Sir, – As somebody who grew up in priest-ridden Ireland, I am so glad that I have lived to hear our Taoiseach say, “I am proud to stand here as a public representative, who happens to be a Catholic but not a Catholic Taoiseach” (Dáil Report, June 13th). Dev and John Charles must be spinning in their graves. – Yours, etc,
PATRICK O’BYRNE,
Shandon Crescent,
Phibsborough, Dublin 7.
Sir, – When the Government published the Heads of the Protection of Life in Pregnancy Bill, Head 12, Article 3 stated: “No institution, organisation or third party shall refuse to provide a lawful termination of pregnancy to a woman on grounds of conscientious objection”. This effectively undermined the principle that a Catholic Voluntary Hospital (or indeed any voluntary hospital) could define its own ethos.
Notwithstanding some changes in the draft Bill, the Minister still stubbornly insists that no institution can “refuse medical treatment” on the grounds of conscientious objection and links this specifically to the question of funding. Nobody, of course, is talking about refusing medical treatment. Catholic hospitals must, however, refuse abortion, which is not medical treatment.
The European Directive 2000/78/EC (the discrimination directive) specifically makes provision for the protection of institutional ethos, when it states: “Provided that its provisions are otherwise complied with, this directive shall thus not prejudice the right of churches and other public or private organisations, the ethos of which is based on religion or belief, acting in conformity with national constitutions and laws, to require individuals working for them to act in good faith and with loyalty to the organisation’s ethos.”
I believe that Catholic Voluntary Hospitals as a body must make it clear, both to legislators and to their own staff, that while they will always provide life-saving medical treatment for women in pregnancy, they will uphold their ethos and will never facilitate or tolerate the deliberate termination of human life, at any stage.
It would also seem very important that, at a time when new hospital governance structures are being developed, voluntary hospitals should ensure that they remain the direct employers of their own staff. – Yours, etc,
Fr KEVIN DORAN,
Administrator,
Sacred Heart Parish,
Donnybrook, Dublin 4.
Sir, – How appropriate that "The Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013" was released in the dark of night. Section 22 of the Bill gives the game away. It starts promisingly: "(1) It shall be an offence to intentionally destroy unborn human life", and for a moment there was hope. But then sub-section (4) runs: "For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared that subsection (1) shall not apply to a medical practitioner who carries out a medical procedure referred to in section 7, 8 or 9 in accordance with that section". In other words, intentionally destroying life is banned except for all the cases mentioned in the Bill, including suicide risk, which surely means that the intentional destruction of human life is envisaged in these cases. That alone makes a laugh of the title of the Bill. – Yours, etc,
BRENDAN O’REGAN,
Dublin Road,
Arklow, Co Wicklow.
Sir, – I understand that Enda Kenny is an ardent fan of JFK and can even recite his speeches as his party piece. He is now even beginning to sound like him in the flesh. “I am proud to stand here as Taoiseach who happens to be a Catholic but not a Catholic taoiseach” – Enda Kenny (2013) in response to pro-Catholic lobby. “I am not the Catholic candidate for president, I am the Democratic Party candidate for president who happens to be a Catholic”– JFK (1960) in response to anti-Catholic lobby. Given it’s the 50th anniversary of JFK’s visit, maybe its appropriate that history does repeat itself. – Yours, etc,
TOM GERAGHTY,
Landscape Park,
Churchtown, Dublin 14.