Abortion

Frequently Asked Questions

Pro Life Campaign,

104, Lower Baggot Street,
Dublin 2
01 662 9275

Email: prolife@indigo.ie
www.prolifecampaign.ie
ABORTION - FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Why not just go ahead and bring in abortion legislation?

Because it would involve legalising the deliberate and intentional taking of the life of the unborn
child. The 1992 Supreme Court decision legalised abortion in wide circumstances, up to birth and
without medical evidence. Without a referendum to put this right, any legislation would have to
allow induced abortion.

This is the lesson from other countries where the distinction between necessary medical treatment
in pregnancy and direct and intentional taking of human life has been blurred. The failure to
distinguish between necessary medical interventions in pregnancy and procedures designed to
end the life of the unborn child inevitably leads to an outright denial of the humanity of the
unborn child.

In induced abortion the aim of the procedure is the death of the unborn child, whose continued
survival would constitute a failure of the procedure.

How do you envisage building a more pro-life society?

One thing we can all agree on whatever our views about abortion, the numbers involved in
abortion are deeply disturbing - over 4,000 women traumatised, and the same number of unborn
lives lost. Women and Crisis Pregnancy found that what pressurises women into abortion is not
medical necessity but social factors.

In her Millennium address to the Oireachtas, President Mary McAleese chose the photograph of
Samuel Armas, showing the hand of an unborn child stretched from within his mother's womb
and gripping the finger of the surgeon who was operating on him, as a symbol of the care for one
another that makes us an inclusive people. It is on this ethos that we need to draw if we are to face
abortion in a way that respects the equal humanity and inherent worth of women in crisis
pregnancy and their unborn children.

Without respect and legal support for the right to life, the foundation of all our other rights
becomes insecure.

“Pro-choice groups are more honest at confronting the reality of crisis pregnancy”?

That is not true. They do not confront the reality and rights of the unborn child and they ignore or
deny the depth of the negative effects of abortion on so many women. The ‘quick fix' approach of
pro-choice groups to crisis pregnancy does nothing to address the long-term social and
psychological needs of women.
Instead of accepting vague terms like the “right to choose”, we need to challenge those who make
such statements to be clear about what exactly they are saying and proposing. For example, pro-
choice advocates should be pressed to specify the exact circumstances where they think abortion
should be permitted. We shouldn't have to read between the lines because it is only when plain
and honest statement of what each side really means that we can test each other's viewpoints and
subject them to public opinion. Sometimes those who contribute to the debate, journalists and

2
politicians included, are inclined to skirt round the issues, and to talk in bland, general terms
about compassion without saying what they really mean.

“But we always appear to be looking for the ‘Irish solution to an Irish problem'”?

Rather than feeling pressured into introducing abortion in vague ill-defined terms, we should
reflect on how other countries are slowly beginning to question how they have for too long denied
the humanity of the unborn child and the emotional harm endured by many women following
abortion. A recent Gallup poll in the USA showed that in the last five years the percentage of
people supporting the "pro-life" position rose from 33 percent to 45 per cent, while those who
saw themselves as "pro-choice" declined from 56 to 47 per cent.

Why does the unborn child deserve any legal protection?

Because the unborn child is a human being, one of us, he/she is entitled to our special protection a
vulnerable member of the society, and so entitled to our special protection. In the first 3months,
when most abortions occur, the baby's heart is already beating, unique fingerprints have formed,
and will remain the same throughout life. The baby's brain waves can be detected. The unborn
child is sensitive to touch. We cannot simply ignore this reality.
A necessary first step is to restore clarity to our laws regarding the right to life of the unborn. In
addition, we can all play a part in creating a more welcoming society for mothers and their
unborn babies.

The Irish abortion rate must be highest in Europe?

No in fact it is probably the lowest. In England, 1 in 4 pregnancies end in abortion; in Ireland, the
figure is less than 1 in 14 - still shockingly high, but nowhere near as high as countries with
abortion clinics.
The Dutch abortion rate is not lower than ours - it's just that they count the figures differently. In
Holland, most first trimester abortions do not feature in the official abortion statistics.

Wasn't it a mistake to campaign for the original amendment in 1983?

There was nothing wrong with the amendment, but rather with the Supreme Court's flawed
decision in 1992. It is not the first time the Court has caught everybody by surprise - for instance,
on bail, and again on cabinet confidentiality. In the 1970's, the Supreme Court handed down a
judgement which cast doubt on the validity of all adoption orders, and a referendum was held to
reverse that unexpected decision and to restore the previously understood position. Now, we are
in a similar position - and the issue is whether policy on abortion should be decided by the courts,
or the electorate.

Opponents of the 1983 Amendment argued primarily that it would outlaw ethical treatments and
therefore put women's lives in danger. This did not happen.

3
Before 1983, the prohibition on abortion was contained in an act of parliament dating from 1861,
which in other jurisdictions was simply amended to allow widespread abortion. Without explicit
Constitutional protection for the unborn, the same would have happened here.

The 1983 Amendment held the line for nearly ten years against a background of abortion being
widely introduced in other European countries.

In the most difficult situations

What about genuinely ‘hard cases'?

Sometimes abortion is put forward, even taken for granted, as a 'solution' to the most difficult
situations. But this approach ignores the fact that it involves the taking of the unborn life and the
exposure of the women to emotional hurt and possible psychological harm. The reality is that our
willingness to offer social support is the single most important factor influencing a better
psychological outcome for women in crisis pregnancy.

A study by Sandra Mahkorn Pregnancy and Sexual Assault * showed that there is a better social
and personal outcome for women who chose to continue a pregnancy, despite harrowing initial
circumstances. Two recent Finnish studies show a better outcome for women who continue their
pregnancy as compared with women who opted for abortion.

The reality is that abortion means social exclusion rather than real personal support for women
facing unexpected pregnancy. It allows society to abdicate from its responsibility towards them.
The landmark case of Roe v Wade in the United States demonstrated the manner in which women
are sometimes used to promote access to abortion. Ms Norma Mc Corvey (Jane Roe) now
campaigns against abortion having been exploited by pro-abortionists at the time.

There are many examples of women joining the pro-life movement offering contrasting
testimonies to those of the pro-abortion lobby - some representing women hurt by abortion -
others include people like Pam Stenzel (lecturer on teen pregnancy USA) who was herself
conceived as a result of rape.

We must recognise, however, that there are immensely difficult and agonising situations which
test our true compassion and solidarity as a society. If what seems impossible initially has a better
long-term outcome for both the woman and her unborn baby, we owe it to them to have supports
in place to cope with these situations. Abortion is often the easy solution for everybody except the
woman and her unborn child.

Hard cases and the Law

From a purely practical standpoint the Government has acknowledged that it would be impossible
to legislate for ‘hard cases'. If abortion were legalised in sexual assault cases how would a
complaint suffice? Would it have to be corroborated? Would it prejudice the fair trial and
investigation of rape type offences?
*Mahkorn S: Pregnancy and Sexual Assault. In Psychological Aspects of Abortion Mall and
Watts (eds) 5: