After two decades of inaction, in 2012 the Irish government was finally compelled to commit to legislating for 1992’s X case judgement, in which the Supreme Court ruled that women have a constitutional right to an abortion in Ireland if their lives are at risk – including the risk of suicide.

Not even a ruling in December 2010 by the European Court of Human Rights, stating that Ireland was breaching women’s rights by forcing women who are ill to travel for potentially life-saving abortions, had been enough to inspire decisive action by the Government. Then, on 28th October last, a young Indian woman, Savita Halappanavar, died in tragic circumstances in Galway University Hospital, having been denied her repeated requests for an abortion.
As the horrific facts of the case became public knowledge, there was outrage, both nationally and internationally. The Taoiseach Enda Kenny misread the mood of the country, stating that he “wouldn’t be rushed on the issue.” But the wave of revulsion turned into a tsunami, finally forcing the Irish government’s hand. What was even more interesting was that the case created a context in which a new and very different understanding of the radically altered views of the Irish electorate could be crystallised. Which is exactly what has happened. In a sense this debate is only starting, and is likely to gather momentum through the year ahead.
Immediately after the Christmas break, in Leinster House, the Dáil Sub-Committee on Health and Children conducted a three-day hearing of the views of ‘expert witnesses’ on abortion. The hearing gave an inkling of the future direction of the abortion debate in Ireland.
For a start, there was near-unanimity amongst the medical witnesses that the government’s approach of combining legislation with reglations to give effect to the judgement of the Supreme Court in 1992, in the X case, was the best immediate way forward. The quandary faced by health professionals, and the threat to women’s health and lives arising from the ongoing criminalisation of abortion, was most clearly expressed by the master of Dublin’s Holles Street Hospital, Dr Rhona Mahony, an obstetrician and mother of four. She emphasised her own need to know that she will not be prosecuted for performing abortions to save women’s lives, and – tellingly – that the women she treats won’t be prosecuted either. Young, powerful and hugely impressive, Mahony is a feminist mover and shaker in terms of reproductive health rights for women in Ireland.

DEMEANING PATRIARCHAL BULLSHIT
However, there was also a growing clamour that the Government must do more.
Orla O’Connor of the National Women’s Council of Ireland (NWCI) made her understanding of the government’s task crystal clear, suggesting that more radical action is necessary. “Abortion must be decriminalised if the legislation plus regulation approach is to be accessible and effective,” she said, “and to remove the shame, stigma and discrimination that women in Ireland have to endure as a reuslt of these criminal provisions.”
Speaking on behalf of Choice Ireland, Abigail Rooney pointed out that mere post X-case legislation will not solve some of the key problems: in particular, women and physicians will still be criminalised in Ireland if abortion is carried out, in cases of fatal foetal abnormality. She called for a referendum to deal with this. “If you think this is saving lives,” said Rooney, “it’s not. We need to regulate for abortions in cases of fatal foetal abnormality immediately. This can’t be done without a referendum, so let’s ask the people.”
Ailbhe Smyth, of Action on X, called a spade a spade. “The blunt reality,” she stated, “is that the restrictive terms of the X-case ruling would exclude the large majority of women who leave Ireland for an abortion.” She called for the repeal of the ‘unworkable’ article 40.3.3, 1983’s so-called ‘pro-life’ constitutional amendment, which grants the ‘unborn’ an equal right to life to ‘the mother’.
Numerous churches and faiths gave evidence during the hearing. All, with the predictable exception of the Catholic Church, backed the need for abortion legislation. Outside the chamber, from his eyrie in the Vatican, the Pope had the gall to get involved in the debate, saying that he was “dismayed” by attempts to introduce legislation on the issue.
Inside the chamber, the Bishop of Elphin, Christopher Jones, vainly attempted to make a distinction between ‘abortion’ and ‘medical termination’, and called for a referendum to overturn the X-case judgement, which he described as ‘morally unacceptable’. The lawyer William Binchy, who was the main architect of the botched ‘pro-life’ constitutional amendment, said the same thing. But they, and the representatives of the Iona Institute, were clearly singing from an old and hopelessly tattered hymn sheet.
The Bishop’s remarks provoked anger amongst female representatives. Senator Ivana Bacik questioned “the right of clerical males and celibates to pronounce on the rights of women.” And she charged, with ample justification, that the Church “worked from the assumption of the innate deceitfulness of women.”
The above clashes notwithstanding, it is clear that a strong middle-ground on the need for abortion legislation has emerged across the Dáil parties, with the majority of Fine Gael, Labour, Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein TDs all broadly in favour of the government’s approach. As a result, hardcore anti-abortion crusaders are now completely at odds with the majority in the country, 85% of whom – according to a Sunday Business Post poll, published on December 2, 2012 – support abortion legislation where the life of a woman is threatened, including by suicide.
Some TDs in FG and FF continue to voice fears about legislating for the suicide option. But there is a growing groundswell which sees this as fundamentally misogynistic.

RIGHT TO CHOOSE
The Oireachtas committee is due to draw up a report over the coming weeks detailing the evidence presented during the hearing. The next step is for the government to draft the heads of a bill, which will give effect to the X case judgement. With the Council of Europe breathing down Ireland’s neck, and Praveen Halappanavar – the husband of Savita – taking the case surrounding his wife’s death to the European Court of Human Rights, it is hard to see how the government can delay legislation for much longer.
In the meantime, in an apparent attempt to assuage Europe’s concerns, Minister for Health, James Reilly, has stated that women fearing for their lives who get refused an abortion in Ireland can apply to the High Court for the refusal to be overturned.
This, of course, is demeaning, patriarchal bullshit. Offering women who, like Savita Halappanavar, are too ill to get on a plane to England for a potentially life-saving abortion the option of applying to the courts to overrule the decision to deny them medical treatment is just another cowardly Irish solution to an Irish problem. But it is one we are likely to be stuck with in the short term.
Even when the government finally legislates, Ireland will have the most restrictive abortion law in Europe. No other jurisdiction makes a distinction between a risk to the life, and a risk to the health, of a woman. This piece of semantic sorcery is not only insulting to women but it is also unworkable, and in a significant number of cases will leave vulnerable women at a high risk of being denied vital medical care.
That’s why the pro-choice movement is now gearing up for the real challenge – a successful campaign to repeal the misnamed ‘pro-life’ amendment, which was inserted into our Constitution in 1983, and its replacement with a statement of a woman’s right to choose as the over-riding legal principle.
Because, as a placard at one of the demos asserted, “Laws protecting foetuses endanger women’s lives.”