The Big Question: After decades of controversy, could abortion become legal in Ireland?
By David McKittrick, Ireland Correspondent, The Independent
Friday, 11 December 2009
Why are we asking this now?
This week three women mounted a legal challenge at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, arguing that the Irish Republic's strict abortion laws violated their rights. Specifically they claim that they had to go abroad for abortions and in doing so their health was put at risk. They say this amounted to inhumane treatment. Two of the women are Irish while the third is a Lithuanian living in Ireland. One was an unemployed long-term alcoholic who lived beneath the poverty line and was trying to regain custody of her four children when she became pregnant. Another was at risk of an extra-uterine pregnancy while the third was recovering from cancer and feared a relapse. The women are said to have borrowed money from friends and a money-lender to travel abroad for their abortions.
What do the lawyers say?
A statement on their behalf said: "All three women complain that the impossibility for them to have an abortion in Ireland made the procedure unnecessarily expensive, complicated and traumatic. In particular, that restriction stigmatised and humiliated them and risked damaging their health and, in one applicant's case, even her life." Their case is that Irish abortion law breaches several articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, including the rights to life, privacy and family life, and further represents discrimination against women.
What do their supporters and opponents say?
The Irish Family Planning Association, which supports the case, declared: "This is hugely significant for reproductive rights in Ireland. The fact that Ireland's draconian laws on abortion have been put under the spotlight is a landmark. They are totally out of step with those of its European neighbours. Women and girls do not give up their human rights when they become pregnant." Pro-life campaigners responded by accusing the Family Planning Association of "creating unnecessary fears about women's health in an attempt to have abortion foisted on Ireland by a European court."
How have the Irish authorities responded?
The Irish government sent a strong legal team to Strasbourg, headed by Attorney-General Paul Gallagher, to contest the women's challenge. He characterised the claim that their health was threatened as "a significant attack" on the Irish health service and the treatment, advice and support it offered, including aftercare and post-abortion counselling.
He asserted that Irish laws – which have forbidden abortion in almost every case for a century and a half – were based on "profound moral values deeply embedded in Irish society." He said anti-abortion legislation had been endorsed in three separate referendums.
Are there any abortions in Ireland at the moment?
They are extremely rare. But each year thousands of Irish women make the journey abroad, mainly to British clinics, to have their pregnancies terminated. Last year at least 4,600 did so, and over the decades an estimated 140,000 have made the trip. A recent Trinity College Dublin study concluded that almost one in 10 Irish pregnancies ends in an English abortion clinic. This cross-channel traffic has long been regarded as a fact of life.
Does this case have global implications?
Yes. Abortion is a highly emotive issue in many countries and in the US, for example, it is a highly important political issue. In some countries, such as Britain, termination is readily available while in others the law allows it in cases such as rape or serious risk to the woman's life or health. European court rulings are not always automatically and fully put into effect but, representing as it does 47 member countries of the Council of Europe, its judgments carry substantial weight.
Why is Ireland so strongly anti-abortion?
It always has been, with the right of the unborn child to life enshrined in the constitution of this overwhelmingly catholic country. Over the years church authority has been in decline, largely because of the child abuse scandals. The emergence of a more secular and cosmopolitan society has brought a marked relaxation in laws and general public acceptance of issues such as divorce, homosexuality, contraception and co-habitation rather than marriage. But abortion has always been regarded as a special case, a fraught issue which has been a particular battlefield between liberals and conservative elements which touches the rawest of nerves.
Why have a referendum?
Making important changes to the anti-abortion measures means changing the constitution, and that means having them approved in a referendum. Recent decades have been littered with bitter abortion controversies and a series of
referendum votes, some of them intensely hard-fought and traumatic. None of the various referendum campaigns was fought on the basis of legalising abortion, instead centring on amendments which made often confusing adjustments to legal wording. As a result the exact status of the law has lacked clarity, although the general sense that the authorities frown on abortion has been clear enough.
Referendums have often served to show the depth and starkness of divisions. One in 2002, which aimed at further tightening the law, was rejected by the narrowest of margins – 50.42 per cent to 49.58 per cent. Outcomes such as this have caused many politicians to steer away from an issue on which no consensus seems possible.
Have cases in the courts had an effect?
Two cases over the years have attracted great attention and caused national soul-searching. In one a 14-year-old girl who had been raped by a neighbour was initally prevented from travelling to England for an abortion. This was overturned. In another a health authority sought to prevent a 17-year-old girl, who was four months pregnant, travelling to England to abort a foetus suffering from a brain condition which meant it could live for only a few days after birth. A court gave her permission to travel.
What happens if the court demands Ireland legalise abortion?
The result could be uproar. Although the Court is entirely separate from the EU, the Irish public has recently shown itself to be in two minds about Europe in general. During a referendum campaign on European issues earlier this year, centring on the Treaty of Lisbon, Irish bishops assured their flock that the Treaty "does not undermine existing legal protections in Ireland for unborn children." But anything that seemed like a directive from another part of Europe on such a contentious issue would create major controversy. Enacting such a directive would presumably involve a referendum, and referendum campaigns are often bitter and divisive.
More to the point, they have often proved unpredictable. Ireland is a country in deep trouble at the moment, struggling to cope with a shocking economic downturn and problems such as the church abuse scandal. Most of its politicians would almost certainly shy away from the abortion issue if they possibly could, preferring to continue with the present approach, even though that would allow drift and confusion to prevail.
Would legalising abortion benefit Ireland?
Yes...
* It would show Ireland as more secular, shrugging off the dominance of the Catholic church
* It would end the trail of pregnant women travelling to England for abortions
* It would de-criminalise abortion, gradually removing the stigma attached to it in Ireland
No...
* Legalising it would probably result in more abortions, putting Ireland out of line with other Catholic countries
* Introducing abortion would fly in the face of more than a decade of Irish tradition and culture
* Legalising it would create yet more division in a country which already has other deep problems
Thursday, February 04, 2010
Guardian: Summary of Irish Abortion Legislation Report
Summary of the Irish abortion legislation report
What Human Rights Watch discovered in its investigations of abortion laws and pro-life groups in Ireland
Alexandra Topping guardian.co.uk, Thursday 28 January 2010
The Human Rights Watch report A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland accuses the Irish government of limiting information about how to access abortion services abroad.
According to the report, "rogue" agencies, representing themselves as providers of information about abortion, have told women that, should they choose to have an abortion, their relationships are likely to fail, that they may become infertile or need a hysterectomy, or a colostomy bag after the procedure.
Sinead Ahern from Choice Ireland, a pro-choice group, went undercover to visit an agency. Having told the woman that she was five weeks pregnant, at which point her foetus would have been the size of a grain of rice, she was shown a plastic fetus the size of a pen.
"[The woman] told me that's what my baby looked like … the plastic foetus was sucking its thumb and had eyelashes."
She described being asked to sign a consent form. "It said I understand that I most certainly will need a hysterectomy ... that I might end up with the need for a colostomy bag ... [it said] most women end up with infections, infertile."
Another woman who visited an agency with her boyfriend described being separated from him. "They said I'd probably never have kids [if I had an abortion] that we'd probably split up … They said your family is going to reject you."
A women who contacted a service called British Alternatives in the Golden Pages [the Irish equivalent of the Yellow Pages] was asked from the start of her consultation about adoption.
"I was devastated I was in this situation and I was afraid of getting a doctor who was unsympathetic [...] Nothing tipped me off about whether they were pro-life. I was in a state and just looking for something friendly. British Alternatives sounded very friendly."
What Human Rights Watch discovered in its investigations of abortion laws and pro-life groups in Ireland
Alexandra Topping guardian.co.uk, Thursday 28 January 2010
The Human Rights Watch report A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland accuses the Irish government of limiting information about how to access abortion services abroad.
According to the report, "rogue" agencies, representing themselves as providers of information about abortion, have told women that, should they choose to have an abortion, their relationships are likely to fail, that they may become infertile or need a hysterectomy, or a colostomy bag after the procedure.
Sinead Ahern from Choice Ireland, a pro-choice group, went undercover to visit an agency. Having told the woman that she was five weeks pregnant, at which point her foetus would have been the size of a grain of rice, she was shown a plastic fetus the size of a pen.
"[The woman] told me that's what my baby looked like … the plastic foetus was sucking its thumb and had eyelashes."
She described being asked to sign a consent form. "It said I understand that I most certainly will need a hysterectomy ... that I might end up with the need for a colostomy bag ... [it said] most women end up with infections, infertile."
Another woman who visited an agency with her boyfriend described being separated from him. "They said I'd probably never have kids [if I had an abortion] that we'd probably split up … They said your family is going to reject you."
A women who contacted a service called British Alternatives in the Golden Pages [the Irish equivalent of the Yellow Pages] was asked from the start of her consultation about adoption.
"I was devastated I was in this situation and I was afraid of getting a doctor who was unsympathetic [...] Nothing tipped me off about whether they were pro-life. I was in a state and just looking for something friendly. British Alternatives sounded very friendly."
France 24: Ireland's Abortion Laws 'Violate Human Rights'
Dublin 28th January 2010
Click headline above for France 24 film report.
Irish abortion laws 'violate human rights' Human Rights Watch has accused Ireland of violating women's rights with its strict legislation on abortion. Terminating a pregnancy in the Irish Republic is illegal, unless the mother's life is in danger. Punishable by life in prison, the only alternative for Irish women is to travel to Great Britain or the rest of Europe and pay for the operation themselves.
http://www.france24.com/en/20100128-Ireland-accused-of-violating-womens-human-rights
Click headline above for France 24 film report.
Irish abortion laws 'violate human rights' Human Rights Watch has accused Ireland of violating women's rights with its strict legislation on abortion. Terminating a pregnancy in the Irish Republic is illegal, unless the mother's life is in danger. Punishable by life in prison, the only alternative for Irish women is to travel to Great Britain or the rest of Europe and pay for the operation themselves.
http://www.france24.com/en/20100128-Ireland-accused-of-violating-womens-human-rights
From Irish Central.com: Ireland's War on Women
You wouldn’t expect a country like Ireland to be accused of breaching human rights. Our little green nation is best known for its rich culture and friendly customs. We’ve never invaded another country or annoyed anyone too much.
But on Thursday the respected international advocacy group Human Rights Watch published a report saying Ireland deprives many of its citizens of their basic entitlements.
The report is called “A State of Isolation.” It tells how the government blocks the way of women who look for information on abortion or seek care abroad.
Marianne Mollmann, women's rights advocacy director at HRW, said such women “are actively stonewalled, stigmatized, and written out."
Today in Ireland, abortion is allowed if a woman’s life is at risk. But otherwise a woman who has one potentially faces a life term – yes, life – in prison.
It’s a good time to recall that the Irish government has not yet agreed to compensate the women who spent decades, some of them a lifetime, imprisoned in the Magdalene Laundries, often for crimes that included getting pregnant or giving birth.
Not that government policy has prevented terminations. Every year thousands of women and girls (7,000 by one estimate) travel from Ireland to other European countries in order to end their pregnancies. Officials may have tried to stop abortion, but all that has happened is that the country has inadvertently outsourced it.
In this sense Irish women have been lucky. The price of a botched backstreet abortion is high: in the developing world 68,000 women die of complications every year, according to a BBC report.
The European Court of Human Rights is currently considering the case of three Irish women who argue their rights were denied because they were forced to abort outside their home state: one was a former substance abuser whose other children were in care; one wished to avoid an ectopic pregnancy (where the fetus develops outside the womb); the third became pregnant while undergoing chemotherapy and feared for her own well-being, as well as the child’s.
This decade has seen a plague of problems afflict Ireland: sex abuse revelations in the Catholic Church, political corruption, and more recently, an economic crisis, the housing boom and bust, and some environmental issues too. Many real crimes have occurred and gone unpunished.
The phrase “war on women” gained currency to refer to the experiences of women living in places far away from Ireland. But Ireland should take heed. It’s time to give women a choice in this vital matter. This is 2010, not 1950.
But on Thursday the respected international advocacy group Human Rights Watch published a report saying Ireland deprives many of its citizens of their basic entitlements.
The report is called “A State of Isolation.” It tells how the government blocks the way of women who look for information on abortion or seek care abroad.
Marianne Mollmann, women's rights advocacy director at HRW, said such women “are actively stonewalled, stigmatized, and written out."
Today in Ireland, abortion is allowed if a woman’s life is at risk. But otherwise a woman who has one potentially faces a life term – yes, life – in prison.
It’s a good time to recall that the Irish government has not yet agreed to compensate the women who spent decades, some of them a lifetime, imprisoned in the Magdalene Laundries, often for crimes that included getting pregnant or giving birth.
Not that government policy has prevented terminations. Every year thousands of women and girls (7,000 by one estimate) travel from Ireland to other European countries in order to end their pregnancies. Officials may have tried to stop abortion, but all that has happened is that the country has inadvertently outsourced it.
In this sense Irish women have been lucky. The price of a botched backstreet abortion is high: in the developing world 68,000 women die of complications every year, according to a BBC report.
The European Court of Human Rights is currently considering the case of three Irish women who argue their rights were denied because they were forced to abort outside their home state: one was a former substance abuser whose other children were in care; one wished to avoid an ectopic pregnancy (where the fetus develops outside the womb); the third became pregnant while undergoing chemotherapy and feared for her own well-being, as well as the child’s.
This decade has seen a plague of problems afflict Ireland: sex abuse revelations in the Catholic Church, political corruption, and more recently, an economic crisis, the housing boom and bust, and some environmental issues too. Many real crimes have occurred and gone unpunished.
The phrase “war on women” gained currency to refer to the experiences of women living in places far away from Ireland. But Ireland should take heed. It’s time to give women a choice in this vital matter. This is 2010, not 1950.
IFPA Welcomes International Scrutiny of Ireland's Restrictive Abortion Laws By Human Rights Watch
The Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) has today (28.01.10) welcomed the publication of the Human Rights Watch report A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland.
The IFPA is not surprised that the Irish Government has been criticised by this important international human rights group. As a service provider IFPA has extensive knowledge of the extreme physical, financial and emotional hardship experienced by women who are forced to travel abroad for health care that should be available to them at home.
According to the IFPA, the criminalisation of abortion in Ireland violates international human rights standards because it disproportionately harms women's health and well-being. The organisation believes that women and girls do not give up their human rights when they become pregnant nor should the State take these human rights away with impunity.
The experiences of women outlined in the Human Rights Watch report are illustrative of the reality faced by thousands of women in Ireland. Since 1980, at least 138,000 women have been forced to travel abroad to access safe and legal abortion services. The IFPA believes that the criminalisation of abortion has little impact on abortion rates, it merely adds to the burden and stress experienced by women experiencing crisis pregnancies.
Ireland’s restrictive laws on abortion are out of step with those of its European neighbours. Forty four out of 47 European countries provide for abortion to protect women’s health.
This is the second time in the last two months that Ireland’s restrictive abortion laws have been scrutinised by international human rights bodies. In December the European Court of Human Rights heard a challenge to Ireland’s abortion laws.
According to the IFPA, Ireland has a strong reputation for promoting human rights values around the world, yet it is unwilling to recognise the human rights of women in its own country. Ireland’s restrictions on abortion put it firmly outside of human rights norms.
The IFPA has called on the Government to take responsibility and stop exiling women experiencing crisis pregnancies.
ENDS
About IFPA:
The Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) has been to the fore in setting the agenda for sexual and reproductive rights in Ireland for the last 40 years.
The IFPA offers a comprehensive range of services which promote sexual health and support reproductive choice on a not-for-profit basis, including clinical and counselling services, sexual and reproductive health information, education, training and awareness raising.
The IFPA is not surprised that the Irish Government has been criticised by this important international human rights group. As a service provider IFPA has extensive knowledge of the extreme physical, financial and emotional hardship experienced by women who are forced to travel abroad for health care that should be available to them at home.
According to the IFPA, the criminalisation of abortion in Ireland violates international human rights standards because it disproportionately harms women's health and well-being. The organisation believes that women and girls do not give up their human rights when they become pregnant nor should the State take these human rights away with impunity.
The experiences of women outlined in the Human Rights Watch report are illustrative of the reality faced by thousands of women in Ireland. Since 1980, at least 138,000 women have been forced to travel abroad to access safe and legal abortion services. The IFPA believes that the criminalisation of abortion has little impact on abortion rates, it merely adds to the burden and stress experienced by women experiencing crisis pregnancies.
Ireland’s restrictive laws on abortion are out of step with those of its European neighbours. Forty four out of 47 European countries provide for abortion to protect women’s health.
This is the second time in the last two months that Ireland’s restrictive abortion laws have been scrutinised by international human rights bodies. In December the European Court of Human Rights heard a challenge to Ireland’s abortion laws.
According to the IFPA, Ireland has a strong reputation for promoting human rights values around the world, yet it is unwilling to recognise the human rights of women in its own country. Ireland’s restrictions on abortion put it firmly outside of human rights norms.
The IFPA has called on the Government to take responsibility and stop exiling women experiencing crisis pregnancies.
ENDS
About IFPA:
The Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) has been to the fore in setting the agenda for sexual and reproductive rights in Ireland for the last 40 years.
The IFPA offers a comprehensive range of services which promote sexual health and support reproductive choice on a not-for-profit basis, including clinical and counselling services, sexual and reproductive health information, education, training and awareness raising.
