TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 9 °C Sunday 19 May, 2013

As it happened: Advocacy and religious groups address Oireachtas on proposed new abortion laws

Religious representatives and interest groups will offer their thoughts to politicians today.

THE OIREACHTAS COMMITTEE on Health and Children today held the final of three days of public hearings on the government’s proposed new legislation on abortion, following its decision to legislate to allow abortion within the terms of the X Case ruling.

The third day of hearings – split into three sessions – will include representations from the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference, Church of Ireland, Presbyterian Church of Ireland, Methodist Church of Ireland, Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland and Atheist Ireland (9.30am – 11.30am); Caroline Simons and Dr Berry Kiely of the Pro-Life Campaign, Dr Eoghan de Faoite and Dr Seán O’Domhnaill of Youth Defence, Patrick Carr and David Manley of Family & Life, Breda O’Brien of the Iona Institute (11.45am – 1.45pm); and Sinéad Ahern of Choice Ireland, Orla O’Connor, National Women’s Council of Ireland and a director of Action on X (2.45pm – 4.45pm).

9.21 – Good morning – and thanks for joining us on the final day of hearings for this week’s Oireachtas committee hearings on abortion. Having already been briefed on the thoughts of the medical and legal professions over Tuesday and Wednesday, today we will hear the views of religious and interest groups in Ireland.

9.25 – Today’s hearings will be broken up into three sessions, the first of which will focus on the views of religious organisations – including the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference, Church of Ireland, Presbyterian Church of Ireland, Methodist Church of Ireland, Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland and Atheist Ireland.

9.26 – It’s Jennifer Wade here for the first two hours, by the way – please leave your thoughts and questions in the comments section below, or tweet us @thejournal_ie. We’ll try to address any queries you might have.

9.34 – Committee chairman Jerry Buttimer opens the eight session and summarises the arguments heard so far. He also thanks all witnesses to date for their submissions, and for the Oireachtas members of their sensitive and tolerant approach to the issue.

9.40 – We begin with Rev Christopher Jones of the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference, who welcomes the “calm and dignified” manner of discussions over the past two days. Jones speaks of the many women in parishes across the country who are “deeply concerned” about the issue of abortion. He said that women and girls who find themselves experiencing an unexpected pregnancy should be shown love, care and support to cope in order to deal with their situation in a “life-giving way”.

9.42 – Jones says any suggestion that Ireland is not a safe place for pregnant women because we don’t have abortion is a ‘distortion of the truth’. He said that both mother and child have an equal right to life – and both are sacred.

9.43 – The church draws a distinction between medical intervention to save the life of the mother and abortion. He said the X case ruling would remove the obligation to make every effort in all times to save life of mother and baby.

9.46 – Reverend Dr Michael Jackson, of the Church of Ireland, says that the church opposes abortion but that there are exceptional cases in which a termination is permissible. Such cases included ‘real and substantial risk to the life of the mother’, he said.

9.48 – Jackson says the current state of affairs is “unfair” to both women and medical professionals.

9.49 – The Expert Group on Abortion’s report highlights the need for effective decision making procedures, he says.

9.54 – Heidi Good of the Methodist Church of Ireland recognises that the issue is complex and difficult. She says the Methodist Church opposes ‘abortion on demand’ – but she outlines four cases in which the termination of pregnancy is acceptable: 1) the mother’s life is at risk, 2) the risk of grave risk of serious injury to physical or mental health ,3) gross abnormality of the foetus, 4) pregnancy resulting  from rape or incest.

9.55 – Good said the Methodist Church “strongly urges” the Oireachtas to legislate and set minimum  standards for the social good.

9.57 – Trevor Morrow, of the Presbyterian Church of Ireland, said all religious had upheld the ‘sanctity of human life’. He said the Government had a duty to care for the weak and vulnerable – including the unborn child, and that the embryo should be treated “as a person”.

“The strong should make sacrifices for the weak,” he said.

9.59 – Presbyterian Church  is “very opposed to any suggestion of abortion on demand”, he said.

10.02 – Morrow recognises that in our “messy world” medical professionals are confronted with two things that are wrong – the death of a mother or the death of a child. He says the lesser of evil option must be chosen in these cases.

10.04 – Maternal health care should strive to save life of both mother and baby, but if the continuation of pregnancy endangers the mother’s life, then the pregnancy should be terminated – Selim.

10.06 – In cases where there is a risk to the life of a foetus and a woman, Selim says, “obviously the latter is of greater importance than the former”. However, he says that the threat of suicide not a ground for abortion.

10.08 – In cases of rape – Selim says that children born in this “unfortunate situation” are still entitled to life. He says that society needs to support women who become pregnant in such circumstances.

10.09 – Atheist Ireland is up now – and says that “our laws should not be based on other people’s religious beliefs”.

10.13 – Government has the duty to legislate for the X case. “It took a raped teenage child to legislate, it has taken the death of a miscarrying woman to bring us here today,” he says. “Stop lawmaking by response to personal tragedies”, he added.

10.18 – Questions from members now – and Deputy Billy Kelleher asks what the Irish Catholic Bishops are proposing regarding the X case ruling – and, to all churches, if legislation should be confined to the X case ruling, or if it should be broadened.

10.21Ciara Conway talks of ‘nuanced’ theological approach to contraception and divorce – asking “If women and men are truly equal, why are women entitled to less medical care?” She asks why Irish women presumed to manipulative, or lying, about suicide intention?

10.23Mattie McGrath asks if a referendum is actually being suggested by the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference – and for them to expand on why.

10.24Rev Christopher Jones of the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference says that the Supreme Court judgement on the X case “reversed totally” the will of the Irish people as expressed in the 1983 constitutional amendment. He said a referendum would give people the chance to re-establish their voice.

10.29 – Fr Timothy Bartlett of the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference refers to the issue of the two previous referenda, saying that there was not a ‘clear pro-life pro-choice’ result. “There is a reason we hold the courts in high esteem – but here’s also a reason why they don’t frame legislation,” he said. “You, as legislators, are free to consider the wider issues.”

10.31Michael Jackson: On the issue of referendum, our concern is more on legislation in order to provide for life of mother. There is a difference between crisis and emergency.

10.37 – Dr Ali Selim says “We think it’s an issue that should be considered from a medical point of view. The treat of suicide could be bases on many other things.”

Jane Donnelly of Atheist Ireland women in this country “do not have an equal right to health”.

Legislation for X case will not open door for abortion on demand, says Heidi Good.

10.39Rabbi Zalman Lent of the Irish Jewish Community, who was delayed in arriving, gives his opening speech. He says the Jewish faith only allows abortion in certain circumstances, including a danger or risk to mothers life, mental health complications to mother leading to her death, rape or incest, or foetal abnormalities which impact viability.

10.44Eamon Maloney – some argue that recognition of the risk of suicide will open floodgates. It is an “insensitive and insulting” view. Do the churches and atheists share that view?

Imelda Henry – what would the Catholic Church say to an obstetrician fearing jail? What about parents whose teenage daughter has been raped and becomes pregnant?

10.55Imelda Henry – what would the Catholic Church say to an obstetrician fearing jail? What about parents whose teenage daughter has been raped and becomes pregnant?

Denis Naughten – is legislation extending the grounds for termination? Should there be a referendum that 433 of constitution (Roche case) that provides for abortion in cases of foetal abnormality.

Robert Dowds – ask that the Catholic Church, in particular, goes back to look at the issue in detail. “Life is not as easy as we would like it to be,” he says.

Seamus Healy – addresses the concern over legislation leading to widespread availability of abortion. Is that not unfounded, on the basis of the fact that we operate under a constitution?

Regina Doherty – given that suicidal intent is recognised as a real and substantial threat to the life of the mother. How does the Catholic Church deal with cases such as this?

Peter Fitzpatrick – Would the Catholic Church elaborate on medical intervention.

Marc McSharry – Bases on physiatrists’ presentation, McSharry asks comment on numbers actually number of women at risk of dying by suicide.

John Crown – Given the fact that medicine is getting better and mothers are getting older, this legislation would apply to about 30 people per annum. Why do you think this would to an substantial increase in abortions?

Asks each church if a woman is “allowed to rise to a job” in the official organisation of their faith?

11.00Trevor Morrow, of the Presbyterian Church of Ireland: There are messy situations, but moral laws are vital in the midst of the complexities. An argument exists that, if there a risk of even one woman taking her life, you have to respond to that as legislators… but if we believe in the right of life of the unborn, we should be equally concerned for the foetus.

We have a right not to be harmed by another… once you move away from this – which is what the X case judgement opens up – then you open up all pressures and the possibilities, he adds.

11.02Christopher Jones of the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference expresses sadness towards girls and women who have become pregnant through rape, but says the denial of a human life is not condonable even in such cases.

11.06Samuel Harper, of the Church of Ireland, reiterates need for legislation – despite concerns over what it would “open up”.

The measure of the legislation will be on how it addresses the 3 per cent of women who are at risk of suicide – not how it might open it up to the 100 per cent, he adds.

11.08Michael Jackson that – as it stands – we are not able to assess the trauma of women who have undergone abortion, or find ways to support them

11.09 – Heidi Good says the care and protection of the mother and the unborn is primary. “We don’t not legislate just because it affects one person.” Even if this applies to just one woman in the next ten years, we should legislate, she adds.

11.13Rabbi Zalman Lent says we must approach the issue of suicidal pregnant women with compassion. In relation to the low percentage of potential suicides, he says that – if there is a risk to the life of the woman – it must be addressed.

11.14Trevor Morrow: abortion is being practised in Ireland today – otherwise members of the medical profession would not be seeking to protect people.

11.25Derek Byrne: says this is a Catholic country – based on last census – so should we apply Roman Catholic teaching to medical practise?

Fidelma Healy-Eames:asks Atheist Ireland and Methodist about “compassion”? Asks, isn’t the X ruled “flawed”?

Terence Flanagan: What is the variety of opinion regarding exceptional cases within the Church of Ireland?

Bernard Durkan: In cases of rape – is it position of the Catholic Church that the victim of rape is to live with the consequences of that, ie pregnancy? What about minors and intellectually challeged people?

Jim Walsh: Asks for comment on ‘two person model’.

Michael Creed: Is the Church saying it is happy for a “carte blanche” situation relating to potential suicide – is their disdain for the legislator do great?

11.28Marcella Corcoran: What is your definition of “life”?

Ivana Bacik: isn’t the opposition to X cased based on misogyny? Where is your compassion to victims of rape? Bacik also notes that most of those heads of churches are male and celibate – and questions how they can comment on women’s reproduction.

11.30Timothy Barlett says medical intervention to save of mother is always acceptable, as long as every move has been made to also save life of child.

There are many women who I know in my life – and who I love dearly. No woman has ever called me a misogynist.

11.32Jackson comments on the range of views on abortion within Church of Ireland – fluidity on issues like health and suicide exists.

11.33Good says Methodist church has compassion for the unborn child as well as the mother – that it is a difficult situation and she “would not like to be in medical profession and be faced with that decision”.

11.36Atheist Ireland says legislators are retrained – which is not ideal – but they must work within the constitution.

In relation to viability – if a foetus is viable, it will be delivered as a baby.

11.37 – Jones: “We do not need to legislate for abortion in order to satisfy the European Court of Human Rights.”

11.38 – That concludes this session – the Committee has now been suspended until 11.50 am.

Next up will be Caroline Simons and Dr Berry Kiely of the Pro-Life Campaign, Dr Eoghan de Faoite and Dr Seán O’Domhnaill of Youth Defence, Patrick Carr and David Manley of Family & Life and Breda O’Brien of the Iona Institute.

11.46 – And so ends Jennifer Wade’s two-hour shift of liveblogging – it’s Gavan Reilly here with you for the next two-hour session as we hear from the pro-life groups offering their thoughts on the government’s proposals.

11.47 – There’s seven pro-life campaigners due in for the second session: Caroline Simons and Dr Berry Kiely of the Pro-Life Campaign, Dr Eoghan de Faoite and Dr Seán Ó Domhnaill of Youth Defence, Patrick Carr and David Manley of Family & Life, and Breda O’Brien of the Iona Institute.

11.52 – And so we begin the ninth of our ten sessions. Nearly there. In case you’d like a quick catch-up on everything so far, we’ve summarised the 10 interesting moments from Day 1′s medical evidence and Day 2′s legal evidence.

11.55 – We open with Caroline Simons of the Pro-Life Campaign (and former European Parliament candidate for Libertas), who is again hamstrung by the same dodgy microphone which flummoxed Jennifer Schweppe’s testimony yesterday. She switches seats to get a better mic.

11.57Caroline Simons says there is no evidence that abortion reduces the mental health risks of unwanted pregnancy, and questions why legislation is being compiled to address medical evidence that appears not to exist.

What would be the impact? Psychiatrists would be asked to administer a procedure for which there is no psychiatric justification, and all would be violating the most basic human right for unjustifiable reasons, Simons says. She speaks of an “irrational and entirely unjustifiable basis”. Legislating for abortion is a profound cultural change in society. “It is certain that ideas like these have real consequences,” she says.

11.59Simons: Most of the doctors who have come to this committee want to know “that I will not go to jail” and that they were free to make appropriate clinical judgements anyway. No doctor has ever withheld treatment for fear of the law, she says – so why change the law, especially if no doctors have been prosecuted? Are their fears well-founded?

Simons refers (though not by word) to the legal principle of mens rea – that a person needs to have acted ‘with guilty mind’ to be prosecuted of a crime. A doctor acting in good faith has nothing to fear from the law, she says.

The ECHR did not direct Ireland on the form or action to take, but only to clarify the law so that people knew where they stood. Legislating would not be problematic for the X decision itself, where the court heard no medical or psychiatric evidence, Simons says.

12.01 – After this week we know abortion will never address the suicidal woman’s actual needs, Simons says – so there is no need to legislate for it. A referendum is needed to address the ‘faulty’ X Case ruling, she says.

The government should commit to examine the difficulties established by X, she says. This issue is complex and sensitive, but this committee’s efforts over the last few days have clarified much of what is confused. “We may finally address the problems addressed by the X Case” because of its findings, she concludes.

12.04 – We’re now joined by Dr Eoghan de Faoite, a medical doctor and member of Youth Defence. He begins on the ECtHR ruling. “The EHCR absolutely did not demand, or even require, that Ireland legislate for abortion,” he opens with, saying the court merely demanded clarity.

He says Ireland is a “world leader” in maternal health, and says Ireland already permits labour to be induced early if a mother’s life is at risk. Obstetricians have the absolute freedom to intervene to save the life of a woman, he says.

There is a distinction between the termination of pregnancy and the termination of the life of a child, he says – there’s a clear difference between terminating a pregnancy (by inducing labour early, to trigger a birth) and aborting an unborn child.

12.06 – De Faoite refers to questions from Prof John Crown on Tuesday, who was told: “We never kill a foetus,” by the master of the National Maternity Hospital, Dr Rhona Mahoney. “That is not our aim.”

He also says his medical colleagues are often insulted by claims that people need to go to Britain for “so-called life-saving abortions”. There were zero abortions carried out in Ireland under Category F (where abortions are carried out to save the life of the mother) of British law, he says, citing British data released under Freedom of Information legislation. “Irish women are not travelling to the UK to undergo so-called lifesaving abortions because they are being denied treatment in Ireland,” he affirms.

12.08 – Next up is Dr Sean Ó Domhnaill, a consultant in general adult psychiatry and a member of Youth Defence’s sister organisation, the Life Institute. He says he began working in Jersey in 1997, where his first weekend on call brought him into contact with an attempted suicide victim who had been previously pressured to undergo an abortion in Southampton against her will. (Abortion was not legal in Jersey at the time, but is now.)

12.10 – At the time, he says, his patient asked him to tell her that she hadn’t killed her own baby or that she could ‘bring her baby back’. He evidently could not do so.

Ó Domhnaill regularly comes across women in crisis or unplanned pregnancies. In another case, he says, he was aware of a woman who went into deep depressive moods on the anniversary of her abortion. “These people have been left out of the hearings to a large extent,” he says.

He concludes with a quote from an academic psychiatric textbook. “Only 10 per cent of women suffer with severe or prolonged sequelae [pathological conditions] as a result of pregnancy,” he says.

12.13 – Next is David Manley of Family & Life. The issue of abortion is divisive, but there’s a large area of agreement and common ground that women in Ireland should receive whatever medical care they require in pregnancy – and there’s a majority who want the protection of unborn life continued. All but a small number of people are content to see the protection of human life, he says.

In the A, B and C case, the ECtHR didn’t ask Ireland to legalise abortion – but rather introduce procedures that were accessible to women, without prescribing what these should be.

12.14 – The 1992 ruling in the X Case will remain the source of legal difficulty and social controversy until the suicide provision is removed, Manley says, returning to testimony given by William Binchy yesterday.

Further clarity is desirable, indeed, but it is important to note that whatever lack of clarity presently exists and existed, it clearly did not prevent doctors in Ireland from providing women in pregnancy with the high standard of care that they need.

12.16Manley goes on: The course of action chosen by the government gives statutory effect to the provision of the X Case. Yet all the psychologists at the committee said abortion was not in itself a treatment for suicidality. The constitution recognises the fundamental equality of all human beings. Ireland, in 1983, made explicit that this equality extends to the most vulnerable of human beings, the unborn.

The government has no mandate to legislate for the direct and intentional killing of unborn children in Ireland. To do so would create a law that is fundamentally unjust, he concludes.

12.19 – Last up is Breda O’Brien from the Iona Institute, who thanks members for the chance to interact with them. She’s spent three decades teaching young women, she says, and has witnessed something terrifying: the normalising of suicide as a response to extreme stress. When a girl comes to her with suicidal tendencies, she therefore takes it very very seriously.

She refers to claims that removing suicidal tendencies as a stigmatising effect, but says it’s actually the opposite: a perinatal psychologist has says ‘emergency terminations’ are ‘obsolete’ and a calmer response is needed.

The judges in X acted in good faith, but the tragic case of Miss C – a rape victim at 13 who was brought abroad by the State for an abortion – is the result: she has attempted suicide many times since her abortion, thankfully unsuccessfully, O’Brien says.

12.20 – Journalists would be condemned to prescribe a simple cause to suicide, for risk to contagion, and yet this legislation proposes to legally enshrine that pregnancy can be so traumatic as to drive a woman to take her own life.

It isn’t the baby that ruins you life. It’s everybody else. It’s the family who won’t stand by you, the principal who won’t give you a place in his school. The partner who’ll pay for your abortion but not pay child support.

12.23 – The Expert Group report referred to delivering children “on the brink of viability”, and says the legislation is asking an obstetric team to scrub up and deliberately induce labour and deliver an extremely premature baby – at risk of brain damage, blindness or death – on an ‘emergency’ basis that doesn’t exist.

All of this is in the absence of any benefit from the mother, O’Brien says, going on to quote Planned Parenthood – the body which carries out abortions in the US – who admit a woman is equally likely to have mental health issues after an abortion than after becoming pregnant in the first place.

Nobody told the committee that an abortion meets the criteria of being the only way to avert suicide. This is a shaky foundation to build legislation on, O’Brien claims. “You have a moral duty – responsibility – to disobey unjust laws,” she concludes, quoting Martin Luther King.

12.25 – Speeches done; on to questions and Fianna Fail’s Billy Kelleher who asks about the Pro-Life Campaign’s submission – and a quote that there were two maternal suicides in Dublin’s three main maternity hospitals over a two-decade period. He asks: Is it possible that this number could have been higher, but for the fact that many in crisis pregnancies were able to travel to Britain? He also asks if the Pro-Life campaign is asking for a referendum to change the wording upon which Article 40.3.3 is based?

12.27Rónán Mullen has a point of order – asking if one person who attended was mistakenly overlooked. He says it would be “appropriate and generous” if an opportunity was given to pro-life barrister Maria Steen (who is present alongside the panellists, though not a panellist herself) to speak to the committee.

12.33Caoimhghin Ó Caoláin (SF) has a question for psychiatrist Seán Ó Domhnaill, and recaps the current legal status in Ireland. The five consultant psychiatrists before us earlier this week confirmed that they never had to intervene in ways Ó Domhnaill outlined. Why would this change simply after a new law? He also asks Breda O’Brien to outline her calls for a new referendum, and what it is she would like the public to vote on. He adds that one in 19 Irish pregnancies ends in abortion – it’s just the case that most of those are aborted overseas.

Mattie McGrath (Independent) refers to the C Case, of a girl in state care who was allegedly suicidal while in state care and brought to Britain for an abortion, and asks what implications this had in Ireland.

Ciara Conway (Labour) asks De Faoite about his reference that no women had travelled to Ireland “for life-saving abortion”. She says the medics who spoke earlier said it was commonplace to refer women to Britain for abortions, and asks for a response to this. She adds that the committee is looking to give women choices about access to life-saving treatment, and asks Ó Domhnaill why he may fear women could falsify a threat of suicide simply to end a pregnancy.

12.39Breda O’Brien responds first, to Conway. “Do you have such a certainty that you can legislate for suicide on the grounds of lifesaving, given the evidence that some women after an abortion continue to be suicidal and some tragically succeed?,” she asks. There’s no medical evidence to suggest that it’s in any way helpful.

She says a change in culture – like the one that would be brought about in this legislation – would be a greater educator than any other.

Maria Steen, a barrister with Iona, is invited to step in to comment that the 1861 legislation cannot apply to a doctor who acts in good faith because they require the aforementioned ‘mens rea’. The 1861 law does have an important effect in deterring backstreet abortions, she says, commenting that those laws are still in place in 1861 to underline the illegality of improperly obtained abortions.

Ultimately members are being asked to make political decisions and value judgements, she says. The current medical practice – where everything is done to save the life of the mother – is what people want retained. She says as a mother-to-be herself, she wants to be assured that a doctor will only act to save her life when her life is on the line (but no earlier).

12.43David Manley summarises that yes, the Family & Life group would like a new referendum to amend the constitution and undo the effect of the X Case. He says the referendums in 1992 put two questions: asked people if they want termination banned, and if they wanted suicide removed as a grounds for it. Pro-life people were pulled in two directions and were forced to vote in ways they were uncomfortable.

In 2002 there was “a deep division among pro-lifers” on the question of suicide, with a large number again uneasily voting No. He says, as a result, it cannot be said that the majority of Irish people support the suicide provision that currently exists.

Finally we hear from Patrick Carr, another Family & Life member, who says it’s not unique to Ireland where the Supreme Court “would make a faulty decision” (he adds he means no disrespect to the court in this case). Other countries have recognised their other previous decisions as flawed, and takes the pro-slavery rulings of the US Supreme Court as simply one example. Flawed decisions have all introduced the notion that some lives and people are less valuable than others, a basis which is also present in the X ruling.

12.47Sean Ó Domhnaill looks to respond, to Kelleher’s question about whether more Irish suicides could have occurred if Britain didn’t offer a solution for those women. O Domhnaill says the figures were obtained from the UK authorities, and says only between 1992-2011, two Irish women presented and claimed mental health grounds (though not on the basis of suicide risk). Abortion is not reported in any journal or textbook as a treatment for mental illness or disorder, he says.

The problem with the presentation of someone with a major suicide risk, is presenting as someone is usually acutely stressed. Anyone at risk of suicide should be thoroughly assessed on the basis of their own psychiatric history; this is still the case if two psychiatrists are needed to provide this opinion, he says. He cites medical advice to admit a depressed person to hospital and not ‘to make an intervention that is irrevocable’. Under Irish law, someone in an acute risk of suicide has to be admitted to a place of safety. Law, therefore, doesn’t allow a doctor simply to discharge someone who has a suicide risk.

12.50Eoghan De Faoite follows up on a question about abortion statistics and again vouches for their legitimacy. They were obtained by him, himself, from the UK Department of Health. Under sections F and G – the categories which refer to abortion on the grounds of mental health – and was told there were 0 abortions done between 1992 and 2010. Further, there were 10 abortions carried out where an Irish woman presented with a grave health condition. Looking at those ten, only three were actual physical medical conditions, the remainder being psychological.

12.52 – More remarks come from Dr Berry Kiely of the Pro-Life Campaign – who says obstetricians told the committee that they did not feel handcuffed by the law as it currently stands, and clarifies that the current status only permits abortion where it was the sole way of addressing a suicide risk. Discussing risks beyond that are outside the ambit of the committee, she says.

12.53Caroline Simons has one final response: The totality of the evidence heard over the last few days has completely demolished any argument that suicidality can only, and indeed ever, be treated by abortion. It would therefore be madness to legislate for it.

12.59 – Here’s more questions, firstly from Senator Colm Burke (FG), who returns to the notion that the X Case didn’t hear psychiatric input. If that’s the case, he asks, isn’t the proposed legislation welcome because it requires psychiatric evaluation from two consultants?

He says medical professionals want clarity, and asks if the panellists believe any regulations can be brought in under existing legislation without the need to introduce a new Act in the Oireachtas.

Denis Naughten (Independent, formerly FG) says everyone is in agreement that the ECtHR must be heeded and followed. He also says the current medical ethics guidelines currently allow a single consultant to determine a circumstance where an abortion is permitted.  Should current guidelines not be legislated for, he asks?

13.02Prof John Crown (independent senator) says it appeared from the medical evidence that there were about 30 abortions carried out in Ireland each year as a direct result of an imminent threat to the life of the mother, but none as a result of suicide. Therefore, he asks, why are the panellists focussing so solely on abortions through suicide? If it’s not feigned suicidality, he wonders, what possible grounds could there be to fear a larger number?

Seamus Healy (ULA) visits a similar point – we’re dealing with about 30 abortions which are carried out per year. Does this fit with the statistics presented by the panellists? He also asks about the view of the witnesses in cases where there is a fatal foetal abnormality that means no prospect of survival.

Regina Doherty (FG) says she doesn’t think there’ll ever be a case, if this legislation was brought in, where a woman could be recommended for abortion on the basis of suicidality. Why such huge concern for such a relatively small amount of bona fide interventions?

13.03Peter Fitzpatrick (FG) goes back to the evidence from the three maternity hospitals, where two women committed suicide after childbirth. Does abortion increase the risk of mental health difficulties and suicide, he asks, and does motherhood deter from suicide?

Finally, Mary Mitchell-O’Connor (FG) asks members to comment on Simon Mills’ draft legislation tabled yesterday. She’s “very concerned”, she says, about a comment that said there was no need for legislation and that the current rules were fine, as is. Why, she asks, would the Master of Holles St – herself a mother of four – then come to the committee and say they feel exposed and are unhappy with the system as they currently stand? Do we trust the medical profession?

13.04 – To respond to that batch of questions, we begin with Caroline Simons. Legislation must include suicide because of the X Case, she says – so why do we concentrate on it? Medics say it’s never a treatment for suicidality, that’s why we need to look at it.

“To address Professor Crown’s question – if he’s finished looking at Twitter there…”

13.05 – …to Crown’s question, she says suicide is both a medical and psychological question. She cites examples where people have openly discussed ‘coaching’ pregnant women to feign suicide.

She says Mills’ legislation also provided for the termination of fatal foetal abnormality, which is pretty bluntly deemed “entirely inappropriate”.

13.08Dr Berry Kiely says an obstetrician can currently make the decision they think is best, but they won’t be allowed to do that under the current legislation because they’ll need a second opinion. “In order words, this legislation proposes to deal with something, more than what we’re currently doing,” she says. Asking for two or more medical opinions fundamentally changes the treatment currently offered, she says. “It will clearly be more than what is currently there, and more than what is currently needed.” This is the “chink”, she says, that “opens the door” to lessening the value of the life of the unborn.

13.12 – Prof John Crown, it should be noted, has left his seat. Caroline Simons has apologised for making a joke about his use of a tablet computer.

Eoghan de Faoite says doctors know when they’re entitled to intervene, under the medical guidelines – this was clearly indicated by the medical evidence. De Faoite does not oppose clarification, and if doctors want a further legal basis to allow them to practice their discipline, nobody opposes that. The problem is when legislation doesn’t recognise the right to life of the unborn, and recognising the doctor’s duty of care to both a pregnant woman and her unborn child.

He also criticises what he sees as dishonest reporting by some – who claimed that 30 ‘abortions’ were taking place every year in Ireland – when it was not known whether this involved premature labour or any other circumstances.

13.16Sean O Domhnaill says his colleagues in Britain have seen “the floodgates open”. Before 1966 most abortions in Britain were carried out on the basis of protecting maternal health; within 12 months of a new law in 1967, over 90% of applications for abortion were on the basis of suicide.

