Irish Times finally reports Irish Family Planning advice scandal.

Yesterday's Order of Business in the Seanad was dominated by the scandal of IFPA councellors offering dangerous and illegal advice which could possibly put women's lives in danger. The discussion was reported in today's Independent. You can read that here. The story is beginning to be taken seriously at last. It's about time.
The Irish Times has also begun to take the story seriously, Ivana must have given the nod, that can be read here.

Senators call for investigation into "illegal" advice offered by the IFPA.

During today's Order of Business in the Seanad several senators raised the issue of illegal and dangerous advice being offered by the IFPA under the Crisis Pregnancy Program. I have already blogged about the actual issue, it was originally exposed about a week and a half ago by Gemma O'Doherty in the Irish Independent. Several senators raised the subject yesterday during the Order of business. It was first raised by Senator Marc MacSharry who welcomed the proposed investigation. Of course he was barley finished speaking when the leading campaigner for abortion in Ireland and leader of the Labour Party in the Seanad (and serial failed Dáil candidate) Ivana Bacik stood to speak. She wanted to talk about non-taxpayer funded organizations, rogue organizations, as she likes to call them, that should be investigated. Perhaps she feels that a proper investigation would be diluted if others weer investigated. This is the oldest trick in the civil service book but Sir Humphrey she ain't. The next person to speak was Senator Rónán Mullen and despite several interruptions by human rights superstar and the real President of Ireland, Senator David Norris made the point that women's lives were endangered and Senator Bacik was trying to minimize that fact. Senator Norris in his usual histrionic manner was going on about impugning named people despite no actual people being named. Did I mention that he has a biography out about how he singlehandedly won human rights for all people?
There were many good contributions from quite a few senators. It would be unfair to name any more senators without mentioning them all but you can read the transcripts here. Other topics are covered too.

Is illegal advice offered by the IFPA being ignored?

In his column in today's Irish Independent David Quinn asks the question why are the accusations against the IFPA being ignored? The accusations which appeared in last Saturday's Independent are substantial. RTÉ are still refusing to cover the story. This is the same network that sent a team of reporters to Kenya to carryout interviews that were used in a program that let to one of the worst cases of libel in recent years. RTÉ clearly have an agenda and that agenda is to ignore stories based on factual evidence that expose their pro-abortion fellow travelers. The story has also failed to be taken up by the "paper of record." Fintan O'Toole's head might explode if he was forced to write on this story. Quinn starts his column by giving Ireland's opinion makers a history lesson:

A FEW years back, at taxpayers' expense, the Crisis Pregnancy Agency launched an advertising campaign warning women not to be manipulated by 'rogue' anti-abortion pregnancy-counselling agencies.
The then Health Minister Mary Harney described the manipulative behaviour of such agencies as "quite appalling".
The pro-choice Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) joined in the attack, with a briefing document on those 'rogue' agencies.
Thanks to the Irish Independent, we discovered last weekend that there are plenty of 'roguish' elements on the pro-choice side too. In fact, 'roguish' is putting it very mildly.

Indeed! The hypocrisy of those who campaign on the platform of women's health is particularly galling. The full piece is here.

Minister calls for IFPA investigation.

Illegal advice by Irish Family Planning Association to be Investigated.

The story in last Saturday's Irish Independent is beginning to cause a stir in political circles. As of yet the national broadcaster, RTÉ have refused to cover the story other than a mention in their online presence. They even refused to cover it in their "As it says in the papers" section. This is another example of the pro-abortion bias which has taken hold of the entity which, despite advertizing revenue and forcing every household in the state to pay a €160 tax still can't stop losing money. If you haven't already then go take a look at www.hearbothsides.org and see examples of RTÉ's bias in this area. There was no mention of it at all in the Irish Times. Maybe they're waiting for Ireland's leading intellectual Fintan O'Toole to offer more advice to Ireland's farmers before they comment. Gemma O'Doherty has followed up her story from Saturday with some of the political reaction.

HSE chiefs face grilling over illegal advice on abortions

HSE chiefs are to be quizzed by a Dail committee about revelations that staff at some state-funded crisis pregnancy services gave illegal and medically dangerous advice to women during one-to-one counselling sessions.
And Junior Minister for European Affairs Lucinda Creighton described the allegations - revealed in the Irish Independent on Saturday - as "extremely serious" and said they "must be investigated by all of the appropriate authorities".

The full story is to be found here.

The Irish Family Planning Association offers a "comprehensive range of services" even ones detrimental to women's health.

Abortion campaigner uses taxpayer funds to endanger women's health!

It was revealed in this morning's Irish Independent that the Crisis Pregnancy Program which comes under the HSE is implicated in a scandal whereby women were offered advice that was dangerous and potentially illegal. It is astounding that an organization like the IFPA which is Ireland's leading pro-abortion organization to the extent it took the state to court receives taxpayer funds in order to advance its agenda. The money it receives is to provide non-directive counselling. Instead we see that the advice offered isn't just in contravention of those conditions it is dangerous and potentially illegal. It's time for our elected representatives and especially the Minister for Health, Dr Reilly to call for an investigation.
This story is due to the excellent investigative reporting of Gemma O'Doherty and the women who actually caught the IFPA people on tape.

Revealed: the abortion advice that could put lives at risk.

   
STAFF at some taxpayer-funded pregnancy counselling services are putting women's lives at risk and breaking the law, an undercover probe has revealed.Some of the advice they gave about abortion was illegal, according to a leading lawyer, and some was medically dangerous, a top doctor says.In several instances, women were told to hide their abortions from their doctors, a course of action that could endanger life if post-surgery abortion complications remain undiagnosed.

Read more here.

Also in today's Irish Independent medical and legal experts have their say on this story.

Shocking breach of good medical practice, says Rotunda chief

A LEADING obstetrician has warned that advice given by some taxpayer-funded pregnancy-counselling services is putting women's lives in danger.
Sam Coulter Smith, clinical professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at the Royal College of Surgeons, said he was "shocked and very disappointed" to learn that Irish women who travel to Britain for abortions are being told they should hide this from their doctors.
The findings, which emerged as part of an undercover investigation into crisis-pregnancy counselling services, are now the subject of an HSE probe.

More about that here.
Considering the fact that the Minister for Health thinks that the former head of the IFPA is an appropriate person to head the HSE the question must be asked, is the HSE the appropriate body to investigate this scandal?

500, no, 5,000, no, 2,500, no 2,000 ...

I was going to blog about the March for abortion choice which goes under the rather disingenuous title March for Choice (variously #march4choice and #marchforchoice on Twitter), I mean what choice are they talking about? Boxers or briefs, paper or plastic? No they want the choice to kill human persons. Anyway I could go on about that but as I said I was going to blog about the march but the story of the day wasn't the march itself or the rather predictable speeches (the capitalist bishops want to control your fertility and ignore the bank bailout - Clare Wallace neé Daly, late of the Socialist Party) but the numbers fiasco.
I'd link to the story in the Irish Times, posted almost two hours after the conclusion of the march, that mentioned how the turnout was dismal, around 500 only it changed later that night. Between 6PM and about 11 Twitter was alive with people encouraging pro abortion choice advocates to contact the Irish Times, eventually the paper of Ricard relented and changed to a rather vague report of thousands turning up.
Anyway, the fiasco is captured pretty comprehensibly here in this new blog.   The Quicker goes the journalist the slower go his thoughts.

PLC says National Women’s Council of Ireland no longer a “mainstream representative group for Irish women”

The National Women's Council of Ireland (NWCI) is the representative organisation for some women and certain women's groups in Ireland. They now support abortion at all stages. They can no longer claim to represent all women or all women's organizations. Last year they attacked Women Hurt for having the temerity to speak out about their own experiences of abortion. Now they're giving comfort to the most extreme element in the pro abortion movement in Ireland. I really hope that some of their member organizations let them know that they do not speak for them.

PLC says National Women’s Council of Ireland no longer a “mainstream representative group for Irish women”

27th September 2012

Speaking in response to a statement issued today by the National Women's Council of Ireland calling for abortion legislation, Dr. Ruth Cullen, Education Spokesperson of the Pro Life Campaign said;
"The NWCI can no longer call themselves a mainstream representative group for Irish women. Only last year the NWCI launched a scathing attack on Women Hurt,  for simply launching a billboard campaign drawing attention to abortion regret and the stories of women seeking hope and healing after abortion.
In citing public support for abortion today, it is interesting to note that the NWCI quoted a recent poll which made no distinction between necessary medical interventions in pregnancy and induced abortion which targets the life of the baby. Polls that do not make this ethical distinction are meaningless in the current abortion debate."

