Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
TODAY MARKS THE anniversary of the X case – one of the most controversial and closely-followed legal battles in the history of the State.
Not only did it spark outrage and debate among Irish citizens, it drove thousands of people to demonstrations across the country – both for pro-life and pro-choice campaigns.
As a result of the court rulings on the matter, a constitutional referendum was called asking the Irish people about a woman’s right to life, her right to information on abortion and the right to travel for a termination.
Although the X case ended up being bigger than the individual, at the centre of it all was a distressed, pregnant young teenager – a victim of rape on the verge of taking her own life.
December 1991: A 14-year-old girl is raped by a man known to her and her family. She becomes pregnant and it is later discovered that the teenager was being sexually abused by the same man for the previous two years.
Court judgements subsequently call him an “evil and depraved” man.
27 January 1992: The teenager and her parents are made aware of the pregnancy after seeking the assistance of a doctor.
30 January 1992: The rape is reported to the Gardaí and investigations begin.
4 February 1992: The victim and her parents decide to travel to the UK to undergo an abortion. The family informed the Gardaí of their decision and asked whether the foetus could be tested after it was aborted to provide proof of the paternity of the accused in the rape case.
The Gardaí then asked the Director of Public Prosecutions whether such evidence would be admissible in court. The DPP liaised with the Attorney General Harry Whelehan.
6 February 1992: The defendant and her parents travelled to England and arrangements were made for an abortion to take place in London. On the same date, the Attorney General obtained an interim injunction stopping the teenager and her parents from leaving the country or arranging the termination of the pregnancy. Once they were informed of the injunction the family returned to Ireland.
The AG’s order was based on Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution, more specifically on the 1983 amendment that puts the right of the unborn child’s right to life on an equal footing of the mother’s right to life.
Whelehan has since said that he had no choice but to seek the injunction as he had a duty to uphold the Constitution. He told an RTÉ documentary that his problem was “stark” after being contacted by the DPP.
10 February 1992: The first injunction only lasted until this date but a hearing of the action was tried before Justice Costello over two days – 10 and 11 February.
During the trial the judge heard how the girl at the centre of the case told her mother that she wanted to throw herself down a flight of stairs and while in London contemplated throwing herself under a train.
A clinical psychologist determined that there was a risk of suicide as she expressed a desire to end her life to “solve matters”.
17 February 1992: After reserving his judgement for a week, Justice Costello ordered that the right to life of the unborn child should not be interfered with and said that the defendant must be restrained from leaving Ireland for a period of nine months.
Although he did accept that the defendant was suicidal, he said the risk was not sufficient to override the right to life of the unborn.
“I am quite satisfied that there is a real and imminent danger to the life of the unborn and that if the court does not step in to protect it by means of the injunction sought, its life will be terminated.
“The evidence also establishes that if the court grants the injunction sought there is a risk that the defendant may take her own life.
But the risk that the defendant may take her own life, if an order is made, is much less and of a different order of magnitude than the certainty that the life of the unborn will be terminated if the order is not made.
“I am strengthened in this view by the knowledge that the young girl has the benefit of the love and care and support of devoted parents who will help her through the difficult months ahead.
“It seems to me, therefore, that having had regard to the rights of the mother in this case, the court’s duty to protect the life of the unborn requires it to make the order sought.”
21 February 1992: An appeal on behalf of the teenager at the centre of the case is made to the Supreme Court.
The grounds of the appeal centred on the right to life of the mother as she may take her own life if the pregnancy was not terminated.
Lawyers for the teenager and her parents claimed that the High Court judge was “wrong in law” in finding the danger to the life of the mother was less than the danger to the right to life of the unborn.
March 1992: The appeal was heard at the Supreme Court and on the final day the judge ruled that the decision of the High Court should be set aside.
She was permitted to travel for an abortion but it is understood that she suffered a miscarriage at a hospital in England following the hearing.
Despite that ruling, which allowed for the threat of suicide as a grounds for abortion, legislation on the matter has still not been brought forward.
February – March 1992: Multiple demonstrations were held in Dublin both by pro-life and pro-choice campaigners.
