keane, Master of the National Maternity Hospital, Holles Street, discusses the implications of anencephaly
Morning Ireland: Geoffrey Shannon, child law expert, says the case was never about abortion, but centred on the law concerning child care
Morning Ireland: Deirdre de Barra, who found herself in a similar situation at the time of the referendum in 2002, says she feels the greatest sympathy for Miss D
Story from RTÉ News: http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0510/abortion.html
Leadership Lacking On Abortion
Irish Daily Mirror Editorial Thursday May 10th 2007.
LEADERSHIP LACKING ON ABORTION
The Miss D case has shown once again this country has still not face up to the abortion issue.
The fact it ended up in the courts is proof of officialdom's reluctance to live up to its responsibilities. Instead of helping out this vulnerable young girl those charged with protecting her reported her to the gardaÃ.
This was a complete abdication of responsibility on the part of the HSE. It should never have ended up the courts and Mr Justice McKechnie was right to criticise the HSE for their cowardice and incompetence.
This case was not about abortion but a citizen's right to travel. It was also clear the fall-out from the X case continues to influence decision making in the HSE.
Mr Justice McKechnie rightly highlighted something which the health services appeared to forget- that they were dealing with a vulnerable girl who knew her baby would soon die.
For decades Ireland has happily buried its head in the sand instead of confronting the tragedy of abortion. We have had two divisive referenda thanks to Government's unwillingness to legislate.
Unfortunately there will be many more Miss D's in this country unless politicians have the courage to deal what with what is dlearly a serious health issue and not a political one.
LEADERSHIP LACKING ON ABORTION
The Miss D case has shown once again this country has still not face up to the abortion issue.
The fact it ended up in the courts is proof of officialdom's reluctance to live up to its responsibilities. Instead of helping out this vulnerable young girl those charged with protecting her reported her to the gardaÃ.
This was a complete abdication of responsibility on the part of the HSE. It should never have ended up the courts and Mr Justice McKechnie was right to criticise the HSE for their cowardice and incompetence.
This case was not about abortion but a citizen's right to travel. It was also clear the fall-out from the X case continues to influence decision making in the HSE.
Mr Justice McKechnie rightly highlighted something which the health services appeared to forget- that they were dealing with a vulnerable girl who knew her baby would soon die.
For decades Ireland has happily buried its head in the sand instead of confronting the tragedy of abortion. We have had two divisive referenda thanks to Government's unwillingness to legislate.
Unfortunately there will be many more Miss D's in this country unless politicians have the courage to deal what with what is dlearly a serious health issue and not a political one.
'I Hope They Stop This Nonsense'
Irish Examiner Thursday May 10th 2007.
Pro-Choice View/ Cornelia Lucey
PRO-CHOICE campaigners yesterday waited with baited breath to hear the outcome of yesterday's ruling in the Miss D case. Finally just before 3pm, High Court Judge Liam McKechnie confirmed that the 17-year-old had been given her choice.
'She's been let go' said Dr Mary Muldowney from the pro-abortion group, Alliance for Choice.
'I hope they stop this nonsence. How many more women will have to go through this trauma?'
'Most people now believe abortion is acceptable in certain cases. Why has the Government failed to respond and legislate for this so that Irish women can have abortions safely and legally in a hospital here?'
'Irish women who are not in a financial position to travel for abortions are the biggest losers. We will now be asking politicians and seek legal protection for these women'
Legal Opinion / Claire O'Sullivan
UCC constitutional law expert Dr Conor O'Mahony says the High Court decision did not break new ground but clarified how the HSE did not need to go to the courts to get permission to allow the 17-year-old travel. Dr O'Mahony believes that the Child Care Act clearly outlines how the HSE has the power of a parent, once a child is in their care.
'The immediate consequence of the ruling is is that Miss D can travel and that if a similar case arises, it is now clear that this right to travel, which is available to all, can not be undermined because you are in care and not suicidal' he said.
'Basically the HSE had the power all along but for some strange reason, decided to pass the decision upwards. The High Court decision yesterday just re-affirmed that.'
Pro-Life View / Evelyn Ring
PRO-LIFE group Youth Defence has claimed Miss D is being used by the pro-abortion lobby to further their agenda. Spokesman Eoghan De Faoite said the HSE had brought a number of girls in their care to England for abortions in the past. But, he said, shortly before a general election a girl was prevented from travelling and the issue ended up in the High Court.
'You have to but wonder whether or not this is some political decision from within the HSE to try and challenge Ireland's abortion laws,' he said.
The Pro-Life Campaign and the HSE had a duty to ensure the girl was made aware of the long-term negative effects of abortion on some women. The group's medical adviser, Dr Berry Kiely, said the case should be a reminder society was obliged to ensure every support is in place so no woman felt abortion was the only option.
Pro-Choice View/ Cornelia Lucey
PRO-CHOICE campaigners yesterday waited with baited breath to hear the outcome of yesterday's ruling in the Miss D case. Finally just before 3pm, High Court Judge Liam McKechnie confirmed that the 17-year-old had been given her choice.
'She's been let go' said Dr Mary Muldowney from the pro-abortion group, Alliance for Choice.
'I hope they stop this nonsence. How many more women will have to go through this trauma?'
'Most people now believe abortion is acceptable in certain cases. Why has the Government failed to respond and legislate for this so that Irish women can have abortions safely and legally in a hospital here?'
'Irish women who are not in a financial position to travel for abortions are the biggest losers. We will now be asking politicians and seek legal protection for these women'
Legal Opinion / Claire O'Sullivan
UCC constitutional law expert Dr Conor O'Mahony says the High Court decision did not break new ground but clarified how the HSE did not need to go to the courts to get permission to allow the 17-year-old travel. Dr O'Mahony believes that the Child Care Act clearly outlines how the HSE has the power of a parent, once a child is in their care.
'The immediate consequence of the ruling is is that Miss D can travel and that if a similar case arises, it is now clear that this right to travel, which is available to all, can not be undermined because you are in care and not suicidal' he said.
'Basically the HSE had the power all along but for some strange reason, decided to pass the decision upwards. The High Court decision yesterday just re-affirmed that.'
Pro-Life View / Evelyn Ring
PRO-LIFE group Youth Defence has claimed Miss D is being used by the pro-abortion lobby to further their agenda. Spokesman Eoghan De Faoite said the HSE had brought a number of girls in their care to England for abortions in the past. But, he said, shortly before a general election a girl was prevented from travelling and the issue ended up in the High Court.
'You have to but wonder whether or not this is some political decision from within the HSE to try and challenge Ireland's abortion laws,' he said.
The Pro-Life Campaign and the HSE had a duty to ensure the girl was made aware of the long-term negative effects of abortion on some women. The group's medical adviser, Dr Berry Kiely, said the case should be a reminder society was obliged to ensure every support is in place so no woman felt abortion was the only option.
Judge Removes C Case Doubts About Right To Travel After 10 Years.
Ivana Bacik The Irish Examiner Thursday May 10th 2007.
Justice McKechnie rejected the suggestion that a pregnant girl in care, who is not suicidal, might not be allowed to travel, writes Ivana Bacik.
Mr Justice McKechnie's judgment must be welcome for its clarity on key issues; and for the comprehensive way in which he identified those issues.
He began by stating his overall decision 'firmly and unequivocally', that there is no legal basis to prevent Miss D from travelling to Britain for termination of her pregnancy if she so wishes. He then proceeded to give his reasons.
He emphasised that the case was not about abortion, or 'born or unborn children with disabilities' since the foetus carried by Miss D is not in such a category. He pointed to the uncontested prognosis was that the child would not survive outside the womb.
The judge was very critical of the HSE's conduct in the case, saying that they had not carried out their crucial function to safeguard Miss D's welfare; and had failed to give due credit to her informed decision to have a termination. Instead, they had suggested that that they could prevent her from doing so, and had even contacted the gardaà about this.
He commented that they had tried to 'shoehorn' her case into an X situation; but to her credit, she had not perjured herself by saying she was suicidal. He praised Miss D in very strong terms, saying she had shown 'courage, integrity and maturity' throughout the proceedings.
He went on to consider whether District Court approval was a necessary precondition for Miss D to travel lawfully to Britain, and considered at length the provisions of the Child Care Act 1991, governing the terms on which children are placed in care. He concluded that because Miss D was under an interim care order rather than a full care order, the powers of the HSE were less extensive. For example, they had no express power to give consent to the issue of her passport.
He considered the right to travel, noting its importance in a democratic society. He referred to the travel referendum in November 1992, and stated that the right to life of the unborn cannot restrict the constitutional right to travel.
In an important decision on this point, he disagreed with an earlier judgment by Mr Justice Geoghegan in the 1997 C case, also involving a pregnant in the care of a health board. Because Miss C was suicidal, the High Court allowed her to travel for an abortion, on the basis that it would have been legal for Miss C to have the abortion in Ireland under the X case test, since the pregnancy posed a real and substantial risk to her life.
However, Mr Justice Geoghegan suggested in the C case that where a pregnant woman did not fall within the terms of the X case test, she might not be given permission to travel abroad.
In yesterday's decision, Mr Justice McKechnie rejected this interpretation of the Constitution. He said that the 1992 travel amendment prohibits barriers on the exercise of the right to travel, whatever form they might take. There might be cases, he said, where failure to make a positive order allowing someone to travel could constitute a barrier.
