UCC Societies Guild rejects application for pro-choice society

By Alan Davis, Indymedia, 12 March 2009:

The Societies Guild at UCC has twice rejected applications to set up a pro-choice society on campus on the spurious grounds that this issue is already covered by other groups - including in their first rejection the ludicrous suggestion that this was done by the anti-choice "Students for Life".


Timeline of the political censorship of pro-choice views at UCC.

Monday 26 January – Societies Guild turn down application to set up pro-choice society:

"Your society application was brought before the Guild last evening. Unfortunately status was not approved. It is a decision that was ultimately made by a previous Guild and is being upheld. 'A society already exists which caters for debate in the area of abortion and choice'. Membership to this and all societies is open to all students in UCC. Thank you for your interest and I hope you join one of the many societies in UCC."

Friday 30 January – President of the Students Union says in an email that the application was rejected “due to flaws in the constitution.”

Tuesday 10 February –The Societies Guild confirms by email that the other society is the anti-choice “Students for Life who deal with many issues such as abortion, stem cell research etc.”

Thursday 12 February – Societies Guild suggest meeting up to discuss the failed application.

Wednesday 18 February – Stall at UCC by pro-choice activists for 2 hours collects over 100 signatures on a petition calling for overturning the decision.

Monday 2 March – Meeting with the Societies Guild indicates that a proposal for a broader-based society would be accepted.

Monday 9 March – Societies Guild turns down second application for a much more broadly based society:

"Thank you for your proposal which was discussed at last nights Guild meeting. Unfortunately it was decided not to grant status of the UCC Pro-Choice society at this time. Since the health promotion issues are covered by the UCC Slainte society and the debates on the topics are covered by the UCC Philosophical society it was thought that a society already exists that could cater for your needs. This would limit the remit of the UCC Pro-Choice society as well as the membership.

"Thank you for your interest in any case and I hope that you get involved in one of the eighty-four societies in UCC."

This is a clear and blatant case of political censorship and must be opposed. Send messages calling for this outrageous political censorship to be overturned to the Societies Guild at susocieties@ucc.ie with copies to cork.womens.right.to.choose@gmail.com and prochoice.ucc@gmail.com.

Let us know, at prochoice.ucc@gmail.com, if you want to help with making a big splash at UCC in Freshers Week in September – the pro-choice message will not be silenced!

Link: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/91507

Support Setting Up A Pro-Choice Society at UCC

Quoted From Indymedia (Alan Davis, Wednesday Jan 28, 2009):

"On Monday evening this week the Societies Guild at UCC rejected an application, backed by over 100 student signatures, to set up a pro-choice student society. The 'reason' the Societies Guild gave for their disgraceful decision was:

Your society application was brought before the Guild last evening. Unfortunately status was not approved. It is a decision that was ultimately made by a previous Guild and is being upheld. 'A society already exists which caters for debate in the area of abortion and choice'. Membership to this and all societies is open to all students in UCC. Thank you for your interest and I hope you join one of the many societies in UCC."

This is clearly absurd as the society that already exists is the anti-choice 'Students for Life' - this decision amounts to political censorship of the pro-choice message and must be overturned."


Students for Choice with the help of Cork Women's Right to Choose have been leafletting at UCC to raise awareness about the Guild's decision. We have created a petition and are collecting signatures to support an appeal process to set up a pro-choice society. We've collected over 100 additional signatures from UCC students and staff on campus to give to the members of the Societies Guild. We've created an online version of the petition as well, so please check it out and sign at: http://www.petitiononline.com/choice09/petition.html

JOINT LETTER TO BRITISH MP'S URGING SUPPORT FOR AMENDMENT 30

We, the undersigned, are writing to urge you to support the proposed amendment 30 to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill which would extend the 1967 Abortion Act to Northern Ireland. The extension of the 1967 Abortion Act has wider implications beyond Northern Ireland, and would ensure earlier access to abortion for women in the Republic of Ireland.


You may be aware that abortion on the island of Ireland, both in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland is governed by the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. We believe that it is now time to end an 1861 Victorian response to the 21st century issue of abortion, and ensure that wider international developments in medicine, science and ethics are reflected in amendments to the 1967 Abortion Act.

We support a guarantee for the full enjoyment of the human rights of women in Northern Ireland in this area of sexual health and reproductive rights. We fully support the policy of the British Medical Association, which in its Annual Representative Meeting in 2003 supports the extension of the 1967 Abortion Act to Northern Ireland.

