For the first time, the National Women's Council of Ireland has called for a No vote in an abortion referendum.
When the issue was put to referendum in 1983 and 1992, the council, which represents a large number of women's organisations throughout the country, found that it would be too divisive to attempt to reach a common position.
However, Ms Grainne Healy, chairwoman of the NWCI, told a press conference yesterday that the council had, before this referendum, commissioned legal advice on the proposal and carried out a consultation process with its affiliates, asking for submissions.
Some affiliated organisations sent in submissions and opinions, others did not, and earlier this month the council had a consultation meeting which agreed by consensus on the call for a No vote.
Ms Healy said this was based on the fact that there was conflicting legal and medical opinion, and a widespread concern that more young women and girls would end up in court over the issue of abortion as a result of crisis pregnancies.
Accordingly, the NWCI has published a leaflet calling for a No vote, citing two hypothetical cases: one a suicidal young incest victim, the other a woman haemorrhaging 80 miles from an "approved place" that could offer her a "D and C" procedure.
Ms Healy said that, while there was consensus on these issues there was no consensus within the council on the "substantive issue" of abortion.
Asked about a statement from one affiliated organisation, the Irish Countrywomen's Association, that it was not asking its members to vote one way or the other, Ms Healy said this was an internal matter for the ICA, and she regretted that there were differences within the association on the issue.
Senator Mary Henry said the definition of abortion in this "most complicated and ambiguous bit of legislation" would never be found in a medical dictionary.
There was no certainty about how many "approved places" there would be, where they would be situated, or how this could change in the future.
"We can't be certain that there won't be a situation where a woman's life can never be in danger."
She said she was also concerned about the conscientious objection clause. "How can a doctor be a conscientious objector to carrying out a life-saving operation?" she asked.
She said there was no obligation on an "approved place" to always have a non-objector on duty.
She also expressed concern about the provision where any member of the Government, including ministers outside the Department of Health, could order the examination of medical records on the procedures referred to in the Bill.
Dr Edith Loane, a retired psychiatrist and representative of the Methodist Women's Association, said a recent statement from individual psychiatrists was not representative of the whole psychiatric profession.
"I have talked to many women with crisis pregnancies," she said. She said some of them threatened suicide and some had attempted suicide. No one could predict when a person would commit suicide, she said. Methodists could not accept the removal of the threat of suicide as a basis for abortion.
She said Methodists believed that abortion on demand was wrong. However, they thought there were circumstances in which it was necessary, like an incomplete miscarriage, an ectopic pregnancy, or where the mother's mental or physical health was at risk.
"Mental health is as much a part of our health system as any other."