This was a very important ruling. It seems that Miss D herself does not require the assistance of the HSE in travelling to Britain. She has the support of family and can make her own arrangements. However, there might be future cases involving younger girls in care without supportive families, who require the positive assistance of the HSE in travelling abroad for an abortion. The effect of yesterday's judgment appears to be that the HSE will now be able to offer such assistance without having to ensure first that the girl falls within the X case test.
The judgment therefore marks an important statement of the right to travel and an important decision on the powers and duties of the HSE under the Child Care Act 1991. However it sidesteps the core question as to whether Miss D might have been entitled to an abortion in Ireland.
While the decision allowing her travel is very welcome, a truly compassionate response to Miss D's case would be to provide for her to have a lawful abortion in Ireland.
Ivana Bacik is Reid Professor of Criminal Law at Trinity College Dublin.
Justice McKechnie rejected the suggestion that a pregnant girl in care, who is not suicidal, might not be allowed to travel, writes Ivana Bacik.
Mr Justice McKechnie's judgment must be welcome for its clarity on key issues; and for the comprehensive way in which he identified those issues.
He began by stating his overall decision 'firmly and unequivocally', that there is no legal basis to prevent Miss D from travelling to Britain for termination of her pregnancy if she so wishes. He then proceeded to give his reasons.
He emphasised that the case was not about abortion, or 'born or unborn children with disabilities' since the foetus carried by Miss D is not in such a category. He pointed to the uncontested prognosis was that the child would not survive outside the womb.
The judge was very critical of the HSE's conduct in the case, saying that they had not carried out their crucial function to safeguard Miss D's welfare; and had failed to give due credit to her informed decision to have a termination. Instead, they had suggested that that they could prevent her from doing so, and had even contacted the gardaà about this.
He commented that they had tried to 'shoehorn' her case into an X situation; but to her credit, she had not perjured herself by saying she was suicidal. He praised Miss D in very strong terms, saying she had shown 'courage, integrity and maturity' throughout the proceedings.
He went on to consider whether District Court approval was a necessary precondition for Miss D to travel lawfully to Britain, and considered at length the provisions of the Child Care Act 1991, governing the terms on which children are placed in care. He concluded that because Miss D was under an interim care order rather than a full care order, the powers of the HSE were less extensive. For example, they had no express power to give consent to the issue of her passport.
He considered the right to travel, noting its importance in a democratic society. He referred to the travel referendum in November 1992, and stated that the right to life of the unborn cannot restrict the constitutional right to travel.
In an important decision on this point, he disagreed with an earlier judgment by Mr Justice Geoghegan in the 1997 C case, also involving a pregnant in the care of a health board. Because Miss C was suicidal, the High Court allowed her to travel for an abortion, on the basis that it would have been legal for Miss C to have the abortion in Ireland under the X case test, since the pregnancy posed a real and substantial risk to her life.
However, Mr Justice Geoghegan suggested in the C case that where a pregnant woman did not fall within the terms of the X case test, she might not be given permission to travel abroad.
In yesterday's decision, Mr Justice McKechnie rejected this interpretation of the Constitution. He said that the 1992 travel amendment prohibits barriers on the exercise of the right to travel, whatever form they might take. There might be cases, he said, where failure to make a positive order allowing someone to travel could constitute a barrier.
This was a very important ruling. It seems that Miss D herself does not require the assistance of the HSE in travelling to Britain. She has the support of family and can make her own arrangements. However, there might be future cases involving younger girls in care without supportive families, who require the positive assistance of the HSE in travelling abroad for an abortion. The effect of yesterday's judgment appears to be that the HSE will now be able to offer such assistance without having to ensure first that the girl falls within the X case test.
The judgment therefore marks an important statement of the right to travel and an important decision on the powers and duties of the HSE under the Child Care Act 1991. However it sidesteps the core question as to whether Miss D might have been entitled to an abortion in Ireland.
While the decision allowing her travel is very welcome, a truly compassionate response to Miss D's case would be to provide for her to have a lawful abortion in Ireland.
Ivana Bacik is Reid Professor of Criminal Law at Trinity College Dublin.
Miss D Abortion
Editorial The Irish Examiner Thursday May 10th 2007.
The High Court decision to grant a 17-year-old girl the right to travel to England for an abortion, was sensible and humane- the right thing to do.
Given the tragic circumstances of Miss case, a girl who is 18 weeks pregnant with a baby expected to die soon after birth from anencephaly, which means a major part of the brain is missing, it would be a travesty if the courts stopped her from leaving the country.