25 November 1992: As a result of the X case and the judgement in the Supreme Court appeal, the Government put forward three possible amendments to the Constitution in a referendum. The freedom to travel outside the State for an abortion was passed and the freedom to obtain or make available information on abortion services was also passed. However, the amendment which would have seen the Supreme Court ruling on the X case rolled back was rejected. The Twelfth Amendment proposed that the risk of suicide was not sufficient grounds to allow an abortion.
In 1997, a 13-year-old girl, known as Miss C was entitled to an abortion by virtue of the Supreme Court judgement in the X case and the rejection of the proposed amendment in the subsequent referendum.
5 March 2002: The victim’s perpetrator is sentenced to 42-months in prison for the kidnap and sexual assault of another young girl. Back in 1992, he was sentenced to four years for the unlawful carnal knowledge of Miss X.
Also in 2002, another referendum asking the people of Ireland if the threat of suicide as a ground for abortion should be removed. It was again rejected (this time marginally) by voters.
2010: During 2010 about 12 women a day travelled to England and Wales to terminate their pregnancies. More than 4,402 women gave Irish addresses to UK abortion clinics throughout the year.
December 2010: The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights unanimously rules that Ireland’s failure to implement the existing constitutional right to a lawful abortion in Ireland when a woman’s life is at risk is a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The ruling came in the case of A, B & C v Ireland.
January 2012: An expert group is established by the Government to recommend options available to the State to implement a judgement by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights. It is to report its recommendations within six months, taking into account the constitutional, legal, medical and ethical considerations in creating public policy.
Today: The Action on X Alliance has planned to demonstrate outside the Dáil today wearing the masks of the four taoisigh who failed to legislate on the issues over the past 20 years.
jesus this makes me so angry, bloody catholic church and their hold over everything…
A sign of how backwards Ireland still is. At the end if the day its a choice and that should rest solely with the individual.
Mark opinions like yours are like penises, they are okay to have, they are even okay to be proud of, but you shouldn’t wave it around in public or force it down anyones throat.
The fact is that Irish politicians have always been too yellow to deal with this because they are too terrified of being picked on by the religious taliban and the various right wing ‘pro life’ militias that threaten and shout abuse louder than everyone else. Then there’s the political price, most TD’s put their own election chances ahead of sorting out the abysmal state of Irish abortion laws and with many of them coming from rural, religious invested backwaters they are always going to play the parish pump politician before the national need for clearer and equal rights of Irish women to information and access to abortion services be it in Ireland or elsewhere. The Irish constitution is an outdated and regressive document well past it sell by date and not fit for purpose, it was written at a time when Ireland was under the control of men who were both ultra conservative in their views of women’s rights and slavishly deferential to a religion which hates women anyway and whose thought processes are firmly stuck in the middle ages. The constitution needs rewriting and the politicians need to grow some balls and deal with this. It is a disgrace that it has taken so long to act on the earlier cases back in the 90′s and before the ‘righteous’ on here start their usual blathering about the unborn’s right to life etc just bear in mind the way this country treated the ‘already born’ that it was supposed to look after, the orphans and abandoned, the children of and the unmarried mothers, the mentally ill and disabled children who were dumped in the various state and religious run gulags by members of their own families. The shocking and sickening track record of Ireland and the Irish for mis-treating it’s own vulnerable and the ‘blind eye’ culture which many in Irish society conveniently used to bury their heads in the sand must not be allowed to derail progress towards the rights of Irish women to choose their own solutions when it comes to unwanted pregnancies. It’s not down to the state to deny women their human rights in making the choices that are best suited to them and their future.
Well said Ed.
Beggars belief that 12 women a day need to travel out of their own country for a perfectly legal service. Where is the responsibility to its’ citizens in all this?
Pro-choice. No one has a right to tell you what you can or can’t do with your own body. Least of all our lying thieving government
I think you are slightly amiss there Emsy. The people elect the Government and it’s the people who vote in a referendum so it is the people who decide on abortion legislation. Admittedly politicians don’t have the nerve to tackle this issue properly as they are more concerned about reelection rather than trying to find a just and proper solution to this problem. Add to that and the scaremongering by both sides and we end up in the mess that we are in.
