Youth Defence says committee has `pre-arranged conclusion'

The Oireachtas committee hearing submissions on abortion had a "pre-arranged conclusion" and was "gathering evidence to suit its own political views", it was told yesterday.

Mr Justin Barrett, legal adviser to the anti-abortion group, Youth Defence, was speaking at the end of a combative submission. Eight anti-abortion groups made submissions yesterday.

In failing to legislate against abortion following the 1992 referendum, the Government failed to recognise the will of the Irish people, Mr Barrett said.

The only option before the committee was Option 1 of the seven options in the Green Paper on abortion, he said. "It really is only a matter of deciding how to implement a total ban on abortion."

This would not mean that women who needed medical treatment necessitating the termination of their pregnancy would be denied it, he argued.

"There is a difference between terminating a pregnancy and purposely terminating the life of an unborn child. As the father of two myself, you might say I am the father of two terminated pregnancies," he said.

Dr Sean O Donaill, Youth Defence's medical adviser, said ending a pregnancy for medical purposes need not necessarily result in the death of the unborn, but if it died it was an unfortunate effect of the treatment. Abortion intended that the unborn died, he said.

The present situation in maternity hospitals recognised this, he said. "I can assure you that we have never had an instance where any practitioner has been censured by the Irish Medical Council for bad practice such as early induced deliveries."

Asked if Youth Defence wanted legislation as well as a constitutional amendment, Mr Barrett replied: "Absolutely. The 1861 legislation is inadequate. Its language describes as a felony unlawful abortion, which would imply that there can be lawful abortion."

When Mr Jim O'Keefe TD, committee vice-chairman, put it that a constitutional review group thought the word "abortion" should be taken neutrally to mean the termination of a pregnancy or the procurement of a miscarriage, Dr O Donaill said it was "remiss" if the group could not find a form of wording which expressed the "understood situation in this country as far back as 1861, or at least 1983".

All other groups yesterday said there was a difference between abortion as understood to be the deliberate ending of the life of the unborn, and ending a pregnancy for medical purposes where the life of the unborn may be saved. They called for legal clarification.

Ms Marie Vernon, chairwoman of the Society for Protection of the Unborn Child, said any new constitutional wording would have to "protect today's medical practices and protect the unborn child".

Mr William Binchy, of the Prolife Campaign, said abortion was never the answer for a woman in a crisis pregnancy, even in the case of rape.

"There would then be two innocent victims," he said. "There should in such circumstances be maximum support for the mother. The principle of equality means the unborn child's life should be protected." Referring to the X case, he said it was "through the hard cases that societies' humanity may grow."

The other groups addressing the committee yesterday were Family and Life, Christian Solidarity, Muintir na hEireann Teoranta, Doctors for Life and Life Pregnancy Care.