David Manley wants to address Crown’s question on the emphasis placed on suicide, over any other threat to maternal health. He says it’s because new legislation would allow the life of an unborn child “to be directly and exclusively taken”. “How can a law permit such an injustice? That is the problem.”

The 30 cases of ‘abortion’ raises the difficulty of using the right words, he says. The obstetricians who spoke on Tuesday discussed the interventions they had had to make, which was to do their utmost to maintain the mother’s life and then that of the unborn. This is different to an abortionist’s job which is simply to end the life of the unborn, he says.

He ends by saying he of course trusts medical professionals – just as he trusts local police and local Gardaí, county councillors, teachers, and politicians (which prompts a laugh). The kindness showed to him in the last few days has restored his trust in politicians, he says with a smile.

13.17 – This might be an interesting time to bring you some breaking news from Paddy Power, who have commissioned a Red C poll on public attitude to abortion.

In the words of Hugh O’Connell…

SIXTY-FOUR PER cent of people in Ireland support legislating for the X Case on abortion at the very least, according to a poll conducted by Red C for Paddy Power bookmakers.

The poll, released this afternoon, has found that over a third of the electorate or 35 per cent support the government’s decision to legislate for the X Case allowing for abortion where the mother’s life is at risk, including by suicide.

A further 29 per cent support legalising abortion in Ireland to allow for abortion in any case where a woman requests it, a move that would require a constitutional amendment and therefore a referendum.

More on that over here.

13.20Patrick Carr of Family & Life has reasserted that the campaign would like a referendum to change the wording of the Constitution which is the basis for X.

“That’s all very well in practice, but how will it work in theory?” asks Breda O’Brien, saying Garret FitzGerald’s words apply perfectly to the current situation. What we have in Ireland now is great medical practice which appears not to have a legal basis. If this legislation won’t ever be needed, she asks, why are we introducing it?

Suicide is a terrifying reality, she says, revealing that she has felt such feelings before. But, she says, legislating to allow abortion because of the risk of suicide, creates the absolute certainty that a viable and defenseless child could be killed.

13.22 – Barrister Maria Steen says all barristers believe there to be no legal reality of the prospect of a prosecution brought under the 1861 rules, once a doctor acts in good faith. If it were thought necessary to allay the fears of the medical community, then it may be possible to amend the 1861 laws to explicitly include a ‘good faith’ defence for doctors.

If a law deals with taking an innocent life, that law needs to be justified. This can be done under current medical practice, but if we talk about enacting a law that intentionally takes an innocent life, we need an even stronger justification for doing so. How can one agree with taking the life of an innocent child, Steen says, when its only crime is to have existed at all?

13.24Regina Doherty wants a clarification from Sean Ó Domhnaill’s figures from the UK. Does a pregnant woman, in the UK, need a psychiatric assessment to claim an abortion on  mental health grounds?

Ó Domhnaill says one of his former colleagues in 1997 had a stack of ‘ready stamped’ forms which only need a patient’s name to be filled in in order for a mental health difficulty to be certified.

13.29 – On to questions from non-members: Aodhan Ó Riordain (Labour) says anyone here who argues that the suicide risk doesn’t need to be legislated for is here under false pretences. The X Case includes the risk of suicide, and therefore the duty of the committee is only to figure out how best this can be done.

Ó Riordain wants to ask what degree of lobbying politicians is appropriate and inappropriate. (He has himself been the recipient of some pretty nasty letters.)

Terence Flanagan (FG) wants to address the well-being of fathers whose children are aborted, and asks if there is any evidence about suicide being ‘normalised’ as a result of a formal legal treatment.

Fidelma Healy Eames (FG) says there’s been a missing voice in these hearings – and that’s the voice of the pregnant woman who has been in such a vulnerable place. She asks Ó Domhnaill, who spoke of having treated a suicidal woman post-abortion, how this should be addressed.

She also asks Simons if she believes Ireland needs to legislate for suicide as a result of the ECtHR, and Steen if she believes the current medical guidelines are sufficient to ensure the best medical care.

13.31Jim Walsh (FF) says the medical evidence, thus far, is that the current legal framework has never inhibited someone from giving the best possible care to an expectant mother. The fear of legislation has been raised by a growing number of obstetricians, who fear any legislation could interfere with the best possible medical care.

Paul Bradford (FG) has a question for the female members, saying it has been alleged that questioning the suicide clause is “an insult to women”. Do the female members believe this? Are our current restrictions insulting to women? Are women in other countries with more liberal abortion regimes held in higher esteem or higher regard?

13.35Marcella Corcoran Kennedy (FG) wants to ask if the panellists believe the medical guidelines could be legally challenged, and wants to ask anyone who appeared in the EWTN video if they truly believe Ireland is looking to introduce a “culture of death”.

Bernard Durkan (FG) has a three-parter. If it is not “immeasurably better” to ensure consistent treatment of women in every circumstance? Is it accepted that while one may disagree with a court decision, the Supreme Court is the supreme court and the ultimate authority in the determination of what is constitutional? Are comparisons between Ireland and the UK worthwhile given Ireland’s written constitution which does not exist in Britain?

13.38Ivana Bacik (Labour) wants clarification on the comparisons between Irish and British law, saying she’s checked the British law and it does not limit abortion to the threat of suicide but merely a threat to mental health. She also refers to doctors’ fears of being prosecution, and says the only reason doctors haven’t been prosecuted under the 1861 laws is because anyone who really needs an abortion can get one in Britain.

Susan O’Keeffe (Labour) believes the witnesses have dismissed the Supreme Court, the European Court, two referendums and the Master of the Rotunda. Do any of you call yourselves democrats, she angrily wonders?

Martin Conway (FG) asks if we’re going to see “appalling billboard campaigns” around Ireland from Youth Defence when the legislation is published and brought forward.

John Paul Phelan (FG) is last, and wants to ask the witnesses about the 1861 laws. If you accept the current medical practice that some terminations are medically needed, where do you stand on reconciling new legislation with the constitutional standing?

13.41Dr Berry Kiely is first. Are Ireland’s laws an insult to women? She says she doesn’t believe emotive language helps and says doing what’s just or fair is not an insult to anybody.

She says there is “no disparity of views” about what an ill and pregnant woman needs. The difficulty is that legislators are being asked to legislate for more than that, she says. Abortion is not a remedy for suicide, and furthermore, abortion is associated with an increased risk of suicide.

The Supreme Court is the best we have, but it is not infallible, it says. It would have reached a very different conclusion if it had heard the same evidence in X that the committee has heard this week.

13.42Caroline Simons says she doesn’t know about the EWTN video which some of her fellow witnesses have appeared in. She adds that Ireland doesn’t have to legislate for suicide as grounds for an abortion – merely to have a coherent and easily accessible legal system.

The UK’s medical bodies has recognised that sepsis in pregnancy is the single biggest killer of pregnant women, and issued guidelines on that. The Irish institute of obstetricians did likewise. It’s possible to let the medical profession self-regulate in matters like this, she suggests.

13.45Breda O’Brien says there’s always an alternative course of action to something unjust, and that an unjust law which takes unborn lives is therefore unjust.

She also says she has a “growing bee in her bonnet” about ad hominem campaigning and hopes that any legislation does not bring about directed and targeted personal campaigning against figures on either side of the divide.

O’Brien also references the fact that fathers have a major role in creating pregnancy and that therefore they should have a role in managing it as it continues.

13.48Maria Steen discusses how you might measure a “real and substantial risk” to the life of the mother. This can’t be distilled down into a legal formula, she says – it has to be left up to a clinician to make a call in the circumstances ahead of them.

This test. right now, “affords considerable flexibility” to doctors acting in good faith (and is demonstrated by the complete absence of any prosecutions under the 1861 laws criminalising abortion), and this flexibility can only be threatened by legislating.

The Supreme Court was constrained in X by the facts presented to it. There was no countervailing evidence put up by the State, and the Supreme Court couldn’t ask for more evidence in its own volition. The Oireachtas doesn’t have such limits, she says, and the statistics about the risk of suicide following an abortion, it is important that the Oireachtas doesn’t limit itself to X alone in ways the Supreme Court was.

13.50David Manley wants to distinguish between a ‘necessary medical intervention’ for a pregnant woman facing a risk to her life, and where the child dies, and ‘what is commonly called an abortion’. The former refers to the 30 procedures discussed by the medical experts earlier this week, he says; the latter is simply where you set out to kill the child. The intention of an obstetrician in a maternity hospital is to save the life of the mother, and then that of the child.

Manley says an elective termination is an abortion, sought and painful, where the abortionist simply sets out to kill.

“An obstetrician will treat the ill mother for certain ailments… that is the very same type of treatment who is not pregnant. The abortionist in London will not give the same treatment to a pregnant woman and a non-pregnant woman.”

13.53Patrick Carr of Family & Life addresses the authority of the Supreme Court. We do have a precedent in Ireland where a Supreme Court decision was considered so difficult that a referendum was held to reverse it – this was on adoption. It’s not unreasonable to think similarly, he says, adding that the authority of the people is superior to that of the Supreme Court itself.

“It’s extremely important that those who lobby their elected representatives do so in a courteous manner,” he adds. Some comments in recent times, particularly on social media, have been utterly appalling, he says – though many of these “are coming from the other sides of the argument,” he comments.

This prompts a rare intervention from chairman Jerry Buttimer, who says that as a social media user himself, the abusive comments come from both sides.

13.56Eoghan de Faoite says a symposium held in Dublin last October, including world-leading experts, saw a declaration – the ‘Dublin Declaration’ – that outlined three things: Abortion is never medically necessary; there is a fundamental difference between abortion and emergency medical treatment needed to save a life; the prohibition of abortion does not impact on the provision of the best possible medical treatment.

One of its 400 signatories is a predecessor of Rhona Mahoney’s, and another is a leading consultant within her hospital, he says.

13.58 – The young people who work in Youth Defence do everything they can “in a normal way – I don’t think their campaigns are in any way abhorrent or anything,” De Faoite says, saying Youth Defence volunteers are often the subject of undeserved abuse. He tries to cite an example of a tweet from a Labour campaigner in Cork, and is stopped by Buttimer who asks him not to make comments on outsiders who are not here to defend themselves.

Then comes a perhaps unexpected intervention. Buttimer tells de Faoite that Youth Defence’s manner of campaigning “needs to be reviewed”. De Faoite says he disagrees, which Buttimer completely accepts.

“The dignity of these hearings has just been impugned by both yourself and the deputy behind me,” intervenes Sean O Domhnaill. Buttimer disagrees, says he’s only looking to defend all members and all sides. “You turned this at the end into an adversarial encounter,” Ó Domhnaill says.

13.59 – After World War 2, Ó Domhnaill says, pictures were shown of “corpses piled upon corpses piled upon corpses”, on the premise that such killing should never happen again. If someone disagrees with such killing, he simply says, “don’t legalise it”.

14.03Marcella Corcoran Kennedy tells Caroline Simons she can’t understand why Simons doesn’t know about the EWTN video, considering she appears in it.

Simons: “I wasn’t aware that I was on it. I don’t know any agents of the culture of death, I hope. Certainly they haven’t introduced themselves to me.”

Jim Walsh asks the group if protection of the unborn “is the real human rights issue of our day”.

De Faoite says he agrees with Walsh’s assertion; abortion is the real human rights issue of our day.

David Manley agrees, while Breda O’Brien says it’s up there with aid to the developing world, and there are a jigsaw of issues “all as a piece”. The protection of the unborn is part of that.

14.05Sean Ó Domhnaill concludes by telling Fidelma Healy Eames how he was once told by the IFPA there was no such thing as a post-abortion mental health difficulty – only for the IFPA to then open a post-abortion counselling facility in Cathal Brugha St six years later.

And with that, a frantic two hours comes to an end.

14.07 – The main argument put forward is one that could, in truth, have been predicted: the panellists put forward the belief that allowing an abortion on the grounds of a threat of suicide will ultimately mean that a perfectly viable foetus could be directly killed through no fault of its own.

There were also more concerns that legislation would offer the “chink of light” that could eventually lead to broader abortion in Ireland, and that any legislation could upset the status quo where pregnant women in Ireland are given the best possible medical treatment.

14.11 – A busy couple of hours, then. We’ll be back at 2:45pm with the arguments of the pro-choice campaigners. Until then, we’ll again leave you with some lunchtime reading material – Paddy Power’s new Red C poll showing that a majority of the public supports proposals to legislate for X.

Thanks for joining us for round 2 – this is Gavan Reilly signing off for now.

14.43 – Well, we’re into the home stretch. This afternoon’s session is the final one of a series of 10 hearings in the Seanad Chamber over the past three days. Earlier today, the Oireachtas Committee on Health and Children heard from pro-life campaigners and various religious and atheist groups. Now, it is time for a number of pro-choice advocates to take the stand.

14.45 – It is Sinéad O’Carroll here, by the way. I’ll be bringing you as much detail as I can from the questions-and-answers session with Jacinta Fay and Denise Ryan from Choice Ireland; Orla O’Connor, the Director of the National Womens Council of Ireland who will be joined by Jacqueline Healy; and Ailbhe Smyth and Therese Caherty of Action on X.

14.47 – It’s been a gruelling three days for Jerry Buttimer and his committee, which has been tasked by the government to collect as much information as it can to aid it in its endeavour to bring forward legislation on abortion.

14.49 – Buttimer begins the session and says that so far they have heard wise, constructive and informative deliberations from witnesses. He reiterates that the Government has stated that it wants to ensure clarity and legal certainty within the constructs of the Irish constitution.

14.51 – Buttimer says there will be brief words from the party spokespeople at the end of the session.

14.52 – Abigail Rooney from Choice Ireland is up first.

She explains the work of the volunteer group. She says they have been campaigning for X Case legislation, as well as the open and free access to all options for those with crisis pregnancies.

14.53 – Rooney cites figures of the number of Irish women who travel to the UK and the Netherlands for abortion services. She also brings up the issue of seized medication, which she says indicates there are women in Ireland to try (or do) abort their pregnancies in a risky manner.

14.54 – Choice Ireland welcomes the decision for legislation in this limited way but noted that it would not bring in the same legal system that works in the UK.

14.56 – Up next is Jacinta Fay from Choice Ireland. She will go through the group’s recommendations for lawmakers.

14.58 – Choice Ireland agrees with Dr Rhona Mahoney that a multi-disciplinary approach is favourable.

Where practical, the determination should be made by doctors already involved in the mother’s care, she continues.

The number of doctors’ signatures required should be only two – to reduce stress of process.

In the case of suicide, two signatures (and not three as previously recommended) should be sufficient. This could avoid the stigmatisation of mental health i.e. making it different to physical health risks.

15.00 – With regard to conscientious objection, Choice Ireland believes it should not delay treatment for a woman.

15.01 – Due to stigma around abortion in Ireland, Choice Ireland says that care should be taken to protect the privacy of the care and the practitioner.

On the 1861 Act, Fay recommends the repeal of the Offences Against the Persons Act. She says it brings a certain “chill factor”.

She added that everyone wants to see the number of abortions lowered. “But the criminalisation of women who look for abortions is not the answer.” She calls for better sex education and compassion.

15.04 – Next up is the Director of the National Womens Council of Ireland, Orla O’Connor.

She welcomes the announcement of the Government to bring in regulation and legislation to give effect to the Supreme Court judgement in the X Case.

She says the Council’s position on abortion has developed over time and believes it is well-positioned to add to the debate.

She says 16,000 men and women have written to TDs in the recent past in support of abortion legislation in certain cases. She says its pro-choice position is supported by opinion polls.

15.05 – O’Connor says that due to the stigma that surrounds abortion, women are often voiceless in this debate.

Again, we hear for a repeal of the 1861 laws that criminalise abortion. She also cites the “chilling factor” for doctors, regardless whether prosecutions have not been made.

15.06 – O’Connor says that women who have been at their counselling sessions are terrified of being sent to jail.

Abortion must be decriminalised if regulation/legislation is to be effective, continues O’Connor.

The Council says that regulations should allow for practical risk assessments and a review system for disagreements between women and their healthcare team.

15.09 – O’Connor says suicide must be included as a grounds for a lawful termination.

Women must be trusted as making considered decisions about their own reproductive health.

She says it is insulting that some groups have come out to say that women would be likely to fabricate suicidal tendencies to access abortion services.

There have been cases where pregnancy triggers or heightens mental health problems, she adds.

15.11 – Achieving access to safe and legal abortion is critical, continues O’Connor. Women should be able to make decisions about their own bodies without fear of incarceration or discrimination.

She also raises the issue that the limited legislation/regulation being discussed here will not help women who: travel to the UK for abortions for a myriad of valid reasons; who have been raped or become pregnant from incest; or who have been told the foetus has a fatal abnormality and will not live outside the womb.

15.14 – Next up is Ailbhe Symth from Action on X.

She said today is an historic event – especially for those who have been looking for autonomy for women and their reproductive health since the 1970s.

To echo this afternoon’s other speakers, Smyth calls for the repeal of the 1861 laws on abortion, again quoting the European Court of Human Right’s phrase, “the chilling factor”.

“There is no good reason” for these sections of the 1861 to remain, she said.

In reply to those who said over the past three days that there is no need to remove the sections because there has not been any prosecutions, she said, “All the more reason then to delete these redundant but chilling clauses.”

15.16 – Smyth says it is surprising that some people and groups have decided it is OK to ignore or dismiss the decisions of our highest court or International human rights law.

She brings up Clare Daly’s Bill of 2012 – says that much of the legislation needed is there and that there is no need to continue to beat about the bush.

15.17 – Abortion is a factor of life in Ireland, continues Smyth, bringing up the number of women and girls who travel abroad for abortion services. She says that the difficult decision is made for a number of reasons, including fatal foetal abnormalities.

She says she regrets that TMFR was not invited to make a presentation this week.

15.20 – The needs of the large majority of women who leave Ireland every year for abortions will not be met under the proposed reforms.

She said that there would not be an explosion as feared by some pro-life groups because abortion numbers would remain as they are now. We would just be more honest about it.

The change of culture brought up by other contributors here (Professor William Binchy’s phrase) has already happened, according to Smyth. Irish people’s opinion of abortion has already changed, she said.

15.21 – Smyth says access to abortion should be a real, rather than a theoretical right.

15.27 – Now it is question time.

Again, first up is Billy Kelleher from Fianna Fáil.

He says that 30 abortions are carried out in Irish hospitals every year as it is and those numbers won’t change much if legislation and regulation is brought forward. On the issue of suicide, he says there is a concern about the interpretation.

He asks is there any form of follow-up support (physical and psychological) for women who return to this jurisdiction after an abortion? He wants to know should there be policy on it. He explains that we are confined by what can be done.

He wants to know what sanctions could be brought in to ensure against ‘back-street abortions’ if the 1861 laws were repealed? That brings up Catherine McGuinness’s testimony from yesterday.

15.29Caoimghín Ó Caoláin from Sinn Féin asks Choice Ireland to elaborate on it recommendations about non-registered practitioners signing off on lawful terminations.

He tells Orla O’Connor that she highlights an important point when she speaks of financially accessible services. He says that we live in an unequal society. How do the NWCI suggest that there will be equality of access for supports that women may require?, he asks.

He also reiterates Kelleher’s question about what the 1861 laws would be replaced with to ensure there are criminal sanctions against illegal abortions.

15.31Deputy Seamus Healy stands now.

He says many of his questions have already been asked.

He asks for clarification that the groups’ are supporting the Expert Group’s recommendations of legislation and regulation.

He also asks for a comment on the suggestions that women could “manipulate” their doctors on the issue of suicide.

15.33 – Labour’s Ciara Conway also says her questions have already been asked. They’re making it easy for me!

However, she brings up the last session’s evidence where they were told that no Irish women underwent abortions in the UK.

She also asks how we could combat the practice of women taking “dangerous conconctions” to abort their pregnancies.

15.36 – First to answer is Choice Ireland’s Abigail Rooney.

She says that as a woman and an equal citizen, it is insulting that people believe she could manipulate a doctor. She said such talk is ridiculous and should end.

On the issue of abortion aftercare, she said that there is evidence that women who undergo abortions abroad often present too late with infections or do not visit their GP as they should. She said it is something that could and should be addressed.

On the qualification of doctors, Rooney says that maybe Choice Ireland “got it wrong” or is “being naive” but she says that doctors (and not necessarily consultants) could sign off on lawful terminations if necessary.

15.38 – Rooney says that if people believe they are saving lives by criminalising abortion, they are wrong.

She calls for a referendum on abortion to ask the people what they believe.

15.41 – Orla O’Connor from the National Women’s Council next.

She says the required legislation is urgent but on other abortion issues we need to lift our heads from out of the sand.

She says the grounds for suicide has to be legislated for – that is what the X Case was about.

“Women need to be trusted and the medical profession need to be trusted,” she continued. Having an abortion is surrounded in difficulty and stigma – as is mental health, she added.

The notion that some women would do this is appalling and insulting

Post-abortion care has come up with women contacting NWCI, continues O’Connor. “So many women don’t want to say they’ve had an abortion – so accessing services is a difficulty. Part of that is removing the stigma, decriminalising it so women can go and seek help and post-abortion care.”

15.42 – Answering Conway’s question about online abortifacients, she says that it highlights the fear that women have around the issue.

15.45 – Smyth, from Action on X, next.

On the issue of sanctions and ‘back-street abortions’, she said the best way to deal with it is to legislate for safe access to legal abortions.

She said that Ireland has been saved from this issue by having an “escape route” to the UK for women who could afford it.

“We need to legislate for safe, legal abortion in this country,” she reiterates. “We certainly need to decriminalise it.”

On the issue of suicide, she said that ground is the crux of the X Case. Supreme Court rulings are not à la carte menus that legislators can choose bits from, she adds.

15.47 – With regard to online medication, Smyth reiterates that safe, legal abortions enables women not to have recourse to “perilous” measures of self-medication.

So many of the questions that come up, she says, ask for ways to get around (or ways to dodge) what is actually needed – legislation.

She said there is now an opportunity to be direct, honest and grasp this nettle which will protect the lives, health, wellbeing of women of child-bearing age.

15.50Sinéad Kennedy takes an opportunity to tell the committee that not only does Ireland have the Supreme Court, but it also has the 1992 and 2002 referenda which saw the public reject the roll-back of the suicide ground as was allowed for in the X Case.

She believes that this legislation is just a first step, bare minimum and temporary measure before we go on to provide real care for Irish women.

15.54 – More question time.

Senator Colm Burke says his interpretation of the presentations this afternoon is that the proposed legislation would not change much. He asks whether Choice Ireland would like to see GPs sign off on terminations?

He says the number of teenage pregnancies in Ireland has reduced over the past 10 years, and asks what else can be done to keep this downward trend.

TD Catherine Byrne says her job is not to consider open abortion but to find balance in legislation. She says that this will help even a few women who will not have to leave Ireland. She says education in sexual practice begins at home and parents have a duty to guide their children.

Deputy Robert Dowds, of Labour, asks to what extent is there counselling for women considering abortion and what is the view of the witnesses on such services?

15.57 – Up first to answer those questions is Jacinta Fay.

She says legislating for X will only see abortion in very narrow circumstances. Ireland will still have one of the most restrictive abortion regime in the world. Women will still travel abroad and she believes the numbers won’t change very much.

On the issue of doctor sign-offs, she said her recommendation was to make services as accessible of possible.

Responding to the question on teenage pregnancy, she said the solution is better and cheaper access to contraception and sex education.

On aftercare, she said there needs to be a change in attitude towards abortion so people do not feel the stigma if they go for after care.

She also welcomed the idea of any additional care or counselling for women making the tough decisions in a crisis pregnancy.

15.58 – O’Connor said although the numbers are small, even if one person’s life is in danger, then this legislation is critical.

It is also important for the conversation is has brought up.

She says her group believe counselling is very important so a woman can make a decision that is right for her.

16.00 – In relation to changes in practice, Smyth says this legislation is important because it gives clarity to doctors.

It also sends a signal that abortions can be and are carried out in this county. And that women do need abortions sometimes.

“It is true that the number of women and girls going to Britain have been decreasing and the number of teenage pregnancies are decreasing also. But we have to bear in mind that abortion is going to continue to be a need – women will need to avail of it and we need to make a provision for it.”

16.04 – Kennedy says that one of the barriers to post-abortion counselling is that it is criminalised in this country.

She believes women are impacted by fear and the stigma.

She says regulation is very important when it comes to pre-abortion counselling services. She says Choice Ireland has done great work on uncovering some services that try to shame or bully women. Others do not give abortion options, just information on adoption or giving up a child.

There needs to be more regulation around these counselling services, she added.

Abortion is sometimes a positive decision, she concludes.

16.09 – Now we move to question time for non-committee members.

First up, Senator Fidelma Healy-Eames says that it is vital that we look at the woman holistically. She asks does Choice Ireland agree?

She said she is disappointed with the claims made by the National Women’s Council of Ireland on its website about how it is the voice of the women of Ireland. She also brings up the death of a woman in Galway – is interrupted by Buttimer who asks her not to bring that up. But she continues and asks whether the Council has an agenda, and a dangerous one at that.

She also asks is it not more insulting to women to believe that abortion is a treatment for abortion.

Next up is Senator Ivana Bacik. She criticises Healy-Eames for calling out the Council. She says she is affiliated to it through Labour.

Buttimer pulls up the politicians for descending into a “Hill 16 episode”.

16.13Senator Michael Mullins says it is deeply disturbing that a tragedy would be used by the National Women’s Council.

Buttimer asks him to avoid using language and words such as “dishonest”.

Mullins asks Choice Ireland why they use language on their website which links the anti-choice campaign to religion and homophobia.

Senator Paul Bradford asks whether the witnesses agree that no deaths have occurred in Ireland because of legal uncertainty.

He also raises the Miss C case, and that she regrets the abortion that she underwent.

He reiterates Mullins question and says he is not homophobic, anti-contraception or anti-sex education. He calls it juvenile and pathetic, asks for it to be taken down.

16.17 – Rooney says she never brought up the issue of the anti-choice side. And says that it was juvenile to bring its website into the debate.

Buttimer calls for a tolerant and respectful conclusion.

Rooney says she is not a doctor and doesn’t have statistics on deaths in Ireland. She says that women who could have died went to England.

She says the X Case is too narrow but our constitution does not allow for anything further.

Dealing with Healy-Eames question, Rooney says that abortions should never be forced on anyone. That was not the case with the X Case, continued Rooney, and not what we are talking about today.

“Our country was going to force her to carry that foetus to term and that is why she was suicidal,” she continued.

Rooney says she would love a broader debate on abortion legislation. Women are going to go to the UK, she said, and politicians know this so can’t try to stop them.

16.19 – Rooney says all cases are tragedies, the X Case in particular.

Next up is Orla O’Connor.

“I come from the NWC which represents thousands of women,” she starts, in response to Healy-Eames. “Abortion has been discussed for over 30 years and there has been motions brought to reflect the different perspectives.”

She says she has a strong mandate from women, which is backed up by opinion polls.

On suicide, O’Connor reiterates the X Case. “In what other policy areas do we ditch Supreme Court rulings because we don’t like them?”

16.22 – Standing now is Ailbhe Smyth.

She comes back to opinion polls that show Irish people want more progressive abortion legislation. She says the direct question has not been asked through a referendum.

She says the issue of abortion over 30 years has brought bad feeling, controversy and it is now about time that a sensible, practical question is put to the people of the country so we get a clear answer (at least for the next decade).

16.27 – More questions.

Deputy Terence Flanagan asks the NWCI if they believe in the rights of the unborn? He also asks do they represent women who do not believe in abortion.

He also brings up the father and grandparents. He asks whether the witnesses believe they have a right to oppose a woman’s decision to have an abortion. He also asks whether they believe it is right to abort a baby on the ground of the gender of that baby.

Marcella Corcoran-Kennedy of Fine Gael asks if we know the reasons or demographics of the women travelling to the UK? She also wants to know what a safe and legal abortion is?

Labour TD Aodán Ó Riordáin asks the witnesses about Simon Mills draft bill, specifically about fatal foetal abnormalities and conscientious objection.

He also asks what they believe is appropriate or inappropriate lobbying?

16.34Senator Jim Walsh asks the witnesses if they believe Ireland can’t deal with crisis pregnancies without abortion? He also asks whether the witnesses would like to see a scenario as in the UK where up to 20 per cent of pregnancies end in abortion.