I wish this country would face up to the realities of real life. Over 4000 women felt they had no recourse but to go to the UK and have an abortion (and they’re just the ones that don’t lie about their address). If there were abortion services here, I truly believe in my heart that number would drop. I imagine there’s some women who after spending the money to go to the UK, booking in to the clinic etc find that they’ve no option but to go through with it. What if you could go to Galway or Limerick, rather than London or Manchester it would ease the stress and pressure, both financial and emotional. It gives you a little extra time to think things through rather than the knee-jerk reaction of having to to the UK, it might be the breathing space you need to fully weigh up the options and decide to not go through with it. But if you do, then there’s support and back up available at home, rather than further isolation on your return because “there’s no abortion in Catholic Ireland”.
Finally I hope, after all she went through, Miss X has found contentment and happiness in her life.
Well said.
It is simply shocking how backwards we are on this issue. I think any claim on morality the catholic church claims to have can be easily dismissed. Potential for life is not the same as life. a ball of non sentient cells should never get predence over a living being with actual existence
Exactly, thank you, nobody gets judged for exfoliating…..
Exfoliation is the removal of DEAD skin cells that have no chance of reproduction or the formation of a human being. Embryonic cells are LIVING cells that have the potential to reproduce and form a living person. Big difference. Back to Biology class for you I’m afraid MsPoppie.
Tumours also reproduce and fit the definition of living – are you suggesting that we leave them be too, Brian ? Are do you just enjoy being condescending to others ?
It’s hardly condescending to point out a biological fact and differentiation between living and dead cells. I responded to MsPoppie’s remark as I did as I find it a bit a bit flippant if not distasteful comparing a beauty treatment with an abortion. There is a big difference between a cancer cell and and embryonic cell and while both could in some way be classed as living only one type has the means to form a living, sentient human being. Are you seriously comparing a tumor to a fetus because if you are I would love to know what other commentators who have children think of your description of their offspring!
the right to life of the unborn is a strong arguement but in certain situations surely the rights of a victim of abuse/ incest and rape far out anything else.
That legislation is so far past due that it’s criminal. Easy for the government to toss it to a referendum all those years ago- when today all the want to do is avoid the concept.
The fact that people still think a raped fourteen year old shouldn’t be allowed to have an abortion disgusts me. What a sad hambles of a country. Our concepts of family, children and moral correctness is sometimes so very, very skewed.
What rights do you give the innocent unborn?
I remember asking my mom why were woman handcuffing themselves to the Dail and what abortion was. All I got for an answer was a shush
Making abortion illegal does not make it any less common, it just makes it less safe. Not even in the historical back street abortionist sense, but in a psychological sense. It is a disgrace that girls whoa are already going through a traumatic experience have the added issue of travelling to a different country because of the abject failure of their own to legislate for these instances.
So true – in the 17th and 18th century women would try and abort children by inserting metal catheters, as well as poisoning. I know an elderly relative who tried to give herself an abortion with a knitting needle in the bath in the 40′s after her husband raped her repeatedly – can you imagine the pain?! Then it just so happened her baby was Down’s syndrome – it was 30 YEARS before she realised it was genetic and not her fault, she’d lived with the guilt for that long. I despair, women’s medicine is 100′s of years behind male medicine.
It was believed even during modern historical times that ‘hysteria’ was due to the womb wandering about the body. I mean – seriously? When did they even find one somewhere else in order to back that up?!
Welcome to Ireland where we pay great lip service to the concept of family and our love of children. Where draconian law will force rape victims to bear the children of thir rapists and then give them no further support whatsoever thereafter. Where 4,000 ordinary women face a traumatic journey abroad every year so that we can maintain our farcical pose as a country that gives a damn about any of its citizens.
It’s a disgrace there has been no major changes since the case.
As for the terms Pro-life and pro-choice, they really need to be assessed.
I’m pro-choice, however I’m not anti-life.
And some pro-lifers worldwide need to live up to their title and maybe not kill doctors who perform abortions.
Where are the pro-lifers when it comes to issues like America’s Foreign Policy etc. where thousands of children have been killed in the the past decades.
Your comment is ridiculous, stick to the point. Murdering doctors and American foreign policy have nothing to do with this article.Maybe you just like to take any opportunity to bash America.
A simple suggestion for those of you opposed to abortion – Don’t have one! Providing abortion facilities in Ireland won’t change anyone’s mind. If you’re against it, you’ll keep that mindset whether there’s a clinic in Dublin, or Ballydehob.
