It seems a long time since 1983 when the Irish electorate voted to amend the constitution by adding the 8^th amendment which granted equal rights to the life of the mother and to that of the unborn child.  This amendment was the outcome of much political wrangling.  The wording was drafted by the short lived Fianna Fail government of 1982 and was initially supported by Fine Gael, the party which was in a coalition government with Labour by the end of 1982 and whose task it now was to put the proposed amendment to the people.  So far, so good.  Enter Peter Sutherland who was the very able Attorney General who pointed out that the wording was flawed and, if passed, could actually lead to a situation whereby the Dail would have to legislate for the introduction of abortion into Irish law.  Alan Shatter was a young TD who spoke clearly on the danger of the wording.  In response, the Pro Life lobby carried banners which stated “Don’t shatter the amendment”.  The government put forward a different wording which was criticised by Fianna Fail as not being “pro life” and when the Government wording was put to a Dail vote it was defeated and it was the Fianna Fail wording that was put to a referendum.  The Catholic Church had a lot more clout in those days and used the pulpit to support the amendment which was duly accepted by an overwhelming majority.  Peter Sutherland was seen as an enemy of the moral majority. 

 I didn’t vote give a “yes” vote in 1983 as I believed that the constitution of the country should be a broad statement of principles, not a blue print for the resolution of every possible moral dilemma.   I remember feeling a certain degree of isolation from many of my fellow citizens.  Less than a decade after the passing of the amendment, Peter Sutherland was proven to be right when the Supreme Court interpreted the 8^th amendment to mean that a suicidal teenager had a right to have her pregnancy terminated, not because she was a victim of rape, but because her right to life was equal to that of her unborn child.  This became known as the X case.  Those of us who voted no in 1983 refrained from saying “He told you so”.

In the intervening years, two Fianna Fail led governments asked the people to further amend the constitution so that it would allow for abortion to save the life of the mother, except in cases of suicide.  Twice the people rejected such a proposal.  The government is now in the process of legislating for very restrictive availability of legal abortion in Ireland.  The Catholic Bishops are railing against this and are again using our attendance at Sunday Mass to tell us what to think and what to do on the issue. 

 The death of Savita Hallapanavar catapulted the need to legislate for the X case back on the political agenda and interestingly, we have a total reversal of the 1983 situation.  Now, the whole country seems to want to legalise abortion in situations where there is a threat to the life of the mother, including that of suicide and indeed, there are calls for much broader abortion legislation.  I am not sure that the death of Savita Hallapanavar was solely due to lack of legislation as it would appear that her medical care was not all that it should have been but, somehow the mood of the country is such that there appears to be broad support for the bill that is presently being discussed in the houses of the Oireachtas.    

So, thirty years on where do I now stand on the issue?  I still believe that the 8^th amendment to our constitution was a mistake.  I believe that it has led to medical dilemmas because judging when there is a real and substantial risk to the life a woman is not an exact science and it is not possible to legislate for every situation. The present bill cannot make provision for abortion in cases of rape, incest or when the development of the foetus is not compatible with life outside the womb because such situations do not constitute a risk to the life of the mother.     While I have no means of proving how such pregnancies were dealt with prior to 1983, I have a suspicion that a rape victim might find it possible access a D and C (Dilation and Curettage).  

I was comfortable with my position of this issue until I went to see the play “Enemy of the People” currently being staged in the Gate Theatre.  The plot goes something as follows:  a spa has been developed in a town which is generating an economic boom.  The doctor discovers that the water is poisoned and, instead of being hailed for his discovery, everyone turns against him in what becomes a mob situation.  There is no room for rational discussion.  One line of the play states baldly that the majority is usually wrong—or words to that effect—people get swept up in the tide of popular opinion.  The following questions arise:  How was it that so many voters endorsed the 8^th amendment and how is it now that so many people appear to want to legislation for abortion, albeit in a very limited form?   Could it be that we are not very good at thinking things out for ourselves and that we abdicate our responsibility for our beliefs and principles in favour of following the crowd—regardless of the direction in which that crowd is travelling?