The same statement with some additional comment can be found here. 

Let's clear up a few things ...

Ireland has to legislate for the X Case ... yet there are huge flaws with this judgement. Ireland has to bring in abortion some European court told us after the ABC judgement ... well no actually they didn't. Don't take my word for it take the word of Dr Maria Cahill LLB, LLM, PhD.

The original article is available on the website of the Sunday Business Post but behind a paywall here. It has been reproduced on the Pro Life Campaign website here.

European court's abortion judgment not black and white

Dr Maria Cahill LLB, LLM, PhD

This article appeared in the print edition of the Sunday Business Post on 23rd September 2012

Anybody who claims, by reference to the decision in ABC v Ireland that Ireland is now compelled to legislate for abortion, arrives at their conclusion without much assistance from the judgment.
In fact, the court regularly uses 'mother' as a synonym for pregnant woman and 'her child' as a synonym for foetus. It rules that there is no right to an abortion under Article 8 of the European Convention, and, affirming its earlier ruling in Vo v France, holds that contracting states are entitled under the convention "to choose to consider the unborn to be a person and to aim to protect that life".
Acknowledging that there is broad consensus across the contracting states towards allowing abortion on looser grounds than those required by Irish law, the court nevertheless allows Ireland a broad margin of appreciation because there is "no European consensus on the scientific and legal definition of the beginning of life".
The judgment declares that protecting unborn life, as the Irish Constitution does by means of Article 40.3.3, is "a legitimate aim" and also "necessary in a democratic society" such as Ireland, where the majority of people value the right to life of unborn children. On this basis – that the Irish constitutional protection for the right to life of the unborn is compatible with the convention – the court rejects the claims of Applicants A and B.
Applicant C, the Lithuanian national, was in remission from an unspecified cancer when she became pregnant. Understandably concerned and fearful for her health, she searched online to assess her medical risks and travelled to England for an abortion.
She did not seek legal advice in Ireland and there are conflicting claims on the question of whether or not she consulted her oncologist after she became pregnant. (None of the facts of the case was proven, so this remains undetermined.)
The court ruled that Ireland was in violation of the convention for lack of "an accessible and effective procedure" by which Applicant C could have known her medical and legal position.
So, the take-home messages are that Article 40.3.3 of the Irish Constitution is compatible with the convention; that the prohibition on abortion is compatible with the convention, as the court confirmed by ruling against Applicants A and B; but that there is a problem of lack of clarity in cases where women face medical threats to their lives, as the court determined by finding in favour of Applicant C.
In order to address the lack of clarity that the court found to be problematic, we must therefore focus on the person in the circumstances of Applicant C; that is, on the woman who faces a medical risk to her life during her pregnancy.
While we cannot know exactly how the legal and medical professionals failed Applicant C because of the lack of evidence presented, we do know that Ireland is internationally recognised for the exceptional standard of care provided to women in the same position as Applicant C, and consistently ranks first or second in the world for lowest maternal mortality rates.
It is unquestionably the case that, had her cancer returned and had she sought treatment in Ireland, Applicant C's medical team would have acted to save her life, and her treatment plan could have included radiotherapy, chemotherapy, hysterectomy or any other treatment, notwithstanding that the unintended but foreseeable side-effect of such treatments may potentially have been the loss of her child.
The problem is then that there was no procedure that made this clear enough to her, with the result that she trusted her own Google-searched self-diagnosis, rather than trusting the care that she would have received at the hands of the medical professionals. Therefore, the clarification needed is that the current best practice two-patient model, whereby every medical effort is made to care for the lives of both mother and child, should be placed on a regulatory or statutory footing so that women in the circumstances of Applicant C can be assured that the medical care they need will be provided, to the highest international standard.
Still, those procedures are only useful if a woman has already entrusted herself to the care of a doctor.
For the sake of any other woman like Applicant C, who would turn in desperation to Google in order to self-assess her chances of dying, the Department of Health should initiate an information campaign highlighting that world-leading healthcare is provided to women and children as standard throughout pregnancy. It is an injustice to women such as Applicant C that our outstanding record of maternal health care is such a well-kept secret.
This approach does not necessitate giving legislative effect to the decision in the X case, which is legitimate because Applicant C did not argue suicidal ideation, and therefore her legal position is different to that of the woman in X.
Despite the great clarity with which Article 40.3.3 affirms that the right to life of the mother and the right to life of the unborn are "equal", the Supreme Court ruled in the X case that the right to life of the mother is "superior" to the right to life of the unborn which was labelled "contingent". This departure from the unambiguous constitutional position and the two-patient model it inspires resulted in the legal outcome that, if a mother threatens to commit suicide, the Supreme Court holds that she has the right to an abortion.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court reached this conclusion without hearing expert psychiatric evidence, nor could it have been aware of the huge volume of medical research which has emerged since and which shows that abortion is not a treatment for suicide, but may actually increase its risk.
Furthermore, in the X case there were no time limits placed on that right to abortion in case of suicide. Therefore, bringing clarity to the position held in the X case would entail legislating or regulating for an extremely liberal position on abortion – one that would allow all women who establish that they are at risk of committing suicide to have abortions right up until the moment they give birth.
Any temporal restrictions that the legislature would impose would be inconsistent with the X case, and would therefore add another layer of confusion to the current position, which is the exact opposite of what ABC exhorts. (To overturn the X case, and return to the original clear meaning of Article 40.3.3 which is expressly endorsed by the European Court of Human Rights in ABC, we could pass a constitutional amendment by referendum.)
Ultimately, since the European Court of Human Rights holds that there is no right to an abortion under the convention and that Ireland is entitled to protect the right to life of the unborn child, since the ABC case did not concern suicidal ideation, and since the X case does more to obscure than to clarify the legal position, the most reasonable, proportionate and effective way of responding to ABC v Ireland in order to afford clarity to those in the position of Applicant C is to regulate for the two-patient model – which is the current best practice in Irish hospitals and internationally celebrated.
Dr Maria Cahill is a lecturer in law at UCC

Pro Life Campaign National Seminar 2012

The Pro Life Campaign had its national seminar earlier today. The room was packed and people were treated to a series of great speakers. Not just Matt Mooney who I saw speak earlier in the week but also Dr Patricia Casey, Dr Berry Kiely, Caroline Simons, Professor William Binchy. Joe McCarroll and Cora Sherlock spoke on behalf of the Pro Life Campaign. The full story is found here.

99 Balloons

I always thought 99 (red) balloons was a rather cheesy song from the 1980s. Well it still is. At the same time, however, it is also the title of video that will bring a tear to even the hardest of hearts. I'm posting this here in this blog because I believe it to be very relevant to the discussion going on right now in Ireland. Matt & Ginny Mooney could have made the decision to end the life of their son Eliot before he was born, with his so called "abnormalities" he would never grow up to what the world describes as greatness. He was for his short life precious to them, more precious than if he won Olympic Gold and went on to lead his country.
 I went to hear Matt speak earlier tonight, the man has a great gift.

 

Not viable for life eh? Listen to Matt Mooney and learn differently. Check out the Mooney's blog.      

Sunday Times Poll

A poll appeared in yesterday's Sunday Times. It appears to say something like 80% of Irish people want abortion introduced. Of course as usual you get the response you want when you ask the right question. The question itself was flawed, it asked if people would approve of abortion in the case where a woman's life is at risk. As I've blogged before Ireland is a very safe place for women to give birth. Our constitution recognizes that pregnant women have a right to medical care, that they have an equal right to life with their unborn child. In a case where medical attention would heal the mother but have the unintended side effect of harming the baby's the mother always gets the care she wants.
In a statement the Pro Life Campaign's Dr Ruth Cullen puts it very clear:

This poll is fundamentally flawed and adds nothing to the debate because it fails to make the crucial distinction between necessary medical interventions in pregnancy to save the mother and induced abortion which targets the life of the unborn baby.

The unborn is a human being and worthy of protection

Fintan O'Toole is fairly typical of a class of person that exists in Ireland today. Opinionated, vocal, bitter against the Church, contrarian and most of all pseudo intellectual. He had an article, an opinion piece in last Tuesday's Irish Times. The actual article was laced with inaccuracies and fallacies. William Binchy, legal adviser to the Pro Life Campaign wrote an excellent rebuttal piece for the Irish Times. Among other points he says:

Using emotive language, he identifies the implications of recognising the equal worth and dignity of every human being: “Over the last decade, the equivalent of the entire population of Limerick city has been murdered. ... Of course, the premise which he is inviting the reader to accept is that the termination of the lives of unborn children should not be the source of serious concern because unborn children, on account of their immaturity, are less worthy of respect and protection. ... Yet the central human rights value – the equal worth and dignity of every human being – is rejected by Fintan’s analysis. Human beings in the early stages of their life, when they are at risk of abortion on a “right to choose” test, are in his eyes not human beings “in exactly the same sense” as Mandela.

