I don’t think anyone will be too
surprised to hear that next week’s Universal Periodic Review at the United
Nations will provide an opportunity for the UN to apply pressure to the Irish
Government on what it terms our “restrictive abortion laws”.
Much like Amnesty International, the UN
trades on its reputation for defending human beings but doesn’t live up to that
reputation when it comes to unborn babies.
We’ve become well used at this stage to how the UN reviews Ireland on
this issue – it ignores the excellent work done by our medical profession and
the fact that we are world leaders when it comes to protecting women and babies
in pregnancy.
Never mind that, says the UN. What about abortion? Why isn’t that more freely available? (If only the UN had taken such an active role
in questioning the Irish Government back in 2013 when it introduced a law
allowing for abortion during the full 9 months of pregnancy when there is a
threat of suicide even though there is no medical evidence to show that abortion
treats suicide ideation).
When the UPR takes place in Geneva,
other countries will be given a platform to ask questions of Ireland – this
regardless of the fact that Ireland has a good or better record in protecting
women’s lives than any of them. But
still, this is the UN and there is clearly an agenda at work.
So we’re told that Sweden intends to
ask what the Irish Government is prepared to do “to bring its legislation and
medical practices in line at least with minimum international standards of
sexual and reproductive health and rights and to allow abortion in the most
serious cases such as rape, incest, fatal foetal abnormality and serious risks
to the health of the mother.”
In other words, Sweden wants to know
when the Irish Government will introduce wide-ranging abortion to birth even
though the language used in its question tries to disguise this fact.
The Netherlands will asked what the
Government will do about “the restrictive abortion regime in Irish law.”
The framers of that question clearly
don’t know – or care – about the 2013 Act which is hardly restrictive for
reasons already mentioned.
And Germany wants to know whether the
Government will review the 8th Amendment “in which the biological
existence of a foetus is put on an equal basis with the right to life of a pregnant
woman.”
The language here is particularly
dehumanizing. We only have a “right to life” because we have a “biological
existence” after all, but even the use of the term “foetus” rather than “unborn
child” tells you all you need to know about Germany’s intentions in posing this
question.
Two things would be great about the
UN’s review next week. The first would be if the UN acted as it should, and
actually framed a debate that would protect all human lives, born and unborn.
While it’s at it, the UN could also ask a few questions of its own – like why
countries that do allow abortion do nothing about abuses like babies born alive
and left to die alone in hospital corners.
Or what they’re doing to encourage women to find another option,
particularly given the recognized but mostly-ignored phenomenon of abortion
regret.
But I don’t hold out much hope for that
so I’ll opt for the second thing I’d like to see – the Irish Government putting
up a robust defence to any questions that try to detract from the life-saving
provision that is the 8th Amendment. They should defend it as something which was
chosen by the Irish People and acts as a beacon for the international human
rights community. They should point to
the tens of thousands of people who are alive in Ireland thanks to the 8th
Amendment. And they should go to Geneva
in the full knowledge that we have reason to be proud, not ashamed of a
provision that has ensured our medical profession has not been corrupted by
something as negative as abortion.
That’s what they should do – but will
they? On the basis of the last few
years, it’s unlikely but we’ll wait and see.
And live in hope because that’s the hallmark of the 8th
Amendment itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment