Ruling was not a victory for the unborn child

IT’S ironic that your editorial (May 10) in relation to the ‘D’ case judgement was entitled ‘Ruling is a victory for humanity’.

Ironic because it obviously wasn’t a victory for the humanity of the unborn child. The judge ruled that the right to travel took precedence over the right of the unborn in the constitution.

This seems strange given that he was referring to the right to life of the unborn child. How can a right to travel take precedence over the right to life?

You also rebuke successive governments for failing to legislate for abortion, as do other commentators on this issue in the Irish Examiner. Yet opinion polls have consistently shown the majority of Irish people are pro-life.

International trends show that other countries are increasingly rethinking this issue as the scientific evidence for the humanity of the unborn becomes undeniable. Young obstetricians in Britain, for example, are objecting to having to perform abortions.

In America the banning of partial-birth abortions confirms a reversal of attitudes on this issue.

The damaging psychological effects of abortion are well-documented, yet none was mentioned in your commentaries. For example, a recent Finnish study by a social scientist, who also happens to be a supporter of abortion, found a suicide rate seven times higher for women who had abortions compared to those who gave birth. All of these factors should be taken into consideration in any truthful assessment of this issue.

Michael O’Driscoll

John Paul 1I Society

154 Blackrock Road

Cork