It is heartening that the public wants positive action from the Government on the issue of abortion. The results of a recent opinion poll point to the multi-faceted nature of what is required. Firstly, the poll tells us that 72 per cent of those polled want a clear referendum choice on whether abortion should be banned or introduced.

This is a definite expression of the desire for a democratic solution to the current impasse. However, such a narrow focus has limitations since without adequate alternatives to abortion being put in place the trail to Britain will continue. Some 80 per cent of those polled support government assistance in providing these. This represents a sensitivity and compassion in the Irish people which could, if implemented by the Government, be a beacon to other societies.

It is a recognition that it is possible to wish to protect the pre-born child while also understanding the dilemma facing many women with crisis pregnancies. It is a statement that most accept that abortion is not good for women and hence other solutions must be found if the abortion track is to close. It is a clear demonstration that compassion for the woman is not the exclusive preserve of those libertarians who support the legislative route but also informs the thinking of the majority calling for a referendum.

The rise in abortion is not inexorable as demonstrated in other countries and those who call for legislation as a response to the problem of women travelling abroad for abortion are defeatist and ultimately anti-woman, providing nothing more than a ticket and a clinic.

The "5000 Too Many" conference organised by Breda O'Brien of the Sunday Business Post and myself in September 1998 had just this objective in mind - the wish to explore alternatives to abortion by bringing together those from both poles of the abortion debate.

So what is required? Studies from the United States have provided some clues in this regard. For example, most women who have abortions recognise the humanity of the foetus but see the choice in stark terms - the life of the foetus versus the "life" of the woman.

We are not speaking of life in its concrete, physical sense but rather of the components that make up the totality - emotional, psychological and interpersonal.

The woman who believes that her life is metaphysically over believes that there is no alternative for her but to destroy her unborn child, thus arguments about the humanity of the foetus are futile and serve only to alienate the woman from those who may wish to help her.

On the other hand, presenting positive images of motherhood using modern promotional techniques has successfully reduced the abortion rate in several states in America. Might not the Government consider such a campaign through counselling organisations such as the Irish Family Planning Association and Cura?

Regrettably the current image of the single mother as a feckless burden on the State is an unlikely role model and one which must be counterbalanced by one which is more optimistic.

For every unmarried mother there is also a father and until recently the role of men has been neglected. Indeed fatherhood has generally been devalued by traditional feminism which sought to cast men as oppressors and women as downtrodden heroines waiting to wrest control of the modern single parent family.

The catch cry of feminism "our bodies our own" has instilled in woman an absolute belief in the right to use her body for whatever purpose she chooses. Far from liberating women, these theories have spawned a society of men and women who see recreational sex as a right without responsibility and in which men's only use is to produce sperm. It has created a view among men that they have no responsibility in parenting any child that is born and have given them permission to opt out of fatherhood. In such a society it is hardly surprising that women will seek abortion when they are literally left "carrying the baby".

Changing attitudes is indeed problematic but could begin with society as a whole examining these issues in a spirit of openness. Men must be brought back into parenting, into fatherhood; it must be instilled in our sons and daughters that sexual activity carries with it responsibilities.

The Government is currently grappling with the issue of childcare, but the problem goes beyond the provision of creches or increasing the children's allowance, desirable as both these measures might be. Until employers value motherhood and place a premium on it, many women with an unplanned pregnancy will end it rather than place themselves at the mercy of an unsympathetic boss.

There have been several recent reports in the British press of women, particularly those in the forces, being forced to have abortions rather than forfeit the chance of promotion.

Only when employers accept that having a baby is not a cause of brain death, that wishing to job-share is not an indication of disinterest in the job and that refusal to attend working breakfasts at 7 a.m. is not a symptom of terminal laziness will women in difficult circumstances continue an unexpected pregnancy.

Workplace flexibility, such as job sharing, will become part of our work ethic only if it is demanded by both men and women who value parenthood.

Adoption agencies in Ireland have recently been the butt of strenuous public criticism. Most has centred on the adoption procedures themselves.

It is worth inquiring, however, if women with crisis pregnancies are even told about adoption. Are they told about the current openness that they can expect or are the images those of 1950s' Ireland with children being whisked to America without identity, never to be seen again by their grieving mother?

Are they perhaps being told that an adopted child can never be loved by an adoptive mother as she would love her biological children and are they made to feel pariahs if they contemplate adoption? Minister of State Frank Fahey is now overhauling the adoption process and only time will tell if this has been successful in overcoming the negative stereotypes. Perhaps the Government should contemplate emulating Jack Straw in Britain and be more proactive in promoting adoption. Then we might see adoption taking its place as one of the many alternatives. The time has come for an end to the Government's obduracy and for a democratic and compassionate response to the people's request.

Patricia Casey is professor of clinical psychiatry at UCD and consultant psychiatrist at the Mater Hospital