In his compassionate, sympathetic and landmark ruling, Mr Justice McKechnie said the right to travel abroad took precedence over the right of the unborn in the Constitution.
From the outset, the case had been overshadowed by the emotive and divisive question of abortion even though it was not at issue. This matter is fraught with difficulty because of the lack of legislation on abortion. By refusing to legislate, successive governments have shirked thier responsibility. Instead it has been left to the courts to deal with this nettlesome issue.
It was not surprising that a girl in Miss D's predicament should want to follow in the footsteps of 6,000 other Irish women who annually go to the UK for abortions. But since she was in the care of the Health Service Executive (HSE) the agency insisted that a court order was necessary for her to travel.
Instead of going to the District Court, however, the HSE asked the gardaà to intervene and stop Miss D leaving the country. But they had no power to prevent her from travelling.
Essentially, the legal arguments revolved around whether or not she needed court permission to travel abroad. Lawyers for the State, her mother and the girl, argued that permission was not necessary.
While lawyers representing the unborn also said there was no law stopping her from travelling abroad, they claimed the foetus being carried by Miss D was entitled to constitutional protection and siad it would not be legal for her to have an abortion under Irish law.
When the HSE sought a court order in the District Court to allow her to travel, the application was rejected on grounds that this would be a failure to vindicate the constitutional right to life of the unborn. That ruling has now been overturned by the High Court.
Under Irish law, abortion can only be performed if there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother, including suicide. Thus, in the C case, a suicidal teenager was given the right to travel abroad to terminate her pregnancy.
In the present case a person's freedom to travel, and not abortion, was the issue. As well as ruling that there was no statutory or constitutional impediment against allowing Miss D to leave the country for an abortion, Judge McKechnie criticised the HSE, and rightly so.
Not surprisingly, public sympathy has been firmly on the side of the teenager. More than a fortnight has passed since she discovered her baby's condition, leading to her traumatic decision to travel to England for termination of her pregnancy. Up to that point, she wanted to have her baby.
Throughout this case, her courage and maturity have been commendable. That another pregnant teenager has found herself embroiled in a complicated legal battle underlines the urgent need for government to grasp the nettle and legislate on the question of abortion.
The High Court decision to grant a 17-year-old girl the right to travel to England for an abortion, was sensible and humane- the right thing to do.
Given the tragic circumstances of Miss case, a girl who is 18 weeks pregnant with a baby expected to die soon after birth from anencephaly, which means a major part of the brain is missing, it would be a travesty if the courts stopped her from leaving the country.
In his compassionate, sympathetic and landmark ruling, Mr Justice McKechnie said the right to travel abroad took precedence over the right of the unborn in the Constitution.
From the outset, the case had been overshadowed by the emotive and divisive question of abortion even though it was not at issue. This matter is fraught with difficulty because of the lack of legislation on abortion. By refusing to legislate, successive governments have shirked thier responsibility. Instead it has been left to the courts to deal with this nettlesome issue.
It was not surprising that a girl in Miss D's predicament should want to follow in the footsteps of 6,000 other Irish women who annually go to the UK for abortions. But since she was in the care of the Health Service Executive (HSE) the agency insisted that a court order was necessary for her to travel.
Instead of going to the District Court, however, the HSE asked the gardaà to intervene and stop Miss D leaving the country. But they had no power to prevent her from travelling.
Essentially, the legal arguments revolved around whether or not she needed court permission to travel abroad. Lawyers for the State, her mother and the girl, argued that permission was not necessary.
While lawyers representing the unborn also said there was no law stopping her from travelling abroad, they claimed the foetus being carried by Miss D was entitled to constitutional protection and siad it would not be legal for her to have an abortion under Irish law.
When the HSE sought a court order in the District Court to allow her to travel, the application was rejected on grounds that this would be a failure to vindicate the constitutional right to life of the unborn. That ruling has now been overturned by the High Court.
Under Irish law, abortion can only be performed if there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother, including suicide. Thus, in the C case, a suicidal teenager was given the right to travel abroad to terminate her pregnancy.
In the present case a person's freedom to travel, and not abortion, was the issue. As well as ruling that there was no statutory or constitutional impediment against allowing Miss D to leave the country for an abortion, Judge McKechnie criticised the HSE, and rightly so.
Not surprisingly, public sympathy has been firmly on the side of the teenager. More than a fortnight has passed since she discovered her baby's condition, leading to her traumatic decision to travel to England for termination of her pregnancy. Up to that point, she wanted to have her baby.
Throughout this case, her courage and maturity have been commendable. That another pregnant teenager has found herself embroiled in a complicated legal battle underlines the urgent need for government to grasp the nettle and legislate on the question of abortion.
A Merciful Release
Editorial The Irish Independent Thursday 10th May 2007.
