Some very clear findings have emerged from the Oireachtas committee hearings on abortion in the wake of the expert group report, which were very well chaired by Jerry Buttimer TD.
First, pregnant women are not dying because of a failure to intervene when a mother’s life is at risk. Second, abortion is not a treatment for suicide. Anti-abortion people have been stating this for some time, along with the logical conclusion that it is therefore both unsafe and unjust to legislate for abortion on the grounds of suicide, not only because it destroys an innocent life, but because, for certain categories of women, abortion itself can increase the risk of taking one’s own life.
However, other conclusions were reached by Prof Veronica O’Keane (a witness at the hearings) on RTÉ’s Prime Time on Thursday. “We all agree that abortion is not a treatment for suicide. Abortion is clearly a treatment for an unwanted pregnancy. That is what abortion is a treatment for.” She claimed there was a group of women who don’t have any pre-existing mental health problems, but who because of an unwanted pregnancy, perhaps because of rape, are actively suicidal.
Sweeping statement
She said, “And in a case like that, a case like X, the treatment that she wanted was a termination of her pregnancy, and that would put an end to her suicidal ideation.”
If I made a statement like that in this column, I would be in breach of guidelines for best practice when speaking about suicide. Also, abortion did not put an end to the suicidal ideation of Miss C, the first girl to whom the conclusions reached in X were applied. She made repeated suicide attempts after the State took her to England for an abortion.
Media Guidelines for Reporting Suicide and Self-Harm, produced by the Irish Association of Suicidology and the Samaritans, states: “People don’t decide to take their own life in response to a single event, however painful that event may be, and social conditions alone cannot explain suicide either. The reasons an individual takes their own life are manifold, and suicide should not be portrayed as the inevitable outcome of serious personal problems.”
Prof O’Keane alleges that there is one category where this does not apply – women who are suicidal simply and solely because of crisis pregnancy. Terminating the pregnancy “puts an end to the suicidal ideation”. Although the woman might be pregnant because of rape, apparently rape could not be a factor in feeling suicidal? The idea of a single cause and a simple solution flies in the face of all available evidence.
After the publication of a major systematic review of available research by the Academy of Royal Medical Colleges, Planned Parenthood, the biggest US abortion provider, summarised the findings like this: “A woman with an unwanted pregnancy is as likely to have mental health problems from abortion as she is from giving birth. A woman with a history of mental health problems before abortion is more likely to have mental health problems after abortion.”
A short but very significant submission was made to the hearings by Prof Kevin Malone, a psychiatrist internationally recognised for his work in suicide prevention. Unfortunately, he was not called to speak. Prof Malone is not affiliated with any pro-life or pro-choice organisation. But he is concerned about the dangers of normalising suicide.
His submission states that “by foregrounding a theoretical risk of suicide in women, and enshrining ‘suicidality’ in Irish law, the proposed legislation runs the risk of further normalising and, at worst, exacerbating the much more real and volatile threat of increased suicide risk in Irish men, and potentially accelerating suicide risk in young women also”.
In other words, by legislating for abortion on the grounds of suicide, we are creating an “amplified cultural suicide signal”, as Prof Malone calls it, which will affect far more than pregnant women, including those most vulnerable to suicide – young men.
The irony is the judgment in the assisted suicide case fully acknowledged this danger. In a sensitive and compassionate judgment that acknowledged the tragic dilemma faced by Marie Fleming, the judges nonetheless showed deep awareness of the signals that legislating for assisted suicide would send.
The High Court recognised very clearly the effect that law has in influencing, guiding and inspiring society, and its potential to influence the behaviour of individuals and groups.
Pandora’s box
“Yet the fact remains that if this court were to unravel a thread of this law by even the most limited constitutional adjudication in her favour, it would – or, at least, might – open a Pandora’s box which thereafter would be impossible to close. In particular, by acting in a manner designed to respect her conscientious claims and to relieve her acute suffering and distress, this court might thereby place the lives of others at risk.” And: “The safeguards built into any liberalised system would, furthermore, be vulnerable to laxity and complacency and might well prove difficult or even impossible to police adequately.”
If only our politicians, and a minority within psychiatry, could join the dots, and see that exactly the same problems pertain to legislating for abortion on the grounds of suicide.