I’m being honest by saying I’d prefer women didn’t have abortions, but I vehemently support any Irish woman’s right to make that choice for herself and to have one in a medically safe environment in this country.
Well put Daisy. When I was a child the pro lifers gave me the impression that abortions would be inflicted upon people without choice. Personally I would prefer people didn’t get abortions (unless it involved rape etc) but I would hate my views to affect someone else’s life. Pro life campaigners are selfish!
Just something to bear in mind when it comes to abortion and pro-choice/ it’s my body argument. In a case like the X case I can see the reasonable grounds for her wanting an abortion not just because of her age but also because of the circumstances. Something like that I could support however I’m always uneasy when it comes to consensual sex and any unplanned pregnancy that arises. There are plenty of contraceptive options nowadays available to both sex’s as well as the availability of the morning after pill from chemists so it’s not like we are living back in the 60′s. There is a certain responsibility on people when it comes to sex and the immediate aftermath so if someone finds out 2 months later that they are pregnant because they couldn’t be bothered taking the most basic precautions then why should the child suffer for it. The argument that “it’s my body2 doesn’t hold true as there are now 2 living organisms sharing the one body, that is a simple medical and irrefutable fact. As to whether the fetus is sentient or not is still a matter for fierce debate and TBH I am still unsure on that one. I refer to the medical side of things only and not any religious diktat.
If women do not want a child then why not have it adopted? There are people crying out for children to adopt in this country. They are even going abroad to try to get them, yet we have people going to England to have an abortion. The stigma of having a child out of wedlock is long gone so why not give the child a chance at life? There is also the fact that while the woman may not want the child what about the rights of the father? Does he have any say in the matter? How long will it be before an injunction is taken out by a man to stop a woman aborting a child that he fathered? Now that will really put the cat among the pigeons.
I think that if a woman is determined to have an abortion then I think that it should be provided in Ireland as the journey to England only adds to what is an extremely traumatic time. I would however like to see more of an emphasis on the adoption option being provided, not in a coercive way a la the Catholic Church but more as a way of saying that abortion isn’t the only route available.
Contraceptives can fail though.
I’m living proof of that ;)
Also,the decision to have an abortion before 3 months is less traumatic (though still traumatic for most) than giving birth to a baby you have to give away.
If an abortion is what’s chosen then it shouldn’t be allowed after 2 months I think……
Also,it shouldn’t be used as a contraceptive,I heard of a woman having 4 abortions. That’s just disgusting. Have a hysterectomy for Christ sake
People can’t adopt in the UK and Ireland because of the procedures, NOT because there aren’t enough kids to go around! There are thousands of UNWANTED children in care whose mothers were unwilling or unable to care for them. That’s thousands of UNHAPPY lives.
All very easy for you to sit there, with your womb-less body telling other people what they should do with theirs.
Adoption can often be even more traumatic for the mother – giving away a fully grown, birthed baby, having your milk painfully dry up, knowing your child is out there somewhere and you can never have them back even if you change your mind…
Rape comes in all shapes and sizes, women can be raped and coerced into sex by boyfriends and husbands – why is it they do not have rights to make a decision not to have a baby when that decision was taken out of their hands, either by bad luck, or abuse?!
It’s not the “Olden days” anymore – men are not obliged to “Offer” for a woman he gets up the duff, women have careers to think about, we’re expected to do everything and yet given no rights to our own body.
It’s not just a baby in a womb, it’s stretch marks, gestational diabetes, peridontal teeth problems, hair and skin problems, your hip bones separating to make room for the baby’s head, hemorrhoids, vaginal prolapse, tearing, bleeding – the list goes on!
If the father is THAT worried about his parental rights he should ensure he always uses a condom and that the woman takes the morning after pill when it fails – if he has joint say over her womb then he has joint Responsibility over her contraception!
I can’t wait until that male pill comes out and the responsibility is ALL on them, the bloody things wreak havoc with your hormones anyway.
@Emsy wemsy – abortion works best at 10 – 12 weeks, any earlier and you risk the foetus being missed because it’s so tiny and the woman having to go through it all over again.
