Sir, – In “Rotunda master says 95 per cent of parents in Down syndrome cases choose abortion” (News, December 26th), Prof Fergal Malone, outgoing Master of the Rotunda hospital, offers some insight into the large numbers of women who attend for a first abortion appointment and following the three-day wait period set out in the law, do not attend for the second appointment to go through with the abortion.
According to the figures released from the Department of Health, the difference in the numbers between the first and second abortion appointments in 2019 was 870, in 2020 it was 1480 and in 2021 it was 1,601, a total of 3,951 who did not go through with abortion after an initial consultation.
While acknowledging that some of the above can be explained by 12 weeks of gestation being exceeded or indeed some miscarriages which happen during that 72 hours, the idea that “miscarriage is a more likely explanation than a change of mind for many of these cases”, as Prof Malone suggests, has no basis.
The fact is that despite amendments to the abortion legislation being set down in 2018 seeking that better data be kept by abortion providers, this suggestion was rejected by the Government and now we are left with a vacuum of information on many aspects of the law. That, combined with the curious lack of interest from the Government in interrogating the law and data, including the many women who avail of the three-day wait and change their minds, leaves us with a situation where opinions can be expressed on the matter without any scientific basis.
Faye O’Rourke’s Christmas: ‘I have a reputation for overdoing it. I splash out. It’s not in my control’
‘I know what happened in that room’: the full story of the Conor McGregor case
Sally Rooney: When are we going to have the courage to stop the climate crisis?
Ukraine fears nuclear plants are in Russia’s sights as missile strikes bring winter blackouts
A credible interpretation of the data available that does not include the fact that a sizeable proportion of women changed their minds on whether to end their pregnancy after an initial consultation with a medical provider has yet to be provided, by Prof Malone or anyone else.
The three-day waiting period was an important Government promise used to persuade people to vote Yes in the 2018 referendum.
It is helpful not only in giving a woman time for reflection but also in providing a window of time during which other factors (such as an offer of help, or the obtaining of information on support services) can come into play. – Yours, etc,
EILÍS MULROY,
Pro Life Campaign,
Dublin 2.
Sir, – Prof Fergal Malone says that 95 per cent of babies diagnosed with Down syndrome in utero at the Rotunda Hospital are subsequently aborted. He deserves great credit for his candour on this issue.
During the 2018 referendum campaign, those who opposed the introduction of abortion predicted this horrifying outcome, and were accused of scaremongering and of smearing Irish people as being heartless towards those with disabilities.
Down Syndrome Ireland (DSI) said at the time that it was “disrespectful” to raise the issue and that children with Down syndrome were being “used” and “exploited” by pro-life campaigners.
With 95 per cent of Irish children with Downs now having their lives ended before they are born, might DSI consider modifying this position?
Now that the worst fears of pro-life campaigners have come to pass, Ireland seems certain to be on course to follow countries such as Denmark and Iceland where 100 per cent of babies diagnosed with Down syndrome are aborted.
Welcome to the liberal, compassionate Ireland that voters were promised in 2018. – Yours, etc,
BARRY WALSH,
Clontarf,
Dublin 3.
Sir, – In calling for the removal of the three-day wait period before a woman can go ahead with terminating her pregnancy, the outgoing Master of the Rotunda Hospital Prof Fergal Malone draws a false equivalence between the informed consent process for termination of pregnancy and transplantation or cancer surgery, where no such wait period applies. The reality is that termination of pregnancy or direct intentional abortion ends the life of another human being. No other life is ended when someone undergoes cancer surgery or a transplantation procedure. – Is mise,
Dr NOREEN O’CARROLL,
Blackrock,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – At a time of year when we welcome and celebrate the arrival of a particular child, how sad and ill-timed it was to see the subheadline to your online article of December 26th “‘About 95 per cent of cases of prenatally diagnosed Down syndrome do terminate’”.
We’d have a nerve to claim that we are an inclusive society when this is happening.
It’s bad enough to be reporting this sad news, but the article also features arguments for making abortions easier to get, such as removing the three-day wait, even though the figures given show that at least some women decide not to proceed after initial inquiry, suggesting that lives are being saved by the wait.
Prof Fergal Malone, the focus of the article, says that after the abortion legislation, “The floodgates did not open”, a rather unmedical concept. The official figures suggest that abortion rates increased by around 70 per cent since the legislation. Whether the floodgates metaphor suits or not, this is drastic. He is right to see it as problematic getting into “that very difficult area of legislating for degrees of disability”, but I was bothered by his phrase “a mechanism to operationalise termination for disability”, even though he says he doesn’t know how the legislature would come up with such a thing. The idea is abhorrent. – Yours, etc,
BRENDAN O’REGAN,
Arklow,
Co Wicklow.