FAIR minded people will greet Judge McKechnie's sensible judgment with a sigh of relief.
After a ten-day ordeal, during which she was threatened with the might and machinery of the State, a 17-year-old girl has been told, yes, you may go to England.
The Health Service Executive (HSE) must bear the brunt of the blame for what has been seen by most people as a cruel ordeal imposed with gross heavy-handedness.
One might ask why the Executive chose not to seek directions from the District Court at the start of the protracted Miss D affair.
Instead, the Executive contacted the gardai and the passport office with the intention of preventing a teenage girl from leaving the country. The Executive had taken legal advice.
In the wake of the X Case and the C Case, those responsible for children in care are running scared, afraid of making a mistake which will plunge them into some sort of Constitutional crisis.
They turn to the courts and, as Miss D has learned over a tortuous ten days, the courts grind exceeding slow.
Miss D had declared her intention to have an abortion because her child cannot survive after birth. But Miss D did not feel suicidal. In the context of Irish law, as it stands, this presented a problem. We descended into the realms of black farce.
Miss D lodged a High Court action to prevent the HSE from stopping her from travelling. Before the High Court could begin, the HSE finally applied to the District Court for directions on whether Miss D could travel. The District Court said no.
So, until Judge McKechnie brought matters to a merciful conclusion yesterday, there were two sets of legal proceedings.
Miss D challenged the HSE decision to prevent her from travelling.
The second was an action by the HSE challenging the District Court's refusal to allow Miss D to travel. This, despite the fact it was the HSE that tried to prevent Miss D travelling in the first place.
Judge McKechnie, in his lengthy and sensible judgment criticised the HSE and praised Miss D.
She had shown courage, integrity and maturity. We would add dignity to that list, given Miss D's behaviour under the scrutiny of lawyers and media and the close attentions of pressure groups.
FAIR minded people will greet Judge McKechnie's sensible judgment with a sigh of relief.
After a ten-day ordeal, during which she was threatened with the might and machinery of the State, a 17-year-old girl has been told, yes, you may go to England.
The Health Service Executive (HSE) must bear the brunt of the blame for what has been seen by most people as a cruel ordeal imposed with gross heavy-handedness.
One might ask why the Executive chose not to seek directions from the District Court at the start of the protracted Miss D affair.
Instead, the Executive contacted the gardai and the passport office with the intention of preventing a teenage girl from leaving the country. The Executive had taken legal advice.
In the wake of the X Case and the C Case, those responsible for children in care are running scared, afraid of making a mistake which will plunge them into some sort of Constitutional crisis.
They turn to the courts and, as Miss D has learned over a tortuous ten days, the courts grind exceeding slow.
Miss D had declared her intention to have an abortion because her child cannot survive after birth. But Miss D did not feel suicidal. In the context of Irish law, as it stands, this presented a problem. We descended into the realms of black farce.
Miss D lodged a High Court action to prevent the HSE from stopping her from travelling. Before the High Court could begin, the HSE finally applied to the District Court for directions on whether Miss D could travel. The District Court said no.
So, until Judge McKechnie brought matters to a merciful conclusion yesterday, there were two sets of legal proceedings.
Miss D challenged the HSE decision to prevent her from travelling.
The second was an action by the HSE challenging the District Court's refusal to allow Miss D to travel. This, despite the fact it was the HSE that tried to prevent Miss D travelling in the first place.
Judge McKechnie, in his lengthy and sensible judgment criticised the HSE and praised Miss D.
She had shown courage, integrity and maturity. We would add dignity to that list, given Miss D's behaviour under the scrutiny of lawyers and media and the close attentions of pressure groups.
Role of HSE Seriously Undermined By Ruling
Derbhail McDonald The Irish Independent Thursday May 10th 2007.
MISS D, the 17-year old girl who last night was booking a flight to travel to an English abortion clinic, had several choices available to her when she discovered her baby was doomed to die.
She could have carried it to full term.
But she couldn't live with the trauma of giving birth to "a baby with no head" and no prospect of survival.
She could have lied and told the HSE (her temporary carers) that she was suicidal and win an X case exemption.
But she wasn't prepared to commit perjury by waving a false suicide shroud.
She could have stayed mute, and made arrangements to secretly travel to England without telling the HSE she was pregnant and about to abort her much wanted, but non-viable son or daughter.
But she chose to speak out and have her trauma - personal and legal - read into the public record for all to see and hear.
Miss D chose courage instead of cowardice; truth instead of deceit and faced up to her abortion demons instead of hoping they would go away.
And that is why every political party in Ireland should today hang their heads in shame.
Since the D story broke two weeks ago, politicians of all shades have been disgracefully mute.