I think you are right to point about the flawed terminology. The implication by calling the anti abortion status “pro-life” is to imply pro-choice people are anti-life, which is clearly not the case., I would argue that the inverse is true. Pro-lifers care more about saving a bunch of cells then the mother and how having the child might affect her life. And please, do not say she should have thought about contraception or some other distinctly anti compassionate sentiment because anyone who thinks abortion is the preferred method of contraception for women is not worth engaging.
The entire pro-life (should really be called anti-choice) is so imbued with fundamental Christian dogma I am genuinely horrified that it is still allowed an equal status in the argument. We can never allow religion to dictate policy again. That needs to start be offering a service sought by 4k + women, tax paying, citizens of the state, the facility in their own country.
Pro-Life = Anti-Choice.
I agree terminology is important. So Pro choice = pro killing. We do not like that, do we, but you must accept there is two sides to the argument. Purely from a biological perspective I can accept that human life begins at conception, with their own unique DNA, and to terminate a pregnancy is to kill human life.
I would’nt say pro-killing, that’s a bit extreme. However the foetus is not a sentient being, and therefore is not entitled to human rights. That is not an opinion or stance, but scientific fact.
Susan I agree, using the term killing is offensive but I was just trying to make the point that abortion is”in my opinion” the termination of a human life, and the terminology we use is important. So when people use the term pro choice, I believe they are ignoring the choice of the baby. And thanks a lot,I had to google the meaning of sentient, can you tell me who or what has decided that the fetus had no rights.
The ‘baby’ does not have a choice- it has no consciousness therefore cannot make choices, let alone being aware of its rights. While it is alive in the sense of cellular function, it is still just a foetus.
Can a 1 month old make a choice?
As awful as the circumstances in this case were, abortion is murder, no matter how you disguise it, it should never be allowed under any circumstances.
Your attitude is a disgrace. Saying that what is essentaily a group of cells with the potential to be a human being has the same rights as a young woman is insane.
Alright Mark, let’s see what happens when you’re a 14 year old girl who gets raped and has to carry a rapists child for nine momths! X did not have a choice about her rape, but at least she was able to try and deal with one of the consequences of what happened to her.
For most of the decades of independent Ireland in the 20th. century this cruelly violated and pregnant child would have been consigned to a Magdalene Institution for life – if she was of good behaviour she may have been transferred to Goldenbridge. Her baby would have been sold on to America and Ireland could continue to wallow in the holy Catholic piety that it was renowned for. What was it pope John Paul II said about Ireland during one of his Masses here: “Ireland, Ever Faithful” – as he was saying that a child was being raped in Ferryhouse Industrial School by a member of the Catholic clergy.
Mr Mark. As a Christian, do you have more compassion for the embryo or the mother?
Would you know Lucan John?
You’l find the Catholic church has more compassion for the unborn. My Nan’s stillborn child was taken from her before she got to see him and thrown in some mass grave – all because he wasn’t christened and therefore had no rights in the eyes of the church – this is the same church that tries to defend the rights of the unborn while sexual abusing children. They disgust me.
Spoken just like a man, no chance you would be raped and expected to carry a baby to full term.
Profound words, Andrew.
Marguerite it’s not just men who hold the Matthew’s views, there are plenty of women out there who feel exactly the same as him.
And plenty of men who don’t…
I agree with you Michael, we shouldn’t all be tarred with the same brush.
You may not agree with abortion, as I personally don’t in general but accept the fact that at times it may be necessary, but I also don’t have the right to push my views onto others. Right to choice is what counts
to matthew can i ask what should be done to the pig whom murdered that little girls innocence? A medal??????
to sinead: i dont think she did travel? or had a miscarriage it was to late even though you correct ..it was reported at the time she did…. i dont think the reports were correct…. it was merely to dampen the masses…..that girl had round the clock garda protection due to what happened to her ……….she was treated as if she was the criminal… at 14 ……..not old enough to vote, get the dole or basically be counted at all
It’s a sad fact that in Ireland children do not count – they are the property of parents/guardians – and have no individual rights.
The man who raped the child was released from jail in 1997 after serving just three years of a four-year sentence. He appeared in court in 2002 and was found guilty of kidnapping and raping another child – he was sentenced to 3 and a half years imprisonment .. he also received a 10 year driving ban.
The justice system is broke, he and any other child rapist should be locked up forever.
In relation to both the X & C cases here in Ireland both rapists were released from prison & one of them went on to re-offend by raping an elderly lady, where is the justice in that?