I would like to reproduce the entire article here but newspapers are funny about that kind of thing so the original article can be accessed via this link.  I think Professor Binchy does a very good job at demolishing not just O'Toole's article but the entire pro abortion argument. He attacks it from first principle, that is to say, he makes us ask what is a human being and is it ever acceptable to kill one just because they are at an early stage of development. If we believe the unborn is a human person then they deserve to be protected as much as Mandela or Lady Gaga. If they are not a human person then Fintan needs to be honest and tell us when, in his opinion does human personhood start. I'd like to see him answer that, he may go gaga pretty quickly himself.
It's also worth noting that on the same night as that article appeared Vincent chaired a debate on the Vincent Brown Tonight show on TV3 about the topic of abortion. His partisan article was not mentioned but it was pretty evident from his grandstanding and hostile tone towards Rónán Mullen and Caroline Simons what side he was on. Despite this Senator mullen and Caroline Simons did very very well. The TV debate can be accessed here.

Kulturkampf.

Kulturkampf
Late 19th century Europe was not a very pleasant place for Catholics. Political activism by Catholics was discouraged, clergy were persecuted and very often exiled. The Minister for mis-Communications Pat Rabbitte said that it would be a regressive step if the Church dictated policy to the government. Pat Rabitte would much prefer that Unions would dictate policy. Pat was a union official back in the day and was well able to do that himself. He was president of the Union of Students in Ireland and later became an official and eventually National Secretary in the Irish transport and General Workers Union. Presumably he didn't dictate to Labour Party or other Ministers during his tenure, maybe they discussed the progress of the Mayo football team? The very language he uses is inaccurate and inflammatory. He seeks to poison the well as it were. 
Whatever your opinion on the Church it is still the moral guide for the vast majority of Irish people. Religious practice in Ireland is still high compared to many countries, more people go to Mass on a regular basis than participate in the political process. Far more people are Catholic and look to the Church for moral guidance than have ever voted for the Labour Party. The fact that someone would seek to silence such a large organization, one that plays such a large part in civic society is profoundly undemocratic. 
The Pro-Life Campaign weighed in fairly early, it's statement is below. 

Pro Life Campaign criticises Minister Rabbitte for attempting to suppress voices in abortion debate

27th  August 2012

The Pro Life Campaign has criticised the Minister for Communications, Pat Rabbitte over his remarks on RTÉ radio yesterday when he said he didn't welcome plans by the Catholic Church to play an active role in the abortion debate.
Cardinal Brady, the leader of the Catholic Church in Ireland said at the weekend that the Catholic Church would get involved in the abortion debate should the Government attempt to introduce abortion in the coming months.  In response Minister Rabbitte said ‘I would hope we’re not going to see a situation where one church decides to weigh into the campaign in the political sense.’
Commenting on Minister Rabbitte's remarks, Pro Life Campaign spokesperson Cora Sherlock said:
“No church, faith-based group or any group should be intimidated out of the public arena when it comes to commenting on public policy, particularly on an issue as fundamental as the right to life. I would have thought it was partly the role of any Minister for Communications to encourage public discourse on important issues not try to suppress it.”
Ms Sherlock continued: “In the same interview, Minister Rabbitte also misleadingly implied that women were currently being denied necessary medical treatments because of the absence of abortion here.  This is a total misrepresentation of the facts. Ireland, without abortion, is a recognised world leader in safeguarding the lives of women in pregnancy.”

Well said Ms Sherlock. This was covered in today's Irish Times with some reactions from less hostile politicians.

Irish abortion regime must be resisted

 Irish abortion regime must be resisted

As the rather pathetic summer turns into autumn we have to keep our eye on one of those issues where there is a "consensus" among the left wing politicians and some of the hacks in our newspapers on one hand and the majority of the population on the other. The indubitable Cora Sherlock, chairperson of the Pro Life Campaign has her say in The Examiner.

Irish abortion regime must be resisted

By Cora Sherlock

Thursday, August 23, 2012

The introduction of abortion has far-reaching effects. Everyone should be free to voice an opinion, says Cora Sherlock
WE’VE come to expect a certain level of divisiveness in the abortion debate. It’s an emotive subject simply because it concerns the most fundamental right of all — the right to life. 

Ironically, many call for a calm debate one minute, and then revert to accusations of cowardice the next. We saw this in action recently when a group of Fine Gael TDs indicated that they were not prepared to vote for abortion legislation. 

But why should they, or anyone who opposes abortion, be accused of cowardice? Surely we’ve wrestled with this issue for long enough to have passed the stage of name-calling? The introduction of abortion to a society has far-reaching effects. As such, everyone living in that society should be free to voice an opinion without fear of being castigated, regardless of where they stand on the issue. 

Health Minister James Reilly’s comments and actions over the past few weeks mean it will not come as any great surprise if the expert group on abortion reports back in September with a limited list of options, all of which lead to the introduction of abortion, whether by legislation or regulation. However, if this happens it will be on the basis of a political decision and will have nothing to do with the requirements of either medicine or law. 

Women don’t die in Ireland because abortion is illegal here. We have a lower maternal mortality rate than countries such as the Netherlands or the UK, where abortion is legal. This fact is often dismissed by those who would like to see abortion introduced here, but their arguments ignore the fact that pregnant women in Irish hospitals already receive whatever treatment they need for an existing medical condition. The only difference is that doctors here have a duty of care towards the unborn child as he or she is recognised as a separate patient. The same cannot be said of the UK, for example, where abortion is legal up to 24 weeks and up to birth if the baby is suffering from even a minor disability. 

Earlier this year, The Daily Telegraph carried out an undercover investigation which revealed systematic abuses in a number of abortion clinics, including the illegal practice of sex-selective abortion. Babies are born alive during "botched abortions" in the UK — and then left to die. 

These facts are unpalatable, but it is incumbent on those who advocate the introduction of abortion to explain how we will be any different to countries such as the UK, which introduced abortion on supposedly "limited grounds" and subsequently found it impossible to restrict or control. Legally, there is no obligation on the Government to introduce abortion. The oft-quoted ABC European court decision merely obliged us to state our laws clearly; it did not state what those laws should be but recognised the right of the Irish people to decide this issue. 

If, as some have suggested, we legislate on the basis of the X Case, we would be ignoring the fact that the court in X heard no medical evidence. In making its decision, the court set no time limits. Legislation based on X means late-term abortions would be protected in law right up to birth. Since the X Case too, there has been a wealth of peer-reviewed evidence showing that abortion often has negative consequences on the woman involved — a fact exemplified by the testimonies of the women in groups like Women Hurt and this year’s HSE/Crisis Pregnancy Programme Study, which found a marked increase in the level of abortion regret since the last study carried out in 2003. An honest debate accepts that there are negative effects on many women. Their voices must not be drowned out. 

In its pre-election commitment to the Pro-Life Campaign, Fine Gael restated its opposition to the legalisation of abortion and research conducted on human embryos. It undertook to bring to the expert group a clear "commitment that women in pregnancy will receive whatever treatments are necessary to safeguard their lives and that the duty of care to preserve the life of the baby will also be upheld". 

This is the genuine pro-life, pro-woman position that is currently in practice in Irish hospitals and is consistently supported in independent opinion polls. A careful review of the facts has meant several governments have realised abortion is not necessary to safeguard women’s health. On the contrary, it may jeopardise their psychological wellbeing and end the life of a separate human being. 

Right now, Dr Reilly has primed the expert group to produce a list of options that would impose an abortion regime on Ireland. This is an affront to human dignity and the right to life and must be opposed.

 



* Cora Sherlock is deputy chairwoman of the Pro-Life Campaign

Without the right to life, all other rights are meaningless. 

Although I live west of the Shannon I don't make it to Mayo half as much as I should. Therefore I was slightly amused to find a letter that was originally published in the Connaught Telegraph on the  website for the US National Right to Life. I think it sums up perfectly the situation in Ireland right now, how Fine Gael, who are the majority party after all, need to stand up against the pro abortion bullies in the Labour Party.
Here is the letter as it appeared on the US website, complete with explanatory notes for the US readers.

Without the right to life, all other rights are meaningless

Editor’s note. The following letter to the editor was forwarded to the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, which reprinted it on its webpage. Mr. Ryan’s letter was sent to “The Connaught Telegraph.” [The “Fine Gael” is a political party in Ireland.]

Sir,
In a time when politicians get criticised for following the party line without question, I was very pleased that some members of Fine Gael stood up recently and said they were not going to accept abortion.
I’m referring to this month’s meeting of the Fine Gael parliamentary party when a number of Fine Gael representatives challenged the Minister for Health and vowed to vote against abortion legislation.
I was especially glad to see John O’Mahony [a member of the Fine Gael from Mayo] listed among those who spoke up on this issue.
Based on his defense of the unborn so far I would have no difficulty either voting for him or asking others to vote for him in a future election.
While it seems that Ireland remains an overwhelmingly pro-life country, according to consistent Millward Brown Lansdowne opinion polling, there does seem to be bias among the national media that favours legislating for abortion.
Over 79 per cent of people in Mayo want Fine Gael to keep their pre-election promise. That is considerably more than the 65 per cent that voted for Fine Gael in the last election.
In the same election the pro-abortion Labour party got less than five per cent of the vote. Clearly the people of Mayo support women who are pregnant and they want to see the law reflect this.
I was shocked to see that some member of the Labour party were critical of the Fine Gael [members of the lower house of Parliament] and senators. The fact that the Fine Gael party made a pro-life commitment to The Pro-Life Campaign prior to the general election is laudable and the fact the Fine Gael deputies feel that they should honour their promise is something Fine Gael should be proud of.
It continues to be a tragedy that Irish women travel for abortions and it’s a scandal that women do so because they do not feel they have adequate supports in Ireland.
I hope our politicians will continue to see the need to offer women more and better support services when they are faced with a crisis pregnancy.
Without the right to life, all other rights are meaningless. I congratulate the Fine Gael deputies on their stance and hope that the rest of the Fine Gael party follows suit.
Yours sincerely,

Tom Ryan, Castlebar. 

Abortion campaigner to head Ireland's health service. 

More on Tony O'Brien's appointment. A statement from the Pro Life Campaign via their Facebook page. The Independent describes O'Brien as one of Reilly's "key executives." Reilly is an intelligent man, he is a doctor after all. He is also a businessman, though he has been described as more of a businessman than a doctor. This worries me as the debt default issue would suggest that he is not much of a businessman either. The point I'm trying to make is that he is a terrible politician, he seems to have no idea ...

Pro Life Campaign says new HSE appointment sends the wrong message on abortion

27th July 2012

The Minister for Health James Reilly today appointed Mr Tony O’Brien as the new Director General of the HSE.  Mr O'Brien was previously the Chief Executive of the Irish Family Planning Association and a leading campaigner for abortion in Ireland.
Commenting on the Minister for Health’s latest appointment, Pro Life Campaign spokesperson, Cora Sherlock said:
“Ever since the Clare Daly Bill on abortion, Minister Reilly has been effectively relying on the speaking notes of the pro-abortion movement rather than defending Fine Gael’s pre-election pro-life commitments.
“Now he has appointed someone as Director General of the HSE who has spent most of his career campaigning for abortion on demand in Ireland. The political message sent by this appointment is unmistakable. Whether it’s the issue or the optics, clearly Minister Reilly doesn’t get it.
“Of more concern, however, to pro-life supporters is the manner in which the Expert Group process initiated by the Minister is descending into farce.
“Both Minister Reilly and Minister of State Kathleen Lynch have already made public statements pre-empting its findings and it will come as no surprise if it reports back with a narrow list of options all advocating abortion. If this happens, it will have nothing to do with women’s health or the right to life and everything to do with politics.”

Former head of IFPA to head Ireland's health service, well done minister Reilly, you get the prize for most cock ups this Summer. 

James Reilly believes that he doesn't have enough trouble on his plate. His recent appearance in Stubbs Gazette as a debt defaulter hasn't caused him enough grief, he has decided to appoint a former head of the largest organized campaigner for abortion in Ireland as head of the new health service.
As chief executive of the IFPA Mr Tony O'Brien was very critical of Ireland and her laws in this regard. Mr O'Reilly was very vocal more than ten years ago when the statistics showed that the number of Irish women seeking abortions in Britain was on the rise, responding to the release of statistics in 2000 he said: "... we are doing very little to seriously tackle the underlying issue of unplanned pregnancy."The numbers have declined over the last ten years, the IFPA have their own spin on that but it can't be explained by contraception, not when the birth rate is at a 118 year high and abortions are at a 30 year low.
Mr O'Brien has spent the last ten years working in the health services. He seems to have done very well there. I can't take his success from him. His appointment as head of the nation's health services is a strange move, this cannot be denied. The minister cannot claim that he was not aware of Mr O'Brien's résumé. Because of this Mr. O'Brien's appointment at this time, when abortion is being discussed with such heat his appointment for a three year period is extraordinary arrogant by O'Reilly. O'Reilly has made other decisions where he has been criticized for his arrogance but this one takes the biscuit. Considering some of the actions Mr O'Brien took and remarks that he made during his tenure as chief of the IFPA the only thing that can be said is that his appointment is thoroughly unsuitable at this time once you consider the issue that James Reilly has told us that he will legislate.
Thankfully some within Fine Gael have the courage to stand up to Reilly and I hope that others will develop the same but this appointment while it will give comfort to the Labour Party it will do nothing to boost support for Fine Gael. Having two Junior Ministers in your department, at least one of which feels slighted that the resignation of the head of the HSE wasn't made known to her before it was announced publicly, isn't working well for Reilly.
Of course there is one other possibility, that Reilly is just not up to the job.

Martin statement re abortion legislation "timely and welcome" say Pro Life Campaign

23rd July 2012

Fianna Fáil leader Michéal Martin's comments today, in which he said that legislation to allow abortion along the lines of the X case would effectively lead to abortion on demand "are timely and welcome", the Pro Life Campaign (PLC) have said.
In a statement, PLC spokesperson Dr Ruth Cullen said that Mr Martin's remarks "acknowledged the reality of what an Irish abortion regime would look like after legislation".
Dr Cullen said: "The past week has been heartening for those who still believe that when political parties make promises, they should stick by them.
"Last week we saw a significant number of Fine Gael TDs and Senators remind their party leadership of their election pledge to stand up for unborn human life. Today we saw Michéal Martin reaffirm his party's commitment to the same principle: that human life must be protected at all stages. Both developments were timely and welcome.
"At a time when Labour politicians are trying to bully the Government into believing the myth that the European court judgement in the  A,B and C v Ireland case obliges Ireland to legalise abortion, we welcome the clarity which both Mr Martin's comments, and the stance taken by backbench Fine Gael TDs, have brought to the debate.
"Mr Martin's statement, that legislation to provide for abortion along the lines of the X case would create "an open-door situation" which would be "very difficult to hold back" acknowledged the reality of what an Irish abortion regime would look like after legislation.
Dr Cullen also welcomed Mr Martin's acknowledgement that current Irish medical practice was about protecting both mother and child.
"Pro-abortion advocates and politicians have repeatedly attempted to obscure the fact that Ireland boasts world class medical care for pregnant women. In this context, Mr Martin's recognition that Irish doctors do everything they can "to preserve the life of the unborn and preserve the life of the mother" is very welcome.
"Ireland has consistently shown itself to be the safest place in the world to give birth in, and international statistics confirm this."

Opinion poll shows overwhelming support for Ireland's pro-life laws. 

It's been a while since I've seen an opinion poll on abortion that was conducted by a polling agency and not conducted online or by phone in. The recent poll conducted by Millward Brown Lansdowne for the Pro Life Campaign turned up some interesting results. 
When people understand that the law as it stands in Ireland ensures that mothers get all medical attention that they need while doctors also strive to preserve the life of their unborn child they are more likely to support the status quo.

Thursday 21st June 2012

Public wants Fine Gael to honour its pro-life commitments

Pro Life Campaign calls on Minister for Health to clarify Fine Gael’s stance on abortion following Dáil speech

The Pro Life Campaign today released the latest Millward Brown Lansdowne polling research on life issues which shows strong public backing for the pro-life commitments made by Fine Gael prior to the general election in 2011. The research also reveals significant public support for current medical practice in Ireland where there is a duty of care towards the baby when intervening in pregnancy to save the mother’s life.
The research was carried out on a quota controlled sample of 979 people aged 18+ between 2nd – 15th May 2012.
The first question reads:
Just prior to polling day in the 2011 General Election, Fine Gael said it was opposed to the legalisation of abortion and experimentation on human embryos. It said that Fine Gael’s representatives would bring to the proposed all-party committee a clear commitment that women in pregnancy will receive whatever treatments are necessary to safeguard their lives, and the duty of care to preserve the life of the baby will also be upheld.  Would you agree or disagree with this commitment?
Overall, of those who expressed an opinion, 80% agreed with the commitment and 20% disagreed.  In Connacht/Ulster which includes the Taoiseach’s constituency of Mayo, 87% agreed and only 13% disagreed.
The second question was worded as follows:
Current medical practice in Ireland does not allow the deliberate killing of the unborn baby.  In a crisis pregnancy situation, the doctor has a duty of care towards the baby when intervening to save the mother’s life.  Do you consider that this ethical practice should be protected by law?
78% of those who expressed an opinion said it should and 22% disagreed.  There was majority support in all ages, social classes and regions.
Commenting on the poll findings, Dr Berry Kiely of the Pro Life Campaign said: “When the ethical distinction between induced abortion and necessary medical interventions in pregnancy is clarified in polling questions, the true strength of public opposition to abortion is revealed. The latest poll findings bear this out and are immensely reassuring from a pro-life perspective.”
Referring to the speech by Minister for Health, James Reilly in the Dáil during the recent Private Members’ Bill on abortion, Dr Kiely said,  “The Minister for Health’s speech alarmed pro-life supporters and he has a responsibility to clarify his position and that of Fine Gael”.
In his speech Minister Reilly said that the previous six governments had failed to legislate for the X Case decision but that the present Government “will not be the seventh.”
In response to this, Dr Kiely said, “It is clear from the Minister’s remarks that he does not expect the “Expert Group” on abortion to list as one of its options ways of complying with the European Court of Human Rights decision in A, B and C v. Ireland, that afford legal protection to both mother and baby in pregnancy. This completely undermines Fine Gael’s solemn pre-election commitment opposing abortion legislation and pledging that “women in pregnancy will receive whatever treatments are necessary to safeguard their lives and the duty of care to preserve the life of the baby will also be upheld.
“Legislation based on the X Case would amount to abortion on demand as the judges heard no medical evidence and set no time limits for when an abortion could take place. In addition the recent European court decision in A, B and C v. Ireland does not oblige us to introduce an abortion regime.
“Instead of repeating pro-abortion claims, the Minister for Health needs to acknowledge that Ireland, without abortion, is the safest country in the world for pregnant women as recognised by the UN and World Health Organisation. The Minister also needs to clarify Fine Gael’s stance on abortion in light of his recent speech in the Dáil”, Dr Kiely concluded.

Number of Irish women seeking abortion in Britain declines for the tenth consecutive year. 

British health authorities have released their statistics for abortions over the last year and for the tenth consecutive year the number of women with Irish addresses has declined. The figures are back to where they were about 30 years ago.  Some people, like the IFPA, will like to claim credit for this, people are using contraception they say (yet our birth rate is at a 118 year high) so obviously something is off in their reasoning. But I suppose when your raison d'être is abortion and contraception you have to come out with some spin. They will also tell you that fewer and fewer Irish women give Irish addresses because of a variety of reasons. Again no evidence to support this, and indeed it calls into question the method the British use to compile their statistics. Highly original. 
Anyway this is good news. 
One of the main arguments for introducing abortion into Ireland is that Irish women will only go to Britain anyway. Not much of an argument but now that fewer Irish women feel the need to go to Britain does this mean we will hear less of that argument? One final note. Just because fewer women feel the need to have an abortion does not mean that we do not try to help them, change our culture and society to one that values mothers and their babies. 

 PLC welcomes fall in abortion rates for tenth consecutive year.   While abortion rates fall, rate of women regretting abortions rise

29th May 2012

The Pro Life Campaign has welcomed the latest Irish abortion figures released today by the British Department of Health,* which show that the number of Irish women travelling to Britain for abortions has decreased for the tenth consecutive year.

In 2011, 4,149 Irish women travelled to Britain for abortions, down from 4,402 in 2010 and 4,422 in 2009.  The 2011 figures show a marked decrease over previous years.  2011 is the tenth consecutive year that Irish abortions have declined and represents a 38% decline since the high of 6,673 Irish abortions in 2001.

The release of these figures follows the recent report ** from the HSE/Crisis Pregnancy Programme showing an increase in the number of women expressing abortion regret.  In that study, 44 per cent of women expressed varying degrees of regret about their abortions up from 33 per cent in a similar HSE study in 2003.

In a statement welcoming the continuing reduction in the number of Irish women travelling to Britain for abortion, Cora Sherlock of the Pro Life Campaign said:

“While it is too early to draw firm conclusions, the fact that the abortion figures are decreasing while the number of women expressing regret after abortion is increasing, shows the need for a much closer examination of women’s experiences of abortion, including abortion regret."

She said: “There has been a refusal on the part of those campaigning for abortion in Ireland to take on board the research indicating the negative consequences of abortion for women. This does a tremendous disservice to women. The claims by some groups that the reduced figures can be explained by the fact that women are travelling to other countries is not backed by the evidence."

 *Summary Abortion Statistics, England and Wales: 2011 (29/05/12)
 ** Irish Contraception and Crisis Pregnancy Study 2010 (ICCP 2010), published in May 2012 (HSE/CPP 

Ignoring abortion regret. 

If you frequent discussion boards about abortion you will, from time to time, see people disusing abortion regret. Now those who are content with having liberal abortion laws and a liberal abortion culture blame conservative, Catholic guilt culture and so on. If only people weren't so judgmental. I've seen people write things like women who have regrets over their abortions should just "suck it up" "get over it" and so on.
A study released by the HSE recently reveled that 44% of women who have had an abortion regret the experience. That is an enormous amount and begs the question,  are women who regret their abortions being ignored? It also, and maybe more importantly, begs the question, what is being done to help women who have regrets?
There is help out there though. Women who have been through the experience are there to help others. Women Hurt is an organization where women who have had abortions and regret them reach out to other women who have regrets to offer hope and healing. They want to tell those contemplating having an abortion that there is another side. Women Hurt have their own website, that can be accessed here, womenhurt.ie
Here is a statement by the Pro Life Campaign on the findings with further analysis.

Study showing regret after abortion must be considered by the Minister For Health says Pro Life Campaign

15th May 2012

A comprehensive study showing that 44 per cent of women expressed varying degrees of regret about their abortions “must be urgently considered by the Minister for Health”, the Pro Life Campaign (PLC) has said.
They were responding to the Irish Contraception and Crisis Pregnancy Study 2010 (ICCP 2010), produced by the HSE's Crisis Pregnancy Programme (CPP).
The study showed that 31pc of women who had abortion experienced "some regrets", with 13pc reporting that they experienced “a lot of regrets”. This represents an increase from 2003, when 22pc reported experiencing some regret, with 11pc saying they had a lot of regrets.
Spokesperson for the PLC, Dr Ruth Cullen, said the figures showed that the abortion debate “needed to make room for the voices of the increasing number of women who regret their abortion”.
She said: "While there has been considerable media focus on the stories of women who wished to see abortion legal in Ireland, the same cannot be said for the stories of women who regret their abortions. This has to change.
She said: “Even organisations like the National Women's Council of Ireland, which are supposed to represent all women, dismiss organisations that seek to express the pain of women hurt by abortion.
Dr Cullen also said that Minister James Reilly needs to take into account the experiences of women who regretted their abortion and ensure that counselling services also acknowledge this reality.
She expressed surprise that the CPP had not conducted research into the mental health impact of abortion, given the fact that there were now a number of studies showing that abortion presented a considerable risk to the mental health of women.
Dr. Cullen said: “A number of peer reviewed studies have now shown that women who have abortions are up to 30pc more likely to experience subsequent mental health problems. This is even after those studies controlled for women with pre-existing mental health conditions.
“One might have expected a comprehensive study on crisis pregnancy to have examined this area.”
Dr Cullen also noted that the study's findings on attitudes to abortion were compromised by the question asked.
According to the survey, 45 per cent of adults believed abortion should be permissible in all circumstances, down from over 50 per cent in a similar study in 2003. And 44 per cent said it should be available under certain circumstances, up from 39 per cent in 2003.
However, Dr Cullen said, the survey's question relating to abortion when there is a risk to the woman's life “failed to make the distinction between medical interventions in pregnancy to save the mother's life and induced abortion, the sole aim of which is to end the life of the baby.
She said that this shortcoming in the research made the findings on attitudes to abortion “effectively irrelevant”.

RTÉ, biased? 

