14.03.2002

Launch pad for women's rights

Defeat for the Irish government in the March 6 referendum on abortion is highly significant. There was no certainty that the proposed amendments to the constitution would fall. Moreover, the failure of taoiseach Bertie Ahern's personal crusade to tighten further the already impossibly tight restrictions on abortion is a blow for his entire administration. But what does the vote mean for progressive politics and is it a step forward for women's rights? It is necessary to examine the context within which the referendum has taken place. Most important is the changing perception of the catholic church and its loosening hold over Irish people, especially the young, on questions of 'morality'. Systematic abuse has taken place in orphanages and care homes run by sisters and brothers of the church. Since the late 1980s it has been beset by scandal. With revelation following revelation of sexual scandal and physical abuse, and thousands claiming compensation against the church, a significant minority now view it as rotten to the core. Attendance at mass has fallen considerably. The clergy has been forced to admit the appalling way in which many vulnerable children have been treated. They have also been forced to dip into their coffers to compensate those who have suffered. Day by day the list of those demanding redress grows. All this has caused enormous damage to an institution that was once the pride of the pope. The numbers of men and women taking up holy orders has dwindled. That the church has seriously offended its flock is undisputed - the only issue is whether it can recover. Some have seen the church's involvement in the referendum as an attempt to reverse the growing tide of ill feeling and cynicism towards it. It was said to be a bid to win back the status it once enjoyed as the custodian of virtue in every aspect of Irish life. Fearful of 'sinful European influences' and falling Sunday attendances, the bishops actively backed Fianna Fáil's referendum, hopeful that the popular appeal of the taoiseach would also reflect well on them. Ahern himself consulted with senior clergy in formulating the question to be posed on the ballot paper. It has been rumoured that without their backing he would not have gone ahead. He need not have worried. Throughout the campaign prominent members of the church establishment wrote articles in the popular press attacking the opposition parties for their advocacy of a 'no' vote. The bishop of Ferns, Brian Comiskey, slated them for their immorality and opportunism from the pages of the News of the World. Colum Kenny argues: "Bishop Comiskey's official attack on dissenting politicians suggests that he and other bishops saw a 'yes' victory as their doorway back to the corridors of power" (Irish Sunday Independent March 10). Glossy leaflets were produced and on the Sunday prior to the referendum a special pastoral letter calling for a 'yes' vote was read out from the pulpit at every service up and down the county. This type of intervention was unprecedented. In the first referendum on abortion in 1983 the church left it to groups like the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child to do their work for them. Then they were confident that they had the support of two thirds of the population. And their confidence was borne out with overwhelming support for a 'pro-life' amendment to the constitution. Not so in 2002 - this time they were leaving nothing to chance. In a country where 90% of the population still consider themselves catholic, the message was clear and the stakes were high. It became a referendum on the church itself - one that it lost. In Colum Kenny's words, "They are now revealed as a weak force in Irish society, having wasted their authority on a foolish proposal that was seen by most political commentators as an opportunist attempt by Bertie Ahern to wrong-foot the opposition in advance of a general election and to keep certain independent TDs in tow" (ibid). The referendum itself was complicated and spread much confusion. Ultimately a 'yes' vote would have closed a loophole which, in theory, allows the possibility of abortion in the case of suicidal women. If the government had succeeded, it would have overturned the precedent establshed in the 1992 'X case' - where a girl of 12 who was raped, became pregnant and threatened to kill herself was eventually allowed to have an abortion by the Supreme Court. The decision was made after weeks of controversy. This was followed in 1997 by the 'C case', where in similar circumstances a health authority was allowed to fund a girl to travel to Britain for an abortion. Basically, if the referendum had been passed, no woman with a crisis pregnancy in the care of the state would be allowed to cross the Irish Sea to end her pregnancy. The only abortions allowed would be those necessary to "prevent a real and substantial risk of life to the woman (not including suicide)". And these could only be carried out at "approved places", which would mean that if there was a danger to the life of the woman an abortion could not be carried out on the spot. Instead she would have had to travel miles to the nearest city. Attempting or helping to carry out an abortion in any other circumstances would carry a penalty of up to 12 years imprisonment. In fact, abortions were not being performed on suicidal women anyway. In practice the only 'right' preserved as a result of the 'no' vote is that women in the care of the state will still be allowed to travel to Britain for a termination. Abortion is not even allowed