Guardian: Ireland Accused Of Exposing Women To Anti-Abortion Lies
Ireland accused of exposing women to anti-abortion liesHuman rights group says women seeking information about terminations are told they will often cause irreparable damage
Alexandra Topping guardian.co.uk, Thursday 28 January 2010
The Irish government came under increasing pressure to overhaul its ban on abortion today, after it was accused of exposing women to "grossly misleading" information about the procedure.
According to Human Rights Watch, Irish legislation – under which women who have an abortion in Ireland face a life sentence in prison if prosecuted – is putting women's health at risk and exposing them to deliberate misinformation from rogue pro-life agencies.
Women have been told they may become infertile, require a hysterectomy or possibly need a colostomy bag after an abortion by agencies that target women seeking advice about unwanted pregnancies, says the report.
It comes as Ireland waits for a landmark ruling from the European court of human rights on the case of three women who accuse the government of putting their health at risk by forcing them to travel abroad for terminations.
"Women in need of abortion services should, as a matter of international law and human decency, be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation," said Marianne Mollmann, the women's rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. "But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatised, and written out."
According to the report, the government limits information about legal abortion services and has failed to crack down on false claims from "rogue" agencies masquerading as unwanted pregnancy support groups.
One 29-year-old woman was shown a video of ultrasound images and pictures of mothers by an agency called "British Alternatives".
"[The woman] put a model of a small foetus in my hand ... told me to name my baby, asked me how I would feel if I killed the baby," she said.
Another woman described being harassed over the phone by a pro-life agency for weeks: "They would ask 'Is your baby still alive? Have you killed it yet?'."
The Irish government recently launched a campaign urging women who feel that have been given false information about abortions to inform the authorities, but this assumes that women have access to the correct information, said Mollmann.
"This is abdicating their responsibility and putting it on the shoulders of already distressed women. The government needs to take decisive action to shut down and prosecute these rogue agencies," she said.
It is currently illegal to have an abortion in Ireland under any circumstances, unless the life of the pregnant woman is at risk, although women have the legal right to terminate their pregnancy abroad.
According to UK Department of Health figures, 4,600 women who had abortions in the UK in 2008 gave Irish addresses, but the real number of Irish women having terminations is likely to be significantly higher, said Mollmann.
"This law does not stop women getting abortions but it does prevent them getting one in a timely manner, which increases the risk involved," she said.
The difficult economic situation in Ireland is making it increasingly difficult for some women to meet the cost of an abortion, estimated by HRW at between €800 and €1000 (£690 and £862) for the procedure and travel costs, said Niall Behan, CEO of the Irish Family Planning Association.
"We are increasingly seeing women who can't travel being forced to look at other options that are not safe. There is evidence to suggest that women are having illegal abortions, not on a huge scale, but on any scale is unacceptable," he said.
The Pro-Life Campaign in Ireland has previously accused the IFPA of creating unnecessary fears about women's health and argues that Ireland without abortion is the safest country in the world in which to be pregnant.
In the case currently before the European court , three women, known as A, B and C, are arguing their right to privacy and family life have been violated.
One of the women who had a termination became pregnant while undergoing chemotherapy treatment for cancer and feared for her health and that of her child. Another is a former alcoholic and drug addict whose four children were in care. She feared her pregnancy would prevent her getting her children back, and borrowed cash from a money lender to finance the termination. A judgment is expected in the autumn.
Alexandra Topping guardian.co.uk, Thursday 28 January 2010
The Irish government came under increasing pressure to overhaul its ban on abortion today, after it was accused of exposing women to "grossly misleading" information about the procedure.
According to Human Rights Watch, Irish legislation – under which women who have an abortion in Ireland face a life sentence in prison if prosecuted – is putting women's health at risk and exposing them to deliberate misinformation from rogue pro-life agencies.
Women have been told they may become infertile, require a hysterectomy or possibly need a colostomy bag after an abortion by agencies that target women seeking advice about unwanted pregnancies, says the report.
It comes as Ireland waits for a landmark ruling from the European court of human rights on the case of three women who accuse the government of putting their health at risk by forcing them to travel abroad for terminations.
"Women in need of abortion services should, as a matter of international law and human decency, be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation," said Marianne Mollmann, the women's rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. "But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatised, and written out."
According to the report, the government limits information about legal abortion services and has failed to crack down on false claims from "rogue" agencies masquerading as unwanted pregnancy support groups.
One 29-year-old woman was shown a video of ultrasound images and pictures of mothers by an agency called "British Alternatives".
"[The woman] put a model of a small foetus in my hand ... told me to name my baby, asked me how I would feel if I killed the baby," she said.
Another woman described being harassed over the phone by a pro-life agency for weeks: "They would ask 'Is your baby still alive? Have you killed it yet?'."
The Irish government recently launched a campaign urging women who feel that have been given false information about abortions to inform the authorities, but this assumes that women have access to the correct information, said Mollmann.
"This is abdicating their responsibility and putting it on the shoulders of already distressed women. The government needs to take decisive action to shut down and prosecute these rogue agencies," she said.
It is currently illegal to have an abortion in Ireland under any circumstances, unless the life of the pregnant woman is at risk, although women have the legal right to terminate their pregnancy abroad.
According to UK Department of Health figures, 4,600 women who had abortions in the UK in 2008 gave Irish addresses, but the real number of Irish women having terminations is likely to be significantly higher, said Mollmann.
"This law does not stop women getting abortions but it does prevent them getting one in a timely manner, which increases the risk involved," she said.
The difficult economic situation in Ireland is making it increasingly difficult for some women to meet the cost of an abortion, estimated by HRW at between €800 and €1000 (£690 and £862) for the procedure and travel costs, said Niall Behan, CEO of the Irish Family Planning Association.
"We are increasingly seeing women who can't travel being forced to look at other options that are not safe. There is evidence to suggest that women are having illegal abortions, not on a huge scale, but on any scale is unacceptable," he said.
The Pro-Life Campaign in Ireland has previously accused the IFPA of creating unnecessary fears about women's health and argues that Ireland without abortion is the safest country in the world in which to be pregnant.
In the case currently before the European court , three women, known as A, B and C, are arguing their right to privacy and family life have been violated.
One of the women who had a termination became pregnant while undergoing chemotherapy treatment for cancer and feared for her health and that of her child. Another is a former alcoholic and drug addict whose four children were in care. She feared her pregnancy would prevent her getting her children back, and borrowed cash from a money lender to finance the termination. A judgment is expected in the autumn.
'I was very angry. I felt let down, maltreated'
‘I was very angry. I felt let down, maltreated’
By Evelyn Ring The Irish Examiner
Friday, January 29, 2010
NONE of the 13 women interviewed by Human Rights Watch wanted to be identified, even though all had told friends and family about the abortion and had received support and understanding.
The women interviewed described feelings of isolation and shame, and their fear of public disapproval.
Sarah B talked of the "shame factor" and being "terrified of people judging me". She also spoke of her anger at being made to feel like a criminal by her country.
Aisling J had an abortion abroad after a scan conducted in another European country showed that the foetus she was carrying had spina bifida and hydrocephalus and could not survive.
She recounted several obstacles she experienced accessing diagnostic tests in Ireland during the early stage of her pregnancy .
"I was very angry. I felt let down, maltreated," she said.
Siobhán G was pregnant with twins when she discovered that both had fatal birth defects.
"I was forced to leave home and do everything in secrecy... I was made to feel that I was doing something wrong."
Mary H ended her pregnancy in Britain after antenatal tests showed that the foetus had Edwards syndrome, which leads to severe physical and mental disabilities.
"I was all over the place... Then (after an initial visit to an Irish clinic) I was on my own. I had to contact the place, make my own travel arrangements, hotel arrangements."
Aoife C, who is from a rural part of Ireland, was almost 28 weeks’ pregnant when she finally had an abortion in Britain and blamed a lack of information for having the termination so late in her pregnancy.
"Information wasn’t easily available... it was really hard to make the right connections," she said.
All the women interviewed for the report said costs associated with travelling was their most immediate and urgent concern once they had decided to have an abortion.
Sarah B went to Britain for an abortion when she was a student and part-time waitress. "First and foremost was the money thing, I was so broke, I was up to my eyeballs in debt."
This story appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Friday, January 29, 2010
Read more: http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/i-was-very-angry-i-felt-let-down-maltreated-110783.html#ixzz0eZcnnNkN
By Evelyn Ring The Irish Examiner
Friday, January 29, 2010
NONE of the 13 women interviewed by Human Rights Watch wanted to be identified, even though all had told friends and family about the abortion and had received support and understanding.
The women interviewed described feelings of isolation and shame, and their fear of public disapproval.
Sarah B talked of the "shame factor" and being "terrified of people judging me". She also spoke of her anger at being made to feel like a criminal by her country.
Aisling J had an abortion abroad after a scan conducted in another European country showed that the foetus she was carrying had spina bifida and hydrocephalus and could not survive.
She recounted several obstacles she experienced accessing diagnostic tests in Ireland during the early stage of her pregnancy .
"I was very angry. I felt let down, maltreated," she said.
Siobhán G was pregnant with twins when she discovered that both had fatal birth defects.
"I was forced to leave home and do everything in secrecy... I was made to feel that I was doing something wrong."
Mary H ended her pregnancy in Britain after antenatal tests showed that the foetus had Edwards syndrome, which leads to severe physical and mental disabilities.
"I was all over the place... Then (after an initial visit to an Irish clinic) I was on my own. I had to contact the place, make my own travel arrangements, hotel arrangements."
Aoife C, who is from a rural part of Ireland, was almost 28 weeks’ pregnant when she finally had an abortion in Britain and blamed a lack of information for having the termination so late in her pregnancy.
"Information wasn’t easily available... it was really hard to make the right connections," she said.
All the women interviewed for the report said costs associated with travelling was their most immediate and urgent concern once they had decided to have an abortion.
Sarah B went to Britain for an abortion when she was a student and part-time waitress. "First and foremost was the money thing, I was so broke, I was up to my eyeballs in debt."
This story appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Friday, January 29, 2010
Read more: http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/i-was-very-angry-i-felt-let-down-maltreated-110783.html#ixzz0eZcnnNkN
Human Rights Group Attacks State Policy on Abortion
Human rights group attacks state policy on abortion
By Evelyn Ring The Irish Examiner
Friday, January 29, 2010
WOMEN entitled to a legal abortion in Ireland cannot get one because of deliberately obscure anti-abortion policies, a leading human rights organisation has claimed.
Human Rights Watch has accused the Government of actively seeking to restrict access to abortion services and information, both within Ireland and for residents seeking care abroad.
In particular, it has criticised the lack of legal and policy guidance on when an abortion might be legally performed within Ireland.
"The Irish Government has failed utterly to ensure that health services are available to those women who are legally entitled to an abortion," claims a report by the independent body.
It says some doctors in Ireland are reluctant even to provide pre-natal screening for severe foetal abnormalities and very few, if any, women, have access to legal abortions at home.
Marianne Mollmann, women’s rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch, said women in need of abortion services should be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation.
"But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatised and written out," Ms Mollmann said at the launch of a 57-paper report, entitled A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland, in Dublin yesterday.
"Irish law on abortion is in and of itself an affront to human rights. But it is made worse by the fact that even those who may qualify for a legal abortion in Ireland cannot get one due to deliberately murky policies that carry an implied threat of prosecution."
Ms Mollmann said women should have publicly available information on how to seek abortion services abroad and there should be medical guidelines for the kind of abortions that are currently legal within Ireland.
"Your newspaper (Irish Examiner) just published a survey saying that over 60% of young adults agree that abortion should be legalised. So it is a little bit of a myth that the Irish population believes that abortion should be a criminal offence."
Rosie Toner, crisis pregnancy counsellor with the Irish Family Planning Association, said the report illustrated the reality faced by thousands of Irish women. Since 1980, over 140,000 women have been forced to travel abroad for an abortion, she pointed out.
"Women are put under severe burdens of distress to try and find medical services in other countries to give them a service they believe should be available to them here in Ireland," said Ms Toner.
The IFPA had been advocating for safe and legal abortion in Ireland over the last two decades.
The Cork Women’s Right to Choose Group said the report and three cases taken by Irish women to the European Court of Human rights demonstrate that successive governments had been blind to women’s needs.
"Making abortion illegal does not stop it happening, it simply makes it more stressful and dangerous," said spokesperson Dr Sandra McAvoy.
This story appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Friday, January 29, 2010
more info »
Read more: http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/human-rights-group-attacks-state-policy-on-abortion-110782.html#ixzz0eZcEavOL
By Evelyn Ring The Irish Examiner
Friday, January 29, 2010
WOMEN entitled to a legal abortion in Ireland cannot get one because of deliberately obscure anti-abortion policies, a leading human rights organisation has claimed.
Human Rights Watch has accused the Government of actively seeking to restrict access to abortion services and information, both within Ireland and for residents seeking care abroad.
In particular, it has criticised the lack of legal and policy guidance on when an abortion might be legally performed within Ireland.
"The Irish Government has failed utterly to ensure that health services are available to those women who are legally entitled to an abortion," claims a report by the independent body.
It says some doctors in Ireland are reluctant even to provide pre-natal screening for severe foetal abnormalities and very few, if any, women, have access to legal abortions at home.
Marianne Mollmann, women’s rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch, said women in need of abortion services should be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation.
"But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatised and written out," Ms Mollmann said at the launch of a 57-paper report, entitled A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland, in Dublin yesterday.
"Irish law on abortion is in and of itself an affront to human rights. But it is made worse by the fact that even those who may qualify for a legal abortion in Ireland cannot get one due to deliberately murky policies that carry an implied threat of prosecution."
Ms Mollmann said women should have publicly available information on how to seek abortion services abroad and there should be medical guidelines for the kind of abortions that are currently legal within Ireland.
"Your newspaper (Irish Examiner) just published a survey saying that over 60% of young adults agree that abortion should be legalised. So it is a little bit of a myth that the Irish population believes that abortion should be a criminal offence."
Rosie Toner, crisis pregnancy counsellor with the Irish Family Planning Association, said the report illustrated the reality faced by thousands of Irish women. Since 1980, over 140,000 women have been forced to travel abroad for an abortion, she pointed out.
"Women are put under severe burdens of distress to try and find medical services in other countries to give them a service they believe should be available to them here in Ireland," said Ms Toner.
The IFPA had been advocating for safe and legal abortion in Ireland over the last two decades.
The Cork Women’s Right to Choose Group said the report and three cases taken by Irish women to the European Court of Human rights demonstrate that successive governments had been blind to women’s needs.
"Making abortion illegal does not stop it happening, it simply makes it more stressful and dangerous," said spokesperson Dr Sandra McAvoy.
This story appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Friday, January 29, 2010
more info »
Read more: http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/human-rights-group-attacks-state-policy-on-abortion-110782.html#ixzz0eZcEavOL
In Their Own Words Women Who Travelled Abroad for Abortions
In their own words women who travelled abroad for abortions
Irish Times Friday January 29th 2010
“I was forced to leave home and do everything in secrecy . . . I was made to feel that I was doing something wrong.” Siobhán G was pregnant with twins when she discovered that both had fatal birth defects.
“When I came back, I rang the hospital and asked for follow-up care . . . I told them that I had a therapeutic abortion and asked about genetic testing. They just said to me, come back when you’re pregnant again.” Aisling J encountered problems in accessing diagnostic tests during her pregnancy and discovered late that her foetus had spina bifida. She had no access to follow-up care
“I think they weren’t used to girls coming with their boyfriends, so they separated us. One person spoke to each of us . . . from what I remember, they said we’d probably split up . . . they said your family is going to reject you.” Jane H was misled by an advertisement by a rogue crisis pregnancy agency
Source: Human Rights Watch
Irish Times Friday January 29th 2010
“I was forced to leave home and do everything in secrecy . . . I was made to feel that I was doing something wrong.” Siobhán G was pregnant with twins when she discovered that both had fatal birth defects.
“When I came back, I rang the hospital and asked for follow-up care . . . I told them that I had a therapeutic abortion and asked about genetic testing. They just said to me, come back when you’re pregnant again.” Aisling J encountered problems in accessing diagnostic tests during her pregnancy and discovered late that her foetus had spina bifida. She had no access to follow-up care
“I think they weren’t used to girls coming with their boyfriends, so they separated us. One person spoke to each of us . . . from what I remember, they said we’d probably split up . . . they said your family is going to reject you.” Jane H was misled by an advertisement by a rogue crisis pregnancy agency
Source: Human Rights Watch
Irish Times: State's Erratic Response to Abortion Creating 'Climate of Shame' - report
State's erratic response to abortion creating 'climate of shame' - report
JAMIE SMYTH Social Affairs Correspondent The Irish Times January 29th 2010
THE GOVERNMENT’S erratic and divisive response to the abortion issue has contributed directly to the violation of women’s human rights and increased risks to their health, a human rights watchdog has claimed in a new report.
Human Rights Watch also accused the State yesterday of creating a “climate of fear and shame” that has deepened the emotional trauma and despair felt by tens of thousands of Irish women with crisis pregnancies.
A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland calls for the immediate decriminalisation of abortion for women and the development of a new national regulatory framework to guarantee access to legal abortion.
“Women in need of abortion services should, as a matter of international law and, frankly, human decency, be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation. But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatised and written out,” said Marianne Mollmann, women’s advocacy director at Human Rights Watch.