You need a license to if you want to own a dog, you need one if you want to own a gun, you need one before you can drive a car. Presumably this is because in each case a certain amount of care and responsibility is needed. Dogs can savage people so someone needs to be responsible for them. Even if there is little chance of that then Rex needs to be cared for, you can't just let him roam around trying to care for himself. It's more obvious when it comes to guns, they are lethal weapons. Not just anyone can be allowed on our roads, you need to be able to drive, know the rules and abide by them. If you don't then the potential for doing great harm is great.
This makes the law over having to own a television license even more curious. What is it about RTÉ that is so lethal that watching it requires us to own a license? If you want to watch television in Ireland you need to pay €160 a year to RTÉ, the national broadcaster in what is known as a television license. This supplements their advertizing revenue. Now, with this huge income relative to the size of their market what have they produced in recent years that is worth speaking of?
I couldn't think of anything either. Even current affairs which has often been cited as something they are proud of has been shown up recently as being rotten. The Fr. Kevin Reynolds case still hasn't been sorted.
There is no doubt in my mind that there is real bias in RTÉ when it comes to the issue of abortion. Recent events have only shown this to be the case. The Late Late show of a couple of weeks past is one blatant example.
Now people always claim media bias, especially when that bias is against them but in case anyone is ready to accuse me of making this up I want to draw your attention to a campaign that recently brought the issue to the nation. There was a full page add in the Irish Independent today drawing attention to RTÉ's bias and outlining concrete examples. There is a website associated with the add, hearbothsides.org It's very good, I'd recomend that you check it out.

Chen Guangcheng escapes house arrest in China.

Human rights activist Chen Guangcheng escaped house arrest in China. This is a major international news story but you'll only hear/read about it if you ignore the navel gazing incestuous Irish media. As Reggie Littlejohn, the primary advocate for Chen, was speaking in Ireland plans were already afoot for him to escape captivity.

The photo of Chen is taken from the Daily Telegraph story on his escape.

Some comments from the Pro Life Campaign on Reggie Littlejohn's visit to Ireland and Chen's escape. 

Human rights activist Chen Guangcheng escapes house arrest in China

 

1st May 2012

Last Tuesday Reggie Littlejohn, president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers and internationally recognised expert on China's One Child Policy was in Ireland highlighting human rights abuses against women in China and the plight of blind human rights activist Chen Guangcheng, a campaigner against forced abortion and other abuses that arise from the Chinese One Child Policy.
Ms Littlejohn briefed members of the Oireachtas and addressed a public meeting hosted by the Pro Life Campaign in the Gresham Hotel, Dublin.
Women’s Rights Without Frontiers is a non-partisan, international coalition to oppose forced abortion, sterilisation and human trafficking in China and Ms. Littlejohn is an internationally recognised expert on China’s One Child Policy and the problems it has caused.
The One Child Policy in implemented through, moral, financial and sometimes physical abuse with cases of heavily women being held down as their baby was aborted. This policy combined with a cultural preference for boys over girls has led to what’s become known as “gendercide,” the deliberate targeting of baby girls for abortion or even infanticide. It is estimated that over 100 Million baby girls have been aborted in China alone for the simple reason that they were girls. This has led to a skewed sex ratio in China where there are 113 boys born for every 100 girls. The ratio in Ireland of 106 boys to 100 girls is the figure demographers consider normal.

Reggie Littlejohn and supporters of Stop Gendercide Now outside the Chinese Embassy in Dublin on 25th April

 Ms. Littlejohn has highlighted for some years the case of Chinese lawyer and human rights advocate Chen Guangcheng who was put under house arrest in 2005 as punishment for campaigning against the human rights abuses endured by Chinese women as a result of the One Child Policy. Even though he was officially released from prison he was kept in detention and denied treatment despite suffering a serious illness.

On Wednesday Ms. Littlejohn (who has been denied entry into China because of her advocacy for Chen and the women he has represented) led an awareness event for Chen’s case outside the Chinese Embassy in Dublin. Chen, who’s been blind from an early age, wears sunglasses all the time and as part of the campaign to highlight his case Ms. Littlejohn and other activists donned sunglasses in solidarity.
On Friday, it was announced that Cheng has escaped captivity and he is reported as being in hiding in the United States Embassy in Beijing. This news was an international sensation. While Reggie Littlejohn has welcomed the news of his escape she has also highlighted the fact that he is not yet out of danger and that he, his family, including his wife and daughter (who are still under observation in the family home), remain in danger. She has also called on the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, who is visiting China from Beijing to raise his case.
For more information on Reggie and her work and to sign a petition calling on the Chinese government to release Chen Guangcheng, visit Women’s Rights Without Frontiers website.

Great to see RTÉ reporting on Reggie Littlejohn's visit to Ireland.

Well no actually, not a mention, not a peep. Nothing in the print media either.

It seemed pretty obvious a couple of months past when the Chinese Premier was visiting Ireland for a couple of days that we were courting him and his country. The level of obsequiousness in the voice and actions of our Minister for Foreign affairs was at a level never seen before. You see China is going to invest in us and help us out of the economic mess that we're in. China's economic success (doubtful, possible the mother of all bubble economies) is in stark contrast to Ireland's decline. You see the major reason why China is so successful is that her people save a high percentage of their earnings, the major reason why Ireland failed is because people spent so much of theirs. Mara Hvistendahl believes that one reason why the Chinese save so much money is because since there is such a shortage of women due to genercide men have to save up to "buy" brides, this is, I believe, a good segue to talking about Reggie Littlejohn and her talk at The Gresham last night. I posted a video below which outlines her work so I won't go into that in depth, instead I'd just encourage you to look at her. I'm more concerned about why a major human rights figure was ignored by the Irish media. I have not noticed any coverage of her visit in the Irish print or broadcast media. No figures from the section of society who have made 'uman rights a career bothered to turn up to her public talk. Not one. We have turned this kind of work into a minor industry but not one person bothered to come hear her. Why is that I wonder? The word hypocrite is often misused, people apply it to people who say one thing and then (often in a moment of weakness) do something contrary. Properly it is applied to a person who says one thing and believes another. In other words it is a deliberate, calculated deception.
The dirty truth is that certain organizations in Ireland will never acknowledge Reggie Littlejohn because she campaigns on behalf of women who have been forced to undergo abortions in China. The people who should be highlighting this in Ireland and raising further outrage in our media fear speaking about this issue because they fear the wrath of pro-abortion opinion makers. Is it that or are they themselves so pro-abortion that they cannot see the true horror of China's forced abortions?
Anyway, enough of the disgust with Irish print and broadcast media and their hangers on. They are in crisis. Print media has suffered a 20% decline in sales over the last 5 years and is not about to win that back. The hollowness of RTÉ abilities was revealed by the way they treated Fr. Kevin Reynolds, it was further exposed by the way they dealt with the presidential election last year. The TV License, AKA the "telly tax" isn't working for them, people are refusing to pay it for a variety of reasons, they don't have the money, they object to being insulted and patronized or they no longer watch RTÉ and if they do they watch online.
I intend to write some more and maybe even document some of the biased treatment of the abortion issue at a later date. I'm far more concerned about the bias in RTÉ because it reaches more people and as a license payer I have to pay for their bias.

Reggie Littlejohn to speak tomorrow at the Gresham. 

Reggie Littlejohn of www.Womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org will be speaking about her work on Tuesday, 24th April at 7pm in the O' Casey Room, Gresham Hotel, O' Connell Street, Dublin 1. Places are limited so if you would like to attend, please email mail@prolifecampaign.ie or telephone 086 2195317 with your details.

Over several years, she has testified before the US Congressional Human Rights Commission, briefed the White House, the European Parliament, the British Parliament and others on this issue.   As a lawyer she has represented Chinese refugees in political asylum cases in the United States. The meeting is hosted by the Pro Life Campaign.

Are pregnant women denied medical treatment in Ireland?

To hear Clare Daly and her colleagues speak you'd think that women were being denied life saving medical treatment on a regular basis. Nothing, however, could be further from the truth. The constitution is very clear, mothers and their unborn children have equal right to life and women cannot be denied treatment. To say otherwise is to cast aspersions on medical and legal professionals  throughout the country. Despite the many problems in our health services all people are agreement that once a person is in the system they get excellent care. Our nurses and doctors are among the best in the world and they do everything possible to care for mothers and their unborn babies.

Pro Life Campaign accuses sponsors of Private Members' Bill of misrepresenting facts in the abortion debate

The Private Members’ Bill backing abortion introduced in the Dáil today by Socialist Party TD Clare Daly “falsely creates the impression that women in Ireland are being denied necessary medical treatments in pregnancy because of the absence of abortion here”, Dr Ruth Cullen of the Pro Life Campaign said.
Dr Cullen continued, “The reality is, however, that Ireland ranks as one of the safest countries in the world for pregnant women, safer than places like Britain or Holland where abortion is available on demand.
“The X Case decision, which Ms Daly proposes legislating for, heard no medical evidence and set no time limits for when an abortion could take place. So rather than being restrictive as claimed by its proponents, any legislation based on the X decision would amount to abortion on demand, with no regard for the humanity of the unborn child or the severe negative psychological after effects of abortion for many women. To ignore this reality in the name of “choice” does a grave disservice to women and their unborn children”.