How many on here have actually had to have an abortion or understand what it’s like to be in the position of not just an unwanted pregnancy but an unwanted pregnancy after unwanted sex? Abortion should be legal. It should be done,at the latest,by 2 months. It should not be used as a contraceptive.
Some of these opinions are so self righteous and closed minded. For the men who are anti abortion,if your mother/sister/wife/daughter were brutally raped by one or more men,then became pregnant and you watched them fall apart emotionally,would you tell them they had no right to free their body and get help? For the women on here who are anti abortion,same question but aimed at you yourselves.
If you don’t like it,don’t do it,but do
Not think that you have the right to take away other people’s rights
I agree with almost all you say except that people can be personally be against abortion in principal, but do not force their views upon others but allow for individual choice. In a democratic society choice in matters like this should be the norm and not a “yes” to or “no” to stance to individual rights and choices.
The attorney general harry whelehan who was involved in the original judgement preventing the child and her parents.from traveling was the same age who was involved in the failure to extradite that scumbag brendan smyth. Although he later said he regretted his original judgement in the xx case because of the distress it caused the girl involved its a pity he didn’t look at the bigger picture at the time. And also a pity he didn’t extradite a serial paedophile. It would seem that the perpetrator gets more protection than the victim.
So, Whelehan prevents a raped child from going to the UK for an abortion, a perfectly legal procedure that would save her the traumatic experience of having to give birth (at 14) to an evil rapists offspring, who’s life in turn would then be hell and for the child who was raped her life is, and still probably is destroyed by what happened to her. The same Whelehen then goes on to try and prevent the extradition to Northern Ireland of one of the most vile and evil pedophile priests in the history of the state! Talk about a screwed up country! Says all you need to know about the Theocracy of Ireland, where victims are punished and the perpetrators protected by a constitution that could have been written by medieval monks!
Yep, if I was into conspiracy theories I would say that whelehan did not use his judgement independently but instead allowed himself to be led by his religion….dangerous ground. I always wondered why the girls family did not sue the state for suffering caused. Surely they would have a case.
Did Miss x get an abortion in the end?
Hi Laura,
She was permitted to travel for an abortion and it was later reported that she had a miscarriage at a hospital in England.
Sinead
no she didn’t.
I hope she had the love and support to get her life together after all she went through.Made worse by the public gaze and commentary of an essentially unchristian, judgemental public…
Having spoken with two rape victims last year one opted for abortion the other did not. The victim who decided to abort explained that three decades after this heinous crime was committed to a large degree she had came to terms with it. ‘Time can be a healer’ she said. But every single year when the baby’s due date comes she becomes very emotional. Abortion can never undo the trauma of a rape but can only add to the sufferings, in reference to men 90% of the profiteers in the abortion industry are actually male.
and what about all those women who don’t get “emotional” and are glad they had an abortion, glad they didn’t have to give birth to a rapists child or glad they weren’t saddled with a child whose father did a runner, glad that they are not sitting there thinking ‘where is my child now’ having been adopted or worse being put into a state/religious gulag with all the other ‘undesirables’ also, how can you possibly say the following “Abortion can never undo the trauma of a rape *but can only add to the sufferings*, in reference to men *90% of the profiteers in the abortion industry are actually male*” Would you like to back that up with factual data? or have you just made it up?
Absolute and utter nonsense. Women who have abortions do not suffer any greater trauma than women who do not – http://3menmakeatiger.blogspot.com/2011/07/abortion-misconceptions-and-outright.html
Absolutely right, Marion. Unwanted pregnancy is traumatic and so is abortion. Abortion does not remove trauma; it introduces a new source of trauma.
The Catholic church is consistently being condemned by those who define themselves as Libetarians for ignoring the systematic sexual abuse of youngsters in their care & ‘brushing the problem under the carpet’ but the modern taboo is the denial of the pro-abortion lobbyists of the suffering of post-abortion syndrome & re-enactment trauma by post-aborted mothers. ‘Choice’ is very deceiving because I have met with too many women who were either coerced by their parents or by the child’s father & reluctantly opted to dispose of the child.