As NGOs and individuals working in Ireland, we have witnessed the financial, emotional and health consequences for women caused by laws that deny access to abortion services on the island of Ireland. Significantly international evidence shows that countries which criminalise abortion, as Ireland does, only pushes women into accessing unsafe and life threatening illegal abortions.

The law in Ireland (both in Northern Ireland and in the Republic) allows for abortion when the life of the woman is in danger. In practice, however, abortion is unavailable in Ireland in almost all circumstances due to ambiguity about when a physician may legally perform a life-saving operation. The law also fails to make any provision for a woman who is pregnant as a result of rape or incest, experiencing severe fetal abnormality, or at risk of permanent bodily harm such as blindness, diabetes, kidney or heart disease.

Official figures show that over 7,000 women per year travel to England for abortions from the island of Ireland. This figure is based upon the number of women providing Irish addresses (from the Republic and Northern Ireland) and vastly undercounts the actual number of women travelling, some of whom may give false addresses in England or travel to other countries like Belgium and the Netherlands.

On a daily basis our we witness how a woman's age, her emotional state, and her other life circumstances affect her decision whether to carry a pregnancy to term and her ability to do so. Yet the laws restricting abortion disregard all such factors.

Pregnant women with a fetal abnormality face an added burden. These women often have wanted pregnancies and are extremely distressed. A woman, who is treated in an abortion clinic abroad or by an illegal provider, is unable to access vital genetic analysis of fetal remains to determine implications for future pregnancies. We are aware that some women attempt to bring fetal remains back to Ireland for genetic testing or to bury the foetus in a family gravesite in Ireland. Due to a combination of stigma and a lack of information, these women sometimes smuggle the remains home after an abortion abroad.

A challenge to Ireland's ban on abortion brought by three women who had been forced to travel to England to obtain abortion services necessary to protect their health and well-being is now pending before the European Court of Human Rights and known as ABC v Ireland. Likewise, the ban on abortion in Northern Ireland has been the subject of judicial inquiry. See Family Planning Association in Northern Ireland v. Minister for Health 2004.

We believe that abortion is an intimate aspect of private life, intricately linked with a woman's sexual rights, the right to control her own body, and the liberty and security of her person. These values are unacceptably infringed upon by the forced continuation of pregnancy.

The full body of international law and the authoritative interpretations of this law as provided by international and regional bodies compel the conclusion that, in order for women and girls to exercise and enjoy their human rights fully, a number of conditions related to reproductive and sexual health policy and law must be present.

We would urge you to support Amendment 30 to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill to extend the 1967 Abortion Act to Northern Ireland.


Dr Mary Muldowney
Alliance for Choice, Republic of Ireland

Helen Keys, Spokesperson
Choice Ireland

Dr Sandra McAvoy
Cork Women’s Right to Choose Group

Dr Mary Favier
Doctors for Choice in Ireland

Alison Begas, Chief Executive,
Dublin Well Woman Centre

Niall Behan, Chief Executive,
Irish Family Planning Association

Proinsias De Rossa MEP, Labour,
Member of European Parliament for Dublin

Senator Ivana Bacik, Independent,
Member of Seanad Eireann,
Reid Professor of Law, Trinity College Dublin

Karen Kiernan, Director,
One Family

Catherine Forde BL, Spokesperson,
Safe and Legal in Ireland Abortion Rights Campaign

Rhonda Donaghy, Trade Union Organiser,
SIPTU

Mags O'Brien, Trade Union Tutor,
SIPTU

Keith O'Brien, Welfare Officer,
University College Cork

Linda Kelly, Equality Officer
Union of Students in Ireland

Anthony Muldoon, Welfare Officer,
Union of Students in Ireland

Dr Geraldine Moane
Senior Lecturer, School of Psychology,
University College Dublin

Margaret Martin, Director
Women's Aid

Feminist Majority: This is What A Feminist Looks Like

Judge withdraws from Irish abortion hearing

From The Irish Times
CARL O'BRIEN, Social Affairs Correspondent
Tuesday, July 29 2008

THE IRISH judge appointed to the European Court of Human Rights is to withdraw from hearing a forthcoming case involving three women living in Ireland who are challenging the State’s ban on abortion.

Dr Ann Power SC, who was appointed to the court earlier this year, will be replaced by the Supreme Court judge Mr Justice Nicholas Kearns. The court did not say why Dr Power had withdrawn except that she had done so in accordance with rule 28 of the court. This states, among other things, that judges may not take part in the consideration of any case where they have a personal interest or where they have previously acted as an adviser, advocate of a party which has an interest in the case.