Daly abortion bill defeated.

There was a time when socialists really had a claim to defending the poor and vulnerable in society, not so any longer.
 This past week we saw the hard left wing members of the Dáil unite to sponsor and vote for a bill that would have significantly relaxed Ireland's abortion law. It was defeated by the government parties but not before some members of the Labour Party expressed their personal pro abortion position. Extraordinarily Anne Ferris TD (Labour) stood up and proclaimed that though a Catholic she favoured abortion services being available in Ireland.
Gerry Adams TD said that he did not favour abortion but wouldn't like to criminalise women who had abortions. Weasel words to be sure and I won't even make any jokes about Sinn Féin and their treatment of women.

Pro Life Campaign accuses sponsors of Dáil abortion motion of wilfully ignoring the negative effects of abortion for women

Responding to news that a number of TDs are to table a Private Members motion in the Dáil calling for legislation on abortion, Dr Ruth Cullen of the Pro Life Campaign said:
Those tabling the Dáil motion have chosen to wilfully ignore all the peer reviewed psychological evidence in the intervening years since the X Case highlighting the adverse effects of abortion for women. They also seem determined to gloss over the fact that Ireland without abortion is a safer country for pregnant women than places like England and Holland where abortion is available on demand right up to birth.
There is nothing liberal or progressive about proposing to take away the most basic right of all, namely the right to life. In fact it does a tremendous disservice to women and their unborn children to ignore the basic facts of what abortion entails for both the mother and her baby.

Pro Life Stereotype.
All pro lifers are religious nutters, old men who tell women what to do with their bodies ...
Err, no actually. Take a look at some of the faces in this protest outside the Dáil the other day. Young, articulate (and can I say as a man, very attractive) women who know that abortion is a bad thing, that it hurts women and destroys lives. Photos are via the Pro Life Campaign website. 
The photocall 

Here with some women from womenhurt.ie who know first hand how abortion harms women.

Caroline Simons Pro Life Campaign Spokesperson talking to RTÉ

 

The Labour Party and their pro abortion stance. 

Last weekend the Labour Party held their annual conference in Galway. There was a huge hullabaloo over the household charge and other taxes. There were people there expressing their feelings about the minor party of government deciding to go Frankfurt's way after all. Among the other dross at the conference was a motion that set out clearly Labour's feelings about abortion. Some of their candidates were very tetchy before the last general election when the issue was brought up. Some went as far as to start name calling and screaming hysterical calumnies against pro life advocates.
I wonder if many of their decent members are truly in favour of abortion or if they accept it as part of the socialist package. It certainly seems the case that a wannabe socialist party like Sinn Féin are not pro abortion out of conviction but because it's part of the socialist package. Certainly most of the voters in Donegal North East and South West are not pro abortion, quite the opposite. The same goes for many working class Labour voters. Their urban middle class elite (from which most of their TDs and senators are drawn) are another matter.

16th April 2012

Pro Life Campaign says Labour Party abortion stance 'ignores hurt abortion causes women.

A motion passed at yesterday’s Labour Party conference in favour of abortion legislation has been described by the Pro Life Campaign (PLC) as “ignoring the hurt that abortion causes women”.
In a statement, PLC spokesperson, Dr Ruth Cullen said that those who spoke in favour of the motion had “tried to imply that legislation would safeguard women’s lives”.
“In fact, the motion was about seeking abortion on demand,” Dr Cullen said.
She added: “Those who supported the motion should know that Ireland, without abortion, is the safest country for pregnant women and that there is a clear distinction between necessary medical treatment in pregnancy and direct abortion, the aim of which is to end the baby’s life.
“Repeatedly, figures from the United Nations on maternal mortality show that Ireland is a world leader in this area. Yet instead of celebrating this achievement, pro-abortion campaigners repeatedly distort the facts.
“The adoption of the motion also shows that the Labour Party is ignoring the hurt that abortion causes women.
“Increasingly, research is showing that abortion is a leading risk factor for increased mental health problems for women.
“Despite this, Labour has assumed an outdated position that refuses to take on board this evidence, or the stories that many women are telling about the trauma that abortion has caused them.”
Dr Cullen added: “There is nothing progressive about adopting a policy that disregards the right to life and ignores the negative effects of abortion on women.
“This latest evidence of Labour’s aggressive stance in favour of abortion makes it all the more imperative that voters hold Fine Gael to their election promise to retain Ireland’s pro-life stance.”

Reggie Littlejohn speaking in Ireland.

Reggie littlejohn of www.Womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org will be in Ireland next week!

China criticises Ireland's many child policy?

Hearing that the United Nations was recommending that Ireland change its laws to legislate for abortion was a little like sliding into a parallel universe. Apparently the UN Human Rights Council gets to review Ireland's record on human rights on a regular basis. Along with issues like prison conditions they get to remark on our abortion laws. Anyway this fine organization told us that we were naughty and needed to change.  Current members include China (no, seriously it does!) and Nigeria (home of many an asylum seeker in Ireland). You'll excuse me if I'm not impressed with this august body. Admittedly China was not one of the countries asking Ireland to change her laws, but each country asking Ireland to change it's laws has a poorer maternal mortality rate than us with abortion laws that are very liberal. Perhaps they should take some of their own members aside and have a chat with them regarding what's happening at home.

Pro Life Campaign welcomes Government's rejection of abortion recommendations15th March 2012

The Irish Government's decision to reject recommendations made by a number of UN member states for Ireland to legislate for abortion “recognises the reality that Ireland is the safest country in the world for women to give birth” the Pro Life Campaign (PLC) has said.
Last October the Irish government appeared before the UN Human Rights Council as part of the Universal Periodic Review process and rejected calls made by six countries for Ireland to legislate for abortion.  The countries were Holland, Germany, Denmark, Slovenia, Norway and Spain.
A Government report designed as a response to a series of other recommendations made last year as part of the UN's Universal Periodic Review (UPR) was presented in Geneva this morning and confirms Ireland's decision to reject calls for abortion.
Responding to the adoption of the Universal Periodic Review report, PLC spokesperson Dr Ruth Cullen welcomed the Government’s stance.
Dr Cullen said: “Calls for abortion legislation fly in the face of the United Nation's own recent research showing that Ireland, without abortion, is a world leader in terms of safety for women in pregnancy. Maternal safety in Ireland, it should be noted, is better than in the six countries which last year sought to put pressure on Ireland to introduce abortion. The latest UN study on maternal mortality, published in 2010, shows that out of 172 countries for which estimates are given, Ireland remains a world leader in safety for pregnant women.”

Abortion and mental health.

A follow up letter in today's Irish Times by Dr Ruth Cullen to some of the responses in her Irish Times article. Apparently some didn't like or agree with her:

Irish Times letters, March 13, 2012.

Sir, – Patrick Walsh (March 8th) takes issue with me (Opinion, March 5th) for not referring to the recent systematic review by the National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health (NCCMH) and its comments on mental health outcomes for women following abortion.
Mr Walsh also says that the review holds that unwanted pregnancy rather than abortion itself is linked to mental health problems. However, the review states that whether an unwanted pregnancy is continued or ends in abortion makes no difference to the mental health of the mother. This, therefore, undermines the argument that the termination of pregnancy by abortion will protect women’s mental health.
This feature of the review also completely undercuts the medical justification for abortion in countries like England where the vast majority are carried out on alleged mental health grounds. It is odd how some pro-choice groups are using the latest review as evidence to back up their case when it does nothing of the sort.
In addition, the review points to situations where abortion poses adverse outcomes for women. There is also mounting peer- reviewed evidence showing that abortion has negative consequences for women with no prior mental health problems. We need to acknowledge this honestly and factor it into the debate. – Yours, etc,
Dr RUTH CULLEN,

Are judges capable of making decisions about psychiatry without hearing psychiatric evidence?

The infamous X Case judgement of 20 years ago was a very tragic situation. It involved a fourteen year old girl who became pregnant after being raped and if she had a right to travel to England for an abortion.
I was struck by an RTÉ documentary a few nights ago. In it journalist Fintan O'Toole made a very emotive remark, saying something along the lines that the state was going to make the girl involved bear a child for her rapist. Well at least he admitted that it was a child. Of course the problem with is his argument was that because the child was conceived in rape it had less of a right to live than a child not conceived in rape. That just isn't logical. It puts limits on the right to life.
My own opinion is that if the state was to really help victims of sexual assault it would make greater effort to catch, prosecute and convict those guilty. Right now Ireland has a 7% conviction rate for sexual assault. But, I digress ...
Here is an excellent article by Dr Ruth Cullen of the Pro Life Campaign and printed in the Irish Times a few days ago.