She said the Government “actively sabotaged women’s health” by not allowing women to access abortion services in the Republic and aggressively discouraging them from seeking the care they need abroad.
“The Irish Government is complicit in the distress they feel. In other words, the Government contributes directly to undermining women’s health dignity and human rights,” said Ms Mollmann, who added that preventing women from having abortions in a timely manner could have a detrimental effect on their health.
Human Rights Watch said it sought interviews with senior people in Government about the report but these were refused.
A letter sent by the secretary general of the Department of Justice Sean Aylward to Human Rights Watch while compiling its report suggested there would be no change in policy on abortion.
“Ireland has held five separate referenda on three separate occasions on this issue. I am not aware of any proposal to put this issue before the people again,” wrote Mr Aylward in a handwritten addition to a standard reply letter.
The Human Rights Watch report called on the Government to ensure “truthful and objective” information on abortion is available to all women and to take action against “rogue” agencies that disseminate misleading information to pregnant women.
The report was compiled following interviews with 13 Irish women who had abortions abroad. One woman described how she attended a crisis pregnancy agency called British Alternatives, which had been advertised in the Golden Pages. She said the agency first asked about the possibility of adoption and then left her to watch a video of an ultrasound of a baby. She was then asked how she would feel if she “killed the baby”.
Anti-abortion campaigners said the claims made by Human Rights Watch were ridiculous. “Seeking to protect both mother and baby during pregnancy is not a violation of any human right. In fact it is the complete opposite,” said Dr Ruth Cullen of the Pro-Life Campaign. “Human Rights Watch cannot credibly claim to be a human rights organisation while at the same time denying the rights of unborn children throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy.”
JAMIE SMYTH Social Affairs Correspondent The Irish Times January 29th 2010
THE GOVERNMENT’S erratic and divisive response to the abortion issue has contributed directly to the violation of women’s human rights and increased risks to their health, a human rights watchdog has claimed in a new report.
Human Rights Watch also accused the State yesterday of creating a “climate of fear and shame” that has deepened the emotional trauma and despair felt by tens of thousands of Irish women with crisis pregnancies.
A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland calls for the immediate decriminalisation of abortion for women and the development of a new national regulatory framework to guarantee access to legal abortion.
“Women in need of abortion services should, as a matter of international law and, frankly, human decency, be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation. But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatised and written out,” said Marianne Mollmann, women’s advocacy director at Human Rights Watch.
She said the Government “actively sabotaged women’s health” by not allowing women to access abortion services in the Republic and aggressively discouraging them from seeking the care they need abroad.
“The Irish Government is complicit in the distress they feel. In other words, the Government contributes directly to undermining women’s health dignity and human rights,” said Ms Mollmann, who added that preventing women from having abortions in a timely manner could have a detrimental effect on their health.
Human Rights Watch said it sought interviews with senior people in Government about the report but these were refused.
A letter sent by the secretary general of the Department of Justice Sean Aylward to Human Rights Watch while compiling its report suggested there would be no change in policy on abortion.
“Ireland has held five separate referenda on three separate occasions on this issue. I am not aware of any proposal to put this issue before the people again,” wrote Mr Aylward in a handwritten addition to a standard reply letter.
The Human Rights Watch report called on the Government to ensure “truthful and objective” information on abortion is available to all women and to take action against “rogue” agencies that disseminate misleading information to pregnant women.
The report was compiled following interviews with 13 Irish women who had abortions abroad. One woman described how she attended a crisis pregnancy agency called British Alternatives, which had been advertised in the Golden Pages. She said the agency first asked about the possibility of adoption and then left her to watch a video of an ultrasound of a baby. She was then asked how she would feel if she “killed the baby”.
Anti-abortion campaigners said the claims made by Human Rights Watch were ridiculous. “Seeking to protect both mother and baby during pregnancy is not a violation of any human right. In fact it is the complete opposite,” said Dr Ruth Cullen of the Pro-Life Campaign. “Human Rights Watch cannot credibly claim to be a human rights organisation while at the same time denying the rights of unborn children throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy.”
Human Rights Watch: Ireland: Abortion Limits Violate Human Rights
Ireland: Abortion Limits Violate Human Rights
Policies Designed to Sabotage Access Both at Home and Abroad
January 28, 2010
A State of Isolation.
'Women in need of abortion services should, as a matter of international law and – frankly - human decency, be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation. But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatized, and written out.
.Marianne Mollmann, women’s rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch .
(Dublin, January 28, 2010) - The Irish government actively seeks to restrict access to abortion services and information both within Ireland and for its residents seeking care abroad, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
The 57-page report, "A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland," details how women struggle to overcome the financial, logistical, physical, and emotional burdens imposed by restrictive laws and policies that force them to seek care abroad, without support from the state. Every year thousands of women and girls travel from Ireland to other European countries for abortions.
"Women in need of abortion services should, as a matter of international law and - frankly -human decency, be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation," said Marianne Mollmann, women's rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. "But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatized, and written out."
In Ireland, abortion is legally restricted in almost all circumstances, with potential penalties of penal servitude for life for both patients and service providers, except where the pregnant woman's life is in danger, but there is little legal and policy guidance on when, specifically, an abortion might be legally performed within Ireland. As a result, some doctors are reluctant even to provide pre-natal screening for severe fetal abnormalities, and very few - if any - women have access to legal abortions at home. The government has indicated that it has no current plans to clarify the possible reach of the criminal penalties. The government does not keep figures on legal and illegal abortions carried out in Ireland, or on the number of women traveling abroad for services.
"Irish law on abortion is in and of itself an affront to human rights," Mollmann said. "But it is made worse by the fact that even those who may qualify for a legal abortion in Ireland cannot get one due to deliberately murky policies that carry an implied threat of prosecution."
But women also face more active sabotaging of their health decisions by the state. Throughout the last two decades, the Irish government has used injunctions to prevent individuals from traveling abroad for abortion. As recently as 2007, a 17-year-old girl in the custody of the Health Services Executive had to go to court to get permission to travel to the United Kingdom for an abortion.
Organizations that provide information on how to access abortion services abroad face restrictions on when and how this information can legally be conveyed, under threat of penalties. And the government does nothing to prevent "rogue" agencies that represent themselves as providers of information about abortion from circulating blatantly misleading and false information.
"Women should not have to make decisions about their health and lives based on lies," Mollmann said. "Yet the law leaves ‘rogue' agencies unregulated and threatens honest service providers with fines or worse if they help a distressed woman make a phone call to a clinic abroad."
Policies Designed to Sabotage Access Both at Home and Abroad
January 28, 2010
A State of Isolation.
'Women in need of abortion services should, as a matter of international law and – frankly - human decency, be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation. But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatized, and written out.
.Marianne Mollmann, women’s rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch .
(Dublin, January 28, 2010) - The Irish government actively seeks to restrict access to abortion services and information both within Ireland and for its residents seeking care abroad, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
The 57-page report, "A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland," details how women struggle to overcome the financial, logistical, physical, and emotional burdens imposed by restrictive laws and policies that force them to seek care abroad, without support from the state. Every year thousands of women and girls travel from Ireland to other European countries for abortions.
"Women in need of abortion services should, as a matter of international law and - frankly -human decency, be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation," said Marianne Mollmann, women's rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. "But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatized, and written out."
In Ireland, abortion is legally restricted in almost all circumstances, with potential penalties of penal servitude for life for both patients and service providers, except where the pregnant woman's life is in danger, but there is little legal and policy guidance on when, specifically, an abortion might be legally performed within Ireland. As a result, some doctors are reluctant even to provide pre-natal screening for severe fetal abnormalities, and very few - if any - women have access to legal abortions at home. The government has indicated that it has no current plans to clarify the possible reach of the criminal penalties. The government does not keep figures on legal and illegal abortions carried out in Ireland, or on the number of women traveling abroad for services.
"Irish law on abortion is in and of itself an affront to human rights," Mollmann said. "But it is made worse by the fact that even those who may qualify for a legal abortion in Ireland cannot get one due to deliberately murky policies that carry an implied threat of prosecution."
But women also face more active sabotaging of their health decisions by the state. Throughout the last two decades, the Irish government has used injunctions to prevent individuals from traveling abroad for abortion. As recently as 2007, a 17-year-old girl in the custody of the Health Services Executive had to go to court to get permission to travel to the United Kingdom for an abortion.
Organizations that provide information on how to access abortion services abroad face restrictions on when and how this information can legally be conveyed, under threat of penalties. And the government does nothing to prevent "rogue" agencies that represent themselves as providers of information about abortion from circulating blatantly misleading and false information.
"Women should not have to make decisions about their health and lives based on lies," Mollmann said. "Yet the law leaves ‘rogue' agencies unregulated and threatens honest service providers with fines or worse if they help a distressed woman make a phone call to a clinic abroad."
Maman Poulet Blog: Human Rights Watch Launch Report on Abortion and Ireland
Posted by Maman Poulet on 28 Jan 2010 at 11:00 am | Tagged as: Abortion
'The Irish government should take all necessary steps, both immediate and incremental, to ensure that women have informed and un-coerced access to safe and legal abortion services within Ireland as an element of women’s exercise of their reproductive and other human rights. In the interim, the government should immediately ensure that those abortion services that are currently legal under Irish law be provided to all who need them without discrimination, and that full and accurate information on how to obtain safe abortions both within Ireland and outside its borders be available to all women, without discrimination.'
Human Rights Watch (HRW) have today released their report A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland on the human rights implications of Irish legislation and policies regarding residents access to abortion. The report highlights international law and treaties and how they detail that people should be free from Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and how Ireland’s treatment of pregnant women seeking abortions contravenes this and other rights.
It details the situation facing women seeking access to legal abortion with no clear policy in place enabling these to take place. HRW chronicle the reluctance of the Department of Health, the medical council and many members of the medical profession in becoming involved in forming policy in the area though attitudes towards the women involved are changing.
Women seeking information on abortion are still at risk of receiving information from agencies (state funded) who do not support a woman’s right to choose or receive impartial information or indeed rogue agencies who are allowed to exist unregulated targeting women. (See earlier post on the actions of the state in trying to make women feel guilty about attending rogue agencies)
Women travelling outside the state wishing to access a termination continue to face many barriers in organising travel.
Quote from Report:
'The women interviewed by Human Rights Watch described a climate of fear and shame, at least in part attributable to the criminalization of abortion. They explained their concerns about disclosing that they had had an abortion and the burden of secrecy that they are forced to carry. They also described their confusion about whether they could legally leave Ireland to access an abortion in the UK or other parts of Europe, and their concerns about whether to access post-abortion care, legally available in Ireland.
They also described financial constraints. Every woman interviewed for this report told Human Rights Watch how difficult it was to raise the money needed to pay for travel and the costs of the abortion. Even those who were employed indicated that the costs related to traveling created a significant barrier and delayed their access.'
Asylum seekers face financial and freedom of movment barriers in accessing abortions abroad.
Quote from Report:
'Asylum seekers are in a particularly vulnerable position. Often isolated, without family and other social support, they fear the consequences of seeking permission to leave the country to have an abortion. They also face additional costs as they have no travel documents, and must therefore apply and pay for emergency temporary travel documents, which are issued by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. They will also have to apply and pay for visas to enter the UK, or Schengen visas to enter into a European Union (EU) country. Currently the cost of a UK visa is £65 (€72).[105] Application fees for a Schengen visa to the Netherlands cost £60 (€67).[106]
A service provider, who spoke to Human Rights Watch on condition of anonymity, described the situation of a young female asylum seeker she had worked with:
She could not legally leave the country. Her difficulties were that she didn’t know where to go … money and her legal status. We made the call to Holland … she needed to get a re-entry visa to return and to apply for a Schengen visa…. She needed a temporary travel document from the Department of Justice—we had a contact there—not sure how someone without a contact would do this…. It took a whole month to organize this. She was just over 12 weeks pregnant when she went to Holland. There were fees attached to the issuing of all the documents and there was no funding available for this.[107]'
These issues and recommendations may not be news to many of us, though we often forget about them or have decided that nothing can be done. But it is the first time in some years that all the issues affecting the human rights of women in trying to access information and services inside and outside the state have been researched and documented in one place.
The Department of Justice by the way don’t think that there is a problem regarding the issue in Ireland and refused to be interviewed by Human Rights Watch and said they had no intentions of doing anything on the matter.
I expect many of the agencies cited to come out denying that there is anything amiss in the country while women silently organise to travel or indeed as one person mentions in the report go through ‘desperate pregnancies’.
'The Irish government should take all necessary steps, both immediate and incremental, to ensure that women have informed and un-coerced access to safe and legal abortion services within Ireland as an element of women’s exercise of their reproductive and other human rights. In the interim, the government should immediately ensure that those abortion services that are currently legal under Irish law be provided to all who need them without discrimination, and that full and accurate information on how to obtain safe abortions both within Ireland and outside its borders be available to all women, without discrimination.'
Human Rights Watch (HRW) have today released their report A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland on the human rights implications of Irish legislation and policies regarding residents access to abortion. The report highlights international law and treaties and how they detail that people should be free from Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and how Ireland’s treatment of pregnant women seeking abortions contravenes this and other rights.
It details the situation facing women seeking access to legal abortion with no clear policy in place enabling these to take place. HRW chronicle the reluctance of the Department of Health, the medical council and many members of the medical profession in becoming involved in forming policy in the area though attitudes towards the women involved are changing.
Women seeking information on abortion are still at risk of receiving information from agencies (state funded) who do not support a woman’s right to choose or receive impartial information or indeed rogue agencies who are allowed to exist unregulated targeting women. (See earlier post on the actions of the state in trying to make women feel guilty about attending rogue agencies)
Women travelling outside the state wishing to access a termination continue to face many barriers in organising travel.
Quote from Report:
'The women interviewed by Human Rights Watch described a climate of fear and shame, at least in part attributable to the criminalization of abortion. They explained their concerns about disclosing that they had had an abortion and the burden of secrecy that they are forced to carry. They also described their confusion about whether they could legally leave Ireland to access an abortion in the UK or other parts of Europe, and their concerns about whether to access post-abortion care, legally available in Ireland.
They also described financial constraints. Every woman interviewed for this report told Human Rights Watch how difficult it was to raise the money needed to pay for travel and the costs of the abortion. Even those who were employed indicated that the costs related to traveling created a significant barrier and delayed their access.'
Asylum seekers face financial and freedom of movment barriers in accessing abortions abroad.
Quote from Report:
'Asylum seekers are in a particularly vulnerable position. Often isolated, without family and other social support, they fear the consequences of seeking permission to leave the country to have an abortion. They also face additional costs as they have no travel documents, and must therefore apply and pay for emergency temporary travel documents, which are issued by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. They will also have to apply and pay for visas to enter the UK, or Schengen visas to enter into a European Union (EU) country. Currently the cost of a UK visa is £65 (€72).[105] Application fees for a Schengen visa to the Netherlands cost £60 (€67).[106]
A service provider, who spoke to Human Rights Watch on condition of anonymity, described the situation of a young female asylum seeker she had worked with:
She could not legally leave the country. Her difficulties were that she didn’t know where to go … money and her legal status. We made the call to Holland … she needed to get a re-entry visa to return and to apply for a Schengen visa…. She needed a temporary travel document from the Department of Justice—we had a contact there—not sure how someone without a contact would do this…. It took a whole month to organize this. She was just over 12 weeks pregnant when she went to Holland. There were fees attached to the issuing of all the documents and there was no funding available for this.[107]'
These issues and recommendations may not be news to many of us, though we often forget about them or have decided that nothing can be done. But it is the first time in some years that all the issues affecting the human rights of women in trying to access information and services inside and outside the state have been researched and documented in one place.
The Department of Justice by the way don’t think that there is a problem regarding the issue in Ireland and refused to be interviewed by Human Rights Watch and said they had no intentions of doing anything on the matter.
I expect many of the agencies cited to come out denying that there is anything amiss in the country while women silently organise to travel or indeed as one person mentions in the report go through ‘desperate pregnancies’.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Comment related to launch of Human Rights Watch report
Irishhealth.com
• Irish abortion laws criticised
Deborah Condon
The Irish Government has been severely criticised for its restrictive abortion laws.
According to a new report by the international organisation, Human Rights Watch (HRW), the Government ‘actively seeks to restrict access to abortion services and information both within Ireland and for its residents seeking care abroad’.
"Women in need of abortion services should, as a matter of international law and frankly, human decency, be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation. But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatised, and written out," said Marianne Mollmann, HRW’s women's rights advocacy director.
The 57-page report, A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland, details how women struggle to overcome the financial, logistical, physical and emotional burdens imposed by Irish abortion laws and policies, which force them to seek care abroad without support from the state.
The report notes that in Ireland, abortion is legally restricted in almost all circumstances, with potential penalties of penal servitude for life for both patients and service providers, except where the pregnant woman's life is in danger. However there is little legal and policy guidance on when, specifically, an abortion might be legally performed within Ireland.
As a result, some doctors are reluctant even to provide pre-natal screening for severe foetal abnormalities, and very few, if any, women have access to legal abortions at home.
The report points out that the Government has indicated that it has no current plans to clarify the possible reach of related criminal penalties and that it does not keep figures on legal and illegal abortions carried out in Ireland, or on the number of women travelling abroad for services.
