A chara, – I commend Dr Robert Grant for his honest definition of what abortion on demand is: the "situation where abortion services are safe, legal and available to women who make that choice for whatever reasons they deem fit" ("Phrase 'abortion on demand' has dishonest edge", Opinion & Analysis, June 28th). It is a definition, I think, that both sides of the debate can agree on. Of course, those who oppose abortion will still regard the idea of one person ending the life of another as a "choice" they are entitled to make for any reason as anything but reasonable. I also welcome the implication of his article that abortion on demand is the actual aim of the campaign to repeal the Eighth Amendment. I would imagine that most people understand this already; but it is refreshing to have it honestly put forward as part of this particular debate. – Is mise,
Rev PATRICK G BURKE,
Castlecomer, Co Kilkenny.
Sir, – We are parents who lost our babies to conditions such as anencephaly and trisomy 13. Those conditions meant that our children’s lives were all too short, but we did everything we could to make sure they knew nothing but love in their lives.
These babies were our children. They had a severe disability. They were not a “fatal abnormality”, nor were they less than human. Their lives mattered, because every child matters, whether we have two hours or 10 years to cradle and love them, to make memories and find healing.
It is disturbing and distressing to see abortion campaigners repeatedly use our children’s conditions to further their own agenda in regard to repealing the Eighth Amendment. The phrase “fatal, foetal abnormality”, as every doctor knows and as many have publicly certified, is not a medical term, since no doctor knows how long a baby will live after birth, whatever condition is diagnosed. It is also a fact that many children defy the odds and live far longer than expected. Even when that is not the case, our children were alive and kicking when their condition was diagnosed and that should be respected.
We have asked public representatives and the media, again and again, to bring some honesty to this issue, and to stop misinforming the public. They have ignored that request for honesty and fairness.
Now Mick Wallace TD is proposing a Bill to have sick babies described as “incompatible with life”. This ugly phrase, which uses the language of discrimination, is misleading and dishonest, yet it is repeated by the media and abortion campaigners.
If Mr Wallace and others believe in legalising abortion as a matter of choice, please be honest about that. And please stop dehumanising our children and using their disability to justify abortion. – Yours, etc,
TANYA COONAN,
STEPHEN
and SARAH HYNES,
DAVID and
GEMMA BRADLEY,
GARETH and
CHARLENE McCABE,
MANDY O’NEILL
and MARTY FOX,
LIZ ROTHWELL,
GRACE SHARP,
MICHAEL CURRAN
and VICKY WALL,
Every Life Counts,
Dublin 1.