Madam, - The D case exposes the miserable failure of this Government in fulfilling its duty to protect our most vulnerable women and children. We face the appalling vista of a 17-year-old girl, a child in care, who may be legally obliged against her wishes to continue her pregnancy to term, in the terrible knowledge that the baby cannot survive once born. When confronted with this case, the hypocrisy of Cabinet ministers has been astounding.
They have expressed the hope that the High Court will deal with the case humanely, and that abortion will not become an election issue. Yet due to their failure to reform the law on abortion, this girl has already been subjected to inhumane treatment in being forced to go to court.
Not only should women or girls in such circumstances be able to travel abroad to access abortion; where they have received the devastating diagnosis of anencephaly and wish to terminate their pregnancy, they should be entitled to access legal abortion and other relevant medical treatment here in Ireland.
It is deeply hypocritical to suggest that women should be allowed to travel abroad to access particular medical services, but not allowed to access them in this country.
Despite the wishes of Cabinet ministers, their failure to act responsibly and humanely to protect women and girls in these situations should be an election issue. - Yours, etc,
IVANA BACIK, Law School, Trinity College Dublin.
Madam, - It seems cruel to force "Miss D" to go on with her pregnancy against her wishes only to see the foetus die anyway. Requiring a 17-year-old girl, or any woman, to keep a dying foetus in her womb for five more months, and to then watch it die within a few days of birth, seems to be cruel and unusual punishment and is, in my opinion, immoral.
This girl, if forced against her will to carry this dying foetus for five more months, could be harmed for life. Hopefully, the psychiatrists who are being asked to examine her will be able to attest to the harm that is likely to result from interfering with her wishes and the wishes of the father.
For this foetus, this girl's body is serving as a life-support system for a short interval of time. And the only purpose being served is to satisfy what is clearly a very dubious moral principle. Just as in the case of Terri Schiavo here in the United States two years ago, this case calls for an end to a futile effort to support a life by such extraordinary means. If this foetus were an older, terminally ill person, with little chance of recovering from illness, I believe removing life support systems would be performed as a matter of routine. - Yours, etc,
JOHN J MUGGIVAN, Metairie, Louisiana.
Madam, - I hope the "Miss D" case serves to highlight the absolutely appalling state of abortion-related legislation in this country. It is unthinkable in this day and age that there should even be a question about whether a young woman should be given the option of terminating a non-viable pregnancy. - Yours, etc,
CLAIRE HENNESSY, Cremorne, Knocklyon, Dublin 16.
Madam, - The sad case involving Miss D points up the inadequacy of Irish abortion law.
To insist on the primacy of the right to life of the unborn regardless of individual circumstances is to ignore the quality of life the potential human being will have if carried to term.
How can an unwanted child, born with major health problems or as a result of rape or incest or to a woman in an abusive relationship or living in abject poverty or in any other chaotic or problematic circumstance, possibly have the life it deserves?
It is surely the hallmark of a mature, rational and civilised society that the only children born are those who are wanted and will be loved and cherished. - Yours, etc,
MARY PIMM, Gore Road, London.