Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
At the start of today’s session, the committee is going to address accusations of bias.
Whoops!
We couldn't find this Tweet
Social Democrats TD Catherine Murphy called for the meeting after two members of the committee – independent TD Mattie McGrath and independent Senator Rónán Mullen, who are both pro-life – accused the proceedings of being biased.
Murphy told TheJournal.ie she called for today’s meeting because accusations are being made about witness bias, which she said does not exist.
“There’s very inaccurate information being put out there,” Murphy said.
Chairperson Senator Catherine Noone has repeatedly denied the committee is biased.
Murphy is now addressing committee members, saying the committee has heard from several medical and legal experts. She says when an organisation such as the World Health Organization (WHO) gives clinical information showing that the Eighth Amendment isn’t working, that is a fact, not biased information.
The notion that there’s 24 on one side and four on the other is utter nonsense.
“Facts don’t alter,” she says, adding that all witnesses and their evidence should be respected.
Fine Gael TD Kate O’Connell echoes Murphy’s sentiments, noting that some committee members may have changed their opinions throughout the course of the committee’s work.
“People will say ‘they’re all pro-choice’ – well maybe the world is becoming more pro-choice,” she says.
Anne Rabbitte Oireachtas.ie
Oireachtas.ie
Fianna Fáil TD Anne Rabbitte says it’s not the committee’s fault if certain pro-life groups rejected the invitation to attend, but perhaps replacement witnesses with a similar viewpoint should have been sought out.
Labour TD Jan O’Sullivan says witnesses are not asked to give a side, but to share expertise.
Independent Senator Lynn Ruane says Senator Rónán Mullen was given about three times longer than the six minutes he should have been allocated at one hearing, but she didn’t leave the room “screaming bias”.
Ruane says such misrepresentation is “the last sting of a dying wasp”.
People Before Profit TD Bríd Smith defends Noone, saying she has been unfairly undermined and accused of bias.
Sinn Féin TD Louise O’Reilly agrees with this, stating: “The chair enjoys the support of the vast majority of the members of the committee.”
Fianna Fáil TD Lisa Chambers says she thinks the public have “seen through” repeated attempts to undermine Noone, telling her: “You deserve a medal at the end of this for your patience.”
Her party colleague Senator Ned O’Sullivan agrees with her, saying the treatment of some of the witnesses “borders on un-Christian”. He questions why certain members stay on the committee if they have so little faith in its work and their colleagues.
Ned O'Sullivan Oireachtas.ie
Oireachtas.ie
“Many of us are on a learning curve here, I find my position has changed because of the information I have received,” he says.
Mattie McGrath says other committee members “are waiting to jump on us”. Lynn Ruane is unimpressed, saying he and Mullen are only interrupted because they go over their allocated time.
McGrath accuses other members of sniping and behaving like “ganders”.
He says the committee invited 24 pro-choice witnesses and just three pro-life groups.
22 Nov 2017
2:10PM
Last month, the committee voted to recommend that the Eighth Amendment should not be retained in full, meaning it will recommend a referendum be held.
The final vote was as follows:
Yes: 15
No: 3
Abstentions: 2
The three No votes were Mullen, McGrath and Fitzpatrick. The two abstentions were Fianna Fáil TDs James Browne and Anne Rabbitte.
At the time Mullen and McGrath both opposed the vote taking place, calling it a “farce”. They wanted the vote to be deferred until all witnesses had been heard.
McGrath today says this vote amounts to committee voting in favour of abortion, and proves its bias. He says he understands why pro-life groups have refused to appear given the “predetermined outcome” of the committee’s work.
Sinn Féin TD Jonathan O’Brien says committee members should be more focused on questioning witnesses than giving press conferences.
O’Brien says he doesn’t view himself as pro-life or pro-choice, rather as “a realist” after listening to the evidence. He recently stated that his viewpoint had been changed due to his work on the committee.
O’Brien tells Mullen “your behavior in this committee is downright disgraceful”.
“The only person who is biased Senator Mullen is you, not the committee.”
22 Nov 2017
2:25PM
At a previous session, O’Brien said he might lose his temper, accusing Mullen and McGrath of unfairly trying to undermine Noone.
McGrath references this today, asking O’Brien how his temper is. O’Brien does not appreciate this.
“I don’t know why you feel you’re exceptional here, please stop talking,” Noone tells McGrath after he keeps speaking.
Mullen wants more time to conclude his points, he is not given this as the session has run over time.
“There’s three or four men having arguments here …. while women wait for a decision on their reproductive rights. What are we like?,” Bríd Smith says.
Dr Patricia Lohr, Medical Director of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), is now giving her opening statement.
She tells the committee: “I trained in Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the Harbor-UCLA Medical Center in Torrance, California completed a Fellowship in Family Planning and Contraception Research and a Masters Degree in Public Health at the University of Pittsburgh. I am a Fellow of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology and of the US Society of Family Planning. I have an Honorary Fellowship from the UK Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare.
“During my career, I have focused on the delivery of evidence-based abortion care and family planning; developing protocols, training doctors and nurses, providing services, and conducting research. I am a member of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) Abortion Task Force for which I am currently working on postgraduate curriculum development and a pathway for the care of women needing abortions who are medically complex.
“I am a founding member and the Treasurer of the British Society of Abortion Care Providers which is a RCOG Specialist Society, and currently sit on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Termination of Pregnancy guideline committee which has been tasked with development a new evidence-based guideline for England. I was a member of the development group who wrote the last RCOG guidance on abortion care and have contributed to other national and international guidelines on contraception.”
22 Nov 2017
2:36PM
Dr Lohr continues: “BPAS is a charity which was established in 1968 to provide not-for-profit abortion care that the National Health Service (NHS), at the time, either could not or would not provide . Today, we provide contraception, pregnancy options counselling, abortion care, and miscarriage management from more than 40 centres across England, Wales and Scotland. As part of our charitable remit we also provide education on the causes and consequences of unwanted pregnancy – and our nurses visit schools and colleges to provide information about contraception and fertility to young people, to empower them with the knowledge to make their own reproductive decisions.
“The majority of our services are provided under contract to the NHS, meaning the vast majority of women we see do not pay for their treatment. That now includes women from Northern Ireland, whose care is funded by the UK government and will be managed through a Central Booking Service. The remainder are fee paying patients who overwhelmingly come from the Republic of Ireland.
We provide care at or below cost to women from Ireland in recognition of the financial challenges they have already faced in reaching the UK, and we have a policy of never turning any woman away based on her ability to pay.
“While I am someone who believes strongly that abortion care is a fundamental part of women’s reproductive healthcare, I am here today to provide you with factual information on the experience of Irish women who travel to the UK, how their abortion care is provided, and the limitations of the current framework for providing the highest standard of care. We have no financial interest in Ireland changing its laws, and will continue to provide not-for-profit services to Irish women if they cannot access abortion care at home.”
22 Nov 2017
2:38PM
“In the UK – with the exception of Northern Ireland – women can access lawful abortion if they meet the terms of the 1967 Abortion Act, and two doctors agree in good faith she does so. Any abortion outside of that framework falls under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act and carries the threat of life in prison, both for the woman and those helping her. All abortions must be performed in NHS hospitals or specifically licensed premises such as those run by BPAS.
“The majority of abortions are performed under Ground C – which stipulates that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuation of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman. A smaller number are performed under Ground E – that if the pregnancy continued the baby would be born with a serious mental or physical disability.
The vast majority of abortions – 92% last year – were carried out at under 13 weeks’ gestations, and 81% were carried out at under 10 weeks. This is in no small part due to the increasing availability of medical abortion, which can be offered at some of the earliest gestations. Medical abortion involves taking two medications, mifepristone and misoprostol, ideally 24-48 hours apart for maximum efficacy. Medical abortions account for more than 60% of the total number of abortion performed, although this method becomes less acceptable to women as gestation increases.
“Small numbers of abortions are performed after 20 weeks’ gestation, and account for around 1% of the total number of abortions performed. Some of these will be for reasons of foetal anomaly which are not detected until the 20 week scan. Others will involve late detection of pregnancy, sometimes as a result of contraceptive use which has disturbed bleeding patterns – so that a missed period is not interpreted as a potential marker of pregnancy. While teenage pregnancies have declined dramatically over the past decade, younger women with an unwanted pregnancy are more likely to need a later abortion. This may be because a pregnancy was not suspected, or because she has felt unable to confide in anyone about her circumstances,” Dr Lohr says.
22 Nov 2017
2:40PM
Dr Lohr tells the committee: “Overall the picture of abortion within the UK is as follows:
Abortion rate is stable (around 16 per 1,000 women)
Largely unchanged since the late 1990s
The age profile at which women have abortions is changing: the teenage pregnancy rate has decreased dramatically and more older women requesting abortion care; we see more women over the age of 35 than women under 20
It is estimated that one in three women will need an abortion in their lifetimes, and that one in five pregnancies end in abortion
“The abortion rate in England and Wales is similar to that in socially and economically comparable countries such as France and Sweden – that is to say the UK is not an outlier in regard to its abortion rate.
“There is, in any event, no evidence that laws influence the numbers of abortions: the respected Guttmacher Institute has shown that the rate of abortion in countries with highly restrictive abortion laws is comparable with that in countries with more liberal frameworks.”
22 Nov 2017
2:43PM
Speaking about Irish women travelling to the UK for abortions, Dr Lohr states: “Last year 3,265 women were recorded in the annual abortion statistics produced by the Department of Health in England as having given an Irish address when they presented for treatment. Over the past 10 years, the number of women giving Irish addresses has fallen, from 4,600 in 2008.
“This decline may be underpinned by a number of factors, including: better access to contraceptive services, and emergency contraception, increased access to abortion medication, as well as raised awareness that free treatment can be obtained with a UK address. A paper in the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published in July reported that between January 2010 and December 2015, 5,650 women from Ireland and Northern Ireland contacted one online provider alone to request medical termination of pregnancy.
BPAS has been providing abortion care to women from Ireland since 1968. There is little difference between the reasons why women from Ireland present compared to those from the UK – they will be diverse and multifaceted, involving financial hardship, knowledge that her family is complete, inadequate partner or family support, domestic violence, or simply feeling they are not in the position to care for a baby at that point in their lives.
“While some abortions take place of pregnancies that were planned and indeed wanted, such as those for foetal anomaly, the majority of the women we see were trying to avoid pregnancy when they conceived.
“The majority of women who we treated from Ireland were using a form of contraception when they conceived. An analysis of 2,703 women from Ireland who were treated at BPAS over a four-year period found the following:
3.1%: IUC/implant/sterilisation
28.8%: Injection/oral contraceptives/patch/ring
47.6%: Condom/diaphragm/fertility-awareness based methods
20.4%: No method
“Of Irish women who receive abortion care in the UK, 70% are married or with a partner. Nearly half have already had at least one previous birth, meaning they are already mothers. All this is in keeping with information we have for women from the UK.”
Dr Lohr continues: “As previously noted, medical abortion now accounts for the majority of early terminations in the UK. Many women prefer it as it is akin to a natural miscarriage, they can avoid an anaesthetic, and they can be at home when the pregnancy passes.
“In contrast, the majority of early abortions provided for Irish women are performed surgically – 71%, compared to 28% for women resident in England and Wales.
“This is because for financial and practical reasons, many women travelling from Ireland often aim to fly in and out of the UK within a day, and as medical abortion involves leaving the clinic after taking the second set of medication and going home to pass the pregnancy, it is not clinically optimal for that to happen on the way to the airport or the flight home.
“Effectively this means that women from Ireland are in all practical senses denied a choice of method in abortion.”
She is now showing the committee the below stats:
Oireachtas.ie
Oireachtas.ie
“Nearly a third of abortions (31%) for women from the Republic of Ireland are performed at 10 weeks and over, compared to 20% for women resident in England and Wales.
“Abortion is an extremely safe procedure, but the earlier in pregnancy it can be performed the better for women’s physical and mental wellbeing. Reasons for later presentation will include the time it takes to organise travel and make logistical arrangements, particularly for those with work and childcare commitments,” she states.
22 Nov 2017
2:46PM
Speaking about contraception, Dr Lohr says: “All women who receive NHS-funded treatment at BPAS are also entitled to contraceptive counselling, can choose from the full range of methods available, and if they wish to, can leave with the method of their choice.
“Provision of contraception at the time of abortion has several advantages: the woman is known not to be pregnant, it confers immediate protection against pregnancy, and, with regard to implants and intrauterine contraception, increases the likelihood of receipt of the method compared to women who must return to undergo insertion at a later date.
“Irish women who attend BPAS are also offered contraceptive counselling, and the overwhelming majority take that up.
“However, because of the costs associated with receiving their chosen method, as well as the logistics of integrating contraception care with travel, in our analysis only 31% chose to receive their preferred method from BPAS. This is compared to 85% of those who are funded.
“This means that an important opportunity to enable women to make a choice about contraception and receive that method is lost. It is possible women do visit their GP or family planning clinic on return to Ireland and receive the method they have chosen, but we have no way of establishing this or following this up.”
Discussing post-abortion care, Dr Lohr states: “All women undergoing an abortion at BPAS have access to 24-hour telephone support, and while follow-up appointments are only provided to those women who want them, all women know they can contact the clinic which treated them and return for a checkup or discuss any concerns at any time.
“Women from the Republic of Ireland can access the telephone support line, but if they have any concerns that need in-person care will need to access local services, which can present its own problems in view of the stigma and secrecy that continues to surround travel for abortion.”
She is now showing the committee the below information:
Oireachtas.ie
Oireachtas.ie
“In terms of the mental health impact of abortion, the risk of developing mental health problems is the same for a woman facing an unwanted pregnancy whether she has an abortion or goes to have the baby.
“While most women will not require further counselling, post-abortion counselling is available to all women who have had an abortion at BPAS, on the phone or in person. Needless to say for women from Ireland the option of in person counselling would be difficult, although this is available through some of the agencies in Ireland.
“For women undergoing abortion for foetal anomaly – we can arrange the transport of foetal remains for autopsy. Women from Ireland must take the foetal remains home themselves, and find a carrier which will accept the remains on board. If they wish to have an autopsy or other testing, this would be self-funded,” Dr Lohr states.
22 Nov 2017
2:51PM
Dr Lohr says Ireland can learn certain lessons from the UK.
“If Ireland does overhaul its abortion laws, and it is certainly not for me to prejudge, it would do well to avoid some of the pitfalls and problems that the UK framework presents. The 1967 Abortion Act was passed at a time when abortion was almost entirely surgical, and when all surgery was much riskier than it is today.
“Against that backdrop it is unsurprising that politicians stipulated that all procedures should be carried out in NHS hospitals or in specific premises licensed by the Secretary of State for Health, and that all such procedures should be performed by a doctor.
“Few could have imagined in 1967 that early abortion could be safely provided using medication. Our laws have prevented the provision of early medical abortion in line with guidance from the World Health Organization, which recommends that women should be able to use misoprostol at home once lawfully prescribed.
“This means that women can time the passing of their pregnancy and do not have to risk bleeding or miscarriage on the way home, nor have to attend multiple appointments.
I mentioned the numbers of women from Ireland using online abortion services – it may surprise you to know that women living in areas of the UK where funded, legal abortion is available are also turning online. Over a four-month period alone, more than 500 women in England, Wales and Scotland requested help from Women on Web. For some women, the multiple appointments – sometimes considerable distances from where they lived – were an absolute impediment to accessing lawful care.
“Our laws have also prevented the full development of nurse and midwife led services that are now the standard in other areas of care like colposcopy. Nurses are lawfully able to provide surgical and medical miscarriage management – using the same techniques as an early termination – but are prohibited from providing that service to women needing an abortion.”
22 Nov 2017
2:53PM
Dr Lohr continues: “In terms of premises, there is no reason why early abortion – whether by vacuum aspiration or pills – could not be safely provided from a GP surgery, but again our laws make that all but impossible.
“Keeping abortion within the criminal law, as opposed to regulated by healthcare law like all other procedures can be hugely stigmatising. Canada and parts of Australia have opted for the decriminalisation of abortion, regulating it through healthcare law and professional standards. There is no evidence that abortion is more widely used or indeed more available as a result.
“You do not need a criminal law to impose a time limit for example, but keeping the procedure outwith the criminal law and the subject of professional guidance and healthcare regulation means that lawful abortion care can be provided in accordance with the highest clinical standards and best practice, not a rigid law that will only ever be a product of its time.
“Ireland has the opportunity to create a humane abortion framework that is fit for the 21st century. I hope the information that I have provided is helpful for this discussion, and I would be glad to take questions,” she concludes.
Responding to Deputy Catherine Murphy, Dr Lohr notes that, under the 1967 Act in the UK, two doctors need to sign off on a woman receiving an abortion.
She says some women lie about why they are having an abortion as a result, due to the fact they’re afraid they won’t meet certain criteria.
Dr Lohr says the criminalisation linked to abortion has a chilling effect on the medical profession and people who wish to enter the field.
She says Ireland is lucky in that women are able to obtain safe abortions in the UK, unlike their counterparts in certain other parts of the world. She adds that women who don’t have this option resort to unsafe abortions, leading to high mortality rates.
Replying to Deputy Bernard Durkan, Dr Lohr says giving birth has become safer in the UK in recent years, but she says having an abortion is also extremely safe.
She says maternal mortality data shows that the risks associated with continuing a pregnancy to term are higher than having an abortion at any point in the first or second trimester.
Dr Lohr says that over a three-year period there were 11.39/100,000 deaths resulting from pregnancy, and 0.32/100,000 deaths as a result of abortion. She says cases of serious sepsis are very rare.
She adds that BPAS gives women access to a telephone counselling service, something that many women prefer.
Responding to Deputy Jan O’Sullivan, Dr Lohr says women who receive advice about contraception and start it straight away are at a reduced risk of a further unwanted pregnancy.
Dr Lohr says Irish women sometimes present for an abortion at a later stage in their pregnancy because it can take them a while to be in a position to travel to Britain.
When asked by O’Sullivan if there was any evidence of the ‘floodgates opening’ in the UK once abortion was legalised, Dr Lohr says statistics on illegal abortions aren’t available, but notes the abortion rate didn’t increase dramatically after the 1967 Act was introduced.
Responding to Deputy Lisa Chambers, Dr Lohr says most Irish women choose surgical rather than medical abortions because they usually need to travel to and from the UK on the same day.
She says, proportionally, early medical abortions have a slightly higher risk rate than surgical abortions, but the latter method can also have complications.
Dr Lohr says “abortion is a backup for when contraception fails”, and not something women use as a form of contraception.
“I think it’s really telling a that most of the women that we see were using a contraceptive method [when they became pregnant].”
Deputy Peter Fitzpatrick asks Dr Lohr if she agrees with comments he said Ann Furedi, the CEO of BPAS, made on TV show Loose Women stating that abortion should be available if a woman is unhappy with the gender of her baby.
Dr Lohr says she’s not familiar with these comments. She says if a woman’s only grounds for abortion is the baby’s gender, it’s not covered under the 1967 Act.
However, if the woman may face exclusion from her community or domestic violence as a result of the baby’s gender, there could be legal grounds for the termination.
When asked about how many abortions BPAS has carried out because the baby had Down syndrome, Dr Lohr says she doesn’t have the stats around how many terminations have been carried out due to foetal abnormality, but will provide them to the committee at a later date.
Fitzpatrick says he is very disappointed that she can’t answer his questions.
Replying to a question from Deputy Kate O’Connell, Dr Lohr says if two doctors disagree on signing off on a woman’s abortion in the UK, they examine whether a termination should be granted on other grounds (if before 24 weeks of gestation). If it’s after 24 weeks, another doctor needs to be consulted.
Responding to Deputy Bríd Smith, Dr Lohr says it’s important to have access to both medical and surgical abortions. From a socioeconomic perspective, she says women who can afford to travel to have an abortion do, while those who can’t don’t.
Responding Senator Rónán Mullen, Dr Lohr says it’s “absolutely not the case” that BPAS carries out abortions up to birth, rather up to 24 weeks as set out under law. Mullen accepts this correction.
He brings up a Care Quality Commission safety review that was critical of one of BPAS’s clinics, to which Dr Lohr says this is something the organisation learned from and proves the services they provide are properly regulated.
Mullen says one in five pregnancies in the UK end in abortion, while one in 19 in Ireland do. Dr Lohr says we don’t know how many pregnancies in Ireland end in abortion as we don’t have these statistics.
She says she doesn’t keep track of how many abortions she has carried out, adding it may be hundreds or thousands.
Responding to socioeconomic issues raised by Senator Lynn Ruane, Dr Lohr says both the present and future impact of the pregnancy on the woman and her family is taken into account in the UK system.
Ruane asks how decentralising abortion care could improve access and minimise protests by anti-abortion groups outside their premises. Dr Lohr says providing abortions in centres where other OBGYN issues are dealt with could help in this regard as it’s not clear why a person is attending the centre.
Deputy Clare Daly asks Dr Lohr what Ireland can learn from the UK’s experience in the 50 years since the 1967 Act was introduced.
Dr Lohr says a positive aspect of the Act is that the grounds for abortion can be widely interpreted so most women can access services if they need to, however this changes after 24 weeks. After this time period, she says the woman may have to prove that she is suicidal in order to access a termination.
22 Nov 2017
4:11PM
Responding to Deputy Louise O’Reilly, Dr Lohr says, in the UK, a doctor must prescribe abortion pills, although a nurse can manage the related care.
Replying to Senator Ned O’sullivan, Dr Lohr says BPAS advises women to stay an extra day in the UK if possible so they can be monitored after the abortion – noting the immediate aftermath is the most likely time that complications may occur.
However, she says this is not a realistic option for many women.
Answering a question from Deputy Anne Rabbitte, Dr Lohr says BPAS does not scan women for foetal anomalies – noting this is usually done before they attend the clinic.
Women who come to BPAS clinics have an ultrasound to determine gestation and look for miscarriage. She says women who attend the clinics are also offered counselling.
22 Nov 2017
4:21PM
Replying to Sinn Féin Senator Paul Gavan, Dr Lohr says women from countries other than Ireland travel to the UK for abortions, but not many.
Those who do are from countries with more restrictive laws such as Italy, or are British expats living in places like the Middle East, where they may not be able to access terminations.
22 Nov 2017
4:26PM
Just a quick reminder that we’ll be sending out an email round-up of what happened at the committee later today.
The committee’s second session will focus on termination in cases of foetal abnormality. Liz McDermott from support group One Day More will address the committee.
She is now delivering her opening statement:
“I am a member of One Day More, a support group which came about because of the experiences of parents who received poor prenatal diagnoses for their babies – either that they would not survive until birth or long after birth, or that their babies had significant developmental defects or anomalies which would impact them for life.
“When we received the poor prenatal diagnosis for our children, some of us were fortunate enough to speak to someone who had gone through a similar experience. We found this emotional and personal support of enormous help and in the end it’s what prompted the setting up of One Day More.
“I have brought along some additional information about One Day More and the stories and testimonies of women we have supported. I would request that these form part of the record of these proceedings.
“Their experiences in maternity hospitals vary from very good indeed to very difficult and disappointing. One mother was told at her initial scan that her baby looked like a Michelin Man and was asked why she was persisting with a ‘futile pregnancy’.
“She was asked at each appointment to consider abortion and had to keep refusing and eventually she was advised to pick a plot to bury her daughter in. This little girl celebrated her third birthday last week.
“Another mother who refused to abort her baby who had Down syndrome was contacted after each hospital appointment to change her mind and have an abortion. She did not change her mind and gave birth to her daughter last summer.”
22 Nov 2017
4:36PM
Liz continues: “Couples have contacted One Day More after they came home from England after an abortion and told us they had not known of One Day More and would have continued with the pregnancy if they’d been able to access the supports and perinatal care available. This shows how necessary these supports and efforts are and that many couples would not choose abortion if perinatal hospice care was talked about more than abortion.
“Some medical experts try to reassure people that abortion would only be available to women who want it, not to those who do not; they and their babies would be given every care and support throughout pregnancy and birth.
“But we can see from the experiences of women who contact One Day More that they did not receive this kind of support. Instead, they were dealt with insensitively and felt like they were almost causing problems for the hospital they were attending for antenatal care.
“Some of our members’ babies died before birth, some not long after birth. Thankfully, some children are still alive and many are thriving against all predictions and expectations.
“There is a very important point to make about this, which is that medical prognoses can be wrong, and occasionally very wrong. Doctors can’t always accurately predict outcomes and parents of sick babies can be amazed at how much better things turn out for their baby than was thought.
Hope is a vital human instinct and gives us strength and support at various difficult times all through life. Challenging pregnancies are no different and One Day More exists to offer support and hope to parents of very sick and disabled babies before during and after birth.
“As well as providing direct support to parents, One Day More raises funds for better provision of perinatal hospice care; we also provide care boxes for families awaiting the arrival of their baby with a focus on making the time they have together as a family as precious as possible.
“When death is expected, the experience is bittersweet but it’s incredibly uplifting to hear families describe the wonderful memories their time with their baby gave them and how much love they all felt towards each other and the baby. Even babies who don’t live very long can bring with them tremendous gifts which can’t be predicted or quantified but only felt by going through the experience.”
22 Nov 2017
4:39PM
Speaking about her personal experience, Liz says: “I became pregnant with John in early summer 2002. He was my second child. All was fine, as far as I thought and I felt okay, though very tired, having a very active two-year-old daughter.
“I had a routine scan at 24 weeks in mid-December 2002 and on that occasion the nurse said she saw something amiss as she saw “shortened limbs” and couldn’t see hands, though this might be positional, she said. My husband and I had to come back the next day for an in-depth scan and you can imagine how we felt overnight.
“The next day we went into the hospital and a consultant obstetrician carried out a scan which took a good while as he wanted to check everything out and take measurements. I remember just looking away from the scanning machine the whole time, facing the wall. I felt numb and very anxious.
“Afterwards he said these words which I’ll never forget: ‘I’m afraid it’s a very serious abnormality. The baby’s limbs haven’t grown, there are two very short arm buds and I can’t even get a measurement on the legs.’ He then showed us the pictures and described in detail what he saw.
“I remember looking at the baby’s face and thinking he looked like my husband especially round the eyes. He told us it was a little boy. The doctor finished by saying, ‘He’ll never do anything but lie on a bed. I am obliged to tell you that if you want to travel to England it won’t be a problem.’
“I remember instinctively replying that, no I wouldn’t be going to England. I’d just seen my baby’s face and even though I had no idea how I was going to cope, I had no right to interfere with this child’s life in any way. This certainty was instinctive protectiveness more than anything else at that time but I certainly did not relish the prospect of how life would have to change.”
22 Nov 2017
4:41PM
She continues: “I recall feeling jealous of women whose babies were not going to survive as at least their story had a certain beginning, middle and end to it but mine was not going to end soon and the future looked very uncertain and scary.
“I had a number of friends who were expecting babies at the time and all of them had no problems and their babies duly arrived safe and sound and healthy. I did feel very sorry for myself and felt I was living on another planet to everyone else.
“My bump attracted comments like, ‘Gosh, you’re so neat’ and ‘I’m sure you’re all thrilled to be having another baby’. I can identify with all of the harrowing experiences and feelings of isolation which all mothers with difficult pregnancies go through and we can all agree that much more needs to be done for such women and their families too, as the fathers are affected too and don’t know how to process all their emotions.
“I had support from family and friends and I pushed myself to stay connected to the world I lived in rather than go completely in on myself. When times are tough you just dig deep and are frequently surprised at what you can cope with.
We did not receive much in the way of support from the hospital we attended; with one exception, the scan doctor as we called him, all other medical staff appeared unconcerned about us and our baby. We just did what we had to do and I wanted to get the birth out of the way.
“I asked my consultant what would happen when John was born and he said nothing different would happen as there was no reason to think he could not be treated normally. On the day John was born, I went into hospital around 10am and my waters were broken and labour progressed.
“My husband and I were in a room with a student midwife only and a neonatologist came in and spoke about our baby to someone on the phone, saying, ‘Weird case, no limbs’. This is typical of the treatment we received but I was so focused on blocking them all out and getting on with having my baby that I said nothing and restrained my husband from objecting.”
22 Nov 2017
4:43PM
Liz tells the committee: “John was born after 2pm that day. My own consultant told me he was leaving the hospital to go and see other patients in his consulting rooms, if that was okay. At that point I didn’t care who was there or not but I did feel he was choosing not to be present rather than having to leave for some urgent matter. He did not return that day, I recall.
“Right after John was born, a number of doctors descended upon us, standing at the foot of the bed, all in white coats. One of them announced the baby was going to be taken to the Special Care Baby Unit (SCBU) for tests. John wasn’t sick and didn’t need medical intervention at all and I was heartbroken that he couldn’t be with me as I wanted to breastfeed him. But at that moment I was so vulnerable and tired and these total strangers, who looked rather serious and expressionless, were in charge so I didn’t challenge it.
John spent two days in the SCBU and I was in a room on another floor. This was a horrendous time because no provision was made for me and John in terms of comfort and privacy. I had to sit on a waiting room type chair in the middle of the SCBU, feeling in the way with very sick and premature babies all around, who needed the nurses’ full attention. The feeding didn’t go at all well and I was very stressed. I so wanted to give my son this experience of closeness because he could not even use hands and feet to move and comfort himself at all.
“After two days, John was brought down to me and finally we had some privacy and comfort and I was at last able to breastfeed him in peace. It was awkward changing his nappies in the communal changing room. I tried it a few times as it was awkward in the room but silence always fell when I lifted John onto a changing mat so from then on, I just did it in my room. I couldn’t wait to get out of that hospital. No one was nice to us except one doctor.”
22 Nov 2017
4:49PM
Speaking about a vision for future pre-and perinatal care, Liz says: “One Day More, Every Life Counts and places like Hugh’s House represent concrete examples of reaching out to women with very poor prenatal prognosis. But these are a drop in the ocean compared to what could be achieved in the way of supports if our government would undertake research and investment in these areas.
“Women who’ve gone through this know what it’s like and what would help other women; they are a tremendous resource to tap into, if there is the will on the part of government to really look to give women really meaningful support.
“It is very disappointing to see that all through this process and the Citizens’ Assembly, and back the last five years or so, the only focus of political effort has been towards introducing abortion.
“Looking back, I can honestly say the experience of having my son John in 2003 has had a hugely positive impact on me, my family and beyond. I could not have foreseen this at the time I was carrying him of course and that is the nature of life, we can’t predict the future – how things will go, how we will feel and what help we might be able to get down the line.
“It’s a mistake to try and plan these things out because we risk painting a bleaker picture than actually happens, that’s a human tendency and doctors of course feel duty bound to give us the worst case scenario, to avoid unrealistic expectations.
“Deeming people like my son as unworthy of legal protection before birth – is that to become our new definition of progress? It’s certainly what repealing or amending the 8th Amendment would amount to. My story is far from an isolated one. Every day, new stories about women and families feeling pressure to abort emerge.”
22 Nov 2017
4:51PM
Liz continues: “Some people I’m sure find it hard to believe stories the stories I mentioned earlier about pressure from medics to abort babies with special needs. But sadly they are all too real.
“When we try to explain away this pressure, we shouldn’t be surprised when the horror of what I just outlined starts to happen more often. It’s the kind of denial that led to the present situation in England where 90% of babies diagnosed with Down syndrome are now aborted.”
Liz claims abortions can happen up to and even during birth – if a disability wasn’t apparent until that point – in some countries if the woman says she “can’t handle” the diagnosis.
She states: “Last month, the Care Quality Commission in England issued a damning report on abortion providers Marie Stopes. It revealed that staff were being paid bonuses to encourage women to go through with abortions. The inspectors found evidence of a policy in all 70 Marie Stopes clinics in the country directing staff to contact women who had decided not to go through with an abortion, offering them a new appointment.