Dr Power has previously represented the Irish Bishops’ Conference at an Oireachtas hearing on abortion. The group strongly supports a constitutional ban on abortion which would guarantee the right to life of the unborn child.

No date has been set for the case to be heard involving the three women, although it is likely to be within the next year.

As many as 17 judges may sit on an individual case if it is heard in public before the court’s grand chamber.

The case involving the three women is being contested on the basis that their human rights were infringed by being forced to terminate their pregnancies outside the State. The identity of the three women – known as A, B and C – will remain confidential as it proceeds through the court.

They include a woman who ran the risk of an ectopic pregnancy, where the foetus develops outside the womb; a woman who received chemotherapy for cancer; and a woman with addiction problems whose children were placed in care. Their complaint centres around four articles in the European Convention on Human Rights, including protection from “inhuman or degrading treatment” and freedom from discrimination.

The Irish Family Planning Association, which is supporting the case as part of its campaign to introduce legal abortion services in Ireland , said the grounds on which the case is being taken are “very strong”. The association said it was pleased the case was now progressing and it understood that the Government has been invited to respond to the complaints lodged by each of the three women before the end of September.

Once the Government has submitted its response, the association – together with the three women and their legal team – will be invited to consider and comment on what has been presented.

A spokesperson for the association said: “We are hopeful that the court will issue a positive recommendation in favour of the three women. This will bring pressure to bear on the Government to reform Irish abortion laws.”

The campaign to liberalise abortion law is opposed by anti-abortion groups which argue that a new constitutional amendment is needed to prohibit abortion. They say there is a need to restore legal protection for unborn children after the 1992 Supreme Court decision in the X case, which legalised abortion in certain circumstances.

European court to hear women's challenge to ban on abortion

From The Irish Times
CARL O'BRIEN, Social Affairs Correspondent

Mon, Jul 28, 2008

THE EUROPEAN Court of Human Rights has agreed to hear a challenge by three Irish women to the Government's ban on abortion on the basis that their rights were denied by being forced to terminate their pregnancies outside the State.

The women claim the restrictive nature of Irish law on abortion jeopardised their health and their wellbeing. Their complaint centres around four articles in the European Convention on Human Rights, including protection from "inhuman or degrading treatment" and
freedom from discrimination.

The identity of the three women – known as A, B and C – will remain confidential as it proceeds through the court.

They include a woman who ran the risk of an ectopic pregnancy, where the foetus develops outside the womb; a woman who received chemotherapy for cancer; and a woman whose children were placed in care as she was unable to cope.

The Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA), which is supporting the case as part of its campaign to introduce legal abortion services in Ireland, said the grounds on which the case is being taken are "very strong".

"We hope the case will advance quickly through the court, ultimately making a strong recommendation to the Government to reform Irish laws and the current status quo on abortion," a spokesperson said.

The Government has been asked by the court to indicate who they wish to sit as a judge in the case and to submit its observations to the Strasbourg-based court.

The case was originally lodged with the court three years ago. However, the court has in recent weeks requested written observations from the Government and the women involved.

Any decision of the court is binding on the member states and must be complied with, except in very limited circumstances.

The court can decide to hold a public hearing, which would be likely to be held in the middle of next year. Alternatively, the court may review the case in paper format, followed by a public ruling, which could occur more quickly.

The IFPA says the case has the potential to contribute to a change in the law, just as the 1988 Norris case resulted in the decriminalisation of homosexuality.

It points to a ruling by the court two years ago which resulted in Poland being instructed to guarantee access to legal abortions.

It awarded damages to Alicia Tysiac, a 36-year-old woman who had sought an abortion when her doctor warned that giving birth again would seriously damage her already failing eyesight.

She was unable to terminate the pregnancy. After giving birth, she suffered a retinal haemorrhage, and her sight deteriorated drastically.

Anti-abortion groups here, meanwhile, argue that a new constitutional amendment is needed to prohibit abortion.

They say there is a need to restore legal protection for unborn children as a result of the 1992 Supreme Court decision in the X case, which legalised abortion in certain circumstances.

