Pro Life Campaign News

Lord David Alton corresponds with Your Rights Right Now ‘endorsing’ organisations

2011-05-06T14:34:00.000-07:00

The Your Rights Right Now group has made a submission to the UN Human Rights Council which calls for abortion to be made available in Ireland.

Some Irish organisations had put their name to this submission and have been reported as ‘endorsing’ the Submission. Since the Pro Life Campaign and others have raised this issue, a number of organisations have completely withdrawn their endorsements of the submission. However others have sought to defend their inclusion as an ‘endorsing’ organisation on the basis that the report included a disclaimer and that the Your Rights Right Now submission merely calls for ‘clarification’ of the abortion law rather than legalisation of abortion.

Many people have corresponded with the various organisations to challenge these points, one of whom is a member of the House of Lords and long-time advocate for the unborn Lord David Alton of Liverpool.

In response to the contention that the Your Rights Right Now submission did not in fact promote abortion, Lord Alton quotes the paragraph of the report itself which said “By restricting abortion, the State disproportionately interferes with women’s rights to health, privacy, life, freedom from inhuman or degrading treatment and non-discrimination” and he states “Here is not the place to debate the truth of this statement which I believe to be groundless and profoundly ideological. I quote it merely to illustrate the position of Your Rights Now draftsmen with regard to abortion. Restricting the killing of another human being is here described as an “interference” – a far from neutral statement. I feel, therefore, that it is reasonable to assert that any attempt to claim that Your Rights Now is anything other than a pro-abortion institution is disingenuous”

Regarding the recommendation in the Your Rights Right Now Submission to “immediately repeal the 1861 Offences Against the Persons Act”, Lord Alton states “This is the Act which still forms the basis upon which abortion remains illegal in Ireland. Repealing it removes restrictions on abortion. To those who argue that Your Rights Right Now calls for clarification as opposed to legalisation of abortion I would pose a question as to what they feel the abolition of legal restrictions on abortion would achieve if not permissible abortion?”

In response to the contention that the disclaimer at the start of the Your Rights Right Now report is sufficient to justify the ‘endorsements’ by Irish organisations of the submission, Lord Alton says “..an endorsement (as I have always understood it) denotes support. Certainly, the strong claim in the Your Rights Now website that “more than 100 organisations have already signed up to the report” surely indicates that said organisations are pleased with its contents. He also says “In the absence of a clarification as to which parts of the report reflect the policies of which group, endorsees ought to be alert to the fact that their approval of the report as a whole implies support for its radically pro abortion stance”

He continues “To take an analogy, I highly doubt that, if this report contained a line recommending that we reinstitute slavery or the death penalty, organisations would feel they could be proximate to such reprehensible practices, even if the document were otherwise a wonderful reflection of that organisation’s policies”

You can read the full text of Lord David Alton’s excellent correspondence with Your Rights Right Now groups here.

Thanks to his intervention and that of a significant number of people throughout Ireland emailing and telephoning the ‘endorsing’ organisations, the Your Rights Right Now report has been seriously undermined. We expect that organisations will continue to withdraw their support of the submission over coming days and weeks.

You can view the organisations that have withdrawn their support of the Your Rights Right Now report and download the report here

Your Rights Right Now submission to UN Human Rights Council “has lost all credibility” after falsely implying support of other groups for abortion

2011-04-29T14:31:00.000-07:00

The recent submission to the UN Human Rights Council from the umbrella group Your Rights Right Now is now completely compromised according to the Pro Life Campaign following the revelation that many of the groups who signed up to the submission were not consulted about the section endorsing abortion. In recent days, several high profile organisations, including Trócaire and the Children’s Rights Alliance, have distanced themselves from the submission over its abortion stance.

Commenting on the latest revelations, Dr Ruth Cullen of the Pro Life Campaign said:

"The Your Rights Right Now submission has lost all credibility. Given the highly sensitive nature of the abortion issue, it is inexcusable that the authors of the report did not see fit to inform the various NGOs about the controversial section on abortion.

