Gerard O’Regan: Many fear decision on Eighth will haunt them
IT’S going to be a torturous decision for countless thousands who vote yes – and equally for those who vote no – in the upcoming abortion referendum. Regardless of their stance, long into the future there will be those still wondering whether they did the right thing.
Those on both sides of the divide are confronted with the same existential question. How do they balance the life of a mother with that of her unborn child?
The polls tell us there is already a huge swathe of the electorate which has its mind made up on the matter. But the reality is there are sharp differences as to “when and why” an abortion should be carried out.
At this point in the campaign, it is only those on the extreme sides of the argument – whether they be for or against the Eighth Amendment – who have rock-solid certainty as to what they will do on polling day. Their sense of certitude is in sharp contrast to those still drifting in a middle ground where indecision rules.
Those in this segment of the electorate may hold strong views – but all the while they are riddled with reservations. Their voice is inevitably drowned out by those who consider the abortion conundrum in absolutist terms. This grouping includes those who always see the termination of a pregnancy within the ambit of right versus wrong, of good versus evil.
Meanwhile, many of the “hard cases” have been well aired in the debate so far. These include women who have been victims of rape or incest. And there are the instances where an unborn child has no hope of survival outside the womb. Some opponents of abortion argue for exceptions in such circumstances.
But the greatest area of concern for the undecided are the views of leading medical experts.
There are warnings the Eighth Amendment has introduced unacceptable health risks for pregnant women. It is argued the constitutional guarantee of an equal right to life for the unborn could result in the death of a mother. Medical intervention could be too limited and too late.
This could be the pivot on which the referendum may turn. Is risking the life of any woman – however slight – too high a price to pay?
In medically high-risk situations, how is it possible to measure the “equal” right to life of both mother and baby? The current legal imperative is that both lives must be protected “as far as is practicable”.
Many doctors, facing a possible jail sentence should they make the wrong decision, are vehemently opposed to such guidelines.
The singular statement in the debate so far has come from the Master of the National Maternity Hospital, Dr Rhona Mahony. “The existence of the Eighth Amendment is every day causing women serious risk and therefore I think it should be repealed,” she said.
She also suggested the current situation requires a woman to be dying before she can qualify for a termination of pregnancy.
“This leads to very complex decisionmaking in very sick women, and those decisions are made in the shadow of a 14-year custodial sentence. There are very few other areas of medicine where such complex decisions are made within a criminal context,” she added.
Taken on their own terms, these are startling words coming from such an eminent source. Yet those on the other side of the argument point out the old maxim that “tough cases make bad law”.
They insist the greater good is better served by having constitutional protection for the unborn. The essential belief is this protection outweighs the risk of something going wrong in a minority of cases.
Those in favour of retaining the amendment also dismiss the incest and rape argument. Their bottom line is that the evolution of unborn life – regardless of how it is conceived – cannot be thwarted. The alternative is the intentional killing of a baby who, it is argued, has an inalienable right to live.
On the other hand, there are those in favour of abortion in cases of rape, incest, or fatal foetal abnormality, who worry “the floodgates will open”.
Such see-saw changes in public opinion have been mirrored in recent statements by Simon Coveney. Obviously wrestling with his conscience, coupled with a seeming willingness to change his mind on this most emotive of issues, he is reflective of the indecision still stalking much of the electorate.
Perversely, this approach may represent good politics for the Tánaiste and the Government. It chimes in with much of the national mood and a feeling of uncertainty still felt by many voters.
Many find it impossible to arrive at a final decision on the great unresolved ethical and moral issue of our time.
All this makes the run-in to polling day fraught with the possibility of high drama. The number of “don’t knows” remains stubbornly high.
More importantly, a significant proportion of those who have already committed to either yes or no remain susceptible to changing their mind.
In such a febrile atmosphere, there is an ongoing risk of an own goal by either side in the campaign. A specific intervention by a high-level spokesperson who is judged to be too extremist or too dismissive of the opposing point of view could be seriously counter-productive.
Across the Dáil and Seanad, a sharp divide has opened up, especially reflected in the two main parties.
FINE Gael is being challenged to put forward a coherent voice on behalf of the Government. Fianna Fáil leader Michael Martin is among those who have made a personal journey, by way of evolving his own views on abortion. But although he has the backing of a number of heavy hitters in the party, others take a stridently different stance.
Even Sinn Féin, with its fabled Stalinist control ethic, has found it impossible to present a united front.
But all this divisiveness is not surprising. The reality is that the wilful termination of a pregnancy leaves many Irish people emotionally contorted. That is why it is impossible at this point in time to predict the referendum outcome.
The simple truth is many people really don’t know their own minds on this issue – even if they think they do.
This may seem a bit pretentious and even contradictory. But it is also a sign voters realise some of the life and death issues involved when they cast their vote.
And at the end of it all, there will be those who leave the polling booth still haunted with self-doubt.
Did they do the right thing? For the mother. For the baby. For them both.