Cowering behind the actions and words of an unelected judge - asked, once again, to play God - our politicians buried their heads in the sand lest a "troubled teen" bring the curtains down on an already fraught election campaign.
Last night, Fianna Fail, who promised they would legislate in the wake of the X ruling, said that it did not comment on individual cases and was opposed to legislation calling for abortion.
That means they won't introduce (as promised) laws to regularise abortions that are legal in Ireland. And they won't consider making abortion available in Ireland where the foetus will not survive outside the womb.
But they'll happily pay for women carrying babies with foetal abnormalities to catch a boat or plane to England. It's the Irish way.
Ironically, yesterday's ruling had little to do with political cowardice or abortion.
It is about troubled children in the care of the State who may now ignore court orders because they feel like it. And whilst it has solved one of the problems that Miss D faced by allowing her to travel, it has opened up a Pandora's Box for the Health Services Executive which has over 5,000 children in its care.
The High Court has ruled that there is no statutory or constitutional prohibition preventing Miss D for travelling to England for an abortion or any other reason.
Although most children are placed in care as the result of an interim court order, it now seems - as a result of yesterday's ruling - that they don't need to ask the HSE or a court if they can leave that care. Or the country.
So the HSE, which is legally and morally responsible for children in its care - children who, by definition, require special attention because the State has to step into the role of their parents - now finds that its role could be seriously undermined.
The ruling in the D case has opened up a new chapter in Ireland's childcare narrative.
Are the HSE powerless to stop (mostly older) teens in its care from acting as they wish, going where they want?
If the courts and the HSE have no control or knowledge of children's whereabouts, who is at fault when things go wrong?
Hard cases, the cliche runs, have the potential to make bad law.
And the resolution of one crisis can pave the way for another.
MISS D, the 17-year old girl who last night was booking a flight to travel to an English abortion clinic, had several choices available to her when she discovered her baby was doomed to die.
She could have carried it to full term.
But she couldn't live with the trauma of giving birth to "a baby with no head" and no prospect of survival.
She could have lied and told the HSE (her temporary carers) that she was suicidal and win an X case exemption.
But she wasn't prepared to commit perjury by waving a false suicide shroud.
She could have stayed mute, and made arrangements to secretly travel to England without telling the HSE she was pregnant and about to abort her much wanted, but non-viable son or daughter.
But she chose to speak out and have her trauma - personal and legal - read into the public record for all to see and hear.
Miss D chose courage instead of cowardice; truth instead of deceit and faced up to her abortion demons instead of hoping they would go away.
And that is why every political party in Ireland should today hang their heads in shame.
Since the D story broke two weeks ago, politicians of all shades have been disgracefully mute.
Cowering behind the actions and words of an unelected judge - asked, once again, to play God - our politicians buried their heads in the sand lest a "troubled teen" bring the curtains down on an already fraught election campaign.
Last night, Fianna Fail, who promised they would legislate in the wake of the X ruling, said that it did not comment on individual cases and was opposed to legislation calling for abortion.
That means they won't introduce (as promised) laws to regularise abortions that are legal in Ireland. And they won't consider making abortion available in Ireland where the foetus will not survive outside the womb.
But they'll happily pay for women carrying babies with foetal abnormalities to catch a boat or plane to England. It's the Irish way.
Ironically, yesterday's ruling had little to do with political cowardice or abortion.
It is about troubled children in the care of the State who may now ignore court orders because they feel like it. And whilst it has solved one of the problems that Miss D faced by allowing her to travel, it has opened up a Pandora's Box for the Health Services Executive which has over 5,000 children in its care.
The High Court has ruled that there is no statutory or constitutional prohibition preventing Miss D for travelling to England for an abortion or any other reason.
Although most children are placed in care as the result of an interim court order, it now seems - as a result of yesterday's ruling - that they don't need to ask the HSE or a court if they can leave that care. Or the country.
So the HSE, which is legally and morally responsible for children in its care - children who, by definition, require special attention because the State has to step into the role of their parents - now finds that its role could be seriously undermined.
The ruling in the D case has opened up a new chapter in Ireland's childcare narrative.
Are the HSE powerless to stop (mostly older) teens in its care from acting as they wish, going where they want?
If the courts and the HSE have no control or knowledge of children's whereabouts, who is at fault when things go wrong?
Hard cases, the cliche runs, have the potential to make bad law.
And the resolution of one crisis can pave the way for another.
Judge Praises Girls Courage, Integrity.
Ann O'Loughlin The Irish Independent Thursday May 10th 2007.
THE judge who has ruled that the teenager at the centre of the latest abortion controversy can travel to the UK for a termination yesterday praised her courage.