where it has been found by medical professionals that the foetus will not survive outside the womb. Women are forced to carry on with a pregnancy that will result in a dead or severely deformed baby or else go to Britain. A truly bizarre situation that exposes all the shallow talk about the 'life of the unborn'. The referendum, then, could not be said to be about the right to choose in any meaningful sense. About 7,000 women travel to Britain every year to have an abortion - there are more terminations performed on Irish women in Britain than the total number of abortions in Holland, where they are available, as in Britain, for up to 24 weeks. This is despite the additional trauma and expense of having to 'get the boat' (the figures for Britain are significantly altered by the number of Irish women seeking abortion here). And there are large numbers of working class women for whom even the option of travel to Britain does not exist - those who cannot afford to go abroad and/or cannot face the stigma still attached to abortion. For them there still is no choice. Nevertheless, despite the apparent practical insignificance of the 'no' vote in terms of the right to choose, it could have far-reaching political and social effects. If the 'yes' campaign had succeeded, the powers of the clerical-reactionary right would have been strengthened considerably. Its victory would have been highly symbolic. It would have pushed women back under the thumb of the church and allowed the clergy to encroach still further on people's private lives. The stigma associated with going to Britain for abortion would have become more marked. Fundamentalist anti-abortion campaigners had said that a 'yes' vote would only be the beginning. They had warned that they would use it as a signal to begin to "campaign to have the pill and IUD declared to be abortifacients and have them banned" (Susan McKay in the Sunday Tribune March 3). The church and Fianna Fáil would have gained the confidence to claw back every minimal progressive gain. It would have been a triumph for catholic Ireland. The 'no' vote has opened up the possibility of fighting for a democratic, secular agenda. A small indication of a changed atmosphere has come with the call for legislation to consolidate the 'X case' judgement - so as to actively facilitate abortions for suicidal women. Clearly this is not enough and there is a need to focus on the real issue - a woman's right to choose, irrespective of the dictates of the church. A campaign needs to be launched now for free abortion on demand - as soon as possible, as late as necessary. But many barriers remain for those women's groups and leftwing forces that advocate this. The division between urban and rural Ireland remains as strong as ever. This was demonstrated by the referendum itself. The 'no' campaign won by just 10,556 votes - 50.42%, as against 49.58% for 'yes'. Dublin overwhelmingly voted 'no', as did Cork, Limerick, Waterford and Galway. The rest of the country - rural Ireland - gave a clear 'yes'. The turnout (42% overall) was far higher in urban areas - up to 70% in some areas of Dublin and Cork. These areas are clearly continuing to break from the influence of the church. However, Ireland remains a very conservative country in respect of women's rights. The referendum result was a big disappointment for the government - the second of two referendums lost in 10 months - in the run-up to the forthcoming general election. However, despite an initial dip in the polls, Bertie Ahern appears to be able to ride this one out. He has won support for his handling of the Good Friday agreement and is not tainted by corruption in the way that former taoiseach Albert Reynolds was. He has expressed his disappointment that he did not win, but has declared that he is a democrat and is happy to accept the will of the people. Unfortunately abortion is pretty low down on the agenda for many people. Recent polls show price increases since the introduction of the euro and asylum-seekers as issues of far more concern. The way that Sinn Féin has handled the matter is interesting - showing its willingness to conform to the status quo in the south. It argued for a 'no' vote from the outset, but then Gerry Adams announced halfway through the campaign that Sinn Féin is not a 'pro-choice' party. In fact he made clear in an article in the Irish Independent that he would not entertain the extension of rights - even to bring them in line with what currently exists in Britain. With a rating of five percent in the current polls Sinn Féin clearly does not want anything to stand in the way of its search for votes - there has even been talk of the possibility of a post-election deal between Bertie and Gerry. To summarise, I believe it was important to vote 'no' and defeat Fianna Fáil and the catholic church in their attempt to take Ireland back to the 1950s. A boycott campaign would have been an empty gesture. In the concrete conditions of Irish society it would have been a leftist pose and nothing more. In the context within which this referendum took place a 'no' vote was not about preserving the status quo. It was a refusal to allow the church to dictate the way in which people live their lives. A majority rejected the attempt by the church to push its way back to the centre stage of Irish politics. Many have described this as a 'sea change'. The fact that it had to be 'no' shows the political weakness of the Irish working class. It was not a victory for a woman's right to choose, but could provide a launching pad for a campaign to make it a reality. Anne Mc Shane