Sir, – It is 10 years since my first letter was published here, describing my distress at the invidious position of women in this country who find they are carrying a foetus incompatible with life (February 25th, 2002). I write again for the sake of Savita Halappanavar and extend my condolences to her husband and family.
My case was the first of its kind in Ireland to be taken to the European Court of Human Rights, taking four years to reach a hearing. Lest the findings of that case should be lost in the profusion of current debate, the Irish State argued that I should have applied to the Irish courts first (while pregnant in distress, I might add), because of reasonable chances of establishing that Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution did not apply to a foetus with a lethal anomaly. In its defence, Gerard Hogan, counsel for the State argued that a court would not apply Article 40.3.3 with “remorseless logic” to such exceptional and tragic circumstances. We now know that not to be the case, viz, Miss D in 2007.
It is my understanding that the latest expert group report to the Oireachtas, on the X case, does not include any discussion or recommendations in the event of foetal incompatibility with life. The wording of the 2002 referendum also precluded medical intervention in those cases, which is why, after my letter was printed, there was a volte face by the masters of three Dublin maternity hospitals, as the medical profession remained unprotected unless there was evidence of suicidal tendency. The constitutional amendment was defeated, I believe, because of the constricted wording, the first time the people voted against church and state.
The political procrastination played out over my letter prior to the 2002 referendum and the subsequent 2006 D v Ireland case continues unabated and has led to the tragedy of Savita Halappanavar’s death in Galway last month. During that difficult period 10 years ago, an often repeated phrase rang in my ears from politicians who sat on the fence, “hard cases make bad law”. I say: bad law kills women. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – As the widow of one of the “old editors” let me assure Brian P O Cinneide (November 15th) that if my husband is turning in his grave it is in anger at the unnecessary suffering and death of a young woman – for what? – Yours, etc,
A chara, – Where is the voice of obstetricians in the discussion of such a rare outcome of pregnancy? Where is the reassurance for pregnant women and their families? May Savita Halappanavar and her baby rest in peace. My heart goes out to their loved ones. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – The well-being of my wife matters more to me than does the survival of all the unborn in the universe. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – I would like to point out to Tim Jackson (November 16th) that the reason we do not in Ireland have women dying as result of abortions, legal or otherwise, is that we export our abortions to the relative safety of professional clinics in the UK and the Netherlands. He ignores the fact that the alternative is gin and knitting needles, as has been traditional in all countries without legal abortion, and still continues in some. Actual death was, and is, all too frequently the result. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – I want to thank Fintan O’Toole with all my heart for his article (“When is an abortion not an abortion?”, Weekend Review, November 17th). I was particularly moved by one sentence: “The women whose messy realities contradict the desired image must remain invisible”; it reminded me of others who were shamed into staying invisible so that abusers could keep abusing, so that the desired image, that of a Holy Catholic Ireland, could be upheld.
Shame, secrecy and denial have no place in a people-centred democracy.
As an Irish woman and mother of three grown-up daughters I demand that the State legislates to bring clarity and honesty to the issue. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Breda O’Brien’s article (Opinion, November 17th) is predicated on the basis that Catholic Church teaching should be the foundation on which the State should legislate. She has not understood that the Irish State is no longer a Catholic State, that it is both multicultural and diverse in its religious outlook. Of course law needs to have a moral foundation but the Catholic Church does not hold a monopoly on morality. Were laws to be passed allowing for abortion there’s nothing stopping a Roman Catholic woman deciding not to have an abortion because of her wish to adhere to Roman Catholic teaching. I agree with Breda O’Brien that this situation is no excuse for a witch hunt, and would remind here that the door swings both ways. – Yours, etc,
A chara, – In the past few days, mention has repeatedly been made of the “abortion lobby”. Those who want the government to legislate for the X, A, B and C cases are not the “abortion lobby”. They are the majority of the electorate of this country, and have been since 1992. – Is mise,
Sir, – I grieve for a bereaved husband and family.
I belong to no pressure group.
