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: 15 °C Sunday 19 May, 2013

10 interesting moments from day three of the Oireachtas hearings on abortion

Thursday was the final day of Oireachtas hearings on how to implement legislation for the X case with religious and advocacy groups having their thoughts heard.

Image: Screengrab

YESTERDAY WAS THE third and final day of hearings being held by the Oireachtas committee examining how the government should go about legislating for the X Case on abortion.

After two days of medical and legal evidence yesterday was the turn of religious and faith groups as well as advocacy groups to give their opinions on the issue to the Joint Committee on Health and Children.

Representations came 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 in the morning.

Before lunchtime we heard from the Pro-Life Campaign, Youth Defence, Family & Life, and the Iona Institute. Then in the afternoon we heard evidence from  Choice Ireland, the National Women’s Council of Ireland and Action on X.

As we have done with every hearing so far we liveblogged evidence as it was heard but for a slightly more succinct summary of the evidence, here are the 10 most interesting moments from Thursday’s hearings.

1. There remains a view that the government does not need to legislate for X

Professor William Binchy touched on it on Wednesday but the view that the government does not need to legislate for the X Case – even though it has committed to doing so – was expressed more widely during yesterday’s hearings.

Dr Christopher Jones, the Catholic Bishop of Elphin, said that “appropriate guidelines, which continue to exclude the direct and intentional killing of the unborn or a referendum to overturn the X case judgement” should be explored by the government.

Appearing later in the day Dr Eoghan de Faoite, a medical doctor and member of Youth Defence, said that medical guidelines already in existence are sufficient and the medical evidence has borne that out.

2. Most religious groups favour X legislation

grab2

Except for the Catholic Church and the Islamic Cultural Centre, all of the religious groups who appeared yesterday expressed the view that legislation for the X Case should be implemented in full.

In the case of the Church of Ireland, Archbishop Michael Jackson said the current state of affairs is “unfair” to both women and medical professionals and welcomed  the government’s decision to legislate.

Heidi Good of the Methodist Church and Trevor Morrow, who was representing the Presbyterian Church, echoed this view with Morrow pointing out that abortion is being practised in Ireland today – otherwise members of the medical profession would not be seeking to protect people.

3. Suicide remains the most contentious issue

The inclusion of suicide as risk to life in legislation for the X Case is proving to be controversial and troublesome to many who have appeared before the committee. Though the government decision is to fully implement the X Case judgement through law and regulations, various groups appearing before the committee have raised the inclusion of suicide as being problematic.

All of the pro-life groups who appeared in the middle session yesterday broadly expressed the view that allowing for abortion on the grounds of the threat of suicide would inevitably lead to a viable foetus being killed through no fault of its own.

In fact, Dr Berry Kiely, from the Pro Life Campaign, expressed the view that abortion is not a remedy for suicide, and furthermore, abortion is associated with an increased risk of suicide. Her colleague Caroline Simons said that the belief of medics was that abortion was never a treatment for suicidality.

Labour’s Aodhan Ó Riordain has consistently made the point during the hearings that the suicide risk needs to be legislated for because of the ruling in the X Case. He noted yesterday that the committee’s sole task is to figure out how best to implement the X ruling in full. He said anyone attending the committee arguing that point was there under false pretences.

abortion hearings day three 5

4. Some believe we need another referendum

As mentioned, the Catholic Church is of the view that the only way to ultimately address the difficulties posed by the X Case judgement is to have another referendum. Bishop Jones said that the only way to address the issue definitively was a new referendum. He said that the Supreme Court ruling had “reversed totally” the 1983 referendum on recognising the rights of the unborn, the 8th amendment.

David Manley, from the Family & Life group, said that he would like a new referendum to amend the constitution and undo the effect of the X Case while his fellow pro-life advocate Caroline Simons said that the X Case judgement was “faulty” and needed to be addressed by referendum.

5. Abortion beyond the X Case

Heidi Good, from the Methodist Church of Ireland, expressed the belief that while her church was against abortion on demand, termination of pregnancy should be acceptable when the mother’s life is at risk, there is a grave risk of serious injury to physical or mental health, where there is a gross abnormality of the foetus or where there is a pregnancy resulting  from rape or incest.

Rabbi Zalman Lent from the Irish Jewish Community largely echoed this view saying that his faith allows abortion in these cases. The belief contrasted with the views of other church representatives but touched on a point that has been raised at certain points in recent days that legislators may need to eventually look beyond the X Case and broaden the availability of abortion beyond the parameters in set down by the Supreme Court.

By contrast, Bishop Jones expressed sadness towards the girls and women who became pregnant as a result of rape but said that the denial of human life was not condonable even in those cases. A view that was echoed by Dr Ali Selim from the Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland who said that children born in this “unfortunate situation” are still entitled to life.

6. Separation of church and State

grab3

Atheist Ireland’s Michael Nugent (above) perhaps unsurprisingly expressed the belief that the laws of the land should not be determined by the religious beliefs of its citizens. “Our laws should not be based on other people’s religious beliefs,” he told the Committee.

