In 1882 American publisher Charles Anderson Dana provided a delightfully simple definition of news that has been widely quoted ever since. It even inspired the title for a long-running and popular Irish Times column. "When a dog bites a man that is not news, but when a man bites a dog that is news."
It is very odd that there is a classic "man bites dog" story happening, but it is receiving very little media attention. If a Catholic crisis pregnancy counselling agency terminated its connection with some of its volunteers because they were distributing leaflets with contact numbers for abortion information, that is surely a "dog bites man" story.
It is, after all, what one would expect a Catholic agency to do, given that the protection of the right to life of the unborn is a core value for Catholics.
If, on the other hand, a Catholic crisis pregnancy counselling agency terminates its connection with some of its volunteers because they are unwilling to distribute such information, that is surely a "man bites dog" story. However, in the somewhat topsy-turvy media world we live in, it is virtually certain that the first story is the one that would receive far more media attention. People suppressing the right to information, when that information is about abortion? That would be scandalous. People suppressing the right to conscientious dissent, when the conscientious dissent is against provision of abortion information? Well, that is just a big yawn, apparently.
For those unfamiliar with the background, Cura is the Catholic Church's flagship crisis pregnancy counselling agency which has given a compassionate ear and practical help to women for nearly 30 years. It entered into a service agreement with the Crisis Pregnancy Agency (CPA), which was established by the Government in 2001 to reduce the numbers of women seeking abortion. Cura receives substantial funding from the CPA, and as part of the service agreement agreed to distribute the Positive Options leaflet.
This leaflet contains contact information for agencies willing to provide telephone numbers for British abortion providers. Cura's official policy is that if, after counselling, a woman chooses to proceed with abortion it is better to send her to another counselling agency, even one which will provide abortion information. Every agency has a legal obligation to go through, once again, the alternatives to abortion, so Cura reasons this is better than simply letting her pluck the information out of a telephone book or off the internet.
Some of Cura's volunteers were unhappy with this policy. Having failed to receive what they considered to be a satisfactory response from Cura regarding their expression of disquiet, they wrote to the Irish Catholic.
Last week some of these women, who are based in Donegal, received a letter informing them that Cura's executive committee took "the gravest possible exception to the tone and tenor and content of the women's original letter to the Irish Catholic". It went on to say that the women had breached Cura's code of confidentiality by discussing the agency's policy in public. It finished by saying: "We have no option but to terminate your relationship with the organisation forthwith, your continued involvement having become untenable."
Apparently, the last straw for the Cura executive was that the dissenting volunteers were asked to attend a meeting, but declined to do so until the bishops had discussed the Cura policy on the Positive Options leaflet at a meeting on June 13th.
Now, no one is privy to the discussions between Cura and these volunteers, because Cura is not answering calls and the women, on advice of their bishop, have stopped talking to the media. However, it does not seem an odd request from the volunteers that they be allowed wait and see what the bishops have to say. As for the tone, tenor and content of the original letter, it did not strike me as confrontational in any way.
When a caring agency resorts to "terminating connections", what message does it send out? This is a disastrous, and to my mind, unjust move. There are serious issues in question here, far more serious than the selectivity of media outlets when it comes to highlighting stories.
In February the CPA published research which stated that women seeking abortion found it a "serious deficiency" that agencies such as Cura (so-called 2-option agencies) did not give information about abortion providers. The recommendations of the study are that all agencies should provide full information, including on abortion. Women interviewed for the research had stated that they needed information as detailed as a comprehensive explanation of the procedure, hygiene and sanitary needs, the full cost including flights and accommodation, how to reach the clinic from the airport, and convenient accommodation.
Agencies should provide scanning facilities to show the gestation of the unborn child to facilitate women in organising "the appropriate abortion procedure". Nowhere in this research is it recommended that women be given full and comprehensive information about the development of the unborn child; or the well-documented risks associated with abortion, including a serious risk of depression and a higher risk of suicide.
The CPA also announced it had created a training module for crisis pregnancy counsellors that would provide a "valuable addition" to current training. Is this a move to standardise training according to a CPA template? All the new counselling centres funded by the CPA provide abortion information. It appears that the CPA would be happy to see agencies such as Cura become redundant.
The Catholic bishops need to re-evaluate their connection with the CPA. It is obvious that the CPA sees abortion as one choice among others. In my view, this contravenes the CPA's own mandate, and it certainly contravenes Cura's mandate. The CPA is supposed to reduce abortion. It is unclear how providing women with information about "convenient accommodation" and help with deciding on the "appropriate abortion procedure" meet that mandate.
It is equally unclear how the bishops can go on accepting funding from an agency so clearly at odds with its own objectives. Perhaps, too, the Government might take a look at the ideology that permeates the CPA and decide whether it accurately represents the views of the majority of the Irish people.