Chrysalis

So Cabinet is meeting today to discuss the governments options in relation to the X-Case and enacting legislation based on the Supreme Court’s rulings. Soundings from Junior Minister Kathleen Lynch in the media are that they will not go far enough to meet the expectations of many of the Irish people. Add to this the threats from within Fine Gael from Junior Minister Lucinda Creighton that she will vote against any move by the government that she feels is going too far on this issue.
The debate has raged fierce since the untimely passing of Savita Halappanavar, public outrage led to street protests and vigils. Minister Reilly promised his government would not be the seventh to shirk responsibility in this area; he would act and act decisively. The expert group reported with a variety of options and the government, it would seem, have decided to take an a la carte approach to that advice. If this is the case the clarity we were promised would result seems more likely to be clouded in even further confusion for the professionals working in this area and for the women needed their help.
Now this is a divisive debate, the so called pro-life side have yet again focussed the debate on the subject of suicide. In particular when is the threat of suicide a valid reason to be regarded as a threat to the life of the mother and so require a medical termination? Their argument at its most basic seems to be that women will use, if it is legislated for, the threat of suicide as route to that awful phrase ‘abortion on demand’. This is a simplistic and insulting point of view.
The fact that this point of view is being trumpeted by many elected representatives irks me for another reason. I work with a group called Mad Pride Ireland (www.madprideireland.ie) we are in the mental health lobby area so I have some exposure to emotional distress and the laws approach to it. It seems to me to be a little disingenuous to have politicians questioning the validity of suicidal ideation in women seeking abortion when they seem so comfortable to accept the word of psychiatry backed up by the Mental Health Act 2001 (MHA 2001) to remove the human rights and liberty of individual citizens.
We have argued on many occasions that the MHA 2001 contravenes the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities on the basis that it is a discriminatory piece of legislation (http://tinyurl.com/cmx5kzs) However, in this case I am more annoyed that politicians who have a moral objection to abortion are using suicide, or the perceived threat of suicide to maintain the status quo. If they agree that suicide is a valid threat to the life of someone with emotional problems and have enshrined this in legislation then how can they argue against in in cases where abortion is a possible result?
If they have so much faith in the medical model that they allow it to force treat and force medicate citizens on a daily basis why they do they not have faith in that model to assess properly the validity of suicidal ideation in relation to pregnant women? If politicians have a moral objection that is their right, and they have every right to argue their point but I do not agree that they should be allowed have such double standards when so much is at stake.