© 2008 The Irish Times

Abortion in Northern Ireland

Abortion report - Legal battle leads to landmark abortion consultation paper - More than 40 years after abortion was legalised in Britain, the public in Northern Ireland are being asked for the first time for their views
Date: Thursday, July 17, 2008
Source: Irish News
Author: Seanin Graham

A landmark legal battle launched seven years ago about abortion services in Northern Ireland has led to the first ever public consultation on the issue. The Department of Health yesterday published a 20-page 'guidance' document on the laws and clinical practices relating to the procedure, which remains strictly limited to women whose physical or mental health may be seriously damaged by the pregnancy. It insists existing laws on abortion in the north will not be changed with the report's publication.

The development stems from legal action by the Family Planning Association (FPA)in 2001, which claimed that not all women were being made aware of their rights by healthcare professionals. After the FPA won the right to a judicial review in 2004, the courts ordered the department to review the "adequacy" of services for women seeking terminations and to issue "appropriate guidance". A 10-week consultation period will now begin, allowing the public to have their say on the matter.

Abortion laws in the north differ radically from those in England, Scotland and Wales. The guidance document repeatedly states that abortion is only legal in the north if there is a "serious threat to the life of the woman" or it "would adversely affect her physical or mental health". Women seeking abortion must show that continuing their pregnancy would lead to "real and serious" risks to their health, which are "permanent or long term". Foetal abnormality is not recognised as grounds for termination, unlike in Britain.

Authors accept that the onus will be on the patient's GP to determine whether an abortion is warranted and that this will be a "difficult decision". "Each case requires careful and sensitive assessment within the law as outlined in this guidance," the paper states. "It is important for practitioners to appreciate that anyone who unlawfully performs a termination of pregnancy is liable to criminal prosecution with a maximum penalty of life imprisonment."

The guidance highlights that two doctors - if it is practical - who are familiar with the patient's medical history should make a clinical judgment on whether an abortion is legally warranted. However, it states that in an emergency "it may be sufficient" for a single doctor to assess whether a termination is appropriate.

One of the most difficult issues for medics lies in determining if the pregnancy is likely to cause long-term difficulties for the patient's physical or mental health. The paper points to specific problems in assessing women who have a history of psychiatric problems or severe learning disabilities. It recommends that a psychiatrist should be involved in the care of patients with mental health problems.

Similarly, child and adolescent psychiatrists should be involved in any assessment of under-18s suffering from mental illness. There are long waiting lists in the mental health sector in Northern Ireland, especially in child and adolescent services.

The guidance, meanwhile, states that staff who have "conscientious objections" to abortion on moral or religious grounds should have their rights "recognised and respected" - except in circumstances where the woman's life is in "immediate danger". There are no measures in place across the north's health trusts to deal with such objections and the document recommends that "appropriate arrangements" should be introduced to deal with such requests. If a doctor, nurse or midwife has an objection, they should refer the patient to another health professional. The guidance adds: "Staff with a conscientious objection cannot opt out of providing general care for women undergoing termination of pregnancy. The personal beliefs of staff should not prejudice general patient care."

Gaining patient consent and providing adequate information and services to women both before and after abortion is also dealt with in the document. Women must have "sufficient competence" to understand the procedure, and their consent must be voluntary. Counselling and support should be provided to the woman, both before and after the procedure. The guidance document notes that counselling is not a regulated activity in the north. Access to services should also be ensured for non-English-speaking women and those with speech problems, hearing impairments and physical or learning disabilities.

The Department of Health last night said the guidance "simply restates the legal position" and cannot make any changes to the law. "Health professionals involved in this area of work have told us they are uncertain about the law in relation to abortion and this guidance offers clinical advice and good practice advice to help them make informed decisions and take appropriate action," a spokesman said. "It is intended that, following consultation, the finalised guidance will be published in early October 2008."

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Q: Is abortion legal in Northern Ireland?
A: Abortions are strictly limited and can only be performed if it can be proved that the pregnancy would damage the physical or mental health of the woman. Fetal abnormality is not recognised as grounds for termination in the north, unlike in Britain.
Q: What is the law in England, Wales and Scotland?
A: The 1967 Abortion Act legalised terminations up to 24 weeks of pregnancy. Women from Northern Ireland are not entitled to an NHS abortion in England.
Q. Do the 2008 guidelines on abortion for Northern Ireland change existing laws?
A: The Department of Health has said it simply restates the current legal position.
Q: How many legal abortions are carried out in Northern Ireland each year?
A: Official government figures suggest there are 70 to 80 abortions carried out annually.
Q: How many women travel to Britain for abortions?
A: An average of 1,300 women travel from Northern Ireland to England for abortions each year. The average cost is £1,000 for medical fees and travel.