Sir, - The judgement of the Supreme Court in the X case (1992) was based on the uncorroborated opinion of only one psychologist. The court did not appear to consider it necessary or relevant to seek other expert psychiatric evidence, particularly in the specific area of the suicide risk in pregnancy.
The judgement of the High Court in the recent C case was based on the evidence of one psychiatrist. We have no evidence that he had specific competence in the matter at issue. Once again there was no corroboration. Further, an application by counsel for a brief adjournment to consult with a psychiatrist was rejected in the Children's Court and this rejection was approved by the High Court.
Since human life was at stake, both judgements are profoundly disturbing. It is now accepted in law that abortion of an unborn child can be classified as a "medical treatment" of the mother and the only and appropriate treatment for a suicide risk in pregnancy.
I would suggest, with respect, that our present problem in this area is not the 1983 amendment to the Constitution but rather the medically ill-founded and therefore entirely unacceptable judgements of our Courts. - Yours, etc.,
Blackrock, Co Dublin.