Having made commitments, some say conflicting commitments, to both the Progressive Democrats and to Independent TDs, the Government is moving to find a solution to the vexed question of abortion. But is there such a thing as a solution to this problem and just what does the Government have in mind?
First, a lengthy consultative process has been undertaken. The public have been invited to send in their views to a Government "Green Paper" group. From this, a discussion document (Green Paper) will be produced. This will then go to the All-Party Committee on the Constitution, which will make its recommendation to the Government. And the Government will then decide whether to legislate for abortion itself or to put it to the people.
This sounds as if it couldn't be more democratic. But is it just a PR exercise?
What's really happening
1. The C case: In November last, the Eastern Health Board placed abortion as an option before the courts and then accompanied the girl to Britain for the purpose of an abortion to save her from her alleged suicidal intentions. (Far from being cured, she is believed to be under further care for the same reasons for which she was brought to Britain.)
2. On Saturday, April 4th, 11 members of the pro-life group, Youth Defence, were arrested without warning on Grafton Street while conducting a street information session. At the Garda station, the female members (only) were asked to remove their clothing. The purpose of this kind of action is to humiliate. This was the second time within a month that arrests were made.
3. In May, the Adelaide Hospital Society called for legislation to permit abortion in certain circumstances and for the establishment of clinics to perform "medically-indicated termination of pregnancy".
4. In May, the Garda broke up a demonstration by Youth Defence outside the Adelaide Hospital, held in response to the Adelaide Hospital Society's proposals. Eight people were arrested. A week later, two protesters were arrested at dawn at their homes. There were no arrests of any members of the Adelaide Hospital Society, who had issued the statement advocating the murder of the unborn in certain circumstances.
5. In May, it was announced that embryo freezing, in violation of the Medical Council's guidelines, had begun at the Rotunda Hospital.
6. Continuing media propaganda gives the impression that abortion is either necessary or inevitable. It is neither.
It can be argued that raising the speed limit from 30 m.p.h. to 40 m.p.h. or 50 m.p.h. would do much to reduce speeding infringements. It is a theory favoured by some politicians for application to the abortion problem. Sweeping abortion under a legal carpet would indeed get rid of a major problem. It is a solution which has worked very satisfactorily in the UK, at least for those not unduly troubled by matters of principle or women's long-term health.
And the most convenient way of achieving this is by legislation, not be referendum. Limited to "certain circumstances", of course, with certifications and safeguards. Those pursuing the goal of abortion on demand will know what to do. In due course, such bureaucratic niceties, having been found to be ineffective, can be abolished.
With legislation settled, the next question would then be: who and where?
The Adelaide Hospital and the Church of Ireland
The Adelaide Hospital Society is one of the groups which runs the Adelaide, and will be involved in the running of the new Tallaght Hospital.
In turn, the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Dublin, the Most Rev Walton Empey, appoints representatives to the board of the Adelaide, and will be the president of the Tallaght Hospital. The society is "heavily influenced" by the Church of Ireland.
With the support of the representatives of the Eastern Health Board, the board which authorised the handling of the C case, the Church of Ireland is likely to have a controlling say when crucial ethical issues come up, such as abortion.
The Submission of the Adelaide Hospital Society to the Working Group on Abortion
To begin with, the submission of the society is laden with ambiguities and euphemisms. There is much discussion of support for those with "crisis pregnancies". For instance:
"To concentrate our efforts on how to deal with the rare and difficult cases does nothing for the `routine' problems of ordinary women who are pregnant and do not wish to be. Many of these women are desperate to end their crisis. We ignore to our collective shame the needs of the 125 women per week travelling to the UK for a termination of pregnancy.
"An exceptionally high proportion of women in Tallaght are of reproductive age and many of these are single. These women are at a special risk of having a crisis pregnancy, and we wish to be prepared to deal with this as comprehensively as possible within the law."
The question must be asked: if the society is pursuing something which is right and just why then is there such a need for so much obscurity?
In my opinion, the society is effectively calling for abortion on demand.
The Church of Ireland's position
It is significant that neither Archbishop Eames, the Church of Ireland Primate, nor Archbishop Empey has made any effort to reject the abortion proposals of the Adelaide Hospital Society. On the contrary, Archbishop Empey has quoted the Church of Ireland's view, the guidelines of the Irish Medical Council notwithstanding, that only in "extreme circumstances" should abortion be allowed.
But Archbishop Empey, as well as Archbishop Eames, will be aware that the same argument was used in the UK and that it resulted in some 4.5 million abortions, and almost 13.5 million statements which many believe to be dishonest by mothers and doctors.
It will be noted that the leaders of the Presbyterian and Methodist churches in Ireland, the Rev John Dixon and the Rev David Kerr respectively, have, in near simultaneous statements, effectively endorsed the Church of Ireland's official position on abortion.
On the other hand, two public representatives, both members of the Church of Ireland, have raised objections to the society's submission. They said much of the submission is not acceptable to the majority of their own church members.
In Ireland, members of minority religions have always been treated somewhat deferentially, an attitude well reflected in the media. It will not be politically correct to point this out but those who sought to introduce divorce used those of a minority religion, with this in view, so as to mute or dampen what would otherwise have been a more robust debate. We are now seeing the same strategy in use on the abortion issue.
In my opinion, then, the events I have mentioned above, i.e. the handling of the C case, the giving of control of a new hospital to a minority religious group which is prepared to countenance abortion, and the sweeping of pro-lifers off the streets all point to one conclusion.
The Government intends bringing in abortion without a referendum, and that abortions will be carried out at Tallaght Hospital. And all this could well be achieved in one bold move just before the Christmas recess or even earlier. But only if we allow it to happen.
Cllr Richard Greene is a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, a former member of the Eastern Health Board, and chairman of the Irish Civil Rights Association