When a Human Rights Committee abandons human beings...by Cora Sherlock

To listen to some abortion advocates over the past few days, you would be forgiven for thinking that we were dealing with a court with full jurisdiction and authority over Ireland. This is not the case.  The UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) is simply that – a Committee.  It does not have the right to impose its views on Ireland.

The Committee came to its conclusion based on its interpretation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and specifically Article 7.  That provides that “no-one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”.  This is the headline which is receiving blanket coverage in the Irish media and is being used by abortion advocates to push the case for a referendum to remove the 8^th Amendment which guarantees that unborn babies have an equal right to life under Irish law.

There are two important points to be borne in mind.

The first is that the HRC simply doesn’t have credibility to discuss “torture” in the abortion issue. This is because of how it constantly ignores other instances that would stand out as examples of extreme torture, caused by the abortion procedure.  For example, the case of babies who survive abortions when they’re not meant to.  Melissa Ohden spoke about this sick phenomenon in Dublin last weekend and the situation where, (in her words), “babies born alive after botched abortions are abandoned as they gasp for breath and struggle to stay alive.”

This happened to 66 babies in one year alone according to official records in England and Wales.  It happened to over 400 babies in Canada over a 10 year period.  This type of inhumane treatment of newborn babies amounts to “torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” by anyone’s reckoning – except maybe the HRC.  They have certainly never publicly challenged this practice.  They have never criticised the countries that have allowed this horrific abuse to take place.  They have simply stayed silent.

Silent too has been Amnesty International, who were once a watchdog for all those who threatened the rights of human beings.  Instead, they have fallen in line with a twisted notion of “human rights” which allows international bodies to push for laws that will allow lives to be ended.

This brings us to the second reason why everything this Committee says should be considered as a partisan comment.  They don’t look at the bigger picture.  There is no mention in their report of any rights that unborn babies might have.  As far as the HRC is concerned, the baby’s rights count for nothing.  This is despite the fact that Article 6.1 of the ICCPR states that “Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law.  No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.”

This is a very strong statement of the right to life of “every human being”, and one that doesn’t distinguish between “born” and “unborn” human beings.   Article 6.5 provides for the death penalty to be imposed on some individuals but notes that it is not to be carried out on pregnant women. Regardless of how you feel about the death penalty (and I oppose it), anyone reading this section of the ICCPR will see that its authors made a distinction between pregnant women, and non-pregnant women.  They recognised that there was another human being involved – an unborn baby who could not have taken part in any crime and who should not have their life ended via the death penalty.

The Preamble to the ICCPR talks about how “the recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.” 

Yesterday’s comments prove just how far the HRC have drifted from genuine human rights.  Their viewpoint is so narrow that they have completely ignored the Article in the ICCPR which highlights the most basic human right, the right to life. The unborn baby doesn’t even get a look in.  His or her rights are completely ignored. There is no attempt to acknowledge the fact that a pregnant woman and her baby are two individuals who are each entitled to rights under the law.

The Irish Constitution doesn’t have this kind of narrow focus.  Thanks to the 8^th Amendment, it protects the lives of all human beings in Ireland. In that sense, it is far more in line with the true intention of the ICCPR and what should be the goal of international human rights protection the world over – protecting the lives of every human being, born and unborn. It’s a sad state of affairs when this kind of positive protection is criticised by a Committee claiming to speak out for human rights. 

Introducing the keynote speaker for Celebrate the 8th - Melissa Ohden

In a move that will bring a whole new perspective to the abortion debate in Ireland, the Pro Life Campaign is delighted to welcome Melissa Ohden as the keynote speaker of the Celebrate the 8^th vigil which is due to take place from 3-4pm in Molesworth Street, on Saturday 4^th June 2016.

Melissa has an extraordinary story to tell.  She is a voice for the truly voiceless in society – people who survived abortions and were left to die but were saved when a member of hospital staff decided to intervene and save them.  Melissa was one of those babies.

The whole issue of babies born alive and left to die after failed abortions is, understandably, something the most abortion advocates don’t want to address.  It highlights what is perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the abortion debate – how a lack of respect for unborn human life in any way can lead to the kind of abuses that would shock even the most ardent supporter of the pro-choice cause.