Senator Ronan Mullen starts off by saying he doesn’t agree with the witnesses. He says that suicide has been central to the debate but it doesn’t appear to be a medical phenomenon. What is your honest opinion if there is legislation on the X ground, which many of us fear will open the gates, – what will it lead to?

Senator Martin Conway says that for balance, he would like to raise the “unfair and inappropriate” language being used on some of the websites of the people taking the stand this afternoon. He raised the same issue during the pro-life witnesses.

He said he is concerned about children who have disabilities – where is the protection for the person who will be disabled, he asks.

TD Bernard Durkan of Kildare North, says it is important that women can be reassured of consistent and equal treatment, regardless of the opinion of those treating them.

16.34 – Buttimer says he is of the opinion that all campaigning groups should review their behaviours. He notes that he said it during earlier sessions also.

16.38 – Fay is up first.

She says her group campaigns for sex education, free contraception and safe and legal abortion.

On the demographics of women travelling to England, she said she knows it is a broad spectrum of women with a variety of valid reasons.

In terms of late-term abortions, she said the Master of the Rotunda dealt with that in an earlier session but that it would be an extreme circumstance. She says 87 per cent of UK abortions occur in the first trimester.

She reiterates her group’s stance that abortion is a woman’s choice.

16.40 – Unfortunately, I lost my stream there for a few moments so I missed O’Connor’s answers.

Up now is Smyth. There is a bit of argy-bargy with Senator Mullen but he is rebuked by Buttimer.

16.40 – And Dr James Reilly is in the room.

16.41 – Terence Flanagan gets another shot at his question. O’Connor reiterates that the life of the woman is paramount.

16.42Minister James Reilly begins his presentation.

He says he is happy to be in the Seanad this afternoon. He commends the balanced and dignified approach that has been seen in the past three days.

He adds to the praise being heaped on TD Jerry Buttimer for his work chairing the hearings. He said they will help greatly as he goes about his job to draft legislation and regulation.

16.43 – Reilly said the proposed Bill aims to regulate access to lawful abortion within the parameters of the X Case.

He said parallel regulations can be amended in light of medical and scientific developments.

16.45 – Reilly said much work remains to be done on the issue of lawful terminations in Ireland.

Locations for terminations, the number of doctors involved, the issue of conscientious objection will all need to be reviewed, he said.

He reiterated to the committee that the only legislation that he will bring forward is to offer clarity to what is already lawful.

16.45 – He says he looks forward to getting the Oireachtas Committee report but adds its work is not done. Once the Heads of Bill are complete, the committee will be asked for its assistance once more.

16.48 – Next up with his party’s statement is Fianna Fáil’s health spokesperson Billy Kelleher.

He says there are passionate views on this subject. He says we should be conscious of the “middle ground” out there who probably want clarity on the issue.

A lot of work must be done before legislation is brought, he said.

“We speak about language, and it is critically important in this debate…there is up to 130,000 Irish women who have gone outside this jurisdiction for abortions. We should be very mindful that strong language can be very offensive to many people.”

“Equally, we should be able to put forward our point of view without fear or favour.”

He concludes with his compliments to Buttimer and his administration staff.

16.51 – Next up is Caoimghín Ó Caoláin, Sinn Féin’s spokesperson on health.

He says he would have to put on record his appreciation to Buttimer and the committee’s members for their approach and tone-setting to this very emotive issue.

He congratulated all parties for adhering to the approach. “I hope that will not be lost on the public,” he said, and go towards tempering the future engagements.

He thanked the media for the interest and reporting they have shown. He said public information would be lost without it.

16.54Deputy Seamus Healy is next to give his closing statement.

He thanks all witnesses from the past three days.

“It is an emotive subject, it is a difficult area…it obviously must be dealt with sensitively,” he said. “It is not an option to continue heretofore.”

“I would want to say as well, that I believe the area of fatal foetal abnormality could and should be dealt with in the legislation,” he continues, bringing up Simon Mills sample bill, calling it a good template for future legislation.

“It should be looked at very clearly by the Minister and his department.”

16.55 – Next, Deputy Ciara Conway of Labour.

“Sometimes politics does work,” she says. “We now need timelines on how to proceed…”

“As we approach March – the 21st anniversary of the X Case decision – we owe it to the women and children of Ireland not to have to revisit this.”

16.58 – Dublin TD Catherine Byrne says the past three days have been a learning curve for her.

She says it shows how committees should be run in Leinster House – even to the small things of making sure the politicians are on time.

“It is a very important issue…it is a sad reflection on society that it has taken so long to get to today.

“It is an opportunity – the last few days have been the beginning to change,” she concluded.

17.00Senator Jim Walsh also thanks the committee for the opportunity for both ‘sides’ to have their voices heard.

Lots of pats on the back – he said the quality of questions was also great, despite the rushed nature of the hearings.

He says the past three days have shown him that Ireland’s maternal care is excellent.

Finally, he asked the Minister to listen carefully and reflect on what was said.

17.01Senator Ivana Bacik also gets an opportunity to make a final statement.

She says it is important to move to legislate swiftly.

She also tells the politicians present that they are welcome back to the Seanad any time they wish to visit.

17.04Jerry Buttimer stands now for the final words.

He said over the past three days, the meetings have enabled the committee to learn about current medical practices.

“Across our communities, there are a wide range of views and in the past debates have become heating…”

But he says the engagement here has been positive and constructive.

He says it is a pity that the committee could not hear from all groups who would have liked to make a presentation. He said the committee tried to ensure that it heard from medical and legal experts, as well as advocacy groups.

Speaking to the members, Buttimer said that partisan politics was put aside for the hearings. He singles out Ó Caoláin and Kelleher for their contribution over the past month.

17.09 – Now that the hearings are over, the committee will reconvene next week and the report for government will have to be put together. Buttimer said it will be used when drafting the Heads of Bill.

He also welcomed the Minister’s decision that the committee’s expertise will be called upon in the future.

17.12 – And that brings us to the conclusion of the 10th hearing.

The Oireachtas Committee has heard from medical practitioners, legal experts, religious groups, pro-life campaigners and choice advocacy groups over the past three days. They will now work on a report to summarise all the witness presentations for the Government, which will use it as it drafts legislation (and parallel regulation) on Ireland’s abortion laws.

Legislation will only offer legal clarity to what is already lawful, something that was noted as insufficient by the last three witness groups today.

17.14 – A thank you to all our readers from TheJournal.ie live-blogging staff.

We hope our coverage of the 10 sessions was welcomed. We certainly appreciate your feedback through Twitter, Facebook and our comments section.

As for the suggestion of including live-blogging at Rio 2016, why not Sochi 2014? We’re more used to the cold.

Until next time, thanks and goodnight.

So far: 10 interesting moments from Day 1 and Day 2

Read next:

Comments (244 Comments)

  • Sarah 10/01/13 #

    Comparing abortion to the holocaust is despicable. It belittles the memory of the millions of actually living people who lived through torture, forced labour, starvation, rape, medical experimentation and having to watch their loved ones and others die at the hands of the regime of a dictatorship.

    This has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with a medical procedure to terminate a pregnancy, for whatever reasons and under whatever restrictions. Sean Ó Domhnaill should be ashamed of himself for making that comparison.

    Reply
    • As Jessica and Dee pointed out already – it is the last refuge of a dead argument, it’s akin to the ad hominem or any other fallacy.. The guy was obviously desperate, perhaps he realised that the tide is turning and wanted to shock people back to the pro life side.. A tactic that fared well for them thus far..

      Pity people seem to be a little more educated these days.. There’s a reason logic isn’t taught in catholic schools (is it taught in other ones?)

      Reply
  • I would like to comment and say that the reporting of this Oireachtas hearing by The Journal over the past three days has been exemplary :-)

    Reply
  • Brian 10/01/13 #

    Caroline Simons: “I wasn’t aware that I was on it. I don’t know any agents of the culture of death, I hope. Certainly they haven’t introduced themselves to me.” LOL LOL LOL

    Eoghan de Faoite: The young people who work in Youth Defence do everything they can “in a normal way – I don’t think their campaigns are in any way abhorrent or anything.” LOL LOL LOL

    Reply
  • “Derek Byrne: says this is a Catholic country – based on last census – so should we apply Roman Catholic teaching to medical practise?” Incorrect sir, we are a Country of which majority of it’s residents are Catholic. This should not be taken as the definition of our country, as we should respect those who are not Catholic, and they should not be treated as secondary citizens. I’m sick of the label to be honest.

    Reply
    • “we are a Country of which majority of it’s residents are Catholic”

      I wouldn’t even go that far. We’re a country where the majority of people tick catholic on the census or have it ticked for them.

      Even amoungst those who consider themselves “catholic”, the majority don’t even believe in basic tenants of the church, such as transubstantiation. Some don’t even believe in god. The majority of catholics in Ireland are protestants, they’re just too ignorant to realise.

      Reply
    • Oh, totally with you. It’s just most people don’t renounce. I myself fall into that category, I’d call myself a hypocrite to be fair. But sure, isn’t that the Catholic way :)

      Reply
    • I came across the interesting notion the other day that in some countries without such a hugely Catholic influence on national culture, a distinction is made between someone who is ‘culturally Catholic’ – knows the prayers, goes to mass/Sunday school, gets baptised/communion/married in a Catholic church, but doesn’t actually believe in God or consider themselves religious – and actual believers. They’re all still Catholic because that’s what they call themselves, but many of them are much more liberal than their churchly association would suggest.

      I imagine the vast majority of Irish people who identify as Catholic are cultural Catholics, and not necessarily believers.

      Reply
    • All I know is it is relatively easy to join or leave a religion.

      It is much much harder to enter or leave a country.

      Reply
    • Unfortunately you can’t leave the Catholic Church, changed the rules a few years ago so even when you tick atheist on a census the church still count you as one of theirs once you were baptised

      Reply
    • Can anyone tell me how I can get excommunicated ? I don’t want the RCC having a claim on me.

      Reply
  • Caroline Simons is IN that EWTN video. How does she not know about it?!!?

    Reply
  • “Susan O’Keeffe (Labour) believes the witnesses have dismissed the Supreme Court, the European Court, two referendums and the Master of the Rotunda. Do any of you call yourselves democrats, she angrily wonders?”

    Well put, Susan!

    Reply
  • I’d rather not have an organisation that still opposes the use of condoms interfering in government affairs but that’s just me.

    Reply
    • Niall you’re talking utter sh!te. And as for you other liberals, are those who have a different viewpoint not entitled to express it in your brave new world, be they right or wrong?

      Reply
    • They can express their views on street corners, but when it comes to advising on enacting legislation they can present their medical/legal qualifications or personal experience, or get out.

      Reply
    • Paddy look it up, the Pope blessed Rebecca Kadaga, who is the main supporter in Uganda of the anti-homosexuality bill that allows for the death penalty for homosexuals.

      Happened on December 14th or 13th I believe. Go ahead and look it up.

      Reply
    • Good man paddy. If you are going to accuse someone of talking shite, at least check your facts first. To avoid looking like a clueless fool.

      Reply
    • @ Niall – Re your comment on Kadaga, the Pope blesses millions of people – does that imply he agrees with all of them? Obviously not. Blessing someone is entirely different than agreeing with someone.

      He was following the example of Jesus; the Pharisees scoffed at him for dining with sinners. In fact, Jesus spent much time with sinners.

      The Church has clear teaching that would not be in line with what Kadaga seems to propose:
      “They (men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies) must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”
      (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2358)

      Reply
    • “people eschewing their God-given gender identities to suit their sexual choices – and destroying the very essence of the human creature”
      The popes comments in Dec 2012.

      Defend your faith, that’s fine. Try defend the church, and you lose all moral high ground.

      Reply
    • can’t we just ban the sales of condoms once and for all , the country has had nothing but problems since they were made legal ,what with booms and busts and now a crisis…bust condoms , thats the root of the problem , down with this sort of thing and bring back the good ol 50s when the church had ultimate influence and power and evrything ran so smoothly , thats it give the church more power back , I mean what could go wrong ?

      Reply
    • Jason 10/01/13 #

      Of course your entitled to express an opinion. Just because you have the right to have an opinion, it doesn’t mean people have to respect the opinion.

      Reply
  • “Christopher Jones of the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference expresses sadness towards girls and women who have become pregnant through rape, but says the denial of a human life is not condonable even in such cases”

    —he wouldn’t be saying that if he was in that person’s shoes who was raped and forced to carry a child due to archaic religious beliefs and legislation!
    Far far far too many old men debating a woman’s topic!

    Reply
  • Youth Defence are vile. That is all.

    Reply
    • They are very adept at wielding hurley sticks outside GAA venues.

      Reply
    • And making small children cry when they start thrusting pictures of dead foetuses at advanced stages of development in their faces (ie – when a very small number of abortions happen and usually for medical reasons – funny, because some of the pro life camp are willing to argue for this precise type of abortion while keeping medical or early stage abortions illegal!!)

      Reply
  • Thanks to all at Journal.ie for their fantastic coverage.

    Reply
  • CABK 10/01/13 #

    It is amazing how deluded and self centred these individuals are. Jerry Buttimer who has conducted this entire three days of hearings with completel control, dignity and preventing it from descending into chaos is disciplined by Sean O Domhnaill solely for having an opinion. This is a disgrace and Mr Buttimer should not have backed down on this point. It was a complete mistake to invite these imbeciles in to speak.

    Reply
  • DB 10/01/13 #

    Abortion will not affect 90 plus percent of the population except for couples or woman that may want the procedure.

    This is an absolute disgrace just leaglise the fecking thing and move on.

    This whole debate is a circus .

    Religious orders should not have a say in legislation or how a country is run.

    Wtf a bunch priests and religious people know anyways. Only one woman the rest men at this.

    Christ on a stick cop on.

    Reply
  • The government is considering how to give legal and medical clarity to a woman’s constitutional right to obtain an abortion if her life is at risk, copperfasted twice by the electorare. I agree with Prof John Crown – at this point, only legal and medical evidence should be considered, not lobby groups.

    Reply
  • CABK 10/01/13 #

    Caroline Simons – what an awful woman. Throwing out personal jibes to the Senators and believing that she gets to decide what legislation will come through – “fetal abnormalities will not be in this legislation”. I don’t understand how a woman can have such a low opinion of other women by saying that women will pretend to be suicidal. This entire segment is ridiculous and these people should not be allowed speak.

    Reply
  • For anyone with a clippy internet connection, this is the link for audio only: http://asx.heanet.ie/oireachtas/seanad_audioonly.asx

    Lets hope that today brings reasonable and calm debate

    Reply
  • Religion and Government should never, ever mix, ever!

    Reply
  • “Rev Christopher Jones of the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference says that the Supreme Court judgement on the X case “reversed totally” the will of the Irish people as expressed in the 1983 constitutional amendment. He said a referendum would give people the chance to re-establish their voice.”

    He is aware of the two other referenda that already gave the people the chance to “re-establish their voice” right?

    This is a stalling tactic, has to be! He can’t honestly think we just FORGOT about the other referenda, can he?

    Reply
  • How about a drinking game? Chug on these phrases:

    The Agents of the Culture of Death
    Floodgates
    Slipperly slope
    Abortion on demand

    Reply
  • Ding Dong, round 3

    Reply
  • I hope those making the decisions have the sense to realise that the experts on this topic are wearing the white coats not the white collars

    Reply
  • If the first half hour is anything to go by then today its going to be a waste of time. There’s no fact finding or information gathering here. Its just rhetoric regurgitation.

    Reply
  • CABK 10/01/13 #

    Who let these imbeciles from Youth Defence into this. Its a farce.

    Reply
  • Why are the Oireachtas giving these people airtime/consideration? The Church and religious interest groups have had influence over the government for far too long and most of these groups would drag us back to the 1950s where the Bishops call the shots.

    Reply
    • @ does not compute.

      You are absolutely spot on. Church and state must be kept separate. This is the only sane way to run a fully democratic country. So when do women who have experienced having an abortion get to speak on this debate in the oireachtas. Surely they should have been considered first as participants over a celibate man wearing a collar? It’s high time Ireland matured as a country.

      Reply
  • Stark contrast between this session and the last thus far – no pontificating, apocalyptic predictions, misrepresentation of studies or outright lies!

    Reply
  • Good point. I hadn’t thought of that. Jesus would be declared insane by those same psychiatrists if he appeared in A&E today.

    Reply
  • who let youth defence in?

    Reply
  • Excellent contribution from Atheist Ireland’s Michael Nugent and Jane Donnelly.

    Reply
  • At 9.57, Trevor morrow of the Presbyterian church states that ‘the embryo should be treated as a person’.

    So Trevor, by your belief system, couples undergoing ivf are ‘ murderers’ too. So much for the reasoned debate.

    Reply
    • I genuinely don’t know the answer to this; do the Presbyterian church consider IVR abhorrant?
      If they do, at least they’re being consistent; I can at least respect that, even if i think they’re wrong.

      Reply
  • We live in a secular Republic, the church has no say in what we do, the people will decide!

    Reply
  • Ah the expected smug, pig-ignorance from the Anti-Choice brigade manifests itself through Caroline Simons and her rudeness to Professor Crown.

    If one of the Pro-Choice speakers insulted them in the same manner, they’d be screeching from the rooftops about bias.

    Reply
  • how is the church really an interest group on the subject of abortion?!? leaving religion aside for one minute and examine the fact that celibacy is supposed to be practiced in the church therefore they’d never really be needing the service so why the hell are we in this day and age consulting the flipping church on matters effecting real people!?!? the flipping church and interest groups!! jesus wept

    Reply
    • I’ve always liked Stephan Fry’s line on this: “It’s the strange thing about this church: it is obsessed with sex, absolutely obsessed. Now they will say, we with our permissive society and our rude jokes are obsessed — no, we have a healthy attitude: we like it, it’s fun, it’s jolly. Because it’s a primary impulse, it can be dangerous and dark and difficult. It’s a bit like food in that respect, only even more exciting. The only people who are obsessed with food are anorexics and the morbidly obese, and that in erotic terms is the Catholic church in a nutshell.”

      Reply
    • God said “Go forth, Multiply, fill the earth and conquer it”. I did’nt notice any small print which exempted the cleargy from Gods will. So why does the C.C. insist on cellebacy. Surely if they were given reproductive organs then they should use them and stop telling the rest of us what to do. At least the rest of us will reproduce even if we have an odd abortion or two along the way??

      Reply
    • I’ve heard it argued that the reason priests are celibate is to prevent their property (or church property) from falling into the hands of their wives, in order to keep the church richer. Not sure if it’s historically accurate, but it sounds plausible

      Reply
    • Wynnner 11/01/13 #

      Stephen that’s exactly why they can’t get married, everything goes back to the church.

      Reply
  • Why are the religious having a say in what is essentially about the right of a woman not to be reduced to an incubator??

    Reply
  • It will be interesting when Youth Defence are on to see if their moral army will be mobilised to shout us all down here. So for all you wife-swapping sodomites out there…forewarned is forearmed.

    Reply
  • What do people think of the bit in the Bible where God advocates – nay, demands – the abortion of a foetus and sterilisation of a woman as punishment for infidelity?

    Numbers 5:11-31

    “20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse[b] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.””

    Reply
    • Dee – I would imagine that most reasonable people would understand that selective quoting from the Bible can be used to justify almost any position. As you’re quoting from the Bible, and especially the Old Testament, how about The Decalogue, and especially “You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13)?

      Ignoring the historical, cultural, social, etc. contexts of what one reads in the Bible is not reasonable. As far as I know, only the truly fundamentalist would argue that every word in the Bible is literally true, thus ignoring the collective wisdom and insight of the Christian tradition.

      Reply
    • Hi Damien,

      So who decides which bits are believed/followed?

      That’s my point Damien, it’s absolutely arbitrary, and therefore should not be part of any legislation, or used as a pro-life argument that would affect anyone other than the people who personally believe in the bits of the bible that they want to believe in.

      Still curious as to thoughts on that particular passage.

      Reply
  • With Godwin’s Law and that good old ‘culture of death’ line being trotted out within five minutes of each other, I feel urgently in need of a stiff drink to wash away the lunacy of the past two hours.

    Reply
  • It’s interesting that this debate has been raging for months and the first time we heard from actual medical professionals, without an agenda beyond wanting to provide the best medical care, was in the last two days.

    …and now we back to listening to the fallacious arguments of a praade of naked emperors.

    Reply
  • Good girl Abigail!

    Reply
  • “You have a moral duty – responsibility – to disobey unjust laws,” she concludes.

    Oh really, Breda? Only if it’s unjust to your own refined sense of Catholic ‘morality’ though, I imagine?

    Reply
    • The same Catholic morality that disobeyed laws and allowed child abusers to prey, unfettered, on innocent children. These so called “pro-lifers” couldn’t give two sh!ts about children once they’re born.

      Reply
    • Jessica, I assume that your post means that those brave souls who defied Hitler’s Nurmberg laws because they were unjust and died for their beliefs in Dachau and Auswitch were wrong since they were motivated by their religious beliefs. They famously included the Catholic priest Fr. Kolbe and the great Lutheran theologian Pastor Neimoller.

      Reply
    • I’m not talking about that, I’m saying Breda fatuously asserting that it’s just fine to break the law if you don’t like it would probably take exception to someone who doesn’t share her views breaking the law by say, having an abortion – because they think the anti-abortion amendment is unjust.

      She’s just waffling and trying to sound like some kind of revolutionary, when the truth is she’s just a tired old reactionary conservative.

      Reply
  • Really religion should not have a say, The Medical and legal professionals are far more appropriate in this case.

    Reply
  • GWAN Buttimer..

    Reply
  • Ahh Now I see what’s happening, it’s X factor Irish style…… and today is “judges houses” …..where the contestants are gonna sing their hearts out to win your support……. , see that line up , thats our xfactor live tour 2013 ,tickets at ticket master , and the outcome , YOU DECIDE , well not quite but the winner is pretty much guaranteed Xmas number 1 next year , but you have to vote , calls cost 30cent , don’t vote when the lines close ……..because you may still be charged ………but your vote won’t count.

    Reply
    • Funny enough, the people have voted twice already in two different referenda…

      Reply
    • Aye but the new generation,the ones of childbearing age haven’t voted! Remember religion is dying out through the generations so its less likely to interfere with our beliefs. By the way has anyone ever seen that fairy in the sky called god? We sure talk about him a lot on this island, surely someone has seen him by now? Has Anyone ever seen Santa clause either? The real one!

      Reply
  • Yes brilliant coverage and great to hear and read from all sides of the discussion.

    Reply
  • Reading most of the comments here I presume most people aren’t that happy that we live in a democracy.

    Reply
  • CABK 10/01/13 #

    Excellent session now ongoing from Choice Ireland and Action for x etc – calm and to the point and making it clear to the senators that saying women will lie and manipulate medical staff is unfair and frankly insulting to women. About time someone pointed this out.

    Reply
    • Yeah and it’s about time it was also pointed out that some women do manipulate and lie to get what they want. Are we all that naive to not to know this. Lets be real here, I as a woman, have met and known women that do!….ooooh let’s see all the red arrows now!

      Reply
    • Of course they do Rita and also young girls In particular who get pregnant would use abortion as a way to get rid of an unwanted child, killing that unborn in the process! Most of their views would be I’m young my whole life’s in front of me, I don’t want a child holding me back! They wouldn’t think ” oh this causes my x y z health problems” like so many prob aborts harp on about! If u get preg any true normal circumstances in my eyes it aint a case for abortion

      Reply
    • I agree Shane. I have lived abroad for many years and know that this is the case. I have met women who have had a couple of abortions for those very reasons, so lets not pretend that this does NOT happen. So stop all the crap and lay the truth on the table. Most abortions are for social reasons not medical reasons.

      Reply
    • CABK 10/01/13 #

      Rita – yes some women are manipulative in order to get what they want, but I do not believe that women would be manipulative and lie with regard to abortion.

      It shows little respect for women to believe that if a suicide clause was in place that they would just go out, without a care in the world and get pregnant and not worry about it, because of course the way out is to lie and scheme to their doctors and get on their medical records and notes that they are suicidal and that’ll get rid of the pesky pregnancy for them. I do not believe any woman enters into an abortion lightly so to suggest they would go through this charade all without caring is unfair and disrespectful. Its disappointing that you would have this opinion of your fellow woman.

      Shane – where have you procured your insights into the minds of young teenage girls? I

      Reply
    • CABK, I have the upmost love and respect for my fellow women. As I said in my previous post I have known and met women who have done that. I think that you are naive to think that some,not all women, would do that. I am aware that it is a very difficult emotional situation for a woman to find herself in, but in reality, not all women think like that. I have met women who have had a couple of abortions and think absolutely nothing of it. My original post might have come across as an insult to women, but I assure you it’s not. I’m just being real here and I know in my experience these are the facts.

      Reply
    • Last line sums it up totally

      Reply
    • Young girls I said! From the young girls I no who got pregnant and from articles I read where young girls can remain anonymous but give the REAL reason why they want rid of that healthy baby growing inside

      Reply
    • Your last line sums it up

      Reply
    • CABK 10/01/13 #

      Rita – you know in your experiences of woman you have met who lied to medical practitioners and pretended to be suicidal in order to get access to a abortion? Even though this is not actually the law yet? Are you talking about a different country than Ireland? Or do you just mean you know women who have had several abortions and thought nothing of it – if this is what you mean this is entirely different to saying that if a suicide clause was put into abortion law that Irish women could not be trusted to not abuse it.

      Some clarification?

      Reply
    • Shane, come back when you’ve grown a uterus, had an unwanted pregnancy and learnt to spell. Then maybe someone will finally listen to you.

      Reply
    • Couldn’t care less what way I spell! Correcting a quick typers spelling on here? Lmao very sad! So what u said applies to any lad lol so no lad can have a view then haha hilarious

      Reply
    • Of course there will be some people who will manipulate, lie and cheat to get whatever they want, sure look at the Church leaders and Youth Defence / Iona / Life Institute..

      But those who would treat an abortion lightly and not agonise over the decision would most likely fall into the 1-4% of the population who are psychopathic and therefore devoid of empathy or consequential thinking.

      That or they are teenagers (psychopathy diagnosis not permitted before adulthood as most teenager display the symptoms).

      Don’t try to tar the entire population with the same brush, it’s logical fallacy and therefore a piss poor argument.

      Reply
  • We atheists outnumbered a bit here. The others even have their fairies as backup!

    Reply
  • Maria Steen’s comment at 13.22 today is extraordinary. She asserts that all barristers believe that there will be no prosecution under the 1861 act if the physician acted in good faith. This opens the avenue to an obsolete law which has or will fall into desuetude.

    The particular law is ignored, a blind eye is turned, often an appealing solution to Ireland.

    The decision to prosecute or not to prosecute falls on the DPP. Unfortunately, the DPPs office has some solicitors as well as barristers. To reassure the medical profession, will the Iona Institute obtain a statement from the DPP’s office that it will not prosecute within the terms of a medical doctor or consultant acting in good faith?

    I don’t know how a non practicising barrister, not a member of the Law Library, can assert a belief in what all barristers think about prosecution. I accept that the subset of barristers who are non practicising, member of the Board of the Iona Institute and staunchly pro-life may have such a view but the only view on this prosecution risk aspect I would see as authoritative is the view of the DPP and her staff.

    I really dislike the idea of “Ahh sure, don’t worry, it’s only a law and sure if you think that you are in the right, you’ll be fine. Let’s not get hung up on what the law actually says.”

    A non-practicising may have more latitude on her opinion of the law.

    Reply
  • We have roughly the same laws as Romania when Ceasescu was In power. A Catholic country where a woman is obliged by law carry a baby for 9 months

    Reply
  • Clare Daly does not appear to have attended any of the hearings in the Seanad chamber these past three days. I’m very surprised at that given the profile she built with her unsuccessful bills and her public statements. Is she boycotting these hearings or does she no longer think the issue is important enough for her to participate? Or perhaps she has another reason for not attending?

    Reply
    • @ Desmond O’Toole,

      I don’t know. you will have to ask her. When she is not very busy, she is responsive to emails. I can give you her email address in case you don’t have it.

      Of course, the scope of the legislation which is constitutionally permissible, that is compatible with Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution, is too narrow to address the many important issues of consequences of rape, incest, risk to health of women, risk to life unless preset, real and substantial, socio economic causes, family circumstances and on and on.

      Sadly, the the real and substantial issue of abortion cannot be addressed unless or until the nettle of Article 40.3.3 is grasped.

      We should not delude ourselves into thinking that a civic and civilised set of hearings have achieved much and I will see what is archived.