Mr Justice Liam McKechnie said Miss D had received devastating news about the health of the baby she was carrying when she went for a scan while 16-weeks pregnant. He said she had made a sound moral judgment.
She could, Judge McKechnie said, have stayed mute and travelled or she could have committed perjury by claiming she had suicidal tendencies.
Miss D, he said, was determined to seek a resolution and she had shown courage, integrity and determination.
The decision that she can travel to the UK for an abortion, the judge reminded the packed courtroom, is not the end of Miss D's ordeal.
He said she would now have to book a cheap flight and travel for a termination. The teenager would have to deal with other matters afterwards.
Referring to the incident at the family home which led to the granting of the interim care order after Miss D ended up in hospital, Judge McKechnie said it would be unfair to speculate on what it might have been. Miss D was blameless.
If matters continued as they were now, a recurrence was most unlikely, he said, and later stated that Miss D's mother had supported her daughter's decision and had been with her in court. Her father had been absent from her life.
Miss D had gone for a scan on April 23, her seventeenth birthday, and it had tragically confirmed that the foetus she was carrying was suffering from an abnormality.
There was no cranial vault and, as Miss D had stated, she could see no head. The judge said the discovery was unimaginably traumatic.
THE judge who has ruled that the teenager at the centre of the latest abortion controversy can travel to the UK for a termination yesterday praised her courage.
Mr Justice Liam McKechnie said Miss D had received devastating news about the health of the baby she was carrying when she went for a scan while 16-weeks pregnant. He said she had made a sound moral judgment.
She could, Judge McKechnie said, have stayed mute and travelled or she could have committed perjury by claiming she had suicidal tendencies.
Miss D, he said, was determined to seek a resolution and she had shown courage, integrity and determination.
The decision that she can travel to the UK for an abortion, the judge reminded the packed courtroom, is not the end of Miss D's ordeal.
He said she would now have to book a cheap flight and travel for a termination. The teenager would have to deal with other matters afterwards.
Referring to the incident at the family home which led to the granting of the interim care order after Miss D ended up in hospital, Judge McKechnie said it would be unfair to speculate on what it might have been. Miss D was blameless.
If matters continued as they were now, a recurrence was most unlikely, he said, and later stated that Miss D's mother had supported her daughter's decision and had been with her in court. Her father had been absent from her life.
Miss D had gone for a scan on April 23, her seventeenth birthday, and it had tragically confirmed that the foetus she was carrying was suffering from an abnormality.
There was no cranial vault and, as Miss D had stated, she could see no head. The judge said the discovery was unimaginably traumatic.
The End Of One Ordeal And The Start Of Another
Dearbhail McDonald The Irish Independent Thursday May 10th 2007
YOUNG and old; legal and lay, pro-lifers, pro-choicers, and everything in between.
There wasn't even standing room yesterday at Dublin's Four Courts to hear Judge Liam McKechnie hand down his ruling in Ireland's latest abortion controversy.
The one glaring absence amongst the 100 or so people who tried to cram into court 14 was Miss D, the 17-year-old girl who is 18 weeks pregnant with a baby that is destined to die.
Miss D had dutifully attended court on previous occasions and listened intently to five heavyweight legal teams debate her fate as she placed a protective arm over her growing baby bump and wiped tears with her free hand.
But after being hounded by pro-life and pro-choice activists (inside and out of court) earlier this week, the pretty teenager who had attended court with her boyfriend, left it to her mother and a family friend to accept the verdict on her behalf.
Gaunt and earnest, D's mother, known as Miss A, was ushered to the front of the courtroom to hear Judge McKechnie hold that there is no statutory or constitutional impediment preventing her second eldest daughter from travelling to England for an abortion.
Occasionally, nature gets it wrong and babies die. Mishaps, such as the fatal brain condition anencephaly that claims newborn victims within minutes or days of their short lives, can and do occur.
To the horror of the rosary bead-holding "pro-lifers", Judge McKechnie said that the case was not about abortion or the termination of pregnancy.
It is a case about the right to travel. It was not about the desire to terminate a healthy foetus and definitely not about the lives of children - born and unborn - who suffer from disabilities. It is a case about the right to travel and that right takes precedence over the rights of the unborn whose right to life is guaranteed in the Constitution.
D's mother, miraculous medal tied to a piece of string in hand, hung her head in relief when she realised that her daughter was free to go, but pursed her lips as the judge outlined what she already knew: that her daughter's ordeal isn't over.
In many ways, it is only just beginning.
Now they will have to make arrangements: book a cheap flight and leave the country to terminate the much loved, much wanted, but ultimately doomed unborn baby who nature betrayed.
YOUNG and old; legal and lay, pro-lifers, pro-choicers, and everything in between.