It is clear that the main organisers behind the Your Rights Right Now alliance exploited the goodwill of reputable organisations to further a pro-abortion agenda. This is shameful behaviour and thankfully it has now been exposed."

Regarding the specific call from Your Rights Right Now for abortion to be made available in Ireland, Dr Cullen said:

"It makes absolutely no sense for a self-professed human rights group to be advocating the denial of the most basic human right of all – the right to life.

It is also an affront to genuine human rights to ignore all the latest peer reviewed research highlighting the negative consequences of abortion for women and the fact that Ireland, without abortion, is a world leader in terms of safety for pregnant women."

Ends

Abortion advocacy group falsely claims support of other groups in UN Submission

2011-04-24T14:13:00.000-07:00

The newly formed Your Rights Right Now group has made a submission to the UN which calls for abortion to be made

available in Ireland.

A significant number of Irish non-governmental organisations have put their name to this submission, many of which appear to be unaware that their name is being used to promote abortion. Since the Pro Life Campaign and others have raised this issue, the following organisations have withdrawn their endorsements of the Submission;

Trócaire, Crosscare Migrant Project, the Vincentian Refugee Centre, A.C.T.S Transport, EFL Ireland, A.P.S., The National Council for the Blind, Social Inclusion Ireland, and the Integration and Support Unit for New Communities.

Additionally, the Childrens Rights Alliance (an alliance of over 90 non-governmental organisations in Ireland) has stated that they do not support the call for abortion which is contained in Section 12 of the Submission.

However many other groups have yet to clarify their position.

It appears clear that the main organisers behind the Your Rights Right Now report are exploiting the goodwill of reputable organisations to further a pro-abortion agenda. However, given the fact that many of the organisations which are listed as endorsing the report are involved in separate areas of advocacy, we expect that there will be many more groups opting out of the report over the coming days.

We urge those who are interested in ensuring that a report prepared by an ideologically driven minority does not gain credibility to contact the endorsing organisations and request clarification on this matter.

The list of organisations which endorsed the report was removed from the Your Rights Right Now website on Wednesday 27th April after a number of groups contacted the authors seeking to withdraw their endorsements. However you can download the report here

Below are the email addresses of some of the main groups which have yet to withdraw their endorsements

Organisation Name Email

Adoption Rights Alliance info@adoptionrightsalliance.com

A-Z Children's Charity info@azkids.ie

Barnardos info@barnardos.ie

Comhlámh info@comhlamh.org

Disability Federation of Ireland info@disability-federation.ie

Dóchas anna@dochas.ie

Educate Together info@educatetogether.ie

Foroige info@foroige.ie

Friends of Londiani, Kenya info@friendsoflondiani.com

Galway Traveller Movement maria@gtmtrav.ie

Habitat for Humanity Ireland info@Habitatireland.Ie

Immigrant Council of Ireland admin@immigrantcouncil.ie

Irish Association of Social Workers office@iasw.ie

Irish National Teachers' Organisation feedback@into.ie

Irish Refugee Council info@irishrefugeecouncil.ie

Irish Senior Citizen's Parliament seniors@iol.ie

Irish Translators and Interpreters itiasecretary@gmail.com

ISPCC ispcc@ispcc.ie

Mercy Justice Office mercyjusticesc@eircom.net

Ruhama admin@ruhama.ie

Simon Community info@simoncommunity.com

Somali Irish FA somali-irishfriendship@hotmail.com

Teachers' Union of Ireland tui@tui.ie

Treoir info@treoir.ie

YMCA Cork ymcaroi@indigo.ie

Pro Life Campaign makes submission to UN Human Rights Council and challenges Your Rights Right Now submission

2011-04-24T14:07:00.000-07:00

The Pro Life Campaign has a made a submission to the UN Human Rights Council, which in October 2011 is due to examine Ireland’s record on human rights as part of its Universal Periodic Review.

Among other things, the PLC calls on the UN group to recognise abortion as a violation of human rights and “to acknowledge Ireland’s outstanding record of care in protecting the lives of women during pregnancy while at the same time affording legal protection to unborn babies.”

The submission takes issue with the claims of pro-choice groups and points out that the recent European Court of Human Rights’ decision in A, B and C v. Ireland “does not require Ireland to introduce legislation authorising abortion.”

The Pro Life Campaign cites the fact that “the judges in the X case heard no medical evidence” and that “any revisiting of the X decision would need to take on board the evidence from new studies that abortion involves significant risks for some women.”

Responding to the recently published “Your Rights. Right Now” submission to the United Nations from a coalition of non-governmental organisations, calling for abortion to be made available in Ireland, Dr Ruth Cullen of the Pro Life campaign said:

"The Your Rights. Right Now report regards abortion as a human right. It’s an incredibly strange and narrow definition of human rights to deny the humanity of the unborn child throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy. How can genuine human rights be protected if we ignore the most basic right of all, namely the right to life?

The pro-choice movement is very vocal in pushing abortion legislation but shy away when confronted with the latest peer reviewed evidence showing the negative effects of abortion for women and the fact that Ireland, without abortion, is renowned for being a world leader in terms of safety for pregnant women.

Pro-choice groups are doing their best to create the impression that Ireland is obliged to legislate for abortion following the recent European court ruling on abortion. This is simply not true. The court told Ireland to address the issue but it didn’t instruct the Government to legislate for abortion. The judgement fully respects the right of the Irish people to determine how the lives of unborn children should be protected."

Ends

William Reville, 'Euthanasia will always be cheaper than multidisciplinary care of the dying'

2011-03-11T01:49:00.000-08:00

In an alarming article documenting the abandonment by contemporary medicine of the Hippocratic oath and the rise in its place of a cost-saving mentality, headed Worrying undercurrent of economics in debate on euthanasia, published in The Irish Times on 16th December 2010, ethical medical commentator, biochemist William Reville, observes 'we hear more and more arguments in favour of euthanasia. Whatever about other dimensions, there is a strong economic undercurrent to this debate. ... Euthanasia will always be cheaper than multidisciplinary care of the dying.' And it is not just the elderly who are vulnerable to the new economically driven pressure for euthanasia. 'today, medical technology is very effective. Not only can medicine heal, it can improve healthy but “sub-optimal” bodies using a wide range of technologies'.

You can read the article here

Programme For Government and the Pro-Life issue

2011-03-11T01:27:00.000-08:00

The week before the General Election, Fine Gael gave a written commitment to the Pro-Life Campaign stating it is “opposed to the legalisation of abortion” and “Fine Gael is opposed to research conducted on human embryos, and favours alternative stem cell research that does not involve human embryos such as adult stem cell and umbilical cord research.” The Fine Gael statement also gave a commitment that “women in pregnancy will receive whatever treatments are necessary to safeguard their lives, and that the duty of care to preserve the life of the baby will also be upheld.”

Now that they are in coalition with Labour, Fine Gael must be firmly encouraged to hold to their commitments. The Fine Gael commitment to pro-life values reflects the view of the majority as evidenced by the latest Red C poll showing 68% of the Irish public support constitutional protection for the unborn.

The Labour Party, on the other hand, is still relying uncritically on the increasingly outdated X case decision allowing abortion right up to birth, which heard no medical evidence and which has been over taken by the ever-growing balance of medical research showing negative consequences of abortion for women.

The Pro Life Campaign also acknowledges the significance of the written commitment it received from Fianna Fáil.

Starting over a year ago, the Pro Life Campaign reached out to involve not only its supporters but the wider pro-life community by means of an intensive nationwide billboard, newspaper advertising, online and leafleting campaign urging voters to only vote for candidates and parties willing to give a public commitment to protect life. The campaign also included an email and physical postcard campaign to election candidates and party leaders. The valuable pro-life commitments received from both Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil are a tribute to the thousands of people whether involved in formal politics or as committed citizens who are prepared to work hard and speak out in defence of life.

The challenge now is to stay focussed to ensure that those in Government who favour legislation allowing abortion and embryo-destructive research don’t succeed. We have a positive message to bring to the decision-making process - our new Government has a golden opportunity now to make Ireland a centre of excellence for ethical stem cell research that does not involve the destruction of human embryos, and to consolidate Ireland's ranking as world-leader in safety for women in pregnancy, by taking on board the studies showing the negative effects of abortion for women, and breaking through the ‘pro-choice’ denial of the harm and heartbreak abortion involves for many women and the injustice of the unborn children's lives taken.

Sizeable majority supports legal protection of unborn child

2011-02-16T04:37:00.000-08:00

Comments by Dr Berry Kiely at the Pro Life Campaign Press Conference,

Buswells Hotel, Dublin, 12.00pm, 16th February 2011

The latest research on abortion shows a sizeable majority of the public supports legal protection for the unborn child, while at the same time ensuring that women receive all necessary medical interventions in pregnancy.

The Pro Life Campaign commissioned Red C to carry out the survey on a quota controlled sample of 1,025 people aged 18+ between 8^th – 10^th February 2011.

Question 1 reads as follows:

Are you in favour of, or opposed to, constitutional protection for the unborn that prohibits abortion but allows the continuation of the existing practice of intervention to save a mother’s life in accordance with Irish medical ethics?

The finding shows that 68% support constitutional protection for the unborn, 26% oppose it and 5% don’t know or have no opinion. When the don’t knows/no opinions are excluded, 73% of the public support legal protection and 27% are opposed to it.

The Pro Life Campaign believes that the new poll findings confirm the existence of widespread public support for an approach to protecting the unborn child based on the important distinction between ensuring women receive all necessary medical treatments in pregnancy and prohibiting abortion, where the life of the baby is deliberately targeted.

The success of the Irish medical profession in providing the treatments women need in pregnancy without recourse to an abortion regime is confirmed yet again in the latest Report on Maternal Mortality [1] by the World Health Organisation which shows that Ireland, without legalised abortion, is the safest country for pregnant women, out of 172 countries.

Today’s poll finding comes in the wake of the European Court of Human Rights judgment in A, B & C -v- Ireland which led to calls from some politicians and abortion advocacy groups for abortion to be made available in Ireland. The judgement, however, does not require us to legislate for abortion but leaves it up to Ireland to decide its own laws on abortion.

Question 2 reads as follows:

In a recent Supreme Court decision, judges said that human embryos are not protected by the Constitution but deserve respect and their protection is a matter for the Government. Do you think the Government should legislate, or not, to protect human embryos in the area of stem cell research and assisted human reproduction?

The poll findings show that 62% support legal protection of the human embryo, 27% oppose it and 11% don’t know or have no opinion. When the don’t knows/no opinions are excluded, 69% of the public support legal protection and 31% are opposed to it.

This finding is also very reassuring. The fact that it is adult stem cell research, involving no destruction of human embryos, that is yielding all the breakthroughs we read about on an almost daily basis proves it is possible to work towards a win-win solution for both ethics and science in the area of stem cell research.

Before Election Day, the Pro Life Campaign calls on candidates and parties to state where they stand on the right to life of the unborn child and on legal protection for the human embryo. Voters are entitled to know where candidates and parties stand on these vitally important issues. How we treat the most vulnerable defines how committed we are as a society to an authentic vision of human rights.