      Incidentally, I admire the position taken by the Labour Party on the question of abortion since 1983, and the position it continues to adopt but I feel regretful that institutional and organised religion was permitted an official role in this process. Roman Catholicism gave us Article 40.3.3 and this is a legacy of religious dogma enshrined in our Constitution.

      Clearly the legislature, predominantly male and predominantly Roman Catholic, needed a refresher course in Roman Catholic Church doctrine / dogma. Anyway, now the legislators have their holy orders.

      Reply
  • If a Woman wants , needs an abortion it is her right, one of the few she has , the Irish have become obsessed with the need to row all the time over everything we just cant stick together anymore,no wonder the Government is running rings around us, and getting away with it, …

    Reply
  • How the f*** did anyone vote for Ronan Mullen to become a TD?

    Reply
  • There is no such thing as a soul.

    Early abortion is not murder.

    Reply
    • It is killing! Once a foetus is formed In The womb it’s a child and that’s where the pro life get their views from! Someone will say ah it’s only a bundle of cells! It’s not its a creation of life true an egg and sperm! So in necessity your killing a life

      Reply
    • No it isn’t Shane. Jesus does not enter the womb and magically weld the egg and sperm together to form a baby. Biology books are available in all good bookshops.

      Reply
    • I no how a baby is formed! Jesus teenagers know how babies are formed! It’s still killing the life of the unborn! I’m not complete pro life! I agree with abortion in serious circumstances

      Reply
    • Babies are formed by the very gradual development and growth of a collection of cells in the womb over a period of months. Babies are NOT formed the instant the sperm enters the egg.

      Reply
    • Lmao everyone knows that! A sperm and an egg still form a baby whenever it may be plus abortion is killing the life if that baby

      Reply
    • @Shane –

      So in necessity your killing a life

      I think this was a typo on your part, but actually you make a good point. Yes, in NECESSITY you do terminate a life. It is a necessity for the women who choose abortion.

      Note I say life in a scientific capacity, in as much as a tree is life – the state of being that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter. This has nothing to do with sentience or personhood, or having a soul.

      Reply
    • It’s not an necessity, it’s a way out! I said already I agree with abortion under certain circumstances but not all!

      Reply
    • “It’s not an necessity, it’s a way out! “

      As a man who has never, nor ever will, experience an unwanted pregnancy, you cannot say this with even a shred of credibility. Sorry. You have absolutely no idea what goes on inside these women’ heads.

      What you are doing is projecting your lack of respect for women by assuming they are thinking what you believe they are thinking, without listening at all to the many women who are telling you otherwise. This is wilfully obtuse, and by refusing to believe what many many women with actual life experience as women are telling you, in favour of your own presumptions, you are further showcasing your frankly disgusting lack of empathy or respect for what women have to say.

      Your ill-informed opinions are coming from a place of privilege where you will never, ever, ever have to face this decision, therefore your arrogance in the matter is sorely inappropriate and hugely insulting.

      Reply
    • Ill tell u what then! If a referendum comes of this, no man should be allowed vote, how’s that?

      Reply
    • Shane I don’t really know what to say back to that. You have not actually responded to anything I said, further displaying how blinkered you are by your privilege and refusal to engage in meaningful debate.

      Actually, in an ideal world I think that before men are allowed to vote on what happens to women’s reproductive organs, they should categorically prove that they do not hold incorrect, offensive, ill thought out, misogynist beliefs about women, and should display at least a shred of empathy.

      Reply
    • Oh, if you are struggling about where to begin with a real response, I suggest you begin with explaining how you know/why you feel that abortion for women is an easy way out rather that a necessity. Perhaps show me any evidence you have to back up your opinion. At the very least explain how you have come to that conclusion. I’ll be waiting!

      Reply
    • I’m sick of replying to women on the journal news stories on abortion! Everyone knows my stance on the issue! I just asked you that question since its a female problem so why should males vote? Listen, the majority( and I have spoken to alot) agree that abortion should be brought in to some compacity but not on demand in all circumstances

      Reply
    • Not struggling at all just sick of saying the same thing over n over

      Reply
    • @ Dee – Don’t take this the wrong way as I am in agreement with everything you are saying nearly. Just I don’t think its right to say a man will never experience an unwanted pregnancy. Many men who are reading this article will have had unwanted children.Granted unwanted pregnancies effect either gender in different ways, you still don’t get to say a man will never experience it. Not trying to turn this into a gender debate though, so i’ll leave it there.

      Reply
    • Hi Olaf!

      I must disagree, although I take your point that certainly men have experienced unwanted fatherhood.

      But sorry, a man will never personally experience an unwanted pregnancy. Men will never physically, personally experience the terror and fear of being alone with a pregnancy, and the sickness, and the childbirth, or the same level of stigma that a young mother will face for example. A man will never find himself pregnant after a rape, or pregnant with depression and terrified of it getting worse post-natally. A man can remove himself from the picture far more easily than a woman. It just is what it is (which is not to say men should not have a say in these matters on a personal level).

      My point was that he should not presume to know what reasons ‘women’ (as though we are a homogenous lump!) have for choosing abortion, particularly when it is (as I said previously) a decision he will never personally face.

      I do get your point, though it is a whole different debate.

      @Shane, I am not asking you to say the same thing over and over, I am asking you to explain what you have said more fully. That is the problem in fact – you keep saying the same thing over and over again, even though you are factually incorrect and grossly misrepresenting women.

      But you are ‘sick of” talking to women about abortion – says it all really!

      Reply
    • I have my views on abortion you have yours! That’s the bottom line! I agree with it under conditions not on demand, you want it under all conditions regardless of how the child was put there! That sums it up

      Reply
    • Pro aborts view is its a women’s body to do what she likes with it but on the flipside she wants to kill the life growing inside her! I havnt heard one woman yet say in my lifetime (and I have come across a fair few who were pregnant) I am worried of the health issues this child will put on me! Ill repeat again that is NOT the main reason women want abortion under all conditions

      Reply
    • you want it under all conditions

      No I don’t, there you go again, assuming what is in a woman’s head. Please think a little more deeply about why you feel how you feel, and question yourself sometimes, expecially if many people are telling you that you are actually incorrect on the most basic levels of the debate. It will make you a better person

      Reply
    • Hi Dee ,

      Thanks for that, unwanted fatherhood is the term I should have used! And that debate is certainly for another day! So i’ll take back what I said then because you are correct…if my girlfriend was pregnant, I don’t have to be there if I don’t want to…where as she would be stuck in with her situation. It only properly has an impact on my life if she gave birth.

      Reply
    • To be fair shane, you don’t really seem like the sort of man women are going to confide in about their personal reproductive issues, judging by the attitude to women you have displayed here today.

      Reply
    • Yes Olaf, exactly – not that that isn’t it’s own serious issue. Where the hell is the male pill so that men can take extra precautions to protect themselves and prevent conception?!

      Reply
    • @Shane – I don’t know man…think about it…even if abortion on demand is legalised….the example that pro-life organisations give is a woman who is having sex with whoever she wants (her choice no?), getting pregnant and having a doctor to terminate her pregnancy each time she gets pregnant. Do you really think a woman who is that sexually irresponsible is suitable to raise a child? I don’t think so….I think that an abortion is saving an unwanted child from a life of potential misery and will also give a woman like that time to mature a bit more.

      Reply
    • Your contradicting yourself! If you don’t want it under all conditions then legalising it under serious conditions like rape, life of the mother at risk etc etc shoukd be enough

      Reply
    • If I was in a relationship dee and she didnt want the child and I wanted children! That’s a relationship breaker In my eyes

      Reply
    • @kng Olaf

      Simple response. the child should not be punished for her stupididness

      Reply
    • Hey Shane, still rabbiting on about ‘responsibility’ are you? Did you not get the picture yesterday after that discussion we had?

      Reply
    • @Shane – you said you can understand abortion in cases of rape,right? But then by your logic why should it be ok that a potential child be aborted because of a rapist?

      Reply
    • Because what mother wants to carry a sick rapists child! Plus look at that child when it’s born and bring back memories of that rape maybe! That’s why and thats one of my serious conditions where I agrees with it

      Reply
    • Shane, don’t you think ‘punishing’ a child with a ‘stupid’ mother who doesn’t want it is far worse?

      Your contradicting yourself! If you don’t want it under all conditions then legalising it under serious conditions like rape, life of the mother at risk etc etc shoukd be enough
      No I’m not, I don’t believe in abortion based on gender, or abortion of a viable, healthy foetus after 24 weeks. In fact I have issues with abortion of a viable healthy foetus between 20-24 weeks, but I assume that between a woman and a doctor (or two or more), a decision will be reached that I don’t need to involve myself in. I just remind myself that I do not know what is going on in the pregnant woman’s life/mind and therefore cannot presume to judge her.

      “If I was in a relationship dee and she didnt want the child and I wanted children! That’s a relationship breaker In my eyes
      Cool, but I fail to see what your personal relationship ethos has to do with abortion legislation in Ireland.

      Simple response. the child should not be punished for her stupididness
      Aaaaaaaand there it is. The real reason for your opinions. If those damn lusty women are gonna go round having all the sex, then they should be punished with pregnancy, childbirth, and 18 years of raising a child they do not want. Never mind that the child, once born, may be raised by a resentful/neglectful/impoverished/ mentally ill mother. SHE shouldn’t have been so stupid.

      What you are doing proves how very little knowledge you have on the subject. It is a projection of your own personal beliefs on how women should live. And it callously disregards the ACTUAL life of the child. Sad.

      Reply
    • What ur statistics you where throwing? I taught I was reading a maths book! Your not one iota of a bit maternal! Any woman in your shoes is gonna be pro abortion in all circumstances

      Reply
    • Shane! Engage your brain!!!! The point Olaf is making is, if you firmly believe that a child should not be punished for a woman’s stupidity, why is it ok for it to be punished for a rapist’s crime?

      Your logic is completely skee-wiff, which is why I suggest you have a bit of a think about what you actually believe in the matter.

      Reply
    • No the chances are she will raise that child exceptionally well!

      Any girl who has unprotected sex, yes been stupid and gets pregnant should not have the option of killing an innocent child just because “I got pregnant accidentally and he/she will change my life forever” not a valid reason! what knowledge do u want me to have lmao I’m not a woman! Do u want me to buy books and read deeply into it? Infact every man in Ireland buy these books? Lol I DON’T AGREE WITH ABORTION UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES!I DO AGREE UNDER SERIOUS CONDITIONS!! That should be clear enough for you

      Reply
    • I just told him why and if you can’t grasp what I said as logical your brainwashed with this idea of abortion when she wants it

      Reply
    • Shane, you don’t sound like a religiously motivated person, so I cannot see why you are so opposed to a woman getting an abortion in Ireland. If you are ok with her having the freedom to travel to the UK to get it done of her own free will, well then what is the difference with her having it here?

      She would be an Irish citizen who is/should be entitled to the freedom of choice. People who are pro-life make it out like it is an easy decision to go ahead with an abortion. I don’t think any mentally stable woman would consider it an easy decision. They probably have to think about it…possibly discuss it with their partner and then actually make the choice to go ahead with something that is not reversible. So on top of all that pressure, they still have to deal with travelling to another country and then the stigma about it in Ireland. I want my government to my it a priority to take care of the health of all Irish citizens, no matter what their needs.

      As regards a woman being forced to carry to term because of her stupidity? I don’t think it fair to say that, I have read the comments on the journal over the last couple of months of a few women who have had abortions and all them seemed to be pretty intelligent, normal women who made a tough decision for their own welfare and for that of their future children if they decide to have them.

      Its easy to forget in this debate, that essentially we are arguing over another human beings freedom of choice and freedom to decide how they shape their life. Possibly that is something you should reflect on.

      Reply
    • So by your logic, killing a child is ok if you think the reasons are good enough. That is what you are saying. You believe;

      1 – Abortion is killing a child
      2 – No woman should be able to kill a child because she has had sex and fallen pregnant
      3 – You’re ok with killing a child as long as it’s dad is a rapist.

      Either you believe abortion is the murder of a child or you don’t.

      If you do, but you think there are instances where it’s ok to do it anyway (as long as YOU think the reasons are good enough), then you are messed up and very hypocritical, and I can only hope that you seek help or at least TRY to realise what you are saying. That you advocate child murder in certain situations. I can’t believe you still don’t understand the point being made.

      I don’t know if you are being deliberately obtuse or if you genuinely don’t understand what you are saying. Either way it frightens me a little.

      Reply
    • I’m going to write it a bit more simply, because I need you to understand what you are saying

      1. A child should not be punished because it’s mother had sex
      2. A child can be punished if it’s father is a rapist
      3. You believe there are occasions where killing a child is ok

      Also a women’s stupidity is consensual sex, last time I checked, a rapists crime wasn’t
      And in one of these instances you think it is fine if the child is killed/punished. Wow.

      Reply
    • Olaf

      You make it sound that any woman who gets pregnant accidentally and not planned goes to the uk for an abortion! News flash they don’t! If that’s the case all young girls with their lives ahead of them would jump on a plane and get rid of the “thing” that changes their young lives forever! People harp on here about healthy restrictions! I bet very few women think of “health restrictions” when they get pregnant! The majority just don’t want a child at that present moment in their lives and I also don’t believe for one minute that the majority of unwanted pregnancies happen when protection by both sexes is been used properly! Heck it’s only a certain time of the month most women can get pregnant which limits it further! they use every thing under the book these pro choice! if every woman listened to their full on negativity and nobody would have children

      Reply
    • Yes both formed by sperm and an egg inside her but one been normal consensual sex the other been forced open true a sick rape! They’re the same are they? Lmfao

      Reply
    • I didn’t say that an embryo is a child and that abortion kills it. You did.

      Reply
    • An embryo formed true a disgusting vile act should have different repercussions! Simple fact u can’t see the effects this could have on a mother, a sick rape is astounding

      Reply
    • What I said is abortion shoukd be available after a sick rape! Simple

      Reply
    • I’m gonna have to leave it now Shane, I’m just not masochistic enough for this. Good luck.

      Reply
    • Running away? Good luck

      Reply
    • Shane. You are entitled to an opinion, but PLEASE, for the love of all that is good in this world, PLEASE get an education.
      Your lack of knowledge of biology is truly worrying and perhaps indicative of the level of sex education you had.. Women can get pregnant ANY time of the month, they can get pregnant while breast feeding, they can get pregnant if they have sex standing up, they can get pregnant on pre-ejaculate, they can even get pregnant if there’s already a fertilised egg in there.
      Contraception can fail. The odds of it failing seem very low, but in real terms they are actually worthy of consideration (1% of 100,000 is still 1,000).
      Many women worry about health repercussions from pregnancy – I told you this before, but it is obvious that you did not listen.