"Irish law on abortion is in and of itself an affront to human rights. But it is made worse by the fact that even those who may qualify for a legal abortion in Ireland cannot get one due to deliberately murky policies that carry an implied threat of prosecution,” Ms Mollman said.
According to the report, women also face ‘active sabotaging’ of their health decisions by the state. It notes that throughout the last two decades, the Government has used injunctions to prevent individuals from travelling abroad for abortion. As recently as 2007, a 17-year-old girl in the custody of the HSE had to go to court to get permission to travel to the UK for an abortion.
Meanwhile, organisations that provide information on how to access abortion services abroad face restrictions on when and how this information can legally be conveyed under threat of penalties. The Government also does nothing to prevent ‘rogue’ agencies that represent themselves as providers of information about abortion from circulating ‘blatantly misleading and false’ information.
"Women should not have to make decisions about their health and lives based on lies. Yet the law leaves ‘rogue' agencies unregulated and threatens honest service providers with fines or worse if they help a distressed woman make a phone call to a clinic abroad,” Ms Mollman added.
The report has been welcomed by the Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA). It said it is ‘not surprised’ that the Government has been criticised by HRW.
“Since 1980, at least 138,000 women have been forced to travel abroad to access safe and legal abortion services. We believe that the criminalisation of abortion has little impact on abortion rates, it merely adds to the burden and stress experienced by women having crisis pregnancies,” the organisation said.
The report was also welcomed by the Marie Stopes Reproductive Choices clinic, which provides women with information on abortion, contraception and sexual health.
“The Government’s approach to abortion is restrictive and archaic and a violation of women’s basic right to health and information. Women facing an unwanted pregnancy are in desperate need of non-judgemental, accurate information and support to allow them to make the right choice for their individual circumstances,” said Gabrielle Malone, Programme Director with the clinic.
Mamanpoulet.com
• Human Rights Watch launch report on Abortion and Ireland
Human Rights Watch (HRW) have today released their report A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland on the human rights implications of Irish legislation and policies regarding residents access to abortion. The report highlights international law and treaties and how they detail that people should be free from Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and how Ireland’s treatment of pregnant women seeking abortions contravenes this and other rights.
It details the situation facing women seeking access to legal abortion with no clear policy in place enabling these to take place. HRW chronicle the reluctance of the Department of Health, the medical council and many members of the medical profession in becoming involved in forming policy in the area though attitudes towards the women involved are changing.
Women seeking information on abortion are still at risk of receiving information from agencies (state funded) who do not support a woman’s right to choose or receive impartial information or indeed rogue agencies who are allowed to exist unregulated targeting women. (See earlier post on the actions of the state in trying to make women feel guilty about attending rogue agencies)
Women travelling outside the state wishing to access a termination continue to face many barriers in organising travel.
The women interviewed by Human Rights Watch described a climate of fear and shame, at least in part attributable to the criminalization of abortion. They explained their concerns about disclosing that they had had an abortion and the burden of secrecy that they are forced to carry. They also described their confusion about whether they could legally leave Ireland to access an abortion in the UK or other parts of Europe, and their concerns about whether to access post-abortion care, legally available in Ireland.
They also described financial constraints. Every woman interviewed for this report told Human Rights Watch how difficult it was to raise the money needed to pay for travel and the costs of the abortion. Even those who were employed indicated that the costs related to traveling created a significant barrier and delayed their access.
Asylum seekers face financial and freedom of movment barriers in accessing abortions abroad.
Asylum seekers are in a particularly vulnerable position. Often isolated, without family and other social support, they fear the consequences of seeking permission to leave the country to have an abortion. They also face additional costs as they have no travel documents, and must therefore apply and pay for emergency temporary travel documents, which are issued by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. They will also have to apply and pay for visas to enter the UK, or Schengen visas to enter into a European Union (EU) country. Currently the cost of a UK visa is £65 (€72).[105] Application fees for a Schengen visa to the Netherlands cost £60 (€67).[106]
A service provider, who spoke to Human Rights Watch on condition of anonymity, described the situation of a young female asylum seeker she had worked with:
She could not legally leave the country. Her difficulties were that she didn’t know where to go … money and her legal status. We made the call to Holland … she needed to get a re-entry visa to return and to apply for a Schengen visa…. She needed a temporary travel document from the Department of Justice—we had a contact there—not sure how someone without a contact would do this…. It took a whole month to organize this. She was just over 12 weeks pregnant when she went to Holland. There were fees attached to the issuing of all the documents and there was no funding available for this.[107]
These issues and recommendations may not be news to many of us, though we often forget about them or have decided that nothing can be done. But it is the first time in some years that all the issues affecting the human rights of women in trying to access information and services inside and outside the state have been researched and documented in one place.
The Department of Justice by the way don’t think that there is a problem regarding the issue in Ireland and refused to be interviewed by Human Rights Watch and said they had no intentions of doing anything on the matter.
I expect many of the agencies cited to come out denying that there is anything amiss in the country while women silently organise to travel or indeed as one person mentions in the report go through ‘desperate pregnancies’.
• Irish abortion laws criticised
Deborah Condon
The Irish Government has been severely criticised for its restrictive abortion laws.
According to a new report by the international organisation, Human Rights Watch (HRW), the Government ‘actively seeks to restrict access to abortion services and information both within Ireland and for its residents seeking care abroad’.
"Women in need of abortion services should, as a matter of international law and frankly, human decency, be able to count on support from their government as they face a difficult situation. But in Ireland they are actively stonewalled, stigmatised, and written out," said Marianne Mollmann, HRW’s women's rights advocacy director.
The 57-page report, A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland, details how women struggle to overcome the financial, logistical, physical and emotional burdens imposed by Irish abortion laws and policies, which force them to seek care abroad without support from the state.
The report notes that in Ireland, abortion is legally restricted in almost all circumstances, with potential penalties of penal servitude for life for both patients and service providers, except where the pregnant woman's life is in danger. However there is little legal and policy guidance on when, specifically, an abortion might be legally performed within Ireland.
As a result, some doctors are reluctant even to provide pre-natal screening for severe foetal abnormalities, and very few, if any, women have access to legal abortions at home.
The report points out that the Government has indicated that it has no current plans to clarify the possible reach of related criminal penalties and that it does not keep figures on legal and illegal abortions carried out in Ireland, or on the number of women travelling abroad for services.
"Irish law on abortion is in and of itself an affront to human rights. But it is made worse by the fact that even those who may qualify for a legal abortion in Ireland cannot get one due to deliberately murky policies that carry an implied threat of prosecution,” Ms Mollman said.
According to the report, women also face ‘active sabotaging’ of their health decisions by the state. It notes that throughout the last two decades, the Government has used injunctions to prevent individuals from travelling abroad for abortion. As recently as 2007, a 17-year-old girl in the custody of the HSE had to go to court to get permission to travel to the UK for an abortion.
Meanwhile, organisations that provide information on how to access abortion services abroad face restrictions on when and how this information can legally be conveyed under threat of penalties. The Government also does nothing to prevent ‘rogue’ agencies that represent themselves as providers of information about abortion from circulating ‘blatantly misleading and false’ information.
"Women should not have to make decisions about their health and lives based on lies. Yet the law leaves ‘rogue' agencies unregulated and threatens honest service providers with fines or worse if they help a distressed woman make a phone call to a clinic abroad,” Ms Mollman added.
The report has been welcomed by the Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA). It said it is ‘not surprised’ that the Government has been criticised by HRW.
“Since 1980, at least 138,000 women have been forced to travel abroad to access safe and legal abortion services. We believe that the criminalisation of abortion has little impact on abortion rates, it merely adds to the burden and stress experienced by women having crisis pregnancies,” the organisation said.
The report was also welcomed by the Marie Stopes Reproductive Choices clinic, which provides women with information on abortion, contraception and sexual health.
“The Government’s approach to abortion is restrictive and archaic and a violation of women’s basic right to health and information. Women facing an unwanted pregnancy are in desperate need of non-judgemental, accurate information and support to allow them to make the right choice for their individual circumstances,” said Gabrielle Malone, Programme Director with the clinic.
Mamanpoulet.com
• Human Rights Watch launch report on Abortion and Ireland
Human Rights Watch (HRW) have today released their report A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland on the human rights implications of Irish legislation and policies regarding residents access to abortion. The report highlights international law and treaties and how they detail that people should be free from Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and how Ireland’s treatment of pregnant women seeking abortions contravenes this and other rights.
It details the situation facing women seeking access to legal abortion with no clear policy in place enabling these to take place. HRW chronicle the reluctance of the Department of Health, the medical council and many members of the medical profession in becoming involved in forming policy in the area though attitudes towards the women involved are changing.
Women seeking information on abortion are still at risk of receiving information from agencies (state funded) who do not support a woman’s right to choose or receive impartial information or indeed rogue agencies who are allowed to exist unregulated targeting women. (See earlier post on the actions of the state in trying to make women feel guilty about attending rogue agencies)
Women travelling outside the state wishing to access a termination continue to face many barriers in organising travel.
The women interviewed by Human Rights Watch described a climate of fear and shame, at least in part attributable to the criminalization of abortion. They explained their concerns about disclosing that they had had an abortion and the burden of secrecy that they are forced to carry. They also described their confusion about whether they could legally leave Ireland to access an abortion in the UK or other parts of Europe, and their concerns about whether to access post-abortion care, legally available in Ireland.
They also described financial constraints. Every woman interviewed for this report told Human Rights Watch how difficult it was to raise the money needed to pay for travel and the costs of the abortion. Even those who were employed indicated that the costs related to traveling created a significant barrier and delayed their access.
Asylum seekers face financial and freedom of movment barriers in accessing abortions abroad.
Asylum seekers are in a particularly vulnerable position. Often isolated, without family and other social support, they fear the consequences of seeking permission to leave the country to have an abortion. They also face additional costs as they have no travel documents, and must therefore apply and pay for emergency temporary travel documents, which are issued by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. They will also have to apply and pay for visas to enter the UK, or Schengen visas to enter into a European Union (EU) country. Currently the cost of a UK visa is £65 (€72).[105] Application fees for a Schengen visa to the Netherlands cost £60 (€67).[106]
A service provider, who spoke to Human Rights Watch on condition of anonymity, described the situation of a young female asylum seeker she had worked with:
She could not legally leave the country. Her difficulties were that she didn’t know where to go … money and her legal status. We made the call to Holland … she needed to get a re-entry visa to return and to apply for a Schengen visa…. She needed a temporary travel document from the Department of Justice—we had a contact there—not sure how someone without a contact would do this…. It took a whole month to organize this. She was just over 12 weeks pregnant when she went to Holland. There were fees attached to the issuing of all the documents and there was no funding available for this.[107]
These issues and recommendations may not be news to many of us, though we often forget about them or have decided that nothing can be done. But it is the first time in some years that all the issues affecting the human rights of women in trying to access information and services inside and outside the state have been researched and documented in one place.
The Department of Justice by the way don’t think that there is a problem regarding the issue in Ireland and refused to be interviewed by Human Rights Watch and said they had no intentions of doing anything on the matter.
I expect many of the agencies cited to come out denying that there is anything amiss in the country while women silently organise to travel or indeed as one person mentions in the report go through ‘desperate pregnancies’.
Human Rights Watch report launched in Dublin
Human Rights Watch have just launched a report in Dublin 'A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland'
Check women's rights section of www.hrw.org.
Will post link up later.
Check women's rights section of www.hrw.org.
Will post link up later.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Irish Examiner: 60% In Favour of Legal Abortion
Irish Examiner January 21 2010
Survey: 60% in favour of legal abortion
By Catherine Shanahan and Orla Barry
Thursday, January 21, 2010
THREE-in-five 18-35 year olds believe abortion should be legalised, according to a sex survey which found one-in-four women has experienced an unplanned pregnancy.
The national poll also found almost 10% of 18-34 year olds has been involved in a relationship where an abortion took place.
The survey carried out by Red C on behalf of the Irish Examiner found three-in-four women believe the morning-after pill should be available over-the-counter (OTC). Curiously, less than one in seven men said they had been in a relationship that resulted in an unplanned pregnancy. But Dr Stephanie O’Keeffe, research and policy manager with the HSE Crisis Pregnancy Programme, said not all men may know their partner is pregnant.
According to the Irish Family Planning Agency (IFPA), the cost of accessing the morning-after pill has been an increasing cause of complaint, particularly in the last 12 months.
CEO Niall Behan said they had also seen a fall in the numbers seeking long-term contraceptive methods because of prohibitive costs. The morning-after pill is inexpensive but a GP prescription is required.
Dr Mel Bates, spokesperson for the Irish College of General Practitioners (ICGP), does not believe that free GP visits for the morning-after pill would work. "The woman will come in for the pill, but we may deal with many other issues. How would you decide who to charge and who not to charge?" he said.
Kerry-based GP Dr Eamonn Shanahan said he used the opportunity to "talk to her about why she found herself in this predicament and what her plans are for her sexual health in the future".
Family planning clinics, the Wellwoman Centre and the HSE Crisis Pregnancy Programme are all in disagreement with doctors over fears about abuse of emergency contraception if it was available OTC.
Dr O’Keeffe said a number of studies had concluded that the pill does not impact on a woman’s primary use of contraception.
The recession may also be impacting on the numbers becoming pregnant. Women in their late 20s and 30s attending Dublin’s Wellwoman Centre on discovery that they are pregnant are less distressed than during the healthy economic times. The clinic believes women see the recession as a good time to have a baby.
"I noticed the change about a year and a half ago" said Dr Shirley McQuade, the centre’s medical director.
"Women in long-term relationships with mid-range jobs were saying this might not be the worst time to be pregnant. Most are working shorter weeks and they don’t see themselves in line for a bonus anytime soon."
This story appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Thursday, January 21, 2010
Read more: http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2010/0121/ireland/survey-60-in-favour-of-legal-abortion-110224.html#ixzz0dikMjuwQ
Survey: 60% in favour of legal abortion
By Catherine Shanahan and Orla Barry
Thursday, January 21, 2010
THREE-in-five 18-35 year olds believe abortion should be legalised, according to a sex survey which found one-in-four women has experienced an unplanned pregnancy.
The national poll also found almost 10% of 18-34 year olds has been involved in a relationship where an abortion took place.
The survey carried out by Red C on behalf of the Irish Examiner found three-in-four women believe the morning-after pill should be available over-the-counter (OTC). Curiously, less than one in seven men said they had been in a relationship that resulted in an unplanned pregnancy. But Dr Stephanie O’Keeffe, research and policy manager with the HSE Crisis Pregnancy Programme, said not all men may know their partner is pregnant.
According to the Irish Family Planning Agency (IFPA), the cost of accessing the morning-after pill has been an increasing cause of complaint, particularly in the last 12 months.
CEO Niall Behan said they had also seen a fall in the numbers seeking long-term contraceptive methods because of prohibitive costs. The morning-after pill is inexpensive but a GP prescription is required.
Dr Mel Bates, spokesperson for the Irish College of General Practitioners (ICGP), does not believe that free GP visits for the morning-after pill would work. "The woman will come in for the pill, but we may deal with many other issues. How would you decide who to charge and who not to charge?" he said.
Kerry-based GP Dr Eamonn Shanahan said he used the opportunity to "talk to her about why she found herself in this predicament and what her plans are for her sexual health in the future".
Family planning clinics, the Wellwoman Centre and the HSE Crisis Pregnancy Programme are all in disagreement with doctors over fears about abuse of emergency contraception if it was available OTC.
Dr O’Keeffe said a number of studies had concluded that the pill does not impact on a woman’s primary use of contraception.
The recession may also be impacting on the numbers becoming pregnant. Women in their late 20s and 30s attending Dublin’s Wellwoman Centre on discovery that they are pregnant are less distressed than during the healthy economic times. The clinic believes women see the recession as a good time to have a baby.
"I noticed the change about a year and a half ago" said Dr Shirley McQuade, the centre’s medical director.
"Women in long-term relationships with mid-range jobs were saying this might not be the worst time to be pregnant. Most are working shorter weeks and they don’t see themselves in line for a bonus anytime soon."
This story appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Thursday, January 21, 2010
Read more: http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2010/0121/ireland/survey-60-in-favour-of-legal-abortion-110224.html#ixzz0dikMjuwQ
Monday, December 21, 2009
Spanish Lawmakers Vote To Ease Abortion Law
Spanish lawmakers vote to ease abortion law
Associated Press
Lawmakers voted to ease Spain's abortion law Thursday, approving a bill to allow the procedure without restrictions up to 14 weeks. The change would bring this traditionally Roman Catholic country in line with its more secular neighbors in northern Europe.
The measure now goes to the Senate, where passage is expected some time early next year.
Abortion reform was the last major pending issue in a bold reform agenda undertaken by Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, a Socialist who took power in 2004.
Under Zapatero, Spain has also legalized gay marriage and made it easier for Spaniards to divorce in a drive that has infuriated conservatives and the Roman Catholic Church.
The vote in the 350-seat Congress of Deputies was 184-158 with one abstention.
Under the current law, which dates back to 1985, Spanish women could in theory go to jail for getting an abortion outside certain strict limits - up to week 12 in case of rape and week 22 if the fetus is malformed.
But abortion is in effect widely available because women can assert mental distress as sole grounds for having an abortion, regardless of how late the pregnancy is. Most of the more than 100,000 abortions carried out each year in Spain were early-term ones that fell under this category.
The bill approved Thursday wipes away the threat of imprisonment and declares abortion to be a woman's right.
"We are legislating women's right to decide whether to be mothers," said Carmen Monton, the Socialists' spokeswoman on gender issues.
Conservative Popular Party spokesman Santiago Cervera insisted there was no clamor in Spanish society for changing the existing law and the government instigated it just to raise a stir and distract people's attention away from the country's economic recession.
Anti-abortion demonstrators wearing sandwich boards rallied outside the legislature during debate on the bill. One of the boards showed a picture of a child with Downs syndrome asking Zapatero "why are you letting them kill me?"
The new bill would also also allow 16- and 17-year-olds to have abortions without parental consent, as is the case in other European countries such as Germany, Britain and France.
This clause proved to be among the bill's most controversial ones.
In the end, the ruling Socialist party agreed to amend it so that such minors must inform their parents or legal guardian if they plan to undergo an abortion - although still with no need for their permission - except if they can show that doing so would expose them to violence within their family, threats or coercion.
The Spanish Bishops' Conference warned last month that legislators who voted in favor of the bill would be sinning and no longer eligible to receive Communion. This was particularly touchy for parliamentary speaker Jose Bono, a Socialist who is a practicing Catholic. Bono responded saying "My conscience is clear".
In October, a rally against the reform bill drew hundreds of thousands of people to Madrid. This showed that for all the changes Zapatero has introduced, abortion remains sensitive in a country where most people call themselves Catholic, even if few churches are full on Sundays.
The new bill, besides allowing unrestricted abortion up to 14 weeks, would permit it up to 22 weeks if two doctors certify there is a serious threat to the health of the mother, or fetal malformation.
Beyond 22 weeks, it would be allowed only doctors certify fetal malformation deemed incompatible with life or the fetus were diagnosed with an extremely serious or incurable disease.
Source: Associated Press, 17 December 2009
Associated Press
Lawmakers voted to ease Spain's abortion law Thursday, approving a bill to allow the procedure without restrictions up to 14 weeks. The change would bring this traditionally Roman Catholic country in line with its more secular neighbors in northern Europe.
The measure now goes to the Senate, where passage is expected some time early next year.
Abortion reform was the last major pending issue in a bold reform agenda undertaken by Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, a Socialist who took power in 2004.
Under Zapatero, Spain has also legalized gay marriage and made it easier for Spaniards to divorce in a drive that has infuriated conservatives and the Roman Catholic Church.
The vote in the 350-seat Congress of Deputies was 184-158 with one abstention.
Under the current law, which dates back to 1985, Spanish women could in theory go to jail for getting an abortion outside certain strict limits - up to week 12 in case of rape and week 22 if the fetus is malformed.
But abortion is in effect widely available because women can assert mental distress as sole grounds for having an abortion, regardless of how late the pregnancy is. Most of the more than 100,000 abortions carried out each year in Spain were early-term ones that fell under this category.
The bill approved Thursday wipes away the threat of imprisonment and declares abortion to be a woman's right.
"We are legislating women's right to decide whether to be mothers," said Carmen Monton, the Socialists' spokeswoman on gender issues.
Conservative Popular Party spokesman Santiago Cervera insisted there was no clamor in Spanish society for changing the existing law and the government instigated it just to raise a stir and distract people's attention away from the country's economic recession.
Anti-abortion demonstrators wearing sandwich boards rallied outside the legislature during debate on the bill. One of the boards showed a picture of a child with Downs syndrome asking Zapatero "why are you letting them kill me?"
The new bill would also also allow 16- and 17-year-olds to have abortions without parental consent, as is the case in other European countries such as Germany, Britain and France.
This clause proved to be among the bill's most controversial ones.
In the end, the ruling Socialist party agreed to amend it so that such minors must inform their parents or legal guardian if they plan to undergo an abortion - although still with no need for their permission - except if they can show that doing so would expose them to violence within their family, threats or coercion.
The Spanish Bishops' Conference warned last month that legislators who voted in favor of the bill would be sinning and no longer eligible to receive Communion. This was particularly touchy for parliamentary speaker Jose Bono, a Socialist who is a practicing Catholic. Bono responded saying "My conscience is clear".
In October, a rally against the reform bill drew hundreds of thousands of people to Madrid. This showed that for all the changes Zapatero has introduced, abortion remains sensitive in a country where most people call themselves Catholic, even if few churches are full on Sundays.
The new bill, besides allowing unrestricted abortion up to 14 weeks, would permit it up to 22 weeks if two doctors certify there is a serious threat to the health of the mother, or fetal malformation.
Beyond 22 weeks, it would be allowed only doctors certify fetal malformation deemed incompatible with life or the fetus were diagnosed with an extremely serious or incurable disease.
Source: Associated Press, 17 December 2009
Monday, December 14, 2009
Doctors Fear Abortion Charge If They Direct Patients Abroad
Irish Independent Monday 14th December 2009
Doctors fear abortion charge if they direct patients abroad
Dearbhail McDonald Legal Editor
DOCTORS treating pregnant women whose unborn babies have serious foetal abnormalities are afraid to refer them to expert facilities abroad because of fears of being accused of procuring an abortion.
Professor John Bonnar, the former chairman of the institute of obstetrics and gynaecology, said that Irish-based doctors were afraid that if they referred a patient to a foreign facility, they would be arrested and brought before the courts.
"It (a criminal prosecution) is not going to happen," Professor Bonnar told the Irish Independent.
"But doctors are reluctant, they are wary in case they have gardai arriving at their door. There is a fear that if you refer your patient to an expert foetal clinic or hospital and she ultimately decides to discontinue her pregnancy, you will stand accused of being involved in an unlawful abortion."
The debate around the status of legal abortion in Ireland has been revived in the wake of a landmark legal action earlier this week in the European Court of Human Rights where the Government robustly defended Ireland's restrictive abortion regime.
Three women, known as A, B and C, told a 17 judge Grand Chamber -- which is convened in cases of major importance -- that their health and human rights were violated because they had to travel to Britain to terminate their pregnancies.
The ECHR asked the Irish Government to provide statistics or information as to how many lawful abortions were carried out every year in Ireland.
In response, the State supplied a list of figures for women discharged with a diagnosis of ectopic pregnancies between 2005 and 2008, but could not state how many women had miscarried naturally or required a termination.
No figures were provided for women forced to undergo a radical hysterectomy -- the removal of her uterus and cervix -- to save her life.
During the hearing, lawyers for the State argued that there was a "clear and bright blue line" in Irish law that was known and applied where there was a risk to the life of the mother.
But that view has been rejected by the Irish Family Planning Association which supported the three women in the action.
"While abortion is technically legal in Ireland when a woman's life is at risk, there are no legal or clinical guidelines to assist doctors in assess whether a particular risk qualifies as a risk to life," said an IFPA spokesperson.
"The Government makes no provision to protect a woman's health and well-being.
"Asking a doctor to distinguish between a threat to a woman's life and a threat to her health in medical practice is unworkable.
"Moreover, forcing a woman to endure a progressive and increasingly dangerous condition before she is deemed eligible for a legal abortion is both impractical and inhumane."
Prof Bonnar, who has carried out up to five terminations throughout his medical career to save the life of a pregnant woman, said doctors had nothing to fear if they intervened to save a mother's life.
But he said that advances in medical technology, which have resulted in pregnant women seeking pre-natal tests to ascertain if their unborn child had any abnormalities, had placed doctors in a difficult position as they were ethically obliged to provide vital after-care and support should a woman abort her foetus.
"If a woman has a radical hysterectomy to save her life resulting in the termination of her pregnancy, it is not an abortion as the surgical procedure would be carried out whether she was pregnant or not," said Prof Bonnar who has called on fellow doctors to "speak out" on medical practice surrounding lawful abortions in this country.
Doctors fear abortion charge if they direct patients abroad
Dearbhail McDonald Legal Editor
DOCTORS treating pregnant women whose unborn babies have serious foetal abnormalities are afraid to refer them to expert facilities abroad because of fears of being accused of procuring an abortion.
Professor John Bonnar, the former chairman of the institute of obstetrics and gynaecology, said that Irish-based doctors were afraid that if they referred a patient to a foreign facility, they would be arrested and brought before the courts.
"It (a criminal prosecution) is not going to happen," Professor Bonnar told the Irish Independent.
"But doctors are reluctant, they are wary in case they have gardai arriving at their door. There is a fear that if you refer your patient to an expert foetal clinic or hospital and she ultimately decides to discontinue her pregnancy, you will stand accused of being involved in an unlawful abortion."
The debate around the status of legal abortion in Ireland has been revived in the wake of a landmark legal action earlier this week in the European Court of Human Rights where the Government robustly defended Ireland's restrictive abortion regime.
Three women, known as A, B and C, told a 17 judge Grand Chamber -- which is convened in cases of major importance -- that their health and human rights were violated because they had to travel to Britain to terminate their pregnancies.
The ECHR asked the Irish Government to provide statistics or information as to how many lawful abortions were carried out every year in Ireland.
In response, the State supplied a list of figures for women discharged with a diagnosis of ectopic pregnancies between 2005 and 2008, but could not state how many women had miscarried naturally or required a termination.
No figures were provided for women forced to undergo a radical hysterectomy -- the removal of her uterus and cervix -- to save her life.
During the hearing, lawyers for the State argued that there was a "clear and bright blue line" in Irish law that was known and applied where there was a risk to the life of the mother.
But that view has been rejected by the Irish Family Planning Association which supported the three women in the action.
"While abortion is technically legal in Ireland when a woman's life is at risk, there are no legal or clinical guidelines to assist doctors in assess whether a particular risk qualifies as a risk to life," said an IFPA spokesperson.
"The Government makes no provision to protect a woman's health and well-being.
"Asking a doctor to distinguish between a threat to a woman's life and a threat to her health in medical practice is unworkable.
"Moreover, forcing a woman to endure a progressive and increasingly dangerous condition before she is deemed eligible for a legal abortion is both impractical and inhumane."
Prof Bonnar, who has carried out up to five terminations throughout his medical career to save the life of a pregnant woman, said doctors had nothing to fear if they intervened to save a mother's life.
But he said that advances in medical technology, which have resulted in pregnant women seeking pre-natal tests to ascertain if their unborn child had any abnormalities, had placed doctors in a difficult position as they were ethically obliged to provide vital after-care and support should a woman abort her foetus.
"If a woman has a radical hysterectomy to save her life resulting in the termination of her pregnancy, it is not an abortion as the surgical procedure would be carried out whether she was pregnant or not," said Prof Bonnar who has called on fellow doctors to "speak out" on medical practice surrounding lawful abortions in this country.
Why TDs Harbour Secret Hopes Over Abortion Challenge
Sunday Times 13th December 2009
Why TDs harbour secret hopes over abortion challenge
Liam Fay
Hands Off Ireland! was the slogan on placards waved by anti-abortion activists protesting outside the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg last week. The campaigners were directing the warning at judges hearing the legal challenge taken by three women who claim Ireland’s restrictive abortion laws endangered their health and violated their rights because they had to travel abroad to terminate their pregnancies.
As pro-life sloganeering goes, Hands Off Ireland is relatively mild. Ironically, the phrase can also be read as an uncannily accurate commentary on a political regime that has reneged on its obligation to confront the pressing requirement for abortion legislation. ‘Hands-Off Ireland’ is a place where seeing and hearing no evil is government policy.
It’s now 17 years since the X Case — the shameful saga of a 14-year-old girl who was raped by a friend of her father’s, travelled to the UK for an abortion and was brought back to Ireland by order of the attorney general.
After years of theological hypothesising, the messy complexities of real life had delivered an abrupt wake-up call. In two subsequent referenda, the electorate voted in favour of according women the right to information about overseas abortion clinics, and the right to travel to use such clinics. In a third referendum in 1992, a proposal to permit limited abortion to save a woman’s life was defeated.
In overturning the attorney general’s decision on the X Case, however, the Supreme Court ruled that abortion is legal here in cases where the mother’s life is at risk, and this includes the risk of suicide. Legislation was obviously needed to clarify the law around abortion but successive governments have refused to enact it.
This dereliction of duty has created enormous uncertainty, especially for medical practitioners. Nevertheless, the Oireachtas persists in turning a blind eye. Most politicians seem content that thousands of women go abroad for abortions every year as long as the pretence is maintained that Ireland is a uniquely fortunate haven where abortion services are neither needed nor wanted.
Thankfully, reality has again gate- crashed the fool’s paradise. The three women who’ve taken the Strasbourg legal challenge have an undeniably strong case. Clearly conscious of this, the government has fielded a high-powered defence team led by Paul Gallagher, the attorney general. Nevertheless, lawyers for the women seemed to win the early skirmishes simply by highlighting the myriad ways in which Irish abortion law breaches the European convention on human rights, to which Ireland is a signatory.
Two of the women are Irish while the third is a Lithuanian living in Ireland. One was an unemployed, long-term alcoholic who was trying to regain custody of her four children when she became pregnant. Another was at risk of an extra-uterine pregnancy, while the third was undergoing chemotherapy for cancer and feared a relapse. All three say they were forced to travel abroad for abortions, making the procedures “unnecessarily expensive, complicated and traumatic”.
Pro-choice campaigners aren’t alone in hoping that a court ruling in the women’s favour would lead to a de facto unravelling of Irish abortion law. Privately, liberal TDs within Fianna Fail and Fine Gael must also share this wish, as an edict from Strasbourg would potentially get them off this most troublesome of hooks.
While they occasionally rail against Eurocrat intrusion, many Irish politicians actually welcome the alibi it provides. It was, after all, a European court ruling that provided Fianna Fail with the cover to decriminalise homosexuality in 1993.
This time there’s a complication. In statements agreed between Irish government officials and their EU counterparts, the Irish people’s stated abhorrence of abortion is embedded in protocols attached to the Maastricht and Lisbon treaties. So if the European court rules against Ireland next year, legislators will face unpicking the complicated knot of their own pieties. Having overplayed the hands-off strategy, politicians could soon find themselves with their hands full.
Why TDs harbour secret hopes over abortion challenge
Liam Fay
Hands Off Ireland! was the slogan on placards waved by anti-abortion activists protesting outside the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg last week. The campaigners were directing the warning at judges hearing the legal challenge taken by three women who claim Ireland’s restrictive abortion laws endangered their health and violated their rights because they had to travel abroad to terminate their pregnancies.
As pro-life sloganeering goes, Hands Off Ireland is relatively mild. Ironically, the phrase can also be read as an uncannily accurate commentary on a political regime that has reneged on its obligation to confront the pressing requirement for abortion legislation. ‘Hands-Off Ireland’ is a place where seeing and hearing no evil is government policy.
It’s now 17 years since the X Case — the shameful saga of a 14-year-old girl who was raped by a friend of her father’s, travelled to the UK for an abortion and was brought back to Ireland by order of the attorney general.
After years of theological hypothesising, the messy complexities of real life had delivered an abrupt wake-up call. In two subsequent referenda, the electorate voted in favour of according women the right to information about overseas abortion clinics, and the right to travel to use such clinics. In a third referendum in 1992, a proposal to permit limited abortion to save a woman’s life was defeated.
In overturning the attorney general’s decision on the X Case, however, the Supreme Court ruled that abortion is legal here in cases where the mother’s life is at risk, and this includes the risk of suicide. Legislation was obviously needed to clarify the law around abortion but successive governments have refused to enact it.
This dereliction of duty has created enormous uncertainty, especially for medical practitioners. Nevertheless, the Oireachtas persists in turning a blind eye. Most politicians seem content that thousands of women go abroad for abortions every year as long as the pretence is maintained that Ireland is a uniquely fortunate haven where abortion services are neither needed nor wanted.
Thankfully, reality has again gate- crashed the fool’s paradise. The three women who’ve taken the Strasbourg legal challenge have an undeniably strong case. Clearly conscious of this, the government has fielded a high-powered defence team led by Paul Gallagher, the attorney general. Nevertheless, lawyers for the women seemed to win the early skirmishes simply by highlighting the myriad ways in which Irish abortion law breaches the European convention on human rights, to which Ireland is a signatory.
Two of the women are Irish while the third is a Lithuanian living in Ireland. One was an unemployed, long-term alcoholic who was trying to regain custody of her four children when she became pregnant. Another was at risk of an extra-uterine pregnancy, while the third was undergoing chemotherapy for cancer and feared a relapse. All three say they were forced to travel abroad for abortions, making the procedures “unnecessarily expensive, complicated and traumatic”.
Pro-choice campaigners aren’t alone in hoping that a court ruling in the women’s favour would lead to a de facto unravelling of Irish abortion law. Privately, liberal TDs within Fianna Fail and Fine Gael must also share this wish, as an edict from Strasbourg would potentially get them off this most troublesome of hooks.
While they occasionally rail against Eurocrat intrusion, many Irish politicians actually welcome the alibi it provides. It was, after all, a European court ruling that provided Fianna Fail with the cover to decriminalise homosexuality in 1993.
This time there’s a complication. In statements agreed between Irish government officials and their EU counterparts, the Irish people’s stated abhorrence of abortion is embedded in protocols attached to the Maastricht and Lisbon treaties. So if the European court rules against Ireland next year, legislators will face unpicking the complicated knot of their own pieties. Having overplayed the hands-off strategy, politicians could soon find themselves with their hands full.
Church And State Not Operating In The Real World
Irish Examiner Monday 14th December 2009
Church and state not operating in the real world
Ann Cahill, Europe Correspondent
IRELAND has an ability to produce parallel universes that are breathtakingly wide of reality, and during the past week there were two such instances.
One was unveiled in the Grand Chamber of the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg on Wednesday and the second in St Peter’s Square in Rome on Friday.
The Ireland being described by the state’s legal team in relation to abortion was unrecognisable. The Irish people in the court looked at one another incredulously, wondering if any of the 17 judges had any way to judge the reality for themselves.
Moral ethos was a phrase bandied about, along with reassurances that there were any number of Irish doctors willing to carry out abortions on women whose lives were at risk from their pregnancies.
That the state was unable to give figures to prove this shows doctors are not in fact willing to risk a lifetime in jail for carrying out an abortion in the absence of clear legal guidelines as requested by the courts.
The Attorney General drew gasps when he referred to a "fine bright line" that allows doctors to tell the difference between women whose lives were at risk and those whose health was an issue and, therefore, would not qualify for an abortion in Ireland.
Was he referring to the fine bright blue line on pregnancy testing kits many wondered? He insisted there was help, support and advice for women in Ireland, but made no reference to the fact that each year more Irish women have abortions than those in many other European countries where it is legal.
As a result there is no help, support or advice available for Irish women, other than from voluntary organisations, when they are in crisis or when they return from having an abortion abroad. Rogue groups who try to dissuade people from abortions by frightening them with lies often compound their difficulties.
The Attorney General referred repeatedly to the guarantees in the Nice and Lisbon Treaties on Ireland’s unique position on abortion, which he fought to have included. He made no mention of the fact that our EU colleagues regard this as a neat piece of hypocrisy, since so many Irish women travel abroad to their countries for their abortions.
The second incidence of a parallel universe involved the reaction of the Catholic Church to the Murphy Report on clerical sex abuse.
The senior clergymen appeared to inhabit a different world from the rest of us as they spoke of renewal, culture change and repentance. Their frustration at the repeated questions of when we were going to see bishops dismissed was understandable in their world.
Each diocese is an independent republic we are told and the Pope can only request a bishop to resign. Firing bishops would be beside the point, they suggest, and say what is needed is a reorganisation of the Church in Ireland.
This is sensible, but sometimes people want to see those who have been in positions of power do something painful that shows they understand and are sorry.
For the Pope to say, "I am sorry" in plain English would have been a start.
A little humility does not require one to be humiliated after all. But in the all-male preserve of the Church where bureaucrats rise to power, their main job is to preserve the structures of their power, and the Church in Ireland has not shown itself to be any different.
Until there is an inclusive church with gender equality throughout the ranks, changing culture will be just another academic exercise.
Church and state not operating in the real world
Ann Cahill, Europe Correspondent
IRELAND has an ability to produce parallel universes that are breathtakingly wide of reality, and during the past week there were two such instances.
One was unveiled in the Grand Chamber of the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg on Wednesday and the second in St Peter’s Square in Rome on Friday.
The Ireland being described by the state’s legal team in relation to abortion was unrecognisable. The Irish people in the court looked at one another incredulously, wondering if any of the 17 judges had any way to judge the reality for themselves.
Moral ethos was a phrase bandied about, along with reassurances that there were any number of Irish doctors willing to carry out abortions on women whose lives were at risk from their pregnancies.
That the state was unable to give figures to prove this shows doctors are not in fact willing to risk a lifetime in jail for carrying out an abortion in the absence of clear legal guidelines as requested by the courts.
The Attorney General drew gasps when he referred to a "fine bright line" that allows doctors to tell the difference between women whose lives were at risk and those whose health was an issue and, therefore, would not qualify for an abortion in Ireland.
Was he referring to the fine bright blue line on pregnancy testing kits many wondered? He insisted there was help, support and advice for women in Ireland, but made no reference to the fact that each year more Irish women have abortions than those in many other European countries where it is legal.
As a result there is no help, support or advice available for Irish women, other than from voluntary organisations, when they are in crisis or when they return from having an abortion abroad. Rogue groups who try to dissuade people from abortions by frightening them with lies often compound their difficulties.
The Attorney General referred repeatedly to the guarantees in the Nice and Lisbon Treaties on Ireland’s unique position on abortion, which he fought to have included. He made no mention of the fact that our EU colleagues regard this as a neat piece of hypocrisy, since so many Irish women travel abroad to their countries for their abortions.
The second incidence of a parallel universe involved the reaction of the Catholic Church to the Murphy Report on clerical sex abuse.
The senior clergymen appeared to inhabit a different world from the rest of us as they spoke of renewal, culture change and repentance. Their frustration at the repeated questions of when we were going to see bishops dismissed was understandable in their world.
Each diocese is an independent republic we are told and the Pope can only request a bishop to resign. Firing bishops would be beside the point, they suggest, and say what is needed is a reorganisation of the Church in Ireland.
This is sensible, but sometimes people want to see those who have been in positions of power do something painful that shows they understand and are sorry.
For the Pope to say, "I am sorry" in plain English would have been a start.
A little humility does not require one to be humiliated after all. But in the all-male preserve of the Church where bureaucrats rise to power, their main job is to preserve the structures of their power, and the Church in Ireland has not shown itself to be any different.
Until there is an inclusive church with gender equality throughout the ranks, changing culture will be just another academic exercise.
Abortion Is A Reality In Ireland. An Irish Woman Having An Abortion Across A Narrow Strip Of Sea Is Still An Irish Abortion
Una Mulally The Sunday Tribune Sunday December 13th 2009
In Strasbourg's European Court of Human Rights last week, three women who claimed their human rights were infringed upon by being forced to travel to Britain for abortions brought their case to be heard. They are known as A, B, and C. A's children had already been taken into care when she was pregnant. She had suffered from substance abuse and post-natal depression and knew she wouldn't have been able to care for another child. B, who had taken a morning-after pill, had concerns over an ectopic pregnancy. C was in remission from cancer when pregnant, and failed to gain solid medical advice about what the impact of chemotherapy would have on her foetus.
The state feels so strongly about maintaining the ban on abortion that it dispatched an eight-strong legal dream team to Strasbourg, Attorney General Paul Gallagher, Donal O'Donnell SC and Brian Murray SC among them. In his address to 17 judges on Wednesday, Gallagher said that Ireland's ban on abortion was "based on moral values deeply embedded in Irish society". You can insert your own snide joke about 'morals' and 'Irish society' here.
The same court ruled against a state in 2007, when a Polish woman brought a case against her country after being forced to carry a pregnancy to full term in spite of concerns about her eyesight (she was visually impaired, and upon giving birth suffered haemorrhages in her retina and is facing a serious risk of complete blindness). The court ruled that Poland violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that everyone has the right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence.
So although Lisbon 2 reaffirmed the protection of the right to life in Article 40.3.3 of the Irish constitution, the state could be in trouble here, as it is obliged to listen and act on the court's ruling, something that could provide a gigantic headache for a government in disarray, that is, if it's still in existence in mid-2010 when the ruling will be made.
No one is asking a European court to foist its opinions and rulings on our constitution. But the fact that it has come to this is our fault. The Irish state has for generations ignored this issue.
Abortion is a reality in Ireland. An Irish woman having an abortion across a narrow strip of sea is still an Irish abortion, even if we insist on palming off a very Irish problem onto our British neighbours.
The state's argument that this case should be kicked back to Irish courts is also redundant. It is not up to our courts to create legislation, nor should they have to make judgements on bad law. There needs to be legislation in place to both acknowledge the reality of Irish abortions and clarify the existing murky laws.
Ann Furedi, the chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, wrote last week: "The illegality of abortion at home [Ireland] has consequences even for those women wealthy enough and informed enough to travel. It means they have limited opportunity for counselling before they come here, and little access to aftercare when they return home. They carry the emotional burden of seeing an 'illicit' solution. The truth needs to be heard. Legal abortion is safe and benefits society. And Ireland can only exist as a modern society because of abortion clinics in England."
The Attorney General argues that A, B, and C have "no specifics with regard to the alleged refusal of treatment, the inability to provide treatment, the concerns that treatment would be refused or they would be disapproved if they sought treatment".
But evidence repeatedly shows how women travelling for abortions feel – the shame imposed upon them by the nature of abortion's illegality in Ireland, their reluctance to seek aftercare, the secrecy, the financial strain, the lack of closure because abortion is the unmentionable.
If the state legal team wants 'specifics' on this, then talk to 7,000 women who travel abroad annually for abortions. Don't just assume that these 'specifics' don't exist just because they aren't talked about.
Those specifics were courageously described by Amy Dunne, the young woman known as Miss D, whose case became headline news when the HSE, in whose care she was living, banned her from travelling to Britain for an abortion even though her baby could not be born alive.
She went public on Prime Time last Thursday, describing the ordeal of her court case as she ran the gauntlet of pro-life protestors and told of what it felt like to rely on the comfort of strangers in a hospital where nobody understood her case. Every specific was an ordeal for Amy – right down to not knowing how to arrange to bring home a tiny white coffin.
umullally@tribune.ie
In Strasbourg's European Court of Human Rights last week, three women who claimed their human rights were infringed upon by being forced to travel to Britain for abortions brought their case to be heard. They are known as A, B, and C. A's children had already been taken into care when she was pregnant. She had suffered from substance abuse and post-natal depression and knew she wouldn't have been able to care for another child. B, who had taken a morning-after pill, had concerns over an ectopic pregnancy. C was in remission from cancer when pregnant, and failed to gain solid medical advice about what the impact of chemotherapy would have on her foetus.
The state feels so strongly about maintaining the ban on abortion that it dispatched an eight-strong legal dream team to Strasbourg, Attorney General Paul Gallagher, Donal O'Donnell SC and Brian Murray SC among them. In his address to 17 judges on Wednesday, Gallagher said that Ireland's ban on abortion was "based on moral values deeply embedded in Irish society". You can insert your own snide joke about 'morals' and 'Irish society' here.
The same court ruled against a state in 2007, when a Polish woman brought a case against her country after being forced to carry a pregnancy to full term in spite of concerns about her eyesight (she was visually impaired, and upon giving birth suffered haemorrhages in her retina and is facing a serious risk of complete blindness). The court ruled that Poland violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that everyone has the right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence.
So although Lisbon 2 reaffirmed the protection of the right to life in Article 40.3.3 of the Irish constitution, the state could be in trouble here, as it is obliged to listen and act on the court's ruling, something that could provide a gigantic headache for a government in disarray, that is, if it's still in existence in mid-2010 when the ruling will be made.
No one is asking a European court to foist its opinions and rulings on our constitution. But the fact that it has come to this is our fault. The Irish state has for generations ignored this issue.
Abortion is a reality in Ireland. An Irish woman having an abortion across a narrow strip of sea is still an Irish abortion, even if we insist on palming off a very Irish problem onto our British neighbours.
The state's argument that this case should be kicked back to Irish courts is also redundant. It is not up to our courts to create legislation, nor should they have to make judgements on bad law. There needs to be legislation in place to both acknowledge the reality of Irish abortions and clarify the existing murky laws.
Ann Furedi, the chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, wrote last week: "The illegality of abortion at home [Ireland] has consequences even for those women wealthy enough and informed enough to travel. It means they have limited opportunity for counselling before they come here, and little access to aftercare when they return home. They carry the emotional burden of seeing an 'illicit' solution. The truth needs to be heard. Legal abortion is safe and benefits society. And Ireland can only exist as a modern society because of abortion clinics in England."
The Attorney General argues that A, B, and C have "no specifics with regard to the alleged refusal of treatment, the inability to provide treatment, the concerns that treatment would be refused or they would be disapproved if they sought treatment".
But evidence repeatedly shows how women travelling for abortions feel – the shame imposed upon them by the nature of abortion's illegality in Ireland, their reluctance to seek aftercare, the secrecy, the financial strain, the lack of closure because abortion is the unmentionable.
If the state legal team wants 'specifics' on this, then talk to 7,000 women who travel abroad annually for abortions. Don't just assume that these 'specifics' don't exist just because they aren't talked about.
Those specifics were courageously described by Amy Dunne, the young woman known as Miss D, whose case became headline news when the HSE, in whose care she was living, banned her from travelling to Britain for an abortion even though her baby could not be born alive.
She went public on Prime Time last Thursday, describing the ordeal of her court case as she ran the gauntlet of pro-life protestors and told of what it felt like to rely on the comfort of strangers in a hospital where nobody understood her case. Every specific was an ordeal for Amy – right down to not knowing how to arrange to bring home a tiny white coffin.
umullally@tribune.ie
3 Women Challenge Irish Abortion Ban In European Court
Boston Globe
Friday December 11th 2009
3 women challenge Irish abortion ban in European Court
DUBLIN - Three women filed a lawsuit in a European court against Ireland’s abortion ban yesterday, claiming the government violates the human rights of pregnant women by forcing them to travel abroad for abortions and denying them appropriate medical care at home.
The three women took the case to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France. A verdict is expected next year.
If they win, the women could force Ireland - one of only a handful of European countries that still outlaws abortion - to liberalize a system that inspires more than 7,000 women annually to travel to other countries, chiefly England, for abortions.
But the Irish government fielded a high-powered legal team of constitutional lawyers and Attorney General Paul Gallagher to defend its health policies. They rejected the women’s central claim that they couldn’t receive proper medical care in Ireland before or after abortions abroad.
Gallagher told the judges that the women should have sued the government in Ireland first, exhausting legal options here before turning to the Strasbourg court, which casts a legally binding eye on human rights standards in all 47 nations of the Council of Europe.
Gallagher said an Irish court would have established whether the women’s claims were factual. “If these issues are to come before this court, it should be on the basis of established facts,’’ he told the judges.
The attorney general defended Ireland’s abortion ban as reflecting “profound moral values deeply embedded in Irish society.’’
But the women’s lawyers, who are supported by the Irish Family Planning Association, said taking a court case in Ireland would have been costly and futile, and could have forced them to relinquish their anonymity.
The three women, who were not present at yesterday’s court hearing, were identified in court only by the letters A, B and C.
This is the first Irish case to be heard by the European Court of Human Rights since 1988, when Dublin gay activist David Norris sued the Irish government over its law defining homosexuality as a crime. Ireland decriminalized homosexuality in 1993.
In 1983, Ireland’s voters inserted an abortion ban into its constitution, reflecting the state’s overriding Roman Catholic ethos of the day. Opinion polls over the past two decades have indicated growing support for legalizing abortion here.
Nonetheless, Irish abortion law has fallen into legal limbo since 1992, when a pregnant 14-year-old girl who had been raped by a neighbor successfully sued the government to permit her to travel to England for an abortion. The government tried to stop her, arguing it could not facilitate an illegal act, even though she was threatening to commit suicide.
The Irish Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that traveling to obtain abortions abroad was legal, and Ireland itself should provide abortions in cases where a continued pregnancy would threaten the life of the pregnant woman.
The women’s lawyers argued yesterday that, despite the Supreme Court ruling, Irish doctors continue to fear having anything to do with women who seek an abortion even on live-saving medical grounds. They contended that this makes the Irish medical system unsuitable for women seeking a foreign abortion for personal health reasons.
Friday December 11th 2009
3 women challenge Irish abortion ban in European Court
DUBLIN - Three women filed a lawsuit in a European court against Ireland’s abortion ban yesterday, claiming the government violates the human rights of pregnant women by forcing them to travel abroad for abortions and denying them appropriate medical care at home.
The three women took the case to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France. A verdict is expected next year.
If they win, the women could force Ireland - one of only a handful of European countries that still outlaws abortion - to liberalize a system that inspires more than 7,000 women annually to travel to other countries, chiefly England, for abortions.
But the Irish government fielded a high-powered legal team of constitutional lawyers and Attorney General Paul Gallagher to defend its health policies. They rejected the women’s central claim that they couldn’t receive proper medical care in Ireland before or after abortions abroad.
Gallagher told the judges that the women should have sued the government in Ireland first, exhausting legal options here before turning to the Strasbourg court, which casts a legally binding eye on human rights standards in all 47 nations of the Council of Europe.
Gallagher said an Irish court would have established whether the women’s claims were factual. “If these issues are to come before this court, it should be on the basis of established facts,’’ he told the judges.
The attorney general defended Ireland’s abortion ban as reflecting “profound moral values deeply embedded in Irish society.’’
But the women’s lawyers, who are supported by the Irish Family Planning Association, said taking a court case in Ireland would have been costly and futile, and could have forced them to relinquish their anonymity.
The three women, who were not present at yesterday’s court hearing, were identified in court only by the letters A, B and C.
This is the first Irish case to be heard by the European Court of Human Rights since 1988, when Dublin gay activist David Norris sued the Irish government over its law defining homosexuality as a crime. Ireland decriminalized homosexuality in 1993.
In 1983, Ireland’s voters inserted an abortion ban into its constitution, reflecting the state’s overriding Roman Catholic ethos of the day. Opinion polls over the past two decades have indicated growing support for legalizing abortion here.
Nonetheless, Irish abortion law has fallen into legal limbo since 1992, when a pregnant 14-year-old girl who had been raped by a neighbor successfully sued the government to permit her to travel to England for an abortion. The government tried to stop her, arguing it could not facilitate an illegal act, even though she was threatening to commit suicide.
The Irish Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that traveling to obtain abortions abroad was legal, and Ireland itself should provide abortions in cases where a continued pregnancy would threaten the life of the pregnant woman.
The women’s lawyers argued yesterday that, despite the Supreme Court ruling, Irish doctors continue to fear having anything to do with women who seek an abortion even on live-saving medical grounds. They contended that this makes the Irish medical system unsuitable for women seeking a foreign abortion for personal health reasons.
Women 'Lose Health, Money and Dignity' Because Of Law
Irish Times
Thursday December 10th 2009
Women 'lose health, money and dignity' because of law
CARL O'BRIEN
THE CHALLENGE: THREE WOMEN were subjected to indignity, stigmatisation and ill-health as a result of being forced to travel abroad for their abortions, the European Court of Human Rights heard yesterday.
Legal representatives for the women – who are supported by the Irish Family Planning Association – said their clients were unable to challenge the laws in Ireland because there were no effective domestic legal remedies available to them.
Addressing the court, counsel for the women Julie Kay said taking a case in the Irish courts would have been “costly, futile and could have forced them to relinquish their anonymity”.
Both the State and legal representative for the women outlined their cases before a panel of 17 judges in the court’s grand chamber. High Court judge Mrs Justice Mary Finlay Geoghegan was among the judges on the panel.
Ms Kay contested the Government’s claim that abortion was available in Ireland in the case where a mother’s life was at risk.
While this was provided for following the Supreme Court’s ruling in the 1992 “X” case, she said the Government had failed to produce any legislation for doctors or medical practitioners on this issue.
As a result, doctors were not willing to intervene for fear of potential imprisonment or losing their medical qualifications if the termination was later found to be unlawful or unnecessary. Ms Kay added: “In fact, there are no relevant statistics to show that any life-saving abortions have been carried out since the X case.” Under the 1861 Offences Against the State Act, it remains a criminal offence to “unlawfully procure a miscarriage”.
On the issue of whether the facts of their case were reliable, Ms Kay said their statements had been accepted by the court and pointed out that the State had not sought any additional information in relation to the three women’s cases.
Taking issue with the Government’s insistence that Ireland’s abortion laws were safeguarded as a result of protocols attached to Maastricht and Lisbon treaties, Ms Kay said this was irrelevant and they could not be used as an excuse to affect women’s rights.
Other grounds on which the women’s human rights were violated included through financial discrimination, the court heard.
Ms Kay said some of the women had to borrow money from friends or money lenders to travel abroad, contravening protections under the European Convention.
The women also faced sexual discrimination through the Government’s failure to provide access to vital healthcare which is only needed by women, Ms Kay said.
The court also heard that Ireland’s laws were out of step with its European neighbours, given that 44 out of 47 European countries now provide for abortion to protect women’s health and wellbeing.
Ms Kay, along with senior counsel Carmel Stewart, represented the women in court yesterday. Speaking after the hearing, Niall Behan, of the Irish Family Planning Association, said that he was confident the court’s judgment would “establish a minimum degree of protection to which a woman seeking an abortion to protect her health and wellbeing would be entitled”.
Also yesterday, a small group of anti-abortion campaigners from the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children gathered outside the court, holding a prayer vigil while the case was being heard. They said a positive ruling could have a similar effect to the landmark Roe vs Wade case in the US..
Their Stories: Three Women At The Centre Of The Challenge
Ms A
She was unmarried, unemployed and living in poverty when she became pregnant unintentionally. She had four young children, all in foster care as a result of problems she had faced as an alcoholic.
In the year before her fifth pregnancy, she remained sober and was in constant contact with social workers with a view to regaining custody of her children. She felt a further child would jeopardise the successful reunification of her existing family.
She decided to travel to Britain to have an abortion. The British NHS refused to carry out the operation at public expense, so she borrowed money from a moneylender. Her difficulty in raising the money delayed the abortion by three weeks.
On her return, she experienced pain, nausea and bleeding for up to nine weeks, but was afraid to seek medical advice because of the prohibition on abortion.
Ms B
She was single when she became pregnant unintentionally. She had taken the morning-after pill the day after intercourse, but was advised by two different doctors that it had not only failed, but had given rise to a significant risk that it would be an ectopic pregnancy, where the foetus develops outside the uterus.
She was not prepared to become either a single parent or run the risks associated with an ectopic pregnancy.
She travelled to Britain for an abortion.
On her return, she started passing blood clots and, since she was unsure whether this was normal and could not seek medical advice in Ireland, she returned to the clinic in Britain.
The impossibility for her to have an abortion in Ireland made the procedure unnecessarily expensive, traumatic and complicated.
Ms C
A Lithuanian national living in Ireland, she had been treated with chemotherapy for cancer over the course of three years.
The cancer went into remission and she became unintentionally pregnant. She was unable to find a doctor willing to make a determination as to whether her life would be at risk if she continued to term or to give her clear advice as to how the foetus might have been affected.
Given the uncertainty about the risk involved, she decided to have an abortion in Britain. Although her pregnancy was at an early stage, she could not have a medical abortion (where a miscarriage is induced) because she was a non-resident. Instead, she had to wait eight weeks until a surgical abortion was possible. On returning home, she suffered the complications of an incomplete abortion, including prolonged bleeding and infection.
Thursday December 10th 2009
Women 'lose health, money and dignity' because of law
CARL O'BRIEN
THE CHALLENGE: THREE WOMEN were subjected to indignity, stigmatisation and ill-health as a result of being forced to travel abroad for their abortions, the European Court of Human Rights heard yesterday.
Legal representatives for the women – who are supported by the Irish Family Planning Association – said their clients were unable to challenge the laws in Ireland because there were no effective domestic legal remedies available to them.
Addressing the court, counsel for the women Julie Kay said taking a case in the Irish courts would have been “costly, futile and could have forced them to relinquish their anonymity”.
Both the State and legal representative for the women outlined their cases before a panel of 17 judges in the court’s grand chamber. High Court judge Mrs Justice Mary Finlay Geoghegan was among the judges on the panel.
Ms Kay contested the Government’s claim that abortion was available in Ireland in the case where a mother’s life was at risk.
While this was provided for following the Supreme Court’s ruling in the 1992 “X” case, she said the Government had failed to produce any legislation for doctors or medical practitioners on this issue.
As a result, doctors were not willing to intervene for fear of potential imprisonment or losing their medical qualifications if the termination was later found to be unlawful or unnecessary. Ms Kay added: “In fact, there are no relevant statistics to show that any life-saving abortions have been carried out since the X case.” Under the 1861 Offences Against the State Act, it remains a criminal offence to “unlawfully procure a miscarriage”.
On the issue of whether the facts of their case were reliable, Ms Kay said their statements had been accepted by the court and pointed out that the State had not sought any additional information in relation to the three women’s cases.
Taking issue with the Government’s insistence that Ireland’s abortion laws were safeguarded as a result of protocols attached to Maastricht and Lisbon treaties, Ms Kay said this was irrelevant and they could not be used as an excuse to affect women’s rights.
Other grounds on which the women’s human rights were violated included through financial discrimination, the court heard.
Ms Kay said some of the women had to borrow money from friends or money lenders to travel abroad, contravening protections under the European Convention.
The women also faced sexual discrimination through the Government’s failure to provide access to vital healthcare which is only needed by women, Ms Kay said.
The court also heard that Ireland’s laws were out of step with its European neighbours, given that 44 out of 47 European countries now provide for abortion to protect women’s health and wellbeing.
Ms Kay, along with senior counsel Carmel Stewart, represented the women in court yesterday. Speaking after the hearing, Niall Behan, of the Irish Family Planning Association, said that he was confident the court’s judgment would “establish a minimum degree of protection to which a woman seeking an abortion to protect her health and wellbeing would be entitled”.
Also yesterday, a small group of anti-abortion campaigners from the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children gathered outside the court, holding a prayer vigil while the case was being heard. They said a positive ruling could have a similar effect to the landmark Roe vs Wade case in the US..
Their Stories: Three Women At The Centre Of The Challenge
Ms A
She was unmarried, unemployed and living in poverty when she became pregnant unintentionally. She had four young children, all in foster care as a result of problems she had faced as an alcoholic.
In the year before her fifth pregnancy, she remained sober and was in constant contact with social workers with a view to regaining custody of her children. She felt a further child would jeopardise the successful reunification of her existing family.
She decided to travel to Britain to have an abortion. The British NHS refused to carry out the operation at public expense, so she borrowed money from a moneylender. Her difficulty in raising the money delayed the abortion by three weeks.
On her return, she experienced pain, nausea and bleeding for up to nine weeks, but was afraid to seek medical advice because of the prohibition on abortion.
Ms B
She was single when she became pregnant unintentionally. She had taken the morning-after pill the day after intercourse, but was advised by two different doctors that it had not only failed, but had given rise to a significant risk that it would be an ectopic pregnancy, where the foetus develops outside the uterus.
She was not prepared to become either a single parent or run the risks associated with an ectopic pregnancy.
She travelled to Britain for an abortion.
On her return, she started passing blood clots and, since she was unsure whether this was normal and could not seek medical advice in Ireland, she returned to the clinic in Britain.
The impossibility for her to have an abortion in Ireland made the procedure unnecessarily expensive, traumatic and complicated.
Ms C
A Lithuanian national living in Ireland, she had been treated with chemotherapy for cancer over the course of three years.
The cancer went into remission and she became unintentionally pregnant. She was unable to find a doctor willing to make a determination as to whether her life would be at risk if she continued to term or to give her clear advice as to how the foetus might have been affected.
Given the uncertainty about the risk involved, she decided to have an abortion in Britain. Although her pregnancy was at an early stage, she could not have a medical abortion (where a miscarriage is induced) because she was a non-resident. Instead, she had to wait eight weeks until a surgical abortion was possible. On returning home, she suffered the complications of an incomplete abortion, including prolonged bleeding and infection.
Irish Abortion Laws Defended
Irish Times
Thursday December 10th 2009
Irish abortion laws defended
CARL O'BRIEN, in Strasbourg
The Government has issued a robust defence of Ireland’s restrictions on abortion at the European Court of Human Rights today.
The case involves three women, known as A, B and C, who say abortion restrictions in this country have jeopardised their health and violated their human rights.
In a hearing which could have implications for Irish abortion law, the Attorney General Paul Gallagher insisted that the country’s abortion laws were based on “profound moral values deeply embedded in Irish society”.
Mr Gallagher said the country’s legal position on abortion had been endorsed in three referendums, as well as being safe-guarded in protocols attached to the Maastricht and Lisbon treaties.
He said that the European Convention on Human Rights has recognised over 60 years the diversity of traditions and values of the member states, as well as extending protection to unborn children.
However, the case being taken by the three women sought to undermine these fundamental principles and align Ireland with other countries with more liberal abortion laws.
The Attorney General was part of an eight-strong legal team, including senior counsel Dónal O’Donnell and Brian Murray, as well as four female legal advisors.
Criticising the nature of the case taken by the three women – who are supported by the Irish Family Planning Association – Mr Gallagher said their case was based on “legal and factual propositions which, when analysed, cannot be supported”.
He said the fact that the cases involving the three women had not been before a domestic court meant the facts of case had not been established.
In addition, he said, many these facts were of an assumed and conditional nature, such as a woman not going to a doctor because she feared treatment would not be available.
“Many of these facts are of an assumed nature… if these issues are to comet before this court, it should be on the basis of established facts.”
The court, which is separate from the EU, adjudicates on human rights issues among all 47 member states of the Council of Europe.
As a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights – now incorporated into Irish law – the Government is obliged to seek to implement whatever decisions are made by the courts.
If successful, the court’s ruling could lead to the liberalisation of the State’s abortion laws. At present, abortion is only permitted in the circumstances of the “X” case, where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother.
The three women at the centre of the case include a woman at risk of an ectopic pregnancy, where the foetus develops outside the womb; a pregnant woman who received chemotherapy for cancer; and a woman whose children were placed in care as she was unable to cope.
The women, who have sought to have their anonymity protection, were not in court. They were represented by counsel Jule Kay and senior counsel Carmel Stewart
Addressing the court, Ms Kay said said the lack of any effective remedy in Ireland meant the women had been forced to have their cases heard before the European Court of Human Rights. She said taking a case domestically would have been costly, futile and could have forced them to relinquish their anonymity.
Ms Kay contested the Government's claim that abortion was legal in Ireland in the case where a mother's life was at risk. While this was provided for following the Supreme Court's ruling in the 1992 "X" case, she said the Government has failed to produce any legislation for doctors or medical practitioners on this issue.
As a result, doctors were not prepared to intervene for fear of losing their medical licences or facing potential life imprisonment is the termination was later found to be unlawful or unnecessary.
She said it was highly significant that the State had no statistics to show how many, if any, of these lawful abortions have taken place in Ireland.
Thursday December 10th 2009
Irish abortion laws defended
CARL O'BRIEN, in Strasbourg
The Government has issued a robust defence of Ireland’s restrictions on abortion at the European Court of Human Rights today.
The case involves three women, known as A, B and C, who say abortion restrictions in this country have jeopardised their health and violated their human rights.
In a hearing which could have implications for Irish abortion law, the Attorney General Paul Gallagher insisted that the country’s abortion laws were based on “profound moral values deeply embedded in Irish society”.
Mr Gallagher said the country’s legal position on abortion had been endorsed in three referendums, as well as being safe-guarded in protocols attached to the Maastricht and Lisbon treaties.
He said that the European Convention on Human Rights has recognised over 60 years the diversity of traditions and values of the member states, as well as extending protection to unborn children.
However, the case being taken by the three women sought to undermine these fundamental principles and align Ireland with other countries with more liberal abortion laws.
The Attorney General was part of an eight-strong legal team, including senior counsel Dónal O’Donnell and Brian Murray, as well as four female legal advisors.
Criticising the nature of the case taken by the three women – who are supported by the Irish Family Planning Association – Mr Gallagher said their case was based on “legal and factual propositions which, when analysed, cannot be supported”.
He said the fact that the cases involving the three women had not been before a domestic court meant the facts of case had not been established.
In addition, he said, many these facts were of an assumed and conditional nature, such as a woman not going to a doctor because she feared treatment would not be available.
“Many of these facts are of an assumed nature… if these issues are to comet before this court, it should be on the basis of established facts.”
The court, which is separate from the EU, adjudicates on human rights issues among all 47 member states of the Council of Europe.
As a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights – now incorporated into Irish law – the Government is obliged to seek to implement whatever decisions are made by the courts.
If successful, the court’s ruling could lead to the liberalisation of the State’s abortion laws. At present, abortion is only permitted in the circumstances of the “X” case, where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother.
The three women at the centre of the case include a woman at risk of an ectopic pregnancy, where the foetus develops outside the womb; a pregnant woman who received chemotherapy for cancer; and a woman whose children were placed in care as she was unable to cope.
The women, who have sought to have their anonymity protection, were not in court. They were represented by counsel Jule Kay and senior counsel Carmel Stewart
Addressing the court, Ms Kay said said the lack of any effective remedy in Ireland meant the women had been forced to have their cases heard before the European Court of Human Rights. She said taking a case domestically would have been costly, futile and could have forced them to relinquish their anonymity.
Ms Kay contested the Government's claim that abortion was legal in Ireland in the case where a mother's life was at risk. While this was provided for following the Supreme Court's ruling in the 1992 "X" case, she said the Government has failed to produce any legislation for doctors or medical practitioners on this issue.
As a result, doctors were not prepared to intervene for fear of losing their medical licences or facing potential life imprisonment is the termination was later found to be unlawful or unnecessary.
She said it was highly significant that the State had no statistics to show how many, if any, of these lawful abortions have taken place in Ireland.
Women Challenge Irish Abortion Ban In European Court
The Guardian
Thursday December 10th 2009
Women challenge Irish abortion ban in European court
Ian Traynor in Brussels
Ireland's ban on abortion faced one of its biggest challenges today when three women forced to travel abroad for terminations turned to the European court of human rights.
In a case being watched closely in other Catholic countries such as Poland, Spain and Malta, the Strasbourg court heard the arguments for the ban from the Irish government and from lawyers for the one Lithuanian and two Irish women.
The three women, known only as A, B and C, travelled to Britain to have abortions and claim their health was imperilled and that they were traumatised and humiliated by the Irish anti-abortion laws. "All three women complain that the impossibility for them to have an abortion in Ireland made the procedure unnecessarily expensive, complicated and traumatic. In particular, that restriction stigmatised and humiliated them and risked damaging their health and, in the third applicant's case, even her life," said a court statement.
One of the women is a former alcoholic and substance abuser whose four children were in care. She feared her pregnancy would prevent her getting her children back, and went to a money lender to finance the abortion in England. Another became pregnant while undergoing chemotherapy treatment for cancer and feared for her own health and that of her child.
Lawyers and lobby groups for the three argue that the abortion ban breaches several articles of the European convention on human rights, which is policed by the court, notably the rights to life and to privacy and family life, as well as bans on inhuman and degrading treatment and on discrimination.
Today the Irish government fielded a high-profile team led by the attorney general, Paul Gallagher. He argued that the right to life extended to the foetus and said broad Irish support for the abortion ban had been tested in three referendums and was strongly embedded in the moral fabric of Irish society. The complaint was based on "legal and factual propositions which, when analysed, cannot be supported".
Abortion was outlawed in Ireland in 1861 and can bring a sentence of life imprisonment. The "right to life of the unborn" is enshrined in the constitution. According to the Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) at least 138,000 women have travelled abroad, mainly to England, since 1980 to obtain abortions.
The Irish backed the EU's Lisbon treaty only after the other 26 countries promised its abortion ban would not be affected by the charter. But the Strasbourg court has nothing to do with the EU. It is the supreme human rights authority for the 47 countries in the Council of Europe.
Representing the women, Julie Kay told the 17 judges of the grand chamber that all three women had to borrow money to travel abroad for "clandestine" abortions and dismissed as bogus government claims that abortions were allowed in cases where the women's lives were at risk. She said that pursuing the case in court in Ireland, as demanded by Gallagher, would have been "futile and costly".
The women are being supported by the IFPA and the British Pregnancy Advisory Service on a complaint that took four years to be heard in Strasbourg and on which no ruling is expected until next year.
"Today is a hugely significant day for reproductive rights in Ireland. The fact that Ireland's draconian laws on abortion have been put under the spotlight is a landmark for women living in Ireland," said the IFPA. "Ireland's restrictive laws on abortion are totally out of step with those of its European neighbours … Women and girls do not give up their human rights when they become pregnant."
Patricia Lohr, medical director of the BPAS, said: "There is never any moral justification for the law to place a barrier between women and medical care. The Irish abortion ban risks women's physical health, requires abortions to be performed later than necessary, and creates serious emotional upset."
US anti-abortion lobbyists have been allowed to submit arguments to the court. The US Alliance Defence Fund said "the stakes are high for all of Europe" and that Ireland's defence "of innocent life is under attack".
Rights and risks
Poland
Abortion is permitted only in cases of rape, where the foetus suffers severe abnormality, or if the woman's life is at risk. The need must be certified by a doctor other than the one performing the abortion. After 12 weeks, abortions are permitted only if the life or health of the woman is endangered.
Spain
Abortions became legal in 1985. Terminations are permitted in cases of rape, up to the 12th week of pregnancy, if the rape has been reported to police. Abortions can be performed up to 22 weeks in cases of foetal impairments. Two specialists must certify that the child would suffer severe defects. There is no time limit if a woman's physical or mental health is at risk.
Malta
Abortion has been illegal under all circumstances since 1981. A woman who consents to an abortion can be jailed for up to three years, and doctors, surgeons, obstetricians or pharmacists who perform abortions up to four years.
Thursday December 10th 2009
Women challenge Irish abortion ban in European court
Ian Traynor in Brussels
Ireland's ban on abortion faced one of its biggest challenges today when three women forced to travel abroad for terminations turned to the European court of human rights.
In a case being watched closely in other Catholic countries such as Poland, Spain and Malta, the Strasbourg court heard the arguments for the ban from the Irish government and from lawyers for the one Lithuanian and two Irish women.
The three women, known only as A, B and C, travelled to Britain to have abortions and claim their health was imperilled and that they were traumatised and humiliated by the Irish anti-abortion laws. "All three women complain that the impossibility for them to have an abortion in Ireland made the procedure unnecessarily expensive, complicated and traumatic. In particular, that restriction stigmatised and humiliated them and risked damaging their health and, in the third applicant's case, even her life," said a court statement.
One of the women is a former alcoholic and substance abuser whose four children were in care. She feared her pregnancy would prevent her getting her children back, and went to a money lender to finance the abortion in England. Another became pregnant while undergoing chemotherapy treatment for cancer and feared for her own health and that of her child.
Lawyers and lobby groups for the three argue that the abortion ban breaches several articles of the European convention on human rights, which is policed by the court, notably the rights to life and to privacy and family life, as well as bans on inhuman and degrading treatment and on discrimination.
Today the Irish government fielded a high-profile team led by the attorney general, Paul Gallagher. He argued that the right to life extended to the foetus and said broad Irish support for the abortion ban had been tested in three referendums and was strongly embedded in the moral fabric of Irish society. The complaint was based on "legal and factual propositions which, when analysed, cannot be supported".
Abortion was outlawed in Ireland in 1861 and can bring a sentence of life imprisonment. The "right to life of the unborn" is enshrined in the constitution. According to the Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) at least 138,000 women have travelled abroad, mainly to England, since 1980 to obtain abortions.
The Irish backed the EU's Lisbon treaty only after the other 26 countries promised its abortion ban would not be affected by the charter. But the Strasbourg court has nothing to do with the EU. It is the supreme human rights authority for the 47 countries in the Council of Europe.
Representing the women, Julie Kay told the 17 judges of the grand chamber that all three women had to borrow money to travel abroad for "clandestine" abortions and dismissed as bogus government claims that abortions were allowed in cases where the women's lives were at risk. She said that pursuing the case in court in Ireland, as demanded by Gallagher, would have been "futile and costly".
The women are being supported by the IFPA and the British Pregnancy Advisory Service on a complaint that took four years to be heard in Strasbourg and on which no ruling is expected until next year.
"Today is a hugely significant day for reproductive rights in Ireland. The fact that Ireland's draconian laws on abortion have been put under the spotlight is a landmark for women living in Ireland," said the IFPA. "Ireland's restrictive laws on abortion are totally out of step with those of its European neighbours … Women and girls do not give up their human rights when they become pregnant."
Patricia Lohr, medical director of the BPAS, said: "There is never any moral justification for the law to place a barrier between women and medical care. The Irish abortion ban risks women's physical health, requires abortions to be performed later than necessary, and creates serious emotional upset."
US anti-abortion lobbyists have been allowed to submit arguments to the court. The US Alliance Defence Fund said "the stakes are high for all of Europe" and that Ireland's defence "of innocent life is under attack".
Rights and risks
Poland
Abortion is permitted only in cases of rape, where the foetus suffers severe abnormality, or if the woman's life is at risk. The need must be certified by a doctor other than the one performing the abortion. After 12 weeks, abortions are permitted only if the life or health of the woman is endangered.
Spain
Abortions became legal in 1985. Terminations are permitted in cases of rape, up to the 12th week of pregnancy, if the rape has been reported to police. Abortions can be performed up to 22 weeks in cases of foetal impairments. Two specialists must certify that the child would suffer severe defects. There is no time limit if a woman's physical or mental health is at risk.
Malta
Abortion has been illegal under all circumstances since 1981. A woman who consents to an abortion can be jailed for up to three years, and doctors, surgeons, obstetricians or pharmacists who perform abortions up to four years.
Fear Dictates Ireland's Abortion Policy
Guardian.co.uk
Thursday December 10th 2009
Fear dictates Ireland's abortion policy
Pro-life hatred so dominates the debate it's hard to imagine any real change following this bid to overturn the Irish abortion ban
It has always taken guts to stand up for abortion rights in Ireland, north and south of the border. Straight off, you're likely to be hit by a slew of strident invective from the pro-life lobby, trailing pictures of aborted foetuses in their wake, and nameless bloggers will fall over each other to brand you a baby-murderer. Sure enough, the three women trying to overturn the Irish abortion ban in the European court of human rights were immediately accused on anti-abortion sites of having "travelled abroad to have their children killed". Known as A,B and C, the women have decided to remain anonymous. Smart decision. Why expose yourself directly to such hatred?
Such nasty outbursts could be dismissed as so much ridiculous hysteria, were it not for the fact that the anti-abortion lobby, with its scare tactics, "prayer vigils" and wild accusations, has effectively been allowed to define the situation in Ireland, shifting the entire discourse on to moral grounds. Their own very specific either/or, black or white, baby-killer or baby-lover brand of morality, that is. Discussion of any other kind – such as the moral argument for women's agency over their own fertility – is all too often obliterated by the anti-choice campaign.
In some ways, by making women fearful to open their mouths, the anti-abortionists have won already. Yes, it's got so bad that we can't even talk about abortion. Of course, we do discuss it in private. We all know women who have made that silent, miserable, expensive journey across the Irish sea. But few of us feel comfortable speaking out openly, in public. So there is no debate, no honest exchange of opinions. The result is stasis.
And our political representatives haven't got the gumption to tackle the issue. Their approach is simply to pretend the exodus of women isn't happening, especially in the north. Regardless of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, politicians there are united in their insistence that there is no demand for abortion. And the illogical rejoinder is that if women do want it, well, they can go over the water to access services there. You export it, so we don't have to see it – that's the message.
That see-no-evil piety meets blatant self-interest when the anti-abortionists come to town. Several politicians in the republic had their homes and constituency clinics picketed by activists, and it's been reported that Catholic TDs have been warned they risk excommunication for expressing support for abortion. Dispiriting, but not surprising then, that they find so little to say on the matter.
No ruling is expected on A, B and C's case in Strasbourg until next year. And while pro-choice campaigners are heartened by a ruling handed down by the court that instructed Poland to guarantee access to legal abortions, it's hard to imagine real change in Ireland happening any time soon. Even if the women were successful, I can't see Irish politicians – wary, deeply conservative and haunted by painful memories of the messy Lisbon treaty referendums – tripping over themselves to remedy the law.
And so we wait. Meanwhile, hysteria, hypocrisy and spineless denial remain the watchwords of this (lack of) debate.
Thursday December 10th 2009
Fear dictates Ireland's abortion policy
Pro-life hatred so dominates the debate it's hard to imagine any real change following this bid to overturn the Irish abortion ban
It has always taken guts to stand up for abortion rights in Ireland, north and south of the border. Straight off, you're likely to be hit by a slew of strident invective from the pro-life lobby, trailing pictures of aborted foetuses in their wake, and nameless bloggers will fall over each other to brand you a baby-murderer. Sure enough, the three women trying to overturn the Irish abortion ban in the European court of human rights were immediately accused on anti-abortion sites of having "travelled abroad to have their children killed". Known as A,B and C, the women have decided to remain anonymous. Smart decision. Why expose yourself directly to such hatred?
Such nasty outbursts could be dismissed as so much ridiculous hysteria, were it not for the fact that the anti-abortion lobby, with its scare tactics, "prayer vigils" and wild accusations, has effectively been allowed to define the situation in Ireland, shifting the entire discourse on to moral grounds. Their own very specific either/or, black or white, baby-killer or baby-lover brand of morality, that is. Discussion of any other kind – such as the moral argument for women's agency over their own fertility – is all too often obliterated by the anti-choice campaign.
In some ways, by making women fearful to open their mouths, the anti-abortionists have won already. Yes, it's got so bad that we can't even talk about abortion. Of course, we do discuss it in private. We all know women who have made that silent, miserable, expensive journey across the Irish sea. But few of us feel comfortable speaking out openly, in public. So there is no debate, no honest exchange of opinions. The result is stasis.
And our political representatives haven't got the gumption to tackle the issue. Their approach is simply to pretend the exodus of women isn't happening, especially in the north. Regardless of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, politicians there are united in their insistence that there is no demand for abortion. And the illogical rejoinder is that if women do want it, well, they can go over the water to access services there. You export it, so we don't have to see it – that's the message.
That see-no-evil piety meets blatant self-interest when the anti-abortionists come to town. Several politicians in the republic had their homes and constituency clinics picketed by activists, and it's been reported that Catholic TDs have been warned they risk excommunication for expressing support for abortion. Dispiriting, but not surprising then, that they find so little to say on the matter.
No ruling is expected on A, B and C's case in Strasbourg until next year. And while pro-choice campaigners are heartened by a ruling handed down by the court that instructed Poland to guarantee access to legal abortions, it's hard to imagine real change in Ireland happening any time soon. Even if the women were successful, I can't see Irish politicians – wary, deeply conservative and haunted by painful memories of the messy Lisbon treaty referendums – tripping over themselves to remedy the law.
And so we wait. Meanwhile, hysteria, hypocrisy and spineless denial remain the watchwords of this (lack of) debate.
Legal Challenge To Abortion Law A 'Momentous Day'
Irish Times Wednesday December 9th 2009
Legal challenge to abortion law a 'momentous day'
CARL O'BRIEN Chief Reporter
THE SPONSORS of a legal challenge to Ireland’s abortion laws, due to be heard at the European Court of Human Rights today, say their case represents a “momentous day” for reproductive rights.
The case, taken by three women who say their health was put at risk by being forced to go abroad for abortions, will be heard before the court’s grand chamber of 17 judges.
If successful, the court’s ruling could lead to the liberalisation of the State’s abortion laws. At present, abortion is only permitted in the circumstances of the 1992 “X” case, where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother.
The case will be watched closely by observers, given a ruling by the same court in recent years which resulted in Poland being instructed to guarantee access to legal abortions.
Based in Strasbourg, the court, which is separate from the EU, adjudicates on human rights issues among all 47 member states of the Council of Europe. As a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights – now incorporated into Irish law – the Government is obliged to act on whatever decisions are made by the courts or risk flouting international laws.
The identities of the women, known as A, B and C, will remain confidential as the case proceeds.
They include a woman who ran the risk of an ectopic pregnancy, where the foetus develops outside the womb; a woman who received chemotherapy for cancer; and a woman whose children were placed in care as she was unable to cope.
They argue that the restrictions on abortion, as well as a lack of post-abortion care and counselling, amounted to a violation of their human rights.
They also say the lack of any effective legal remedy in Ireland meant taking a case in the State would have been costly and futile, and could have forced them to relinquish their anonymity.
The Government, however, is expected to argue that the case should be heard in the Irish courts.
It says the recent “Ms D” case – which centred on the right of a 17-year-old girl in the care of the HSE to travel for an abortion – shows that the issue of abortion is arguable in the domestic courts.
It also robustly challenges suggestions by the women that there is a lack of post-abortion care or counselling in Ireland.
In addition, the women’s claim that they experienced “inhuman or degrading treatment” is contested on the basis that aftercare and post-abortion counselling services are available in Ireland.
The Government will be represented at the court in Strasbourg by a team led by Attorney General Paul Gallagher, as well as constitutional lawyers Brian Murray SC and Donal O’Donnell SC.
In a statement yesterday, the Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) said today was a “landmark day for reproductive rights in Ireland”. “It is our view that the criminalisation of abortion in Ireland is disproportionate and unnecessary; the law fails to adequately protect a woman’s health and wellbeing and has violated the rights of the applicants,” the association said.
Criticising the motives of the IFPA, the Pro-Life Campaign said the case ignored the fact that Ireland without abortion was “the safest country in the world in which to be pregnant”, and there was growing evidence that abortion had very serious negative consequences for some women.
Dr Berry Kiely of the Pro-Life Campaign said: “It is regrettable that the IFPA creates unnecessary fears about women’s health in an attempt to have abortion foisted on Ireland by a European court.”
Legal challenge to abortion law a 'momentous day'
CARL O'BRIEN Chief Reporter
THE SPONSORS of a legal challenge to Ireland’s abortion laws, due to be heard at the European Court of Human Rights today, say their case represents a “momentous day” for reproductive rights.
The case, taken by three women who say their health was put at risk by being forced to go abroad for abortions, will be heard before the court’s grand chamber of 17 judges.
If successful, the court’s ruling could lead to the liberalisation of the State’s abortion laws. At present, abortion is only permitted in the circumstances of the 1992 “X” case, where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother.
The case will be watched closely by observers, given a ruling by the same court in recent years which resulted in Poland being instructed to guarantee access to legal abortions.
Based in Strasbourg, the court, which is separate from the EU, adjudicates on human rights issues among all 47 member states of the Council of Europe. As a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights – now incorporated into Irish law – the Government is obliged to act on whatever decisions are made by the courts or risk flouting international laws.
The identities of the women, known as A, B and C, will remain confidential as the case proceeds.
They include a woman who ran the risk of an ectopic pregnancy, where the foetus develops outside the womb; a woman who received chemotherapy for cancer; and a woman whose children were placed in care as she was unable to cope.
They argue that the restrictions on abortion, as well as a lack of post-abortion care and counselling, amounted to a violation of their human rights.
They also say the lack of any effective legal remedy in Ireland meant taking a case in the State would have been costly and futile, and could have forced them to relinquish their anonymity.
The Government, however, is expected to argue that the case should be heard in the Irish courts.
It says the recent “Ms D” case – which centred on the right of a 17-year-old girl in the care of the HSE to travel for an abortion – shows that the issue of abortion is arguable in the domestic courts.
It also robustly challenges suggestions by the women that there is a lack of post-abortion care or counselling in Ireland.
In addition, the women’s claim that they experienced “inhuman or degrading treatment” is contested on the basis that aftercare and post-abortion counselling services are available in Ireland.
The Government will be represented at the court in Strasbourg by a team led by Attorney General Paul Gallagher, as well as constitutional lawyers Brian Murray SC and Donal O’Donnell SC.
In a statement yesterday, the Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) said today was a “landmark day for reproductive rights in Ireland”. “It is our view that the criminalisation of abortion in Ireland is disproportionate and unnecessary; the law fails to adequately protect a woman’s health and wellbeing and has violated the rights of the applicants,” the association said.
Criticising the motives of the IFPA, the Pro-Life Campaign said the case ignored the fact that Ireland without abortion was “the safest country in the world in which to be pregnant”, and there was growing evidence that abortion had very serious negative consequences for some women.
Dr Berry Kiely of the Pro-Life Campaign said: “It is regrettable that the IFPA creates unnecessary fears about women’s health in an attempt to have abortion foisted on Ireland by a European court.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
