Sir, – The abortion Bill before the Oireachtas is a concoction of the Cabinet, embellished with a false sense of urgency.
The unbending parliamentary process applied to the Bill is causing crises in the political parties and in society; crises that could have been avoided had we a more flexible process.
In 1911 GK Chesterton pointed to the flaw in the old British process; the one the Cabinet here is now enforcing. Chesterton wrote,“Our representatives accept designs and desires almost entirely from the Cabinet class above them; and practically not at all from the constituents below them. I say the people does not wield a Parliament which wields a Cabinet. I say the Cabinet bullies a timid Parliament which bullies a bewildered people . . . If you ask me why we have thus lost democracy, I say from two causes (a) the omnipotence of an unelected body, the Cabinet; (b) the Party system, which turns all politics into a game like the Boat Race.”
The British parliament has wisely made its procedures more flexible since 1911, for instance allowing for a free vote on major issues.
The promotion of abortion by the Government, being concerned with life and death, involving the most fundamental of all human decisions, demands that the Irish people be directly consulted in a referendum. Or at least, that their representatives be given a free vote.
The Cabinet’s refusal to do either makes a mockery of its claim to be reforming the political process. – Yours, etc,
Fr MICHAEL G MURPHY,
Uam Var Avenue,
Bishopstown, Cork.
Sir, — The minimalist provision for conscientious objection in section 17 of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill is little more than a box-ticking exercise. Doctors, nurses and midwives (but no other health service workers) will be allowed to exercise their conscientious objection to carrying out or assisting in carrying out an abortion. This right, however, is seriously diluted by the obligation the section imposes on these healthcare professionals to transfer the “care of the pregnant woman” to colleagues who do not share their conscientious objection to abortion.
The provision is, moreover, elitist in that it is only doctors nurses and midwives who will be allowed to have a conscientious objection to assisting in the carrying out of an abortion. There are many other workers in the health services who may have serious objections to being ordered to carry out tasks that assist directly or indirectly in abortion.
The State has no right to lay down in law who may be allowed to have a conscience and who may not. Not all radiographers will be happy that their work is to be used to facilitate the deliberate, intentional killing of an innocent human life. Many pharmacists will not wish their professional expertise to be abused by asking them to dispense the drugs and medicines to be used in the conduct of abortions.
Administrators and managers, who will have to put in place the financial, organisational and human resources arrangements for the provision of abortion, are not devoid of consciences. The porter who wheels a pregnant woman into theatre for an abortion and the cleaner who may have to clean that theatre before and after abortion should have their dignity respected and be accorded the human right of conscientious objection.
It is a matter of particular surprise to me that the Labour Party, which likes to present itself as the champion of ordinary workers, is prepared to go along with the socially elitist philosophy of section 17 which confines the right of conscientious objection to a small elite group of medical professionals, – Yours, etc,
PADDY BARRY,
Brackenbush Road,
Killiney,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – Under article 6.1 of the Constitution, the right to make national policy is reserved to the Irish people. All powers of Government, the legislature and the judiciary flow as a consequence; the people are the ultimate arbiters of national policy. On three occasions the people, through referendums, have decided that suicidal ideation is an acceptable ground for abortion.
Elected representatives now voting against this concept are placing their own consciences above the people’s will and thus seeking to thwart that freely and oft-expressed will. Subject to party whips, TDs and Senators are free to vote as they wish until any issue is determined by the public.
Surely, once a matter of public policy has been determined by the people (as it has been, on three occasions), elected representatives are duty bound to honour the people’s wishes, rather than their own. This issue is no longer a decision for politicians, as the people, whose sole right it is to decide issues of national policy, have already spoken – on more than one occasion. The role of politicians now is to implement the people’s will through legislation – a responsibility shirked for 20 years but at last grasped, in a minimalist fashion, by the current Government. – Yours, etc,
ALAN COOKE,
Cypress Downs,
Templeogue,
Dublin 6W.
Sir, – The patron saint of politicians is Thomas More, who was beheaded by Henry VIII for standing up for what was right. We do not expect our elected representatives to make such a sacrifice, but it is important that they make their decision with an informed conscience. It is reprehensible that the Coalition partners are not allowing a free vote on this issue and it is imperative that all citizens make their views known to their public representatives, irrespective of party loyalties. – Yours, etc,
JOHN MURRAY,
Old Parish ,
Ring,
Dungarvan, Co Waterford.