Sir, - Day after day in our media I see the old, crabby faces of men in positions of power debating women's fertility. These men, full of their own importance and positions, pontificate from their lofty perches on matters of which they could have no understanding. They debate "conception", "implantation", "IUD", etc., with the same passion as those who in past times pronounced the works of Kate O'Brien, John McGahern and a multitude of Irish writers as immoral, sexually deviant and dangerous. These works are now on school curricula. It goes without saying that the men with whom Bertie Ahern has made his Faustian pact are old men - but old, patriarchal men with all their deliberations no longer will find "comely maidens" dancing at the crossroads to their tunes.
In the not so distant future some Irish playwright will write a work based on the abortion referendum and the world audience will be riveted and entertained once again by our unique Irish obsession with matters sexual. Could it ever be rationally explained that this abortion referendum was brought upon us only because it was a matter of political expediency? - Yours, etc.
GWEN WOODS,
Herbert Park,
Dublin 4.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - It was disgraceful of Mary Holland to to bring sectarian divisions into the debate.
I would remind her that the only reason that the 1967 Abortion Act in the UK has not been fully extended to Northern Ireland is because both Protestants and Catholics have united to oppose it. In fact, keeping abortion on demand out of Northern Ireland has been one of the only issues on which that divided community has been able to show unity. - Yours, etc.,
JULIA HEFFERNAN,
Public Relations Officer,
Life Ireland,
Patrick Street,
Cork.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - I was impressed by Mary Holland's article in your issue of February 21st and in particular with her summary of the Protestant churches' attitude to abortion. This was that they believed in the sanctity of human life and are opposed to abortion "in all but the most extreme circumstances". These would include rape, incest or severe foetal abnormality.
If we are looking for an agreed middle ground this might be it. It would, I feel, appeal to many people and I am glad to see that the Labour Party is giving some consideration to adopting it as policy. Of course we are not to be allowed to vote for such a sensible option by this Government.
As, day by day, the case for a Yes vote unravels, it is refreshing to note that there is at least one eminent Catholic theologian who thinks that inserting a ban on abortion into our constitution is not practical.
Although a layman with no medical expertise I cannot help being intrigued by one other element in this debate. We are continually being told by some obstetricians that "direct" abortions are now "never" necessary in order to save a mother's life. This rules out the proposition that such abortions are only rarely necessary. Would the former attitude, I wonder, have more to do with the dogma requirements of one church, rather than with fact? - Yours etc.,
TOM WILLIAMS,
Goldenbridge Avenue,
Dublin 8.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - In an imperfect world, in an imperfect society, our Irish political system, imperfect as it is, has been trying, in several forms of words in three referendums, to give legal expression as to how the majority of Irish people balance and choose between the miracle and mystery of creation and the difficulties and weaknesses of our human nature.
I am one of those who would have been happy not to have had any referendum on abortion. It may be a rather simplistic view but as a husband and parent in the 1960s and 1970s, I was satisfied that our then Constitution and medical ethics in Ireland would take care of mother and baby in a pragmatic way that did not need to be spelt out other than in the Hippocratic Oath. Once we had the first referendum, it was inevitable, when the lawyers on all sides got going, that we would have a second one. And now a third.
I am inclined to accept the majority psychiatric opinion that abortion is not a treatment for suicidal behaviour and I believe a sincere attempt has been made by the Government in an impossible task - to give expression to a less than rigid and inflexible approach, in what may be a very difficult and traumatic circumstance.
As a lawyer, I believe that a majority No vote will require whatever Government is in power to legislate for termination of pregnancy to comply with the judgement in the X case, and I believe that this will lead to a greater availability of abortion in this country in the short term.
I will vote Yes. - Yours, etc.,
JOHN WOODS,
Greenore Road,
Carlingford,
Co Louth.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - There are certain inalienable truths in life that should not change. Life begins at fertilisation - not implantation. I will not waver on this issue nor will I ever compromise for any reason, political or otherwise. In my opinion, this is an abortion referendum rather than one that is pro-life. To give power to one "medical practitioner" to perform a "medical procedure" in his or her "reasonable opinion" and "good faith" is irresponsible if not downright dangerous.
Question: why is the term "medical procedure" not defined in the Bill? Answer: Our ignorance is the pro-abortionist's bliss. For these reasons and others, as a pro-life student, I intend to vote no on March 6th. - Yours, etc.,
AOIFE THORNTON,
Former Auditor of
Students for Life,
NUI,
Galway.
Sir, - In a Human Relationships class of 12-year-olds I was asked recently about abortion.
We had been discussing the miracle of conception and the development of the baby within its mother. They had asked about miscarriage, which I explained. I told them of the time when I had to explain to my own little family a miscarriage I myself had experienced. My youngest was about four and when she heard, in simple terms, what had happened, she slipped up on my knee and while hugging me she said, "Mum, I'm so glad you didn't miscarriage me."
The class reacted with a long "Aaaaaah". I then explained abortion. These young girls found it hard to understand how anyone could purposely plan an abortion. I told them that no one of us is in the position to judge another person but that we must understand the basic process plus the personal, psychological, health and moral implications.
There are complex arguments. We touched on the matter with simplicity and clarity. They asked about the possibility of adoption, which we discussed. The girls asked if rape always resulted in pregnancy. I told them that most usually it did not but that when it did, the mother and child should be cared for with compassion and the baby could remain with its mother or be made available for adoption according to the final wishes of the mother. I assured them that the medical objective would be a healthy birth for both mother and baby.
When they asked how I was going to vote, I explained that the wording was not as clear as I would wish, but that since it is the best pro-life wording we are going to get, I shall be voting Yes. I suggested that they talk with their parents about the referendum. Few felt ready or able to do so.
Few people realise how interested today's sixth class primary school pupils are in such matters. - Yours, etc.,
ANGELA MACNAMARA,
Lower Kilmacud Road,
Dublin 14.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - Now we have heard from the masters, will you provide space in your paper so that the mistresses of maternity hospitals can tell us how they believe we should vote? - Yours, etc.,
JAN O'SULLIVAN, TD,
Labour Party Spokesperson for
Equality and Law Reform,
Leinster House, Dublin 2.