7. The Supreme Court is not infallible

Dr Kiely expressed that view that the highest court in the land is not infallible and speculated that it would have reached a very different conclusion in the X Case if it had heard the same evidence that the committee has heard this week. Patrick Carr from the Family & Life group cited the US Supreme Court’s pro-slavery rulings as one example of the highest courts making flawed decisions.

Later in the day the view of the pro-choice groups was that the Supreme Court ruling needed to be respected, and implemented.

8. Day three was more adversarial than days one and two

abortion hearings day three 7

Though it must be said that overall these hearings were balanced, respectful, thoughtful, and highly informative there were one or two moments when things threatened to boil over.

Credit must go to Chairman Jerry Buttimer for ensuring calm though that did not prevent him from unexpectedly telling Youth Defence that the manner of their campaigning “needs to be reviewed”.  That led to a suggestion that Buttimer had “impugned” the dignity of the hearings. “You turned this at the end into an adversarial encounter,” Dr Sean Ó Domhnaill from the Life Institute told the chair.

Buttimer, to be fair, reiterated his view about campaigning when the pro-choice groups appeared later in the day and that appearance was also noticeable for the content on Choice Ireland’s website being raised, a move which Abigail Rooney (above), from Choice Ireland, said was “juvenile”. A remark which she later apologised for.

9. The ‘chilling factor’

The 1861 Offences Against the Persons Act needs to be repealed in the view of the pro-choice groups because of the creation of a “chilling factor” by its existence and the potential for doctors to go to jail for carrying out abortions.

Ailbhe Smyth from Action on X said that the relevant sections in the Act were “chilling” and “redundant” but unsurprisingly the pro life side disagreed with barrister Maria Steen saying that she and her colleagues believe there to be no legal reality of the prospect of a prosecution brought under the 1861 rules as long as the doctor acts in good faith.

10. The big work starts now

abortion hearings day three 4

As parliamentary hearings go the last three days have been informative, insightful and no doubt hugely beneficial to preparing a report for the Minister for Health James Reilly as he and the government go about formulating legislation for the X Case.

In the Seanad chamber yesterday Reilly addressed the Committee by noting the considerable work that lies ahead such as determining locations for terminations, the number of doctors involved, the issue of conscientious objection and other issues which will need to be examined.

Buttimer, who has been widely praised for his role as chair, now goes off with the rest of the committee to formulate a report that will inform the drafting of the legislation, a report he expects to complete by the end of the month.

This has undoubtedly been a good piece of parliamentary process but the ultimate proof of its success will be in the kind of legislation that is formulated and how much of it is based on the submissions we’ve heard in recent days.

(All images: Screengrabs via Oireachtas.ie)

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

Day Two: 10 interesting moments from day two of the Oireachtas hearings on abortion

Day One: 10 interesting moments from the Oireachtas hearings on abortion

Read next:

Comments (39 Comments)

  • You left out the awkward moment when Caroline Simons of the ‘Pro Life’ movement somehow managed to forget that she had appeared in a very recent video made by EWTN. As you do.

    Reply
  • A total disgrace that TFMR requests for an invite were declined yet religious groups who should have no involvement with anything to do with government decisions were allowed to speak. But at least the government are taking abortion seriously although its sad that a life had to be lost for them to do it. Lets hope they do the right thing and legislate.

    Reply
  • Lol about the US Supreme Court allowing slavery – the UN commission for human rights has said the Magdalene laundries should be investigated for slavery here in Ireland … And the last of these closed in 1996. So yes, let’s talk about fallible judgments on behalf of the Church and state in relation to controlling women’s fertility and sexuality!

    Reply
  • Oh sure, solicit the opinion of the Church. What about Satan? Doesn’t his side get a voice? Try exercising a little impartiality ffs. What’s the problem? Troubled by the smell of sulphur in the Oireachtas? Maybe you boys should lay off the cabbage at lunch then.

    Reply
  • The church has no place there,may as well have invited the postman as well.

    Reply
    • V 11/01/13 #

      I agree, I don’t understand why any religious groups were there at all?

      Reply
    • Its b

      Reply
    • In 2013 there is no place for religion in any society.Dark Ages are over.

      Reply
    • Let religion have its place, in one’s private life, just not involved in directing public policy or affecting non-believers’ lives and choices.

      Reply
    • peter 11/01/13 #

      I blame it all on Adam he should never have taken a bite of that Granny Smith…. How the world would of been with our all of this guilt.

      Reply
    • At least the postman works to better society.

      Reply
    • The reality is somewhat different, government policy is informed by consulting with a wide range of views and so the appearance of the various groups of all views and persuasions yesterday was part of that process. A wide range of views were expressed and weighting will be given to those views. Just because you don n’t agree with a particular point of view does not make it any less valid. However I think its very clear where this is going. The legislation will probably amend the provisions of the 1861 Act to bring it in line with current medical practice but will probably restrict its applications to Maternity Hospital Settings (i.e. there will be no Scope for a Marie Stopes type operation as exists in Belfast), The suicide issue will be dealt with by putting the right that has been established by the Supreme court on a statutory footing but setting the bar so high to exercise the right that it will in practical terms be meaningless, an attempt may also be made to cap the exercising of termination by way of abortion in the case of suicide risk at 24 weeks with a termination thereafter being by way of delivery of the baby to live.

      Reply
    • V 11/01/13 #

      @ Sean. Yeah but I would have liked to hear from some pro life people who’s views were not influenced by their religion at all. Maybe there were some and I’ve overlooked them? Yes, the fact that I do not agree with their point of view does not make it any less valid however the fact that their views come from an outdated book from the dark ages and a magical, invisible, all seeing, all powerful being in the sky does actually make their views on medically necessary abortions less valid, in my opinion….. I think we’ve moved on and should show these people that they are NOT the authority on morality. They shouldn’t be allowed that role anymore.

      Reply
    • @V
      I totally agree. I think if the various churches want to instruct their followers on their obligations that’s fine. But there’s no reason why I should be controlled by religious beliefs that I don’t subscribe to. Obviously the lack of a right to bodily integrity in relation to abortion doesn’t directly affect me but the same goes for using contraception, premarital sex or gay rights. When I think about Sweden, who introduced free abortion in 1975 and gave women the rights to choose for themselves and to be cared for throughout, it makes me embarrassed by our backward little country.

      Reply
  • Niall 11/01/13 #

    The atheist Ireland dude was bang on. Laws of the land should not be dictated by people’s religious beliefs. In such an advanced, scientific world it’s staggering how many still believe in this invisible bearded fairy.

    Reply
  • Three days spent listening to every type of gobsh#te spouting their puritanical bull. Does anybody know how much money was wasted on the emperors new clothes . Dr Reilly said at the very end of that he would be putting legislation forward that deals solely with threat to life as outlined in x case. Thirty years and nothing has changed. This govt will not wish to exclude their support from any side. They can tell the 25% that want no terminations that they were legally obliged and the 34% that want it on demand that their hands were tied. It took the death of someone for this legislation to be brought yet what angers me is the fact that this “new” legislation would not have saved that poor lady. Plus ca change plus cest la meme chose.

    Reply
    • @ Colin, correct and insightful, in my view.

      Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution, even as generously interpreted by the four majority Supreme Court Judgments in the X Case, reflecting as it does the dogma on this issue of the Roman Catholic Church very severely and unreasonably restricts the freedom of legislators to legislate sensibly on this issue.

      This is a case study on being careful what you out into a Constitution.

      I actually agree with the Roman Catholic Church and the oracle of divine wisdom, Ms Simons, that there needs to be a Referendum but it should be a referendum to repeal Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution.

      It does surprise me after the repeated pronouncements of the Roman Catholic Church that our esteemed 85 per cent male and over 80 per cent Roman Catholic TDs needed to hear the Roman Catholic Church again on this issue. We’re the TDs and Senators so ill informed about the dogma of the Roman Catholic Church, even though Senator Ronan Mullen was available to give private briefings.

      The roles of religion, morality and law should not be conflated and confused. Religion should not play a role in the legislative or per legislative process.

      Reply
  • Interesting that, apart from the mini-nazis of Youth Defence and its fronts, the only opponents among religious groups were the Catholics and the Islamics.

    Taliban and Catholiban? Singing from the same hymn sheet, so to speak.

    Reply
  • I agree with Gearoid 100%. Next few generations will take Ireland there. Hope the Catholic Church will be we’ll gone by then also. Private lives only please Mr Pope.

    Reply
  • This is just a stepping stone to giving women a basic right that they should already have. We’re already decades behind many, if not most other developed countries. Embarrassing!

    Reply
    • Gearóid, thousands of years ago our barbaric ancestors had this facility. In fact they often took their babies and sacrificed them in the hope of better crops, better weather, a new house, whatever their hearts desired.
      So we had it a long time before these so called “developed” countries had their sacrifice of babies to get a better career, boyfriend, bank balance, avoid stretch marks – whatever.

      We look down on those people as barbarous savages for such behaviour, if only they could have mechanised and sterilised it as well as we can then we could claim such wondrous advances, no?

      Reply
    • And what about avoiding permanent adverse affects to her health and well being? What about when she has already had her body violated in rape? What about when the baby is not going to survive anyway?

      Nice of you to try and avoid these valid reasons for abortion with your little spotlight fallacy there, throw in some straw men and an over quota catch of red herrings and you’re set.. Did I leave out any? Some appeals to fear, appeals to emotion, appeals to sheer nonsense..

      You know for a guy spouting out about logic, you sure love to argue in fallacies don’t you?

      Reply
  • When are they bringing in Santa. Clause? Surely he should get a say too!

    Reply
  • Think everyone agrees with no. 6

    Reply
  • People’s consciences are informed by their Family, Schools, Church, pressure groups and sadly tabloid media. The muddled media are a greater concern than the church as they are the sole educators of many after formal education finishes.

    Reply
  • buttimer really needs to get off his high horse about having committee hearings about unlegislated 20 year old supreme court ruling

    Reply
  • Potential savings in welfare budget should not be used as excuse for liberal abortion laws.

    Reply

Add New Comment