Sir, - The Protection of Human Life in Pregnancy Act is an attempt to clarify the legal position for medical practitioners and patients in respect of the protection of maternal life during pregnancy. Whether one agrees or not with the restriction of the availability of abortions to the very few situations in which the mother's life is in direct danger from the pregnancy, in theory any illumination of the complex legal situation is surely to be welcomed in the cloudy climate of the abortion debate in Ireland.
However, as well as the many problems inherent in the Act's attempt to deal with termination of pregnancy, issues also arise in relation to contraception and assisted reproduction due to the wording and methodology chosen by the Government.
The Irish Constitution currently obliges the State to protect the right to life of the unborn, but from a legal perspective it has never been clear what the word "unborn" actually means in practice (a fact currently being argued before the High Court in another context).
Does the constitutional provision apply from the moment of conception, in which case legal difficulties arise in the context of the morning-after pill, embryo creation and destruction and other related medical procedures? Or does it apply from implantation in the womb, in which case termination of pregnancy may be prohibited but other procedures before that point remain outside the ambit of the Constitution?
The current Act proposed by the Government might seem to indicate that it is proposed to protect the embryo from implantation onwards - and indeed, many of those involved in the debate thus far have taken that view. However, due to the insertion of the Act to complement the existing provisions in the Constitution, this may not be the result.
If passed, the Constitution will provide that (paraphrased) the State has the obligation to protect the right to life of the unborn. "In particular", once unborn life has implanted in the womb, no termination of pregnancy can take place unless to save the life of the mother. The use of the words "in particular" in the Bill mean that the existing Constitutional provision will continue to apply before implantation. Consequently, contraceptive measures that are designed to prevent implantation remain challengeable under the Constitution, as do some forms of assisted reproduction.
Unfortunately therefore, the Act does not help to elucidate the legal position in Ireland regarding the status of the "unborn". In fact it casts doubt on the legality of many medical procedures currently practised in Ireland in relation to contraception and in vitro fertilisation. If successfully challenged in the future under the Constitution, such practices could be deemed a failure by the State to protect the right to life of the unborn.
Without the morning-after pill, many more women would become pregnant and travel for abortions to the UK. Without IVF, the one in six couples affected by infertility in this country will also have to travel elsewhere in Europe to have the chance of having a child of their own. This is hardly a progressive approach to family planning in modern Ireland. - Yours, etc.,
Dr DEIRDRE MADDEN,
Faculty of Law,
University College Cork.