      And THAT’S the problem here. You have been given the facts, you have been given references, you have been advised to educate yourself – and you admitted yourself up thread that you simply couldn’t be bothered.

      It’s for this reason and this reason alone that I would hold your opinion to be no more than the ramblings of the wilfully ignorant.

      Reply
    • Yes I am running away because I am terrified of your incredible cyber-presence, and totally intimidated by your superior intellect. Or I don’t play chess with pigeons. I can’t remember which.

      Reply
    • What do u want me to do? Lol read loads of female books on the topic haha speak logically thats not gonna happen! I don’t agree with abortion only under serious circumstances that’s all that matters

      Reply
    • Yep running away because I don’t agree with your views

      Reply
    • So because women can get pregnant at any time it’s a liable condition to kill the life if a child? Lol

      Reply
    • Shane, which logic is this? Because you have no grasp on that subject if you cannot master basic grammar. It works in sequence, grammar, logic then rhetoric..
      Like I said, an education would be very useful when you insist upon thrusting your views out to the world..

      The reason I pointed out when a woman can become pregnant is because you didn’t seem to know the answer – you said women could only get pregnant at certain times of the month. Obviously confusing ovulation with a time limit.. I was attempting to clear up your ignorance, but I guess that’s me being negative again isn’t it?

      Like I said, the ramblings of the WILFULLY ignorant..

      Reply
    • Grand no problem! Still not a liable reasoning to kill the life of the healthy baby formed true consensual sex

      Reply
    • Please, don’t try to talk to me about reasoning.. Yours is all over the place, your comments are full of logical fallacies and you lack even a basic understanding of pregnancy or it’s associated mechanisms..

      Read what I said and ditch that straw man, I merely tried to clear up a small misunderstanding you seemed to have about when pregnancy can occur – did I mention it being a *reason*?

      Reply
    • No but you DO WANT girls who fall pregnant consensually to be liable for abortion aswell as those of serious matter

      Reply
    • Sorry should of said girls who fall pregnant consensually with a healthy baby and no complications should have some regard for the life of their unborn

      Reply
    • Ok, well, if you are going to learn anything from this – it’s through not true and there is no such thing as a female book.

      Reply
    • Yeah Shane – and we are arguing that perhaps we should take the already living, breathing, independent and contributing member of society into account.
      Something you don’t give a toss about.. If you care not for women’s consent then I would worry for any girls you come into contact with – even if you are good with your condoms..

      Reply
  • I wish I was born in the future. And what i mean by that is, I wish to live in a society when people have realized the stupidity of religion and fairytales and have left these stories in the dark ages (now). And they believe in science and reason and the compassion of a woman who is suicidal over her current situation.

    Reply
  • Rev Christopher Jones of the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference, ‘said that women and girls who find themselves experiencing an unexpected pregnancy should be shown love, care and support to cope in order to deal with their situation in a ?life-giving way?.’

    Oh the irony…..

    Reply
  • Can anyone tell me why the churchs were given an opportunity to give their opinion?? I dont recall voting them in ….

    Reply
  • The bishops should stay on a Chessboard.

    Reply
  • I just read all the comments on here and I haven’t a clue what’s going on.

    Reply
  • Thanks for your three days of coverage. I founds the live feed and summaries really helpful.

    Reply
  • Why can’t these religious groups let God talk for himself? I know he’s M.I.A for over two Millennium now, but keep praying, keep donating to Vatican-Corp, keep worshipping stautes, keep going on Pilgrims and maybe just maybe he will show up. (I wont hold my breath)

    Reply
  • Again…just as i thought my day going well…another Pro Life news story to annoy me and make me think how much of a self righteous waste of space these people are.

    Reply
  • I find this hearings very interesting to be honest. I even find it more interesting how churches worldwide are striving hard to seem reasonable to modern society and still correspond to the understanding of people who wrote the Bible 2000 or so years ago regarding the world surrounding them at the time. Day by day their job is getting harder. Can bet they envy their predecessors for who the job was easier. Bet if they were unionized, they would be demanding an increase in salary as a consequence of ever-increasing workload.

    Reply
  • Mjhint 10/01/13 #

    Its interesting to read the list & I see there is no Jewish groups represented. Am I correct in that. Also I see the Islamic groups are out in force. The interesting thing about that is the Islamic punishment for apostacy is death & no chance to negotiate that sentence. So protect the life of the unborn until its born & then kill it for the most trivial actions. I glad to see religious groups aligning themselves with this type of hypocracy.

    Reply
  • What makes me chuckle is people who agree with abortion under every circumstance think that people who agree with pro life get their views from the church and religion! It’s hilarious

    Reply
    • Absolutely crazy. You would think people would realize that there is absolutely no link. It is just a coincidence that the vast majority of the pro-life advocates represented today are either explicitly members of some sort of religious clergy, or members of organizations which allegedly get most of their funding from right wing religious groups in America.

      Reply
    • Other coincidences include all the religious imagery that was in the most recent pro-life rally (including I think the woman holding a sign depicting Mary on the lead into this story) and the prayer I heard they had at the end of it. It was just a coincidence that people were hauling around massive crosses at the same time as that rally was held.

      People really just need to stop reading things into these coincidences.

      Reply
    • All leading pro-life groups (Youth Defence, Life Institute) are heavily steeped in religion, funded by them in some cases

      It’s a logical assumption to make that the members of those organisations are religious no?

      Reply
    • Even the name ‘pro life’ is offensive to me, in somehow implying that pro choice is anti life. I think they should be just called pro and anti choice.

      Reply
    • I find the term pro choice offensive, i think it should be pro abortion and anti abortion / anti -abortion on demand . We all have a ‘choice’ men and women, irrespective of any written law, we all have ‘free will’ and the ‘power to choose’.

      Reply
    • But those of us who are pro-choice don’t advocate for everyone to have abortions, we believe women should have the /choice/ whether to have one or not.

      Anti-choice advocates refuse to grant us that choice.

      Reply
    • You don’t need permission to make a choice. It’s called free will. we make our choices be they illegal or legal. No written law can take away our power of choice.

      What your looking for is abortion rights therefore you are Pro abortion…….

      Reply
    • Alright then, if you must be picky: I would describe it as ‘pro-legal-choice’. It’s not much of a ‘choice’ when you can be sent to prison for the rest of your life for exercising it. The anti-choice brigade are quite happy to avoid even giving us that much choice in the matter.

      I am not ‘pro-abortion’. I believe that it should be legal and freely available for those who feel they need one, however.

      Reply
    • Some ones getting ratty, do tell who has been sent to prison for having an abortion in the last 15 year’s…

      Reply
    • Karla, so long as the Offence against the Persons Act is still there, abortion is still unfortunately a crime, The fear of being charged is very real and is something that all doctors genuinely fear, as Dr. Rhona Mahony clearly explained yesterday.

      This story appeared online the other day – It makes me wonder, if abortion was legal down South, would a teenage girl have been driven all the way to Newry miscarrying after a botched home abortion for fear of legal repercussions? Banning and criminalising abortions does not stop people having abortions, but it makes people fearful, distrustful of a very grey legal area and denies them proper adequate care.

      http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/girl-14-allegedly-given-abortion-potion-218984.html

      Reply
    • I think the fear was that Daddy would be identified as the abuser as well as the abortionist! This girl was terribly abused.

      Reply
    • @ Shane McDonnell, Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution was promoted and procured by he hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. The view of pro-life accord precisely with the dogma of the Roman Catholic Church, the Iona Institute is a Roman Catholic Church pressure and advocacy group, the Hierarchy of he Roman Catholic Church led the proliferation advocacy today, the Pope, the Cardinal in Ireland and the Irish Roman Catholic Church pontificate about pro-life and the main pro-life TDs and Senators are transparently and candidly overt that their position is informed by the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, the notion of “double effect” as a defence to rare instances of foetal termination is peculiar to the Roman Catholic Church and the activists and leaders of the pro-life groups are all Roman Catholic. In view of the preceding and the many other connections, the association of Roman Catholicism and the pro-life movement is understandable.

      That said, outside of Ireland, born again Christian fundamentalists also support the pro-life agenda. There may also be other fundamentalists in Ireland who are not Roman Catholic but who are in full agreement with the Roman Catholic Church position on abortion.

      Reply
  • The nature of Irish society cannot but be changed if our Hospitals become places where a quarter of pregnancies are not cared for but ended by staff who in the rest of their duties strive to protect life, no effort spared. The nature of Irish society would change If we had weekly executions of drug dealers rapists and murders in our prisons.

    Reply
    • Cared for? Tom, most of these arent living! If you so concerned about the life of others, go hook yourself up to a dialysis patient for 9 months. See how you get on.

      Reply
    • Holland has abortion legalised and, low and behold, the UN Office on Drugs & Crime stats show that Ireland has a higher murder rate than Holland in their most recent figures.

      How does that fit in with your viewpoints Tom?

      Reply
    • More statistics plucked from your arse Tom.

      Reply
    • Abortion IS the Death Penalty. In UK 25% of pregnancies are terminated. Anyone who is confterble with that and thinks this is just an intellectual debate please be my enemy.

      Reply
    • Can you provide figures stating that 25% of all pregnancies in the UK end in abortion Tom?

      Also could you respond to my point about Holland having legalisied abortion AND having a lower murder rate please, as it was a counter to your assertion that legalising abortion would open Irish society to weekly executions etc.

      Thanks

      Reply
    • Guess I’m your enemy then.

      I’m curious. What do you think will happen if women can’t access legal and safe terminations? Do you think abortion will “vanish”? We all know what will happen. Women will STILL attempt to terminate their pregnancy only large numbers of them will suffer horrible injuries and deaths will occur. There is strong evidence that clearly shows that making abortion illegal does nothing to impact the number of women seeking a termination.

      Women will always seek terminations. And without legal and safe access, they will suffer and many will die.

      Do you care at all about that?

      Reply
    • My original comment was to indicate a belief that legalising abortion is as significant as the legalising death penalty in defining what we are as a society.

      Reply
    • Well Tom, that may be your interpretation of it. Mine is that by not allowing safe and legal access to abortion we condemn thousands of women to criminality, suffering and often death.

      Reply
    • @Tom – as of October 2012, the rate per 1,000 women aged 15-44 is 17.5%, so I’m not sure where this 25% comes from. It’s not made up surely?

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/may/24/abortion-statistics-england-wales

      Reply
    • The nature of society changes as a natural process, which some people are trying to oppose now. In other words, people opposing legislation are afraid that society is changing and moving farther from their ideology. This is where the whole problem lies. I do not think it has anything to do with saving human life or right to life. Our life is sacred for us because we as humans have a self-preservation instinct and we make our laws in accordance with our own wishes and feelings of protection. Animals are also alive, but we opt to eat them at the same time. So it is about being selfish in respect of preservation of our own life as opposed to being compassionate for all life unless one agrees that animals are never alive. The British and Americans are not sorry about where they have arrived by time with the exception of some people who would even be sorry we do not live in caves and pray day in and day out. Grown up people, such as yourself, Tom, will hardly ever change their ideology, but world society as a whole has not been documented to move backwards, except for a few rare cases. Therefore, time will change everything in any case and it will be against your ideology. One would laugh if someone said today that the rest of Europe and the major part of the world are against human life. Your statements, too, Tom, will hardly start to make more sense if you keep on changing your profiles every day adding a few letters to your name each time (I think this last point was irrelevant to the point but true)

      Reply
    • I would wish that no woman would suffer and that their was a win win answer to this issue. It needs to be admitted that we are choosing to forsake the (perceived) lesser life of the not yet born to benefit the born person. The word Abortion is being used as having a dual meaning thus making discussion fruitless. 1%. Would be covered by one usage of the word and 99% by another usage of it. Some are even unable to differentiate between miscarriage and abortion. In the end we may have to leave it to the professionals and live with the outcome though we will not all be pleased.

      Reply
    • The pro-life movement is a bunch of religious fanatics, who are upset that religious organisations have become irrelevant in modern society, throwing a tantrum.

      Bring on the constitutional convention and referenda to follow so we can irradicate their influence from our constitution and law once and for all.

      Reply
    • “Some are even unable to differentiate between miscarriage and abortion.”

      @ Tom NewNewman That’s because there is none. Miscarriage is a euphemistic term for spontaneous abortion.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscarriage

      Reply
    • Society does change. There was a time when women were viewed as not even fit to vote, not fully fledged human beings. At one time slavery was viewed as acceptable and it was alright to treat some human beings as being of less value than others We still haven’t eliminated slavery and many people, especially women and children, live in deplorable situations forced to provide for the needs of others and deprived of their freedom. In modern times, the humanity of unborn human beings has been stripped away to make it easier to end their lives. This too will change when more and more people recognise the rights of all individuals, even the very smallest ones.

      Reply
    • Recommended you by mistake.

      women and children, live in deplorable situations forced to provide for the needs of others and deprived of their freedom
      Yes. Even in Ireland. Which would surely be a reason to not keep bringing children into a world of suffering and misery, or force women to ‘provide for the needs’ of more people than they are capable of?

      Reply
  • The majority of people who agree with saving the unborn get their views from just that! PROTECTING THE UNBORN AND NOT KILLNG IT! It’s nothing to to with agreeing with the church! It’s just a coincidence

    Reply
  • Finally we will here some sense.

    Reply
    • It would be a first.

      Reply
    • Indeed. I’m looking forward to the contribution from Atheist Ireland too. Shame we’ll have to wade through the fairy tale believers first!

      Reply
    • That’s it Brian, I’m citing Poe’s Law and saying you are a parody of fundamentalism. Because if the opinions you’ve posted are your legitimate concerns you must be freaking out at the godless state Ireland has become.

      Can I suggest you move to a country more suited to your theocratic cravings, perhaps Iran?

      http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe’s_Law

      Reply
    • So to answer the age old question of is there any church left that isn’t pure evil I see that the correct response is the Methodist Church.

      They seem like they actually brought reason to the table and looked at the issue, rather than what they believe some burning bush said to a guy thousands of years ago in a book where their own god slaughters actual children on mass.

      Bravo the Methodists.

      Reply