I am sorry Marion, you say it took this woman 3 decades to come to terms with the rape, to make peace with it. So lets suppose she had had the child, would it have taken her 3 decades to come to terms with him or her, 30 plus years before she could accept the child who was the product of a rape? Clearly she would not have been in the position, mentally, emotionally and perhaps even physically, to raise a child. That is no life for any child. Pro lifers are so stuck on pregnancy they forget that the child is for life. And if you can’t offer them a good, stable and well loved life, than you should really think twice about having one. That is the humane thing to do. Not force someone to have a child so that they satisfy ones own dogmatic views about the right to life. Well I also believe that the child has a right to a good life. And if a woman does not feel she can give that, for whatever reason, that is her private choice.
In ref: to the second victim I spoke to she agreed to an open adoption & takes comfort in the fact that her little child (a boy) is in good care with brilliant parents. Adoption is another option. A person I know when she went looking for her natural mother found out that she came into existence as a result of rape, has she less of a right to exist? Her & the natural mother developed a loving relationship & remain in constant contact. Children who are conceived by rape are not monsters.
No doubt she gets emotional because she was made to feel guilty by someone along the line. I shudder to think what would have become of my life if my abusive teenage boyfriend had an excuse to see me forever in the form of an unwanted child.
@ Marion,
When did anybody say children that were conceived by rape were monsters? Or that they had no right to exist. Nobody. Typical dogmatic pro-lifers, force opinions and words on to people. No rather I was attempting to highlight the fact that women have choices, private choices, about whether or not they are ready for motherhood, and this does not mean that because they decide they are not they should be forced to carry on the pregnancy and give the child up for adoption. Where is the women’s right in all this?
Any to return to my earlier point, it is totally irrelevant what you or me or anyone thinks. What matters, whether or not we legislate for it, is that this is something 4k + women do every year. We are failing our citizens.
to brian……….. I know of case where a man stopped his ex wife from impregnanting herself with from frozen embryo as she wanted him to pay maintance too but he went to court an stopped it
What about the harm to the Unborn from Drug & Alcohol Use in Pregnancy ? Is it ok to protect the ‘life’ but for a child to be born with life long brain injury from the toxic affect of Alcohol ?
Very good article from the journal – I’ve done a history of the Irish government action on the case and similar amendments if you’re interested. http://goo.gl/JeO5e
what has the x factor got to do with all this .
the x factor is the factor the girl couldnt be named for legal reaons. just like the x factor song contest you refer to cant be named cause we not suppose to know :-)
Martin,if that’s a joke then it’s funny,otherwise that is just great mistake to lighten the mood…. ;)
some of these posts are as long as the article.
@ Oaklane 1, rather than reiterate what I have already replied below I have copied for you as I believe the point in salient. Marion, below, talks about a woman who had an abortion after a rape, and who now 30 years later having come to terms with the rape, regrets the abortion. Please consider the points I raised when you talk about “Killing human life” (a preposterous statement) , and “the choice of the baby” (another equally preposterous term when referring to an insentient group of cells)
I said, “I am sorry Marion, you say it took this woman 3 decades to come to terms with the rape, to make peace with it. So lets suppose she had had the child, would it have taken her 3 decades to come to terms with him or her, 30 plus years before she could accept the child who was the product of a rape? Clearly she would not have been in the position, mentally, emotionally and perhaps even physically, to raise a child. That is no life for any child. Pro lifers are so stuck on pregnancy they forget that the child is for life. And if you can’t offer them a good, stable and well loved life, than you should really think twice about having one. That is the humane thing to do. Not force someone to have a child so that they satisfy ones own dogmatic views about the right to life. Well I also believe that the child has a right to a good life. And if a woman does not feel she can give that, for whatever reason, that is her private choice”.
In ref: to the second victim I spoke to she agreed to an open adoption & takes comfort in the fact that her little child (a boy) is in good care with brilliant parents. Adoption is another option. A person I know when she went looking for her natural mother found out that she came into existence as a result of rape, has she less of a right to exist? Her & the natural mother developed a loving relationship & remain in constant contact. Children who are conceived by rape are not monsters.
Did the original girl end up having the child then?
Hi Val,
I’ve just updated the article. Miss X, as she was known, was permitted to travel to England for an abortion but before the procedure she had a miscarriage.
Sinead
Maybe she had an illegal abortion? makes sense?
have your say