There wasn't even standing room yesterday at Dublin's Four Courts to hear Judge Liam McKechnie hand down his ruling in Ireland's latest abortion controversy.
The one glaring absence amongst the 100 or so people who tried to cram into court 14 was Miss D, the 17-year-old girl who is 18 weeks pregnant with a baby that is destined to die.
Miss D had dutifully attended court on previous occasions and listened intently to five heavyweight legal teams debate her fate as she placed a protective arm over her growing baby bump and wiped tears with her free hand.
But after being hounded by pro-life and pro-choice activists (inside and out of court) earlier this week, the pretty teenager who had attended court with her boyfriend, left it to her mother and a family friend to accept the verdict on her behalf.
Gaunt and earnest, D's mother, known as Miss A, was ushered to the front of the courtroom to hear Judge McKechnie hold that there is no statutory or constitutional impediment preventing her second eldest daughter from travelling to England for an abortion.
Occasionally, nature gets it wrong and babies die. Mishaps, such as the fatal brain condition anencephaly that claims newborn victims within minutes or days of their short lives, can and do occur.
To the horror of the rosary bead-holding "pro-lifers", Judge McKechnie said that the case was not about abortion or the termination of pregnancy.
It is a case about the right to travel. It was not about the desire to terminate a healthy foetus and definitely not about the lives of children - born and unborn - who suffer from disabilities. It is a case about the right to travel and that right takes precedence over the rights of the unborn whose right to life is guaranteed in the Constitution.
D's mother, miraculous medal tied to a piece of string in hand, hung her head in relief when she realised that her daughter was free to go, but pursed her lips as the judge outlined what she already knew: that her daughter's ordeal isn't over.
In many ways, it is only just beginning.
Now they will have to make arrangements: book a cheap flight and leave the country to terminate the much loved, much wanted, but ultimately doomed unborn baby who nature betrayed.
Key Quotes From A Landmark Case.
The Irish Independent.
Key quotes from a landmark case Thursday May 10th 2007
Doctors for Choice: Dr Juliet Bressan said: "We would urge that Miss D be allowed have a therapeutic abortion in Ireland as soon as possible. Failing that, the HSE should fund Miss D's termination on an E112 form without delay.''
''We call upon the political parties to ensure adequate legislation is urgently put in place, to ensure no woman is ever forced through this kind of humiliation again."
Health Service Executive: Accepting the court decision it said it acted in accordance in what they believed to be the correct course of action in terms of the constraints imposed on them by law.
"The HSE always considered a court order was necessary. The decision today will require further consideration in terms of the HSE's duties and responsibilities under childcare legislation."
Irish Family Planning Association: It said the failure of successive governments to legislate for abortion was the singular reason behind the necessity of Miss D having to take her case to the High Court.
It said it was unacceptable that a situation persisted whereby there was no proper legal framework on abortion in Ireland.
Psychologists for Choice: Miss D now needed proper medical and psychological support.
"Unfortunately, this support is impossible to provide to any pregnant woman for as long as there is a failure to properly legislate for travel, information and abortion services in specific circumstances as voted for by the people in the last two referendums." Pro-Life Campaign: "We cannot ignore the fact abortion involves the taking of an innocent life.
"This tragic case also reminds us of the urgent obligation on society to ensure every possible support is put in place so that no woman feels abortion is the only option open to her."
Key quotes from a landmark case Thursday May 10th 2007
Doctors for Choice: Dr Juliet Bressan said: "We would urge that Miss D be allowed have a therapeutic abortion in Ireland as soon as possible. Failing that, the HSE should fund Miss D's termination on an E112 form without delay.''
''We call upon the political parties to ensure adequate legislation is urgently put in place, to ensure no woman is ever forced through this kind of humiliation again."
Health Service Executive: Accepting the court decision it said it acted in accordance in what they believed to be the correct course of action in terms of the constraints imposed on them by law.
"The HSE always considered a court order was necessary. The decision today will require further consideration in terms of the HSE's duties and responsibilities under childcare legislation."
Irish Family Planning Association: It said the failure of successive governments to legislate for abortion was the singular reason behind the necessity of Miss D having to take her case to the High Court.
It said it was unacceptable that a situation persisted whereby there was no proper legal framework on abortion in Ireland.
Psychologists for Choice: Miss D now needed proper medical and psychological support.
"Unfortunately, this support is impossible to provide to any pregnant woman for as long as there is a failure to properly legislate for travel, information and abortion services in specific circumstances as voted for by the people in the last two referendums." Pro-Life Campaign: "We cannot ignore the fact abortion involves the taking of an innocent life.
"This tragic case also reminds us of the urgent obligation on society to ensure every possible support is put in place so that no woman feels abortion is the only option open to her."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