The pro-abortion lobby must have thought Christmas had come early. Could they not have waited until we knew for certain why this tragedy happened, before they started foaming at the mouth? – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Ivana Bacik (Opinion November 16th) asserts that no guidance is given to doctors on how to assess “real and substantial risk”. One wonders if she is not suggesting that politicians are better qualified to do so. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – I note frequent citing of a statistic indicating that Ireland is among the safest countries in the world with regard to pre-natal and post-natal survival rates of women.To infer from this that there is lesser need in Ireland than elsewhere to terminate pregnancies in order to safeguard the lives of women is mathematically incorrect.
The correct method includes consideration of the survival rates of women in Ireland, who, having developed complications that would give rise to termination elsewhere, and whose pregnancies are not terminated, then comparison of these with survival rates of women in comparable medical circumstances who avail of termination elsewhere.
The specific branch of mathematics concerned is that of Bayesian statistics. Expressed in its simplest form, the Bayesian approach provides a method for calculating conditional probabilities: If event A has a certain probability of occurring, and event B has a certain probability of occurring, what is the probability of B occurring given that A has already occurred? The method thus addresses the question: If a pregnant woman develops a certain complication, what are the probabilities of her surviving with and without termination? That is an entirely different question to that of: If a woman is pregnant, what is the probability of her surviving the pregnancy? – Yours, etc,
Sir, – So Americans are ‘left agog at confused cruelty of Irish abortion law” (Ann Marie Hourihane, November 19th). Really? This from a country that aborts one million babies every year and one in which many women die during abortions is a bit rich.
Ireland’s maternal death rate is extremely low and this is being widely overlooked in the publicity surrounding the very sad death of Savita Halappanavar and her child. Maternal care in this country is rightly very highly regarded and it is difficult to see the headlines around the world denigrating it. The facts in this case are not known; with no input so far from the medical personnel involved. It is extremely unfair to jump to the conclusions that are so prevalent in the media. Do we need an investigation at all with so many claiming to know exactly what happened? As was pointed out (Letters, November 17th) “the abortion regime in Savita’s own country, India, is a horror story in its own right. Selective female abortion being the surgery of choice, on a grand scale’.
When will we see outrage and protests about this and the same story in China? Surely those professing such interest in women’s health are outraged? Why so silent? – Yours, etc,
A chara, – The abortion issue is hugely emotive and difficult, especially for those personally affected such as Savita Halappanavar’s family at this tragic time. But we should still look carefully at the consequences of what the Government may do. Many have called for legislation for abortion on mental health grounds. The UK experience is worth noting.
Every year, more than 180,000 abortions are authorised by doctors in England and Wales: one for every four live births, and more than the number of deaths from cancer.
UK government statistics say 98 per cent are on the grounds of risk to the mother’s mental health. This is in spite of a review by the UK Academy of Medical Royal Colleges last year, which found no mental health benefit for women from abortion. Long-term research in New Zealand has found mental health problems to be more common after abortion. But this is irrelevant to many who are involved. Abortion provider BPAS has openly stated online that for the majority of women, mental health is not the real reason for seeking an abortion but “because of the law, women and their doctors have to indicate that this is the case.”
In terms of rare obstetric complications, it wasn’t widely reported that a Marie Stopes International doctor was struck off in England last year, for an abortion which almost killed an Irish woman. In Ireland, there were three maternal deaths for every 100,000 births between 2000 and 2008; in the UK, twice as many.
If the Irish Government introduces similar legislation to the UK, it should be fully aware what to expect – not only worse rather than better healthcare for women, but the deaths of not just a few, but hundreds of thousands, of unborn children.
Abortion in the UK is a tragedy. Let’s find better ways to meet the challenges here. – Is mise,
Sir, – The complacent stance taken by the Archbishop Diarmuid Martin might have been different if he had read “What about the mothers? An analysis of maternal mortality and morbidity in perinatal health surveillance systems in Europe”, British Journal of Obstetric Gynecology 2012; 119: 880-890; where a well-made argument for ignoring meaningless country-by-country comparison is made.
As in many matters, Irish maternal mortality is shrouded in myth and secrecy. – Yours, etc,
Sir,– Thank you to Fr Seán Coyle (November 17th) and Breda O’Brien (Opinion, November 17th) for pointing out that there were, in fact, two deaths in a Galway hospital that terrible day.
Will anyone hold a candle-light vigil for the Halappanavar baby? Not unless it serves to further some insidious campaign to bring about the deaths of more unborn children, all in the name of supposed “progress”. – Yours, etc,