Sir, - Medb Ruane, makes a logically muddled and morally dubious case for legalising abortion in this country (The Irish Times, July 21st). The article lays the blame at the door of the pro-life movement for the high rate of late-term abortions among Irish women. Ms Ruane suggests that "a blanket prohibition of abortion in Ireland" is "liable to increase the rate of women seeking the procedure, not decrease it".
Ms Ruane makes several crucial assumptions in her argument, which I would respectfully take issue with. Firstly, she claims that the legalisation of abortion in Ireland may actually reduce the current abortion rate. The experience of other Western countries, and Irish abortion statistics since the Abortion Information Act (1995), suggest that facilitation actually increases abortion rates.
Secondly, Ms Ruane seems to have a rather crude understanding of the role of moral principles in this debate. She asks outright whether Ireland's "refusal to face facts about abortion" is "the cost of keeping principles intact". The implication is that an abortion law guided by a strict moral principle (kill no innocent human being) prevents the State from offering a practical and socially effective response to the problem. It is as if adherence to a strict moral principle and a practical, humane response to the problem were mutually exclusive. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Opponents of abortion do not claim that a constitutional ban of abortion will, in itself, address the underlying problems leading to high abortion rates. Indeed, pro-life spokespeople have called repeatedly for the abortion issue to be tackled at a social level by putting in place proper support and counselling services for pregnant women and women who have had abortions. They want to see abortion rates go down as much as anyone else.
Legalising abortion, on the other hand, would not only be profoundly unjust and inhumane; it would not do a jot to tackle the root causes of abortion. - Yours, etc.,
David Thunder, Clontarf, Dublin 3.