“This is just one of several recent scandals involving the abortion industry in England and elsewhere. I find it extraordinary that we’re talking about having a referendum in Ireland to introduce abortion and no committee is even looking at what abortion has led to in other countries.”
22 Nov 2017
4:52PM
“Speaking from my own personal experience, I agree with those who say legalised abortion is part of the old order. In the 50 years since it was legalised in England, it has led to millions of babies having their right to life taken from them in a most brutal way and caused a deep, hidden pain for countless women who were betrayed by the sloganeering about “choice” that pretends abortion is without any adverse after effects.
“The Eighth Amendment on the other hand acknowledges the right to life. It doesn’t claim to be its author – merely its protector.
“Those campaigning for repeal of the Eighth Amendment clearly do not regard the right to life as inalienable. Instead they see it as something conferred or withheld by the State based on who the law at any given time deems worthy or unworthy of being protected.
“If we vote to dismantle the Eighth Amendment, we will be saying that we deem certain unborn babies unworthy of legal protection.
“If we vote to keep the Eighth Amendment, we will be recommitting to the goal of making a world that is worthy of the most vulnerable and defenceless members of the human family,” she concludes.
22 Nov 2017
5:03PM
When Noone tells Liz the committee is “indebted” to her for attending as a number of pro-life groups refused to do so, she says she was “in two minds” about appearing.
Responding to Deputy Bernard Durkan, Liz says she and her husband didn’t receive any counselling when they were told about their son’s disability, and were directed to speak to the hospital’s chaplain.
She says she was “often found in a puddle of tears in the corner of a room” due to the situation, stressing the need for better supports for families in this situation.
Liz says babies should not be described as “anomalies” with “fatal” conditions, saying this is insensitive.
22 Nov 2017
5:11PM
Liz says abortions can be “traumatic”, “invasive” and “violent” for women.
She says women instinctively want to nurture their children and “must be dealt with very compassionately” when their baby receives a negative diagnosis.
“I don’t judge or criticise – I fully understand – the fear that creeps in,” Liz says, speaking about why some women consider abortion.
Replying to Deputy Jan O’Sullivan, Liz says hospitals should fully support a woman who decides to carry on with her pregnancy despite a poor prognosis.
Deputy Lisa Chambers adds that the way Liz says she and her husband were treated is unacceptable.
22 Nov 2017
5:19PM
Liz tells the committee there are about 25 people helping to run One Day More, saying the group has reached out to about 20-30 families.
She says the group operates at a grassroots level but could become something “tremendous” if it received investment.
22 Nov 2017
5:25PM
Chambers references the testimony given by Claire Cullen-Delsol of Termination for Medical Reasons Ireland (TFMR) at a committee hearing last month.
Speaking about the death of her daughter Alex in the womb, at the time Claire said her world “fell apart” and hasn’t been the same since. “As the pregnancy progressed, I could feel her getting weaker,” she recalls, noting that she thought her baby died on more than one occasion.
Claire did not travel for an abortion and had to deal with people asking her about her pregnancy, noting: “I couldn’t face the other mams at the school gates.” She developed PTSD as a result of what she went through.
Liz says PTSD could be avoided if women received more support. She says she also had to deal with people asking her when her baby was due, not knowing the reality of the situation. She also recalls an incident where a woman pulled a blanket off her son John and stared at him without saying anything, something that was very upsetting.
22 Nov 2017
5:29PM
Responding to Deputy Peter Fitzpatrick, Liz says she doesn’t believe Ireland can provide the right supports for parents if it also introduces abortion.
“The Eighth Amendment is a positive, life-saving measure,” she states.
Fitzpatrick says it’s a tragedy that some women have abortions without knowing about perinatal hospice care. Liz agrees that this type of care needs to be developed and better promoted here.
Deputy Louise O’Reilly says women should not be directed to have an abortion, but nor is it right that women should be forced to continue with a pregnancy against their will.
“How they feel is how they feel, if they have the right to feel it is not really for me to say,” Liz replies.
Referring to Claire Cullen-Delsol’s experience of PTSD, Liz says this may not have happened had she been better supported at the time. She says PTSD can also be a consequence of having an abortion.
When Liz mentions that she works with Gianna Care, O’Reilly notes that they’re based in the same Dublin office as Ask Majella. Earlier this year an investigation by The Times newspaper found that Ask Majella incorrectly told women abortion causes breast cancer and can lead to suicidal tendencies.
Deputy Catherine Murphy says the way Liz and her husband were treated is an area of concern. She notes that TFMR previously told the committee “you can’t change the diagnosis, but you can change the way people are treated”.
Liz says investment and research is needed in order to improve support for women who are facing an “uncertain and scary” path.
She says her desire is that abortion is made redundant as an option due to the level of support available.
Deputy Clare Daly asks if women should have the option of having an abortion in Ireland, where they can be surrounded by their loved ones.
Liz says there is no right answer to this and “it’s very difficult to airbrush [a baby's life] out of the whole narrative”.
She says she has considered what life would have been like had she had an abortion, noting it would have been easier in some ways, but that ultimately her son’s life was not hers to end.
She says if she aborted him she would have missed moments such as him “rolling over at four months and smiling at me” or his sixth class teacher writing a poem about him.
Daly says she doesn’t think anyone would criticise Liz’s decision, but equally women who decide to have an abortion should also be respected and supported. She says medical evidence shows that abortion is not “violent”, as Liz earlier stated, adding that the foetus doesn’t feel pain before 24 weeks.
Deputy Bríd Smith asks why parents, like Liz and her husband, who are critical of how hospitals treated them don’t make official complaints.
Liz says this is too upsetting for many parents, stating: “You just don’t want to go back there … You’re very vulnerable.”
Smith asks if abortion services should be “free, safe and legal” rather than privatised with a view to making profits, after Liz raised the issue of how much money private clinics make. Liz disagrees.
Responding to Senator Rónán Mullen, Liz says it’s “insulting” to use terms such as fatal foetal abnormality when talking about human beings.
She says only one doctor dealt with her compassionately at the time, adding that this meant so much to her.
Liz says it’s “inevitable” that more Irish women will have abortions if it’s legalised here, saying some will choose this option as the supports aren’t there to help them continue their pregnancy.
Mullen also says the committee hasn’t heard enough evidence on what stage a foetus starts to feel pain, referring to comments made by Clare Daly.
The hearing is currently suspended while a Dáil vote takes place.
I’ll be handing over to my colleague Rónán Duffy shortly. He’ll keep you up to date with the rest of the evening’s proceedings. Thanks for staying with us so far.
22 Nov 2017
6:38PM
Hi, Rónán Duffy here to take you into the evening.
The committee returned briefly before suspending again as witness Liz McDermott of One Day More has not yet returned.
The session has resumed and Deputy Kate O’Connell is asking Liz about how her son John is now. Liz thanks her for that and notes her son is 14 years old.
O’Connell says that additional supports are now available compared with when she had her bad experience.
“I remember getting my own letter for an anomaly scan and not knowing what that was,” O’Connell says of her own experience of pregnancy.
O’Connell says she had a “different experience” when a scan during her second pregnancy revealed a complex physical defect.
She says she asked the doctor whether it may be grounds for a termination. The doctor said it was not.
O’Connell says, had the defect been combined with a genetic defect, it may have been a fatal defect. She says her son is now seven years old.
O’Connell notes that both she and Liz decided to proceed with their pregnancies, but that others may not have that option.
“Do you think we could be more compassionate to women who may not be in as fortunate a position as you or I?,” she asks.
Liz says she does feel that there is a “spectrum” of situations women have to deal with but she does not feel that legislating for abortion is the answer.
“There are always more compassionate responses,” she says.
Hildegarde Naughton is speaking about about the case of a woman who dearly wants a baby but doesn’t feel she can cope with a diagnosis of a fatal foetal abnormality.
This, she says, would be after receiving counselling and discussing it with her partner.
Liz says she does not want to get into the case of hypotheticals.
“The common good must always be legislated for,” Liz says, and adds that an abortion “is not really a solution for a baby”.
Mattie McGrath is again thanking Liz for appearing and notes that she has given a different viewpoint to the committee.
McGrath asks if it is ever the case that it is “cruel” to ask a woman to continue a pregnancy after a diagnosis of a fatal foetal abnormality.
“It’s not about forcing,” Liz says. “It’s about being compassionate and humane to both patients, and to encourage the women to bond with the baby and believe in herself.”
22 Nov 2017
7:00PM
McGrath asks Liz about the terminology used in such cases.
“The language around children who have something wrong with them, like fatal foetal abnormality, it can’t help but dehumanise them,” Liz says.
She compares it to when children with disabilities were described as “mongols” or “spastics” in political debates during previous decades.
22 Nov 2017
7:05PM
At the request of McGrath, Liz reads a poem about her son written by his sixth class teacher.
The poem includes a line about her son using “blue steel”. She thought it was a cartoon reference before Senator Rónán Mullen corrects her.
“I think ‘blue steel’ is the intellectual property of Mr Zoolander,” Mullen says, before Noone moves things along.
22 Nov 2017
7:12PM
Senator Ned O’Sullivan notes that Liz made a very strong choice but he doesn’t think she ever had a doubt about her choice. He says he supports the choice she made.
“Do you not think that the same sense of compassion should be shown to people who have made a different choice?,” he asks.
He also wants to know when she began campaigning on her pro-life position. She says that her convictions about the issue stem from her experience.
On the question about women who may make a different choice to hers, Liz says she does not view it as a choice when a woman is pregnant with a child.
She says she feels that when the UK’s abortion laws were constructed the science of pregnancy was less advanced.
Anne Rabbitte TD says the “biggest battle” she has faced is when she has been forced to consider that the risk to the life of the mother is impacting on the rights of the child.
She says that mothers may have other children or have the possibility of having other children and that this is important.
In response to questions from Deputy Jonathan O’Brien, Liz says it is stated government policy in Denmark to eradicate Down syndrome in society.
TheJournal.ie has previously looked at this claim and determined that, while the number of children born with Down syndrome in Denmark is so low it may be eradicated in the coming decades, it could not be said that there is a policy to eradicate the condition.
Senator Paul Gavan, the final questioner, says he is conscious of time so he wants to ask some direct questions.
He asks Liz about a statement she made that no women are “forced” to travel for an abortion.
“If they want a termination, is it not fair to say they have no choice but to travel?,” Gavan asks.
Liz says: “A lot of the women would not be able to see a way to have their child.
A lot of women don’t have supports, that’s why they travel.
“The geography, where that happens, is missing the point,” she adds.
22 Nov 2017
7:38PM
Liz says she “does not want to say that women are incapable of making a decision” but that during pregnancy women are dealing with a lot of hormones that might influence their decision.
