Madam, - With reference to the concerns expressed in your Letters page of April 30th, I would point out that in his interview with the BBC, Mr Watson made it exceptionally clear that his view is that the decision as to whether or not to abort a fetus is a decision only the mother has the moral right to make, and that the state has no right to play a part in that decision.
Given the history of cases where states were involved in medical decisions over reproductive issues, this seems to me to be quite reasonable.
His statement was in response to the so-called threat of "designer babies", whereby a fetus not genetically predisposed to being tall, intelligent and attractive would be aborted.
Personally, I've never understood why those worried about this nightmare scenario have such a low opinion of expectant mothers that they wish to outlaw such an unlikely action, but have no problem with allowing these same mothers to raise their children.
I would further point out that Dr Watson is not speaking from an academic ivory tower: one of his Watson's children was born with a serious form of autism. He is therefore more qualified than most people to give a weighed and informed opinion on the ethics involved
Dr Watson has a history of promoting ethical debate through unorthodox statements - but for a member of the clergy or a professor of theology to state that he should watch the Special Olympics as some form of remedial therapy displays the kind of blind ignorance that Dr Watson has long battled against. - Yours, etc.,
MARK DENNEHY,
Greystones,
Co Wicklow.