Category: Ireland

Irish Times publishes false “abortion” story

Paper admits “abortion” did not happen

No explanation offered for fabricated “news”

Sean Murphy*

The controversy surrounding Ireland’s new abortion law has been further inflamed by a story by Irish Times Health reporter Paul Cullen.  The story first appeared on 23 August, 2013.  Its accuracy was immediately disputed, and the paper had to add note stating that the article was erroneous in claiming that an “abortion” had occurred at the National Maternity Hospital in Dublin “under the provisions of the new abortion legislation,” which had not yet come into effect. Nonetheless, in an interview the following day, Cullen continued to insist that the reported “abortion” had occurred at the hospital, and that the public had a “right to know” about it.

The Irish Times has now been forced to remove the article from its website because it was found to be false.  Despite Mr. Cullen’s concern about the public’s “right to know,” the paper has offered no explanation to account for the fabrication of the story and the failure of editorial oversight that permitted its publication.

A significant issue raised by the incident is a dispute about what constitutes an “abortion.”  A protest outside the Irish Times organized by Irish pro-life organizations Youth Defence and Life Institute included statements and signs to the effect that premature delivery of a baby (presumably resulting in death) is not an “abortion,” but “medical treatment” intended to save the life of the mother.  It is by no means clear that the Irish Times or those favouring legalization of abortion accept this distinction.  Differences on this point are likely to complicate the exercise of freedom of conscience by health care workers who do not wish to participate in abortion.

Irish government signals intention to force Catholic hospitals to provide abortion

Physician recommends expansion of abortion services beyond designated facilities

Quoting an unnamed official of the Irish Department of Health, the Irish Independent has reported that the Irish government intends to force Catholic hospitals to provide abortions under the new Irish abortion law.  The official is quoted as saying that the new law provides for conscientious objection for individuals, but the exemption ” does not apply to a hospital.”

The Irish Independent also reports that Dr. Kevin Walsh, a cardiologist at Mater Hospital, Dublin, has said that more hospitals should be designated to provide abortions, as he believes that the obstetric hospitals do not have the resources to manage women who are “pregnant and critically ill with heart disease.”   Abortions in such circumstances would be better provided in acute care hospitals, he said, “on an urgent planned basis rather than immediate emergency basis.”

Mater board priest says hospital can’t carry out abortions

Board of governors to consider position on new law versus Mater ‘ethos’

Irish Times

Kitty Holland

The Mater hospital in Dublin “cannot comply” with the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act and cannot carry out abortions, a member of its board of governors has said.

Fr Kevin Doran was speaking to The Irish Times as the board prepares to meet in the coming weeks to discuss how or whether the hospital will abide by the legislation. [Full text]

Ireland: Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013

Protection of Conscience Provision

The  Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013 became law in July, 2013.  The protection of conscience provision is provided here in full within an abbreviated presentation of the entire act.  Paraphrased parts of the bill are in italics.  Mouseover the red text to see government comments that were provided in the “heads of bill” relevant to the text.  Links to other information relevant to the law are in the first column to the right.

Irish Bishops’ briefing note on the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013

The Catholic bishops of Ireland have sent a briefing note to the Oireachtas (Irish parliament) concerning the controversial Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013.  Among the criticisms of the bill was the following reference to the bill’s protection of conscience provision:

3.      The Bill also creates a number of serious moral, legal and Constitutional conflicts in the area of freedom of conscience and religious belief, notably:

A.  The Bill provides for conscientious objection by ‘any medical practitioner, nurse or midwife’ only. It excludes others who may be obliged to co-operate in providing abortion services against their conscience or religious belief. This is in contrast to the wording of the proposed Protection of Human Life in Pregnancy Bill 2001, which provided for conscientious objection by ‘any person’ carrying out or assisting in an abortion. The operation of this clause is also unacceptable because it involves a form of co-operation in evil by obliging those who conscientiously object to knowingly put the patient in to the care of medical personnel who will carry out an abortion. In effect, therefore, medical personnel are being given no choice but to cooperate in an abortion. This is in contrast to the practice in many other countries which ask only that the patient be handed over to the care of other medical personnel. Limiting the scope of conscientious objection in this way is potentially in conflict with Article 44.2.3 of the Constitution, which states that: “The State shall not impose any disabilities or make any discrimination on the ground of religious profession, belief or status”, with the general direction of legal interpretation of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights and with recent UK based cases such as Doogan & Anor v NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde Health Board [2013] ScotCS CSIH 36.

B.  Article 44.2.3 also raises important questions of principle about the application of the Party Whip system to oblige members of the Oireachtas to vote in favour of this legislation, against their religious conscience. It may even open the possibility of a Constitutional challenge to the legislation itself on the basis of an un-constitutional legislative process.

C.  The obligation on ‘appropriate institutions’ identified by the Minister to provide abortion services may be in conflict with existing legal arrangements and, in some cases with Article 44.2.5 of the Constitution, which states that: “Every religious denomination shall have the right to manage its own affairs, own, acquire and administer property, movable and immovable, and maintain institutions for religious or charitable purposes”.