That concludes today’s proceedings, chairperson Catherine Noone again thanks Liz McDermott for attending.
“The point of view you represent, you have done a service to them by turning up,” Noone says.
The committee is adjourned until 2pm tomorrow when we will return with another liveblog.
Thanks for joining us.
Advertisement
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Close
216 Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic.
Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy
here
before taking part.
@Brinster: If it’s a straight repeal or not vote I think a lot of people would vote to keep it out of fear of the legislation that would be brought in. Just my opinion, don’t know what way I will vote myself yet. Won’t know until I see what the referendum is for.
@Let free speech live: well of course legislation would need to be brought in. That would be the whole point.
But then again that’s what we elect TDs for. That’s their job and the function of the Dail.
Unfortunately we’ll get a lot of “I won’t decide until I know what the legislation will say” which is backwards. It’s the job of the Dail to debate and decide. Then the Dail changes and so does legislation. We are free to write to our TDs about our views on that so our vote should not be contingent on some rushed, poorly drafted, proposed legislation.
@Stephen Adam: Well insulting people is a great way to get people to vote your way. I think you are a bit backwards if you blindly vote not knowing what will happen after, plus you seem to trust politicians which is strange. I know what I am ok with and I know what I wouldn’t like. So knowing what legislation is coming if we repeal the 8th is very important.
@The Risen: accusations of bias are absolutely fair. Both sides have not been given equal airtime. The preponderance of submissions have been on the pro abortion side and even some international contributors have withdrawn upon realising this. It is quite clearly a vehicle for the political establishment to bring about a referendum at one step removed to avoid any potential electoral backlash.
@Misanthrope , public opinion surveys put majority sentiment in favour of abortion in defined and circumscribed circumstances. This outlook is increasingly reflected amongst public representatives.
The overall balance is shifting from the worship of the foetus to increasing respect for the decision entitlement of pregnant women.
Some favour the foetus; others favour the pregnant woman.
I don’t trust politicians at all. But that’s our fault. We vote for them. We elect them. If they’re not trustworthy what does that say about us? If they’re no good we need to do better next time. that’s no reason to keep outdated, incompetent and discriminatory provisions in the constitution.
The Dail is there to legislate. That’s it’s purpose. If the 8th were repealed tomorrow abortion would still be illegal by virtue of legislation. I would the expect mature and sensible debate in the Dail and a new piece of legislation enacted. If that doesn’t happen- well there’ll be an election soon enough.
@Misanthrope: The accusations of bias are laughable, there are simply more people in favour of repealing or amending the 8th, simple. The anti-choice side turned down their opportunity to attend, most likely because they knew they were way out of their depth with medical experts and to save face. If there was a committee set up to decide on burning The Book of Kells and only one small group was in favour of it, they couldn’t cry ‘bias!’ just because they didn’t get 50/50 representation.
@Fiona deFreyne: public opinion is hugely at variance with the pronouncements of the citizens assembly. Hardly suprising given the one sided evidence they’ve been spoonfed
@Stephen Adam: calling people backwards is hardly a compliment? You are right in all you say in theory but unfortunately the Dáil doesn’t do sensible debate. People are not going to vote to repeal and then sit back and wait to see what legislation will be drafted. What you are essentially saying is when a politician knocks on the door looking for a vote you don’t need to know their policies as you trust them.
@Misanthrope: I’ll agree that the recommendations of the Citizen’s Assembly were probably more liberal than the general consensus (although I whole-heartedly agree with them), however, equal time was alloted to both sides at the CA, I watched the entire debate, all research had to be sourced and given to the CA members, the only people who didn’t provide sources at one point was Maria Steen of the Anti-Choice side and she was called out on it. The Anti-Choice contributions were full of anecdotal and emotional stories about people with ‘regret’ and spurious scaremongering and logical fallacies, i.e. if you repeal the 8th X, Y & Z will happen just like it has happened in countries A, B & C.
@Misanthrope: On the other side there were contributions from medical experts and groups that work with women with crisis pregnancies every day, with facts and figures and black and white explanations. That is what matters, not the drama, hyperbole and toys out of the pram carry on by the likes of Mullen and McGrath.
@Stephen Adam: Again if people have a different option then the majority they are backwards. I taught this is a free country. Where people can make their own minds up without being called names and insulted. It’s what people died for . Did you ever read the Proclamation ??????
@Let free speech live: that’s not what I’m saying. Your elected representative can tell you what his position is at the door. The Dail however has to debate and decide on legislation which it cannot realistically do until after the referendum. The government can try and say “we’ll do x y z “ but they need support from FF and Independents.
The Dail doesn’t do rational debate. I agree. But that’s our fault for who we elect. We’re to blame.
@David: David – asking for unconstitutional legislation to be drafted in advance of a referendum which is, as yet, not drafted itself in order to decide what way you’d vote in said referendum is, as I said, backwards.
When the way is clear for the Dail to legislate it should legislate. The way is not clear for the Dail to legislate which is ridiculous for such a difficult issue.
@David: Irony much ? If people were allowed to make up their own minds we wouldn’t be forcing thousands of women abroad every year for a minor medical procedure…
@Jason: All I’m saying is the things people are calling other people for not following the majority is a disgrace. Just for having a difference of opinion.
@Stephen Adam: I actually agree with you in theory but the reality is different, when it comes to legislation the government only does what suits themselves and ignores the will of the people (look at water charges fiasco). We don’t have any proper opposition in the Dáil. I wish I had faith in the government to vote to repeal and know they will do what the people want but they don’t do that so I want to know the legislation before I vote. If you think that is backwards fair enough but I don’t think I am alone in my thinking.
@Cultural Marxist: the evidence offered by pro abortionists was not all “facts and figures” . Pro life professional medics/allied medical professionals talking about their experiences of post abortion cases are not hyperbole and waffle
@Let free speech live: first of all the Dail isn’t there to legislate for the “will of the people” – it’s there to do what’s best for the people. Those are often two different things. Water charges is a perfect example of what the country needed and what the people wanted being in conflict. The “People” won. Water charges were suspended.
If the Dail cannot be trusted that’s our fault. The fault of the People. Because we elect them.
You want to do things the wrong way round – only give the Dail power the power to legislate if they somehow come up with something in advance. But if we always do things the wrong way we’ll only ever get things right by accident. Give the Dail the power – then vote for someone responsible next time.
@Brinster: I hope not. Recent polls strongly indicate that most people are in favour of amending the 8th Amendment rather than repeal or retain. This should be offered as an option.
@Stephen Adam: ok how about this, we all know the government don’t do what they are supposed to do. If left to them they will legislate for who can make money from abortion. I want to know what will be legislated for if we repeal the 8th. I don’t know why you have an issue with this, is it because I don’t or won’t blindly support the repeal cause?
@Let free speech live: you know exactly what way you will vote. Everybody commenting knows what camp they lie in. The attempts to persuade you are neutral are obvious.
@WinSomeLoseSome: but that is it, I don’t know but people like yourself think it’s a black and white situation and everyone knows what way they will vote when it is clearly not the case.
@Let free speech live: I have an issue with it because, as I said, it’s doing things backwards. It’s a fine way of making bad policy.
We’re bedevilled in this country with stupid decisions, bad policies and sloppy work. Drafting legislation in order to pass a referendum means its being drafted for the wrong reasons. Not being drafted because it’s the right legislation, drafted because they don’t want to suffer a referendum defeat. So like I said – doing poor work for sloppy reasons.
And again — if you have a problem with your representatives vote for someone else. That’s on you.
@Misanthrope: ‘Pro-abortionist’, the use of that term would suggest an extremist viewpoint on your part so no point in continuing the discussion really. Although I’m happy to do so, in 20 years of following this debate from both vantage points I’ve never once heard a plausible argument against a woman being allowed decide to have an abortion, if I heard just one convincing argument it would make me pause for thought.
@Stephen Adam: that is grand but I’m not asking for the legislation to be drawn up, I want to know what they will be legislating for, I don’t need to know the ins and outs of the legislation just what they plan on legislating for. I don’t think that is backwards, we are being asked to change our constitution so we surely have the right to know what comes after the fact if we do vote for change.
@Let free speech live: aaaah look. The anti choice side just have no valid arguements. Scare mongering and lies and insults are not working any more. Now they resort to the ‘its not fair’ card.
Repeal. Its what most people want.
Face it
@Let free speech live: so let me ask you this – if you don’t like what they propose legislating for what is your response? I can only assume you’ll vote to keep the 8th? Otherwise why would you need to hear the legislative proposal?
So rather than telling your TD or guy at your door to legislate appropriately on the issue you’ll vote to retain an ineffectual, badly drafted and discriminatory constitutional clause?
@Stephen Adam: That is exactly it, if it’s a system like they have in the UK I would vote to keep it, no doubt, that is why I would like to know what comes after. If it’s something I am morally ok with I am happy to vote to repeal. I’m in the middle so if my choice is keep it or get rid and abortion for all, neither is what I want but keeping the 8th is morally better to me in that situation.
@The Risen: look at either in IT ones. But this is interpretation. You see any non pro life position as repeal. I don’r. Many other don’t. Amend is most definitely preferred.
@Dearbhla Russell: face what- you are asking people to repeal not knowing what the final situation is in a country notorious for small parties dictating policy individual matters. Seriously?
@Dearbhla Russell: what scaremongering and lies have I told? I have been straight up about where I stand which in case you missed it is no where at the moment. I want to see what I will be voting for before I vote. I haven’t urged anyone to vote for one side or the other so are you sure you meant to reply to me?
@Cultural Marxist: it boils down to two issues
1; is the unborn a human being, at any part of a pregnancy
2; if you believe it isn’t at conception but is at birth ie, crosses a threshold into humanity during pregnancy do you trust a political establishment not to further extend abortion beyond what u find ethical in the absence of a constitutional ban.
I don’t consider a fertilised egg a human being but it seems clear to me that in the second trimester and beyond a child is present. My vote will be more conservative than my view to protect what I would see as future babies from death.
@Let free speech live: and morals should have nothing to do with it. Because why should I have to live under your moral code? Or you under mine?
If you think the 8th works why would you vote to remove it?
If you think it doesn’t work why keep it??
The following legislation is easily changed. The constitution is not. It’s entirely inappropriate for this to be a constitutional provision – just as murder, assault and theft aren’t in the constitution.
@Misanthrope: I’m actually delighted to interact with you on this topic, you’ve clearly taken pause to think about it and rationalise it which is very refreshing. My answers may seem callous and cold but they are arrived it after many years’ consideration.
