Have we lost sight of the real priorities of our abortion laws?
Monday, 28 December 2009
Abortion is a very controversial subject in Northern Ireland. There is a very strong and vociferous lobby which argues that life is precious from the moment of conception and should never be terminated in any circumstances.
This lobby group even sees proposals by the Department of Health to clarify the circumstances in which medical professionals can conduct a termination as an underhand way of introducing abortion to the province.
It is nothing of the sort, of course. All the new guidelines would do is provide doctors and nurses with clearly understandable sets of rules so that they don't run foul of the law.
For a termination is only allowed in very specific circumstances in Northern Ireland — essentially where there is a danger to the physical or mental well-being of the mother.
The main political parties will not contemplate extending the Abortion Act from England to Northern Ireland.
And figures just published will hardly lessen the opposition to an extension of the Act.
The figures show that around 1,500 of the 19,000 girls aged 18 or under who had a termination last year had previously had another abortion. One teenager had eight terminations and a small number had three or more.
In effect those girls were using terminations as a form of contraception. That is what opponents of the Act — or rather the way it is implemented — find so wrong with it. Most people can think of circumstances in which they would agree with a termination — where the pregnancy is the result of incest or rape; where the life of the mother is in danger or where her mental health is at risk, for example.
When the Abortion Act was introduced in the UK it was on the understanding that women would have to meet certain criteria before the operation was performed. That understanding has long gone by the board and abortion is now available on demand.
The figures prove it. Anyone who wants an abortion can have one and, apparently, as often as they like.
Women may argue that there is nothing wrong with that situation. Why shouldn't they have an abortion if they wish?
But the present situation does not do them any favours. Can anyone say allowing a teenager to have multiple terminations is right? Is it not a sign that society had failed the teenager — failed to instil any self respect in the girl; failed to instil any respect for the unborn baby; failed even to give her the most basic contraceptive advice.
We have skewed our priorities. By making it socially acceptable to have repeat abortions, it is little wonder that some impressionable young girls see nothing wrong with promiscuous behaviour that puts their health at risk, never mind the danger of becoming pregnant.
Abortion should be available in certain circumstances but it should not be treated as an everyday procedure without consequences, both physical and mental.
Post a comment
Limit: 500 characters
View all comments that have been posted about this article
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP address logged and may be used to prevent further submissions. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by BelfastTelegraph.co.uk's Terms of Use.
Posts submitted in UPPERCASE letters will be rejected.



























Carson 1912? That's the problem with Unionism, we're always looking to the past. It's time to bring Unionism into the 21st Century, and reject the "No Surrender", anti-Catholic mentality. It's time for Ulster to become a secular, democratic, and econimically secure, province fully integrated into the UK and European community, with close cooperation with the Republic on issues such as tourism, agriculture, and security. I would suggest the UUP/SDLP/and Alliance forming some kind of coalition government to prevent Sinn Fein, the Robinsons/DUP, and Tradional Unionist Voice from running the province.
Posted by Tom | 23.01.10, 03:26 GMT
Chris its clear you have no clue about human biology, with that logic, you are basically saying its okay to kill anyone cos they are just made up of cells
Posted by fiona | 20.01.10, 15:01 GMT
While I see the point of Mr White's argument,and share his concerns about sexual behaviour, it does seem rather callous to dwell on the promiscuous behaviour of 'impressionable young girls' without devolving some responsibility onto the men who get them into the situation in the first place. It is also worth noting that many of the unwanted pregnancy and abortion statistics come from more mature women.
The last thing we need in an overpopulated world is unwanted children - something has to give. Humans are not going to stop having sex, and having sex is not going to stop resulting in pregnancies. If abortion is to be discouraged, the trade off is the promotion of effective contraception.
I am conscious that there are people, from a religious conscience, who are not going to like either option, but I think we need to take a reality check - abstinence only policies don't work. I seem to remember an abstinence campaign for teenage girls fronted by a certain Mrs Robinson...
Posted by Jennifer | 13.01.10, 17:23 GMT
In the early weeks a foetus a small bundle of cells which have the potential to become a human being.
Every cell in my body has the potential human being, every time I scratch my backside I'm committing a genocide of potential human beings.
If a teenage girl wants to destroy 20 of these little cellular bundles every year she should have the right to, and she should not feel she is doing anything wrong because she does so.
Posted by Chris | 08.01.10, 14:53 GMT