Sir, - I agree with Father Kevin Hegarty's suggestion (Rite and Reason, March 13th) that the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution should be repealed and that the issue of abortion should be dealt with by means of legislation. I also agree with John McKeever, Secretary of the Pro-Life Campaign (March 27th), that the Eighth Amendment, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in the X case, did not improve women's rights, as women always had the right to life under the Constitution and the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act did permit abortion, as Mr McKeever puts it, "to preserve the life of the mother [i.e. pregnant woman]."
The legislation does not specifically state that its prohibition on abortion is subject to any exceptions, but, as Mr McKeever says, the courts in England and Northern Ireland have interpreted the 1861 Act in this way. Similar legislation has been interpreted in the same way in jurisdictions such as Massachusetts, Australia (Victoria and New South Wales), Canada and New Zealand.
In light of this, it is extraordinary that Mr McKeever goes on to say that "direct procured abortion" is never necessary to save the lives of pregnant women. Were the legal and medical professions in England, Northern Ireland, the US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand all mistaken? Were the doctors from the major maternity hospitals in Dublin who gave evidence to the All Party Oireachtas Committee on abortion wrong when they said that they had to perform a small number of abortions each year to protect the life of pregnant women? Was Professor William Binchy, the Pro-Life Campaign's legal adviser, wrong when he said last year, after that evidence was made public, that the Pro-Life Campaign did not want to interfere with existing medical practice?
Why has the Pro-Life Campaign not responded to my earlier letter in this page where I pointed out that the distinction drawn between direct and indirect abortion by the Pro-Life Campaign, which is an ethical and not a legal distinction, requires that the act terminating foetal life has to be indirect and that thus the existing medical practice described to the Oireachtas Committee, apparently supported by the campaign, includes direct abortion?
It is essential that any debate on abortion is factually based and surely it is time for the wholly incorrect argument that "direct" abortion is never necessary to save the life of pregnant women to be consigned to the dustbin of history, along with the flat-earth theory and similar myths. - Yours, etc.,
Se D'Alton, Palmerston Road, Dublin 6.