1) I don’t acknowledge the use of the word ‘unborn’, I don’t go around telling people I’m undead, you and I are human beings but not all stages of development are the same, premature babies have survived from a very early stage, and in most cases can survive from 6 months onwards where adequate medical care is at hand. Your argument would have held great weight 20 years ago, however, determination of pregnancy now happens very early thanks to advancements in both accuracy of pregnancy tests and blood testing.
@Misanthrope: that’s my view also – as any father who has been to their child’s scan at week 13 or thereabouts. And constitutionally protect above this is also important.
@Stephen Adam: Well I live by my morals, I’m just 1 person with 1 vote so you won’t be living under my morals, I will vote for what I feel is right and respect the majority result either way. Do you find something wrong with that? As a parent I can’t coldly go “it’s just a foetus” and shrug my shoulders. To me it is a baby and if it’s an inconvenience, you shouldn’t be allowed end it. Again I’m just 1 person and as I said the majority will decide not my morals.
@Misanthrope: I’m actually delighted to interact with you on this topic, you’ve clearly taken pause to think about it and rationalise it which is very refreshing. My answers may seem callous and cold but they are arrived it after many years’ consideration.
1) It is incredibly rare that a pregnancy is terminated after 12 weeks unless there are complications.
2) No, I 100% do not trust the political establishment and most of the opposition (particularly Sinn Féin), however, I absolutely trust my sister, wife and friends who may find themselves in a position they wished they’d never been.
@Let free speech live: that’s simply not true. Youre voting for morals you agree with to be the unchangeable law of the land. And that’s the problem – we are living under the morals of the people from 30 years ago.
Do you think condoms should be banned? They were. That’s someone’s moral code inflicted on everyone else.
What about making homosexuality illegal? Not marriage. Just being gay. That was illegal too. Someone’s morals at play again.
Your moral outlook is yours to decide and live by and I respect that. But you should under no circumstances be in a position to have that enshrined in the constitution and inflicted on my and everyone else.
@Cultural Marxist: and our few comments demonstrate the importance of the question asked. Both of us are pro abortion but to different degrees I suspect
@Cultural Marxist: As you followed the work of the Citizen’s Assembly you will know that the 99 members of the Citizen’s Assembly were required to publicly declare and put in writing their opinion on the Eighth Amendment at only the second meeting before they had an opportunity to hear even one third of the invited ‘experts’. Psychologists will tell you that when required to give an opinion on something publicly in front of others or to put their opinion in writing most people will not change that opinion even if their opinion changes for fear of appearing weak or prone to change their mind. Countless experiments show this but doubtless you would dismiss them as anecdotal.
@Cultural Marxist: I have an ethical objection to supporting a change in the law that would give people the choice to take what I consider to be a human life during the middle/later stages of a pregnancy. I see no difference between a more relaxed abortion regime and allowing people to kill a born child if they so wish, both being human beings in my estimation. I feel aggrieved that I can’t vote for the abortion regime that would be of great value to women out of fear or its future abuse causing more harm than the distress it would relieve.
@Cultural Marxist: would the fact that abortion kills a human being and has been responsible for not allowing 8million people to be born in the UK over the past 50 years give you pause for thought. Even if you reject scientific opinion worldwide that the life of every human being begins at conception accept the view of leading abortionists like Dr Guttmacher, a president of Planned Parenthood, the biggest abortion provider in the world ‘ Let’s not pretend that it (abortion) is not killing.’ Leading abortionists like Guttmacher today admit that life begins at the moment of conception. No one today is hiding under the pretence that a foetus is only tissue. You and I are also tissue and cells just like the foetus but no one is disputing our right to life.
Mullen, McGrath and Fitzpatrick, the three unwise men who are unable to recognise the rights of and respect the bodily integrity and autonomy of pregnant women.
So sad to see how this biased committee is conducting business.
Whatever way they dress it up the hard fact is that a little baby will die and their heart will cease beating.
I would urge all readers to research how an abortion of a baby is performed before they make up their mind on this referendum.
Also channel 4 Dispatches program did a behind the scenes on abortion clinics some years ago. It showed Gender selection abortion of perfectly healthy babies was common place in the UK.
If you want the facts please research and watch this program.
@Pconor: I’d urge quite the contrary as that is a matter for individual TDs in the Dail.
Keeping the 8th won’t prevent abortions. It’ll just further divide society and discriminate against the poor. This is a matter for the Dail to legislate on. It’s not appropriate to have an unwieldy poorly drafted ban in the Constitution.
@Pconor: Facts and science that can be verified cannot be biased as that is their nature. The committee has sought out the facts from groups on both sides, if one side chooses to put forward the strongest facts with the most up to date thinkings of this evolving country, while the other side chooses by and large to not participate then it is not the committees fault. No body forced the pro-life groups not to turn up.
@Misanthrope ; i like to call it by the correct medical terminology, which would be ‘embryo’ or ‘foetus’…Why do you dehumanise it by calling it a “baby” when it clearly isn’t one ?
@Pconor: if you can see the heart beat on a monitor and the mother can feel it kicking it’s a living baby. I shouldn’t have to spell out the bleedin obvious but some of you are blinded by ideology. Or something else.
@Pconor: A wide range of professionals and intetest groups were called upon to give their opinions. It’s hardly the committee’s fault that most of the professionals leaned one way or another.
@Pconor: The point is people might listen if you weren’t labelling others pro abortionists. Let’s stick to pro life/pro choice and focus on the actual arguments being made
@Lavbeer- you’re like a dog with a bone on that one..which is funny because your personal opinion will not change that phrase..As for me,I am proudly pro choice.. I believe in giving the woman the choice of either giving birth or having an abortion…you can call me ‘pro abortion’ if you want…i’ll just keep on calling myself pro choice/s :-)
@lavbeer: pro life is bs … if you are pro life you are pro subjugation of women. I’m only saying that to make a point. So much arguing back and forth over the labels of the different sides that the real issues gets lost. The terms pro life and pro choice are the closest thing to an amicable consensus in this debate. Let’s just stick with them and stick to the real talking points while we’re at it
@Pconor: May I also recommend that voters read what Dr Nathanson the obstetrician who masterminded the campaign to legalise unrestricted abortion in the US said just a few short years later about that campaign. ‘We fed the public a line of deceit, dishonesty,a fabrication of statistics and figures. We fabricated polls which indicated that 85% of the public favoured unrestricted abortion when we knew it was only 5%.’ And ‘repeating the big lie enough convinces the public’. You can read the extraordinary life of this one time King of Abortion in the US by googling Dr Bernard Nathanson.
@Fiona deFreyne: Are you really saying that without natural death or killing the ‘child in the womb’ to use Dr Varadkar’s expression a baby will not be born circa 9 months after conception ? Why would any woman seek an abortion if she didn’t know that abortion kills the living human being in her womb?
@Choice2parentOrNot2: You obviously have not done much scientific research or even research of what leading pro-abortionists say. Scientists from the middle of the twentieth century are pretty much agreed that the life of every human being begins at conception. Dr Alan Guttmacher a president of Planned Parenthood which you probably know is the largest abortion provider in the world has said,’Let me say something shocking. I am perfectly willing to grant that life begins at conception. Let’s not pretend it (abortion) is not a form of killing ‘.
@Francis Mc Carthy: and that is your opinion – you are proudly pro abortion – fair play and you have been an honest commenter on it. But U just don’t agree . Two dogs- different bones I guess
@John Doe: pro life. Pro abortion in limited circumstances or pro abortion in all circumstances. Equating to no, limited or full protection of the unborn. Choice is a cop out and has different meanings to different people
@Anthony Gallagher: “Every unborn child deserves the right to life ,as a society we live collectively .” -
You and your partner/s can give whatever “right to life” to any “unborn child” that you want to…However,you cannot stop any other determined woman from not giving that “unborn child” that “right to life”
@Anthony Gallagher: and the tax payer will pay for forcing poor women into parenthood because women of means will still travel. Trapping them in poverty. Very nice of you.
@Seamus – can you actually listen to the expert that is on at the moment.It’s actually extremely educational..It will tell you that two doctors have to be in agreement before a woman can have a late term abortion..
@Anthony Gallagher: if you can see the heart beat on a monitor and the mother can feel it kicking it’s a living baby. I shouldn’t have to spell out the bleedin obvious but some of you are blinded by ideology.
I assume you yourself must have been one once.
@Anthony Gallagher: Do you really think that little of women that we’d go through 39 weeks of pregnancy and suddenly decide “naaah, fackit, gimme and abortion” What kind of atmosphere were you raised in that fostered such a hateful attitude to women and girls?
@Anthony Gallagher: We have a collective responsibility to protect our future ,destroying innocent children ,for economic purposes smacks of a society built round the selfish concept of looking after the self .its a cop out .
@Anthony Gallagher: you don’t know what people’s reasons are Anthony that’s the point.
If you’d like to “protect” our future you might try voting for a party that believes in affordable property prices, decent services and stable responsible taxation.
@Anthony Gallagher: Do you think it’s fair to force a woman carrying a child with a fatal foetal abnormality to go full term against her wishes? For her to be constantly asked how she is as her bump grows and to be subjected to the barage of good wishes and unsolicited advice that most women experience throughout their pregnancy, all the time knowing her child won’t live?
@Anthony Gallagher: I never claimed to be a mind reader like you ,the unborn child deserves dignity ,human dignity .how do you know which party i vote for ,your back to your silly mind reading again .
@Anthony Gallagher: A women introducing the word force ,the unborn child deserves to be treated with respect and human dignity inside and outside the womb .I cant force anyone to do anything but as a human being i believe all liife is sacred and we have a moral and ethical reponsibility to protect that which cant protect itself namely the unborn child .
@Anthony Gallagher: “destroying innocent children” – rubbish talk…What is happening at the moment is that nearly 4,000 determined Irish women are going to the UK every year to end their pregnancy…All that the 8th is doing is making those embryos develop into a foetus before they are removed from her womb…
@Francis Mc Carthy: How many determined Irish women do you think would have abortions if doing so was legal in Ireland? Based, say, on stats from other countries where abortion has legalised?
@John Doe ; We’ll never know unless those determined women were given that option to them..So at the moment we’ll just have to say that there ‘could’ be close to 4,000 a yr..
@Francis Mc Carthy: My point is that for better or worse the 8th does serve a purpose. When a country legalises abortion the number of procedures carried out inevitably increases. I think this is an important point for the pro life side
@Fiona deFreyne: The idea that a child is not a human being until it is born is discredited even by those who favour abortion. Move into the twentieth century Fiona. Dr Guttmacher,a president of Planned Parenthood which I don’t need to tell you is the biggest abortion provider in the world has said’ I am perfectly willing to grant that life begins at conception. Let’s not pretend that it (abortion) is not a form of killing’.
Only people on very low incomes are the ones really effected by not having a choice. Women who find themselves in this dire situation who can afford to travel do so & it’s their business & no one else’s. So yet again it’s the less well off who are effected. Repeal the 8th.
Want the Church ridden people misguidedly inserted into the Constitution back in 1983 can be removed in 2018 by people who know the real life implications of the 8th Amendment for pregnant women.
@Fiona deFreyne: abortion is an ethical issue not a moral one for most Irish people. The tired old lie of pro choice being religious zealots is trotted out every time. Athiest and pro life.
@Misanthrope – the majority of Irish people want terminations for cases of rape/incest/FFA .They also want women to be able to travel to the UK to end their pregnancies..
@Misanthrope: salt this is not the case for the people who vote for politicians, where they are having to decide on religious morals vs secular or personal ethics. I respect your decision to be areligious and pro life, but not areligious and removing that respect and choice for others.
@Misanthrope: Ethical. Do not kill innocent babies. This is so sad. Can we promote safe sex, and encourage people to give babies up for adoption if they do not want them. Can anyone who has had an abortion and regretted it come forward and share their story? People have a right to their bodies but so do the unborn child. It also has a right to live if it was brought here by the mother’s choice to have unprotected sex. I know there are variant reasons people want the amendment repealed but can we have a replacement that sets the circumstances? Let us have a conscience and save the many innocent blood that would be shed.
“do not kill innocent babies” -nobody is.
“promote safe sex” – listen to the experts
“adoption” -nothing to do with abortion
“regret abortion and share their story” -we have one
“innocent blood shed” – more rubbish.
@Choice2parentOrNot2: You have not given any reasons for your views. Rather than being so defensive, Kindly do expand on your point by point view. Educate me.
@Choice2parentOrNot2: I wasn’t aware the referendum had already taken place. I wouldn’t confuse the views of the so called ‘citizens assembly’ (100 people) with the views of millions of citizens who have yet to vote.
@Fiona deFreyne: nothing to do with the church. Any church. Not even your pet hatred. It’s a matter of morality and/or ethics.
Also – if you can see the heart beat on a monitor and the mother can feel it kicking it’s a living baby. Even you should be able to understand that. I assume you were one once.
@misanthrope – so what if there is a “liberal regime” like they have in the UK ?All your lot are doing is making Irish women have later abortions,and in the thousands..
@Fiona deFreyne: Young FG & FG generally are staunchly pro life but wont house and heal the existing pain and suffering to lives on the ever extending hospital & housing lists.
@ stefanovich ; nice input . We don’t deny that the embryo or the foetus is human..What a lot of people believe’ is that it is not a human being until it is born..We’re entitled to believe that just like you’re entitled to believe otherwise..We also know that if the human being’s life is in mortal danger then it is her life that is spared ..There is a reason for this..
If you don’t want an abortion, don’t get one. It’s as simple as that. The sooner the issue is resolved, the sooner we can move on to the next big issue, whatever it might be.
@Keith McDonagh: it really isn’t that simple – that’s a viewpoint that completely disregards the genuine views of anyone in the middle with concerns about abortion.
Trite, simplistic Views like that from both sides are the reason this debate is so poisonous.
@Stephen Adam: Would you accept me having input into your healthcare? What if you found a lump on your testicle and treatment now would give you a 90% chance of survival, but because of an amendment in the constitution protecting your reproductive organs, you have to wait until the chance of survival dips below 49%? If you wouldn’t accept it for yourself or your son, why do you accept it for your wife, daughter, mother etc?
@DaisyChainsaw: Jesus Daisy. I am pro choice and pro repeal and believe the 8th is a total joke.
But the comment “if you don’t want one don’t have one” is juvenile, and completely close minded – just like so many of the pro choice advocates who steadfastly refuse to accept why huge numbers have a problem with abortion.
The extremes on both sides of this argument, of which you are a member, do a wonderful job of putting the middle ground off listening to them. You’re Ronan Mullen – from the other side.
@Stephen Adam: no Stephen it’s generalising one’s views and imposing them on tbe rest of the world at large that makes these arguments so long winded and painfully drawn out. Ireland needs to deficate or get off the pot and let individuals decide or remain with the status quo soon. This is boring.
@Stephen Adams: Excellent comment. This is a complex, divisive and emotive subject. These glib soundbites like “abortion is murder”, “my body my choice”, “it’s going to happen anyway so make it legal” etc. sidetrack from the real underlying issues
@John Doe: For every Ronan Mullen there’s a Daisy chainsaw. Both equally offensive in their own ways.
The middle ground in Ireland, as polls show us, are in favour of some sort of change, recognising I suppose the terrible difficulty of the decision to have an abortion and the horrible journey that needs to be taken to UK.
Nevertheless these people still view the unborn as a child, at least a child in development. They don’t view it as a foetus or zygote however accurate those terms may be. And unceremoniously disposing of the unborn causes them grave disquiet.
Yet the current impasse obviously cannot continue. The debate will be won with sensitivity toward the human aspect and pragmatism and mature responsibility toward the choices of women.
@Stefanovich: ” if you dont want your child?ren just kill them. My body my choice right” – we’re talking about the woman’s reproductive rights or lack of in this country..if you yourself wants to actually kill children then there is a huge price to pay for doing that…seek help for those thoughts of yours…
@Richard Doherty: 100 people in a ‘citizens assembly’ who weren’t elected by anybody dont speak for over 4 million Irish people. Thats why we have referendums.
Fair play to Liz for giving evidence. Her story is compelling and authentic. She has some great ideas to help women that find themselves in her heartbreaking predicament that should be looked at. Nevertheless she still wants to make the choice she made mandatory for other women. That’s not a choice or fair. She’s done an amazing job and is obviously a great mother. I wish her and her family well.
@Deborah Behan: i was glad that Clare Daly intervened and told her that medical evidence shows that abortion is not “violent” & that the foetus doesn’t feel pain before 24 weeks.She needed to be put in her place..
@Fran Lonergan: that depends on whose “humanity” you’re referring to surely?
This comes down to a moral judgement. Yours is different to others. Which is why this shouldn’t be a constitutional provision. No one is in agreement.
Don’t write laws based on one small section of societies moral outlook. Write them based on objective fact. That at least will be reasonably unimpeachable.
Is there no standard by which morality can be measured ? Or is all morality subjective and relative? Under normal circumstances is it ever subjectively right to kill someone else?
@Fran Lonergan: Most morality is subjective Fran. There are very few moral absolutes. Which is why morality is a poor grounding for legislation. Nearly as poor as religious objection – which is why the 8th exists in the first place.
Murder is irrelevant to this issue because we all agree murder is immoral. But as has been seen for the last 30 years and in the Dail itself – there is no such consensus on abortion. Which makes it ludicrous to have a constitution clause on something so complex. And I’d point out that murder, sexual crime, theft, kidnapping – none of them are enshrined in the constitution.
Generally speaking I should not be bound by your moral code and you should not be bound by mine.
@Francis Mc Carthy: what’s humane about your stated position of allowing women to terminate life for any reason and at any time during pregnancy? How inhumane of you Francis. You should consider your own morals first before lecturing others on there’s.
@Sean – what’s humane about your views on pregnant women…sure,aren’t you lad that would be delighted that a pregnant woman threw herself off a tall building…and haven’t you also said that women were “too posh to push” so they were now ending their pregnancy through abortion..yikes!
I’m extremely happy to let the woman and the medical staff decide that one,Sean..You should try it sometime..
But how do we all agree murder is immoral. If we all agree that, there must be an objective moral standard that tells us that. Is it really intellectually sustainable to have a pick and mix moral standard?
So if I am not to be bound by your, or any other’s moral code, is it okay for me to murder because it is acceptable in my moral code?
Is it not strange that those who criticise the constitutional position in Ireland do not object to the constitutional interpretation of SCOTUS in the US which allows abortion, in direct conflict with legislation in many states at the time of Roe v Wade?
Is it “ok” for you to murder? An inane question but easily dismissed – Ok is just another word for “right” which is a subjective moral position. I don’t believe it’s right for you to do so. But I can’t decide that for you. Thats up to you. Maybe you feel it’s moral ok. It is however illegal. Rightly so. So you’ll get life in prison.
Should you be subject the morality of others? In the rare case of murder. Yes. Because it’s universally agreed.
Abortion on the the hand does not have universal acceptance. Far from it. In fact yours is a minority position.
SCOTUS: irrelevant. We don’t live there. I have nothing to say on the subject.
Well, it can’t be universally agreed, otherwise, it wouldn’t happen.
But why is it largely accepted if morality is subjective? Why do you not accept it is right for me to murder if morality is subjective?
And why should it be against the law if it is not based on morality or ethics? The law must have some foundations and those foundations must be based on something.
I don’t accept it is inane either.
“SCOTUS, irrelevant”, do you not accept it is a valid or useful comparison when the objection in Ireland is about a constitutional provision?
@Fran Lonergan: @Fran Lonergan: of course it can be universally agreed and still happen. That’s just flawed thinking. People do things they know to be wrong all the time which they fully condemn in others. Murderers don’t sit back when their loved ones are killed and go “that’s ok then cos I’m ok with murder.
These are ridiculous questions Fran. Totally inane. Do I really have to explain why murder is and should be against the law? You want to draw a comparison between abortion and murder – which is completely flawed because:
Ban murder: everyone agrees
Ban abortion: Societal unrest. Irreconcilable Debate. Hardship. Widespread disagreement. International condemnation. Protests.
SCOTUS: no I don’t accept it as a valid comparison. Totally irrelevant & flawed logic.
If you just keep saying an point is inane you are just being insulting and haughty. Try not to be high handed, that’s how you come across.
The point I am making is serious, not just being argumentative. The consensus on murder, or theft, or rape had to be arrived at. My question is about how we arrive at these judgments. Moralities if you like, because it seems they are not just arbitrary, there is an objectivity involved, moral objectivity.
Similarly, with abortion, there are those who instinctively know it is wrong, it is visceral and doesn’t need an internal moral debate.
If you don’t accept the SCOTUS example as a valid comparison, fair enough but it seems like parochialism to me. Constitutionality to support abortion, constitutionality to deny abortion, seems pretty similar to me. If one is valid, so is the other.
@Fran Lonergan: have you actually listened to the women who horribly came to this conclusion? Have you even tried or just jumped to the easy judgement? No woman comes to this decision easily. But you don’t trust that. Would you stop women from traveling? If you don’t then your problem is not with women aborting it’s with women having sex. Please listen to the evidence and the women/couples it’s affected. Please.
I am married to a woman who had an abortion, I had a girlfriend 20 odd years ago who had three abortions, I mixed with a lot of girls in the late 80s early 90s, most of whom had abortions. I’ve heard pretty much all of the arguments and the excuses. I have also seen the behaviours of the people I’m talking about, almost all university students living chaotically, thinking it was sophisticated. And many of them, DID come to the decision easily.
Where have I suggested I would stop anyone from travelling?
“If you don’t then your problem is not with women aborting it’s with women having sex.”
What a typically third wave feminist comment. You are smarter than that, you really shouldn’t borrow such nonsense. The fact is that probably a majority of men are in favour of abortion because it lets them off the hook, they can have the sex with the women they are glad to want to have sex, but without the responsibility.
@Fran Lonergan: it’s not serious Fran. It’s just argumentative unless you genuinely can’t see the difference between a law everyone supports and a law huge numbers of people fundamentally disagree with.
Whether people “instinctively” know its wrong or not is neither here nor there. I don’t want to live governed by their instincts thanks.
SCOTUS: typical straw man argument. You’ve arbitrarily decided what every PC person thinks of the US constitution which you can then call hypocritical or parochial or whatever. But literally no one is discussing it but you. So its pure conjecture based on your own ore conceived notions. It adds nothing to the debate.
Why can’t you see the point I am trying to get to which is why everyone supports a law. It does not spring out of nowhere, it is based on a concept of right and wrong, and that is an objective moral standard. So we must accept that in such a case there is a standard that is not subjective.
Those in favour of abortion who criticise a constitutional provision protecting the life of the unborn cannot then support the SCOTUS decision, that is hypocritical.
As Peter Singer has argued, it is no less ethical to kill a newborn baby as a 12-week foetus. Ethical, if you accept one as moral and ethical you should have no problem with the other. And he does so in support of such measures.
@Fran Lonergan: objective or subjective the prohibition on abortion does not enjoy widespread support. Quite the contrary.
SCOTUS: Pure strawman argument. What people are you talking about? Who supports that law ? You’re the only one talking about it. Have you asked them? They all have an agreed view? They all understand and have knowledge of the Us Constitution? You’ve just dreamt this all up so you can say “ahah you’re all hypocrites”.
I’d also add that while I have no position on the US I do not support any Irish constitutional provision which seeks to outline rules on abortion – prohibitively or permissibly. This is a matter for legislation and legislation alone.
Abortion advocates in the US have used the constitution to make abortion legal against the wishes, up until recently of more than half of the population and in direct conflict with State laws. Many supporters of abortion in Ireland support this stategy but criticise the Irish constitution for giving protection to the unborn.
@Fran Lonergan: “many supporters” “abortion advocates” – vague, unsubstantiated, and irrelevant. show me a specific argument by a specific person related to the Irish question and I’ll consider it. But lots and lots of pro choice arguments are spurious nonsense – just as lots of pro-life arguments are spurious nonsense.
It’s totally pointless Fran. You’re an extreme keep the 8th supporter. You support poor laws written for politically expedient reasons that have caused untold societal division and harm and are criticised the world over. That’s fine. That’s your decision. But it really is the opposite of how a country should make laws.
I don’t. I like my laws logical, pragmatic and changeable. Thankfully it certainly appears that we’re in for change.
Who came up with committe nonsense, but a bunch of busy bodies, so called experts and a clueless motley crew of concerned citizens into a room and what happens, CHAOS. and I assume the tax payer is paying for this absurdity. Just get on with a referendum
@Joseph Dempsey: I think you might be mixing up the committee and the Assembly. But not to worry, The “prolife” side get most things wrong all the time.
I respect this Liz person. At least she had the maturity to come forward to argue her case and not scuttle away like the rest of them. I’m very much pro choice but happy to hear this out. It’s necessary to hear all aspects, particularly if we want to decide on a post referendum world where abortion exists, and what it might look like
@Lucy Legacy: Nobody will force a woman or girl to have an abortion because that’s actually illegal. If her son made it to sixth class, then he didn’t have a fatal foetal abnormality.
@Lucy Legacy:
She presented her case very well . I believe she is a lawyer.Her son was born without limbs , she and her husband knew this in advance but went ahead anyway ,very courageous couple.
She gives recognition to all those carers who day in day out look after disabled relatives with little or no support.
@Fiona deFreyne: Its hard to believe you were once a foetus yourself ,but then i never did like that derogatory term to describe a small human being in the making .what a cold heart you have .
@Fiona deFreyne: Shocking statement,but I suppose Its a position you take based on the presupposition that the unborn is not human and therefore has no value. I find it incredible that a baby born at 25 weeks gestation would be afforded all human rights and protected by law, however it has no value due to its geographical location if it is unborn.
@Alan: I can confirm that this is indeed Tony’s stated view, life does not exist within the womb. Tony believes that life only commences when the foetus’ head surfaces from the womb. Based on that crazy premise, one can understand why Tony may only consider one life in the abortion decision making process, the mother’s, and not two. Only the pregnancy is ended, never the life inside, as Tony believes that there is no life, only the woman’s. There is no moral dilemma or debate as far as Tony is concerned, the clump of cells is dispensable.
@Stefanovich ; You really do “love both” the way that you go on…That woman has a right to look after herself and her already born family…luckily for her.she’s not answerable to some low life on the journal..
Where have they said that their aim is to have no DS children in Denmark ?
Anyway..It is a totally different country to us and there is also no stigma attached to having an abortion..I’ve also seen a statistic in which it showed that 80% of disabled children end up in an institution in Denmark..and that is probably one of the reasons why that EVERY pregnant woman there is given the test…
@Francis Mc Carthy: a so you are saying we shouldn’t have any non Irish input being a different country and that? We seem to have quite a few British contributors that I recall. Or what do you suggest we do to keep us different from Denmark? The constitution perhaps?
I have no issue whatsoever with another country’s input.I was just responding to the speakers input, in which she said that it was Denmark’s government policy to eradicate DS–which is a false claim of hers…But then again,when you have volunteered like for a rogue crisis pregnancy clinic,which has told pregnant women that “abortion causes cancer” – you straight away lose any credibility -especially when it comes to facts…..
I find it funny that liberals, in most areas of their lives, “feelings” and emotions play such a big role, but when it come to abortion it all clinical facts, fetuses and clumps of cells
I just find it a little strange
Anyway I’ll vote to repeal, can’t force people into having children and theyre getting it done in England anyway so why not do it here, I feel Sorry for the unborn child but such is life,
Puts paid to the like that abortions are carried out in circumstances of so called FFA, single women economically incapable of raising the child or rape. Abortion for the convenience of the mother/father. A problem flushed away.
@Misanthrope: It also puts paid to the notion that women and girls are using abortion as contraceptive.
Antis are absolutely bullin’ over the fact that all the misinformation they’ve demanded we accept as the truth about abortion is pure bullplop. Mullen and McGrath come across as so angry and impotent because they no longer control the narrative.
If the 8th Amendment is ever repealed, Mullen, McGrath and Fitzpatrick will have played an invaluable role. Their judgmentalism, fundamentalism and authoritarianism have stood out.
This is heading for a dogs dinner where any hope of decent abortion laws is negligible.
So why not adopt the UK abortion law; its being serving Irish women well for decades and
there is no tangible evidence that it has made the UK a less civilised society.
It will probably end up something close to that. I don’t know if any studies have been done but the UK is a much more violent society today than it was in 1967, I believe abortion, as it is freely available in the UK, cheapens life.
If you can flush 200,000 human lives down the drain every year, how can human life itself have any value?
@lavbeer: Better that it links to a reputable agency like BPAS, than some antichoice religious nut jobs who lie to vulnerable women and girls that abortion gives you breast cancer and turns you into a child abuser.
@Fiona deFreyne: I’ve noticed that comment a few times now Fiona, so please do enlighten me. Where is your scientific proof the unborn is not human? We can all make unqualified statements to justify our position. I’ve read a few history books myself and as far as I can remember that’s the line slave owners espoused to justify slavery. Sure their not fully human, my property so I’ll do as I wish. Sound familiar?
@Alan – where is your proof that Fiona says that it is not “human” ?
Slave women wanted agency over their bodies.That is why they found ways of ending their rape pregnancies ..You seem to want to force a woman to remain pregnant against her will…why is that ?
At least when this Committee has done its invaluable work people will be well informed of the issue. Those of us who have had our privilege to be born and live our lives will have a huge decision to make.
US government brands Dublin riots as terrorism by Irish white supremacists
Patricia Devlin
5 hrs ago
3.7k
California
Firefighters make progress in slowing Los Angeles wildfires amid devastation
Updated
7 hrs ago
18.8k
Temperature drop
Status Orange low temperature and ice warning in place for 15 counties
Updated
9 hrs ago
72.4k
82
Your Cookies. Your Choice.
Cookies help provide our news service while also enabling the advertising needed to fund this work.
We categorise cookies as Necessary, Performance (used to analyse the site performance) and Targeting (used to target advertising which helps us keep this service free).
We and our 138 partners store and access personal data, like browsing data or unique identifiers, on your device. Selecting Accept All enables tracking technologies to support the purposes shown under we and our partners process data to provide. If trackers are disabled, some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you. You can resurface this menu to change your choices or withdraw consent at any time by clicking the Cookie Preferences link on the bottom of the webpage .Your choices will have effect within our Website. For more details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
We and our vendors process data for the following purposes:
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
Cookies Preference Centre
We process your data to deliver content or advertisements and measure the delivery of such content or advertisements to extract insights about our website. We share this information with our partners on the basis of consent. You may exercise your right to consent, based on a specific purpose below or at a partner level in the link under each purpose. Some vendors may process your data based on their legitimate interests, which does not require your consent. You cannot object to tracking technologies placed to ensure security, prevent fraud, fix errors, or deliver and present advertising and content, and precise geolocation data and active scanning of device characteristics for identification may be used to support this purpose. This exception does not apply to targeted advertising. These choices will be signaled to our vendors participating in the Transparency and Consent Framework.
Manage Consent Preferences
Necessary Cookies
Always Active
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
Targeting Cookies
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
Functional Cookies
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
Performance Cookies
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Store and/or access information on a device 96 partners can use this purpose
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development 124 partners can use this purpose
Use limited data to select advertising 94 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Create profiles for personalised advertising 68 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Use profiles to select personalised advertising 67 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Create profiles to personalise content 32 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Use profiles to select personalised content 28 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Measure advertising performance 115 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Measure content performance 56 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Understand audiences through statistics or combinations of data from different sources 67 partners can use this purpose
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Develop and improve services 74 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Use limited data to select content 33 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
Use precise geolocation data 39 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Actively scan device characteristics for identification 23 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Ensure security, prevent and detect fraud, and fix errors 77 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Deliver and present advertising and content 86 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Match and combine data from other data sources 64 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Link different devices 46 partners can use this feature
Always Active
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Identify devices based on information transmitted automatically 76 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
Save and communicate privacy choices 54 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say