Unfortunately, despite the fact that this is such a horrific issue, it’s something which doesn’t come up in the abortion debate in Ireland very often and even when it crops up in other parts of the debate, we find it difficult to come to terms with the fact that anyone would treat a baby in such a cruel way.  

Sadly too, Melissa’s story is not an isolated incidence. Official reports from England and Wales show that 66 babies died in this way in one year alone.  One of those babies struggled for life for 10 hours before expiring. But this fact inspires disbelief, not shock, in many who follow the debate in Ireland.

Just last week, Ireland was subjected to criticism from Canada at the UN’s Universal Periodic Review when Canada called on Ireland to make abortion available. But Canada itself has a record of allowing 491 babies to be born alive and left to die over a ten year period beginning in 2000.  The UN does not stand up for the right to life of these babies and international human rights groups like Amnesty International remain steadfastly silent.

Considering these facts, we hope that Melissa’s testimony will help to focus on the issue of what happens to babies when they are born alive after botched abortions.  What rights do they have? Why do the laws in so many countries disregard them in such an inhumane fashion? 

The Abortion Survivors Network (ASN) was set up by Melissa to help educate the public about failed abortions and survivors, and to provide emotional and psychological support to abortion survivors.  Since its inception, Melissa has been in contact with 206 survivors.

We are delighted and honoured to welcome her as a keynote speaker for the Celebrate the 8^th event and we look forward to hearing her contribution on this very complex issue.  

Make sure you don't miss out on hearing Melissa speak - find out how you can organise a bus or find one in your area today!

Abortion and "healthcare": dispelling the myths

by Clare Cromie

Recently I stopped to have a conversation with a young man raising funds for Amnesty International on College Green. We bantered back and forth about what it really meant to be a person, and why babies didn’t make the cut. His response was telling and it put me on the back foot.

He summed up Amnesty International’s recent push to introduce abortion to Ireland as not rejecting the essential humanity of the developing fetus, per se. Instead, he insisted, it was just “really all about healthcare.”

It’s easy to find yourself on the back foot when abortion is introduced as simply a “healthcare” measure. Healthcare, you see, has such immensely positive, humanitarian connotations. How can a person really argue against providing access to healthcare?

It’s important to recognize that the “abortion as healthcare” line is not new to the political discourse. But, is it true? Can abortion really be called healthcare?

If we look at the definition of healthcare in any number of established dictionaries, the answer has to be - absolutely not. Cambridge defines healthcare as “the set of services provided by a country or an organization for the treatment of the physically and the mentally ill.” Abortion is factually the exact opposite of healthcare; rather than treating ill health, it purposefully takes the life of a human being.

The concept that abortion is healthcare because it serves the health and mental well-being of the mother (rather than preference or convenience whether her own, her partner’s, or society’s) also deserves scrutiny. Treatments that ended a pregnancy that were necessary to save a woman’s life were always permitted in Ireland.  We also know that there is no medical evidence to suggest abortion as a treatment for suicide or mental health problems, in fact quite the opposite. We know that post-abortive stress syndrome is a significant threat to women’s mental health.

It is our duty to call attention to these fallacies and carefully and respectfully steer the conversation back towards objective truths. Truths about what abortion is - the termination of the life of a human being - and what it is not. We know for example that abortion is not an evidence-based treatment for suicidal ideation. We know for example that abortion does not eliminate the pain of an infant’s life-limiting diagnosis for his or her mother and father.

We know that all of us at some stage in our lives will receive news of life limiting diagnoses for either ourselves or for our loved ones. While this will never be welcome news, we know that all human beings, regardless of their age or diagnosis, deserve respectful, end-of-life palliative and hospice care. We also know that meeting your baby and holding him or her in your arms is not accurately described as “torture.” We know that Ireland tops global statistics for excellence in maternal health.

Playing around with the meaning of the term “healthcare” is not a small matter of semantics. Abortion advocates are attempting to shroud abortion in the same positive humanitarian halo with which actual healthcare is rightly associated. Let’s challenge this misappropriation, arm ourselves with the facts and have the courage to add our voices to the conversation.