Irish people deserve to hear the full truth about abortion

Dr. Ruth Cullen, The Irish Times, 5th March 2012

OPINION: TWO DECADES have passed since the Supreme Court ruled on the tragic X case.
The teenage girl at the centre of that case found herself in a horrific situation, and the Irish people’s overriding feeling at the time was one of immense sympathy for her.
Tragically, however, the decision of the Supreme Court seemed to be that, in order to show care for the girl, article 40.3.3, introduced specifically to protect the unborn child, had to be interpreted to allow abortion.
Over the last 20 years, there has been quite an amount of legal and political commentary on the ruling.
However, the evidence, or rather the lack of evidence, upon which the ruling was grounded has received less scrutiny.
The court decided that Ireland’s pro-life amendment permitted legal abortion in circumstances where there was “a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother”.
It further ruled that these circumstances included the threat of suicide.
However, the court heard no medical evidence on the question of whether abortion protected women from suicide. And increasingly, we are seeing medical research demonstrating that far from protecting women from suicide, abortion increases the risk that women will suffer grave mental health problems.
For example, the widely publicised Finnish study, which appeared in the European Journal of Public Health, showed that there was a significantly increased risk of suicide among women who had abortions.
They were six times more likely to commit suicide compared with those who had their babies.
Research carried out recently by Dr David Fergusson in New Zealand and published in the British Journal of Psychiatry found that, compared to other women, there was a 30 per cent greater risk of mental health complications among women who had abortions.
This research undercuts the rationale at the very heart of the X case ruling, a rationale for which there had been little basis in the first place.
The Supreme Court also failed to hear evidence showing that Ireland is the safest place in the world for women to give birth.
Sadly, and alarmingly, politicians seeking to legalise abortion are inexcusably ignoring this fact even today. The TDs who introduced a private members’ Bill on abortion a fortnight ago have attempted to create the impression that pregnant women in Ireland are being denied medical treatment because of the lack of available abortion.
However, they are wilfully ignoring the evidence of UN statistics which show Ireland as a world leader in terms of maternal mortality.
What has been missing from this debate are the voices of women who regret their abortions.
Five years after the X case, Ireland was confronted with yet another traumatising abortion court case, the C case.
This involved a young girl who was pregnant as a result of rape. The High Court decided that it was in the best interests of the girl to permit the then Eastern Health Board, who had taken the girl into care, to take her to England for an abortion.
But in an interview in 2009 the woman at the centre of the case said that her abortion caused great pain and sorrow.
Her story and the stories of many other women who regret their abortions have been effectively silenced.
For too long they have been ignored and in some cases dismissed by those, such as the National Women’s Council, who claim to speak for all women.
The group recently appointed by the Government to examine Irish law on abortion, must take these stories into account, as well as the reality that Ireland is the safest country in the world in which to be pregnant.
It might also look at what happens in countries where abortion is made legal.
In the US, abortionist Dr Kermit Gosnell was recently charged with killing seven born babies and a 41-year-old woman on whom he had performed an abortion.
One of Gosnell’s victims, Robyn Reid, said that when she heard he had been charged with killing viable babies with scissors and giving a woman a lethal dose of painkillers, she felt sick.
“I didn’t know that he was such a monster doing this to everyone,” Reid said.
“I didn’t think it’d happened to somebody else. I thought it was just me.”
Stories like this and the recent revelations from Britain about abortionists performing sex-selective abortions reveal the full implications of what legal abortion entails.
Fine Gael gave clear commitments at the last election that “women in pregnancy will receive whatever treatments in pregnancy are necessary to safeguard their lives, and that the duty of care to preserve the life of the baby will also be upheld”.
Public opinion backs this stance.
When people have the distinction between necessary medical interventions during pregnancy and induced abortion made clear to them, in poll after poll, they reject abortion.
Twenty years after the X case, the Irish people deserve to hear the full story about abortion

Actually, no, they said that we needed to clarify the situation.

When the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgement on the A, B, C v Ireland case a lot of people were quick to jump to judgement. They told us that Ireland now had to legislate for abortion. They said nothing of the sort. In fact they upheld the Irish constitution as it stands where mothers and their unborn babies have the equal right to life.
Paul Brady, barrister and author wrote this article for last week's Sunday Business Post. Because you have to pay for online access to the Sunday Business Post (worth it, but I know that not all readers have that subscription) I'm linking to the Pro Life Campaign site.

Opportunity to clarify abortion law

By Paul Brady, Sunday Business Post, 29th January 2012

The group considering the implementation of the European Court's abortion decision must produce a 'series of options' that covers all the issues
The government has established an expert group to "recommend a series of options" on how to implement the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in A, B, C v Ireland.
This case involved a challenge to Ireland's abortion laws by three women who claimed, on various grounds, that Irish law violated their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.
There was widespread — but needless — confusion when the court's judgment was published in December 2010. Some sought to portray it as a ruling from Strasbourg that Ireland was now legally obliged to legislate for a right to abortion on the terms of the 1992 Irish Supreme Court decision in the X case. This interpretation is contradicted by the actual judgment.
In fact, the decision rests on two key conclusions. First, the court held that current restrictions on abortion in Ireland constitute a fair balance of the rights and interests in what the court called the "wide margin of appreciation" enjoyed by member states on this issue.
Secondly, the court found that the "uncertainty" arising from the lack of legislation or "effective and accessible procedures" for deciding what is legally permissible in individual cases violated the third applicant's right to private life. All other complaints were dismissed.
The judgment is fairly straightforward. The court noted that it was up to each state to decide if it would legally protect unborn human life and, if so, to balance such protection fairly with the rights of others. Once that balance is struck, states must provide "implementing…and institutional procedures" to ensure that the legal implications for individuals can be readily established with reasonable certainty.
But even a "wide margin of appreciation" is not the same as a blank cheque, and its exercise remains — at least in principle — subject to review by the court.
The current "balance" in Irish law was created by the Supreme Court decision in the X case. It held that an abortion is lawful only when there is a "real and substantial risk" to the life, as opposed to the health, of the mother. The court also ruled that such a risk included any real and substantial risk that the mother might commit suicide. However, the court reached this conclusion without hearing expert psychiatric evidence.
In the past ten years, knowledge of the potential mental health effects associated with abortion has been greatly advanced by peer-reviewed studies. This raises a legitimate question as to the appropriateness of basing Ireland's legislative response on terms decided by five judges 20 years ago, uninformed by the findings of expert research.
The experience of Britain of abortion on psychiatric grounds is instructive. Of the 189,574 abortions recorded in England and Wales in 2010, 97.7 per cent were carried out on the reported ground that a doctor considered that continuing the pregnancy carried a greater risk of injury to the mental health of the woman than an abortion. In other words, almost one in five pregnancies in England and Wales are ended by abortion on mental health grounds.
It is no exaggeration to say that it has been an fundamental working assumption of the law and practice of abortion in Britain over the last 40 years that ending a pregnancy by abortion will typically lead to improved mental health outcomes.
This assumption has been challenged by one of the most sophisticated studies on the question ever conducted. Writing in the British Journal of Psychiatry in 2009, Professor David Fergusson concluded that his research "clearly suggested that unwanted pregnancy leading to abortion was likely to be a risk factor for subsequent mental health problems, whereas unwanted pregnancy leading to live birth was not a risk factor for these problems".
Fergusson noted that no study had ever reported that abortion reduced mental health risks. In other words, on the empirical evidence available, it appears that a primary assumption underlying both the reasoning in the X case and the legal basis for the vast majority of abortions in Britain is, at best, questionable and, at worst, dangerously wrong.
Given the long debate over abortion in Ireland, it is perhaps understandable that some view the establishment of an expert group with a mix of cynicism and suspicion. If it is to confound such critics, the group must be fully cognisant of the Irish state's right — confirmed in ABC v Ireland — to determine its own substantive view on abortion and the equal dignity of every human life.
As persons chosen for their technical expertise rather than the representativeness of their moral views, the members of the expert group can best add value to the political process by producing as extensive and comprehensive a "series of options" as possible. Their report should detail objectively the constitutional, medical, legal and ethical issues and technicalities in respect of each option identified.
After that, as Europe has made clear, the responsibility will be on us, not only to decide our position, but to implement it clearly and thoroughly.
Paul Brady is a barrister and co-author of Psychiatry and the Law (Blackhall, 2010)