Ends

[1] Report on Maternal Mortality by the World Health Organisation, UNICEF, UNFPA and the World Bank (2007, 2010)

RTÉ doesn't report Philadelphia doctor, K Gosnell, charged for killing babies surviving his late term abortions

2011-01-28T07:32:00.000-08:00

Dr. Joseph McCarroll PhD
Chairperson
Pro Life Campaign

In Philadelphia, Dr K Gosnell, a licensed family doctor and practising abortionist, has been charged with killing one women during an abortion, and seven babies who survived his late-term abortions.

Like the dog in the Sherlock Holmes story, the curious thing about RTÉ's coverage of this story is that RTÉ didn't cover this story.

It was covered in the Daily Mail, ABC, CBS and AOL. But not by RTÉ.

It was covered by the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal and Associated Press, but not by RTÉ.

Searches on RTÉ's website under world news yielded the following: 'Your search yielded no results.' Indeed.

This is an important story for several reasons. It shines a national and international searchlight into what is involved in later term abortions. It is an example of the way in which abortion targets poor and minority women.

But it also gives the lie to the abortion advocates false claim that it is they who care for women by ensuring the availability of safe and legal abortion for poor women who couldn't otherwise afford them.

The Grand Jury Report shows how pro-choice political pressure brought blocked the implementation of State rules requiring state inspection s oif abortion clinics on the grounds that such inspections would deter poor women from accessing abortion.

As Marian Wang reveals in her piece for ProPublica,

'In the mid-1990s, the administration of Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge, a pro-choice Republican, ended regular inspections of abortion clinics—a policy that continued until just last year.

According to the Grand Jury Report released this week by Philadelphia prosecutors, Pennsylvania health officials deliberately chose not to enforce laws to ensure that abortion clinics provide the same level of care as other medical service providers.

The Pennsylvania Department of Health abruptly decided, for political reasons, to stop inspecting abortion clinics at all. The politics in question were not anti-abortion, but pro.

With the change of administration from Governor Casey to Governor Ridge, officials concluded that inspections would be “putting a barrier up to women” seeking abortions.

“Even nail salons in Pennsylvania are monitored more closely for client safety,” the report states. "Without regular inspections, providers like Gosnell continue to operate; unlawful and dangerous third-trimester abortions go undetected; and many women, especially poor women, suffer."

According to the report, the policy change occurred after 1993 when attorneys under the administration of then-governor Tom Ridge "interpreted the same regulations that had permitted annual inspections for years to no longer authorize those inspections." Thereafter, only inspections triggered by complaints were authorized.

You can read the Grand Jury's Report here

You can read the Associated Press article here

You can read the New York Times article here

You can read Marian Wang's ProPublica article here

A search in the World section on RTÉ's website, however, yielded the following:

'Your search for Dr K Gosnell, abortionist charged with 8 murders in Philadelphia did not return any results.'

They sure got that right. For this ideological censorship we pay our TV licences.

Pro Life Campaign billboards go up across the country

2011-01-28T07:05:00.000-08:00

On billboards across the country, between now and Election Day, the Pro Life Campaign is bringing its pro-life message to the voters -

Ireland, without abortion, is the safest country in the world for pregnant women. Let's keep it that way.

The billboard references the latest WHO,Unicef Report on Maternal Mortality (2007,2010) which shows that, of the 172 nations where figures were available, Ireland leads the world in safety for pregnant women. The message is supported by a dramatic black and white photograph of a young mother protecting her child.

If you see one while you're motoring around the country and have a thought on them you'd like to share, give us a call us at 01 662 9275, but not while driving! And let your local General Election candidates know if you see one in your area - nothing concentrates the mind like a billboard.

Ireland, with no abortion, is the safest country in the world for women in pregnancy - Let's use our vote so we keep it that way

2010-12-19T23:45:00.000-08:00

After the European Court of Human Right’s decision in

A B and C, where do we stand?

Dr. Joseph McCarroll PhD

Chairperson of the Pro Life Campaign

Our national office has been taking calls since yesterday’s European Court of Human Rights ruling in A, B and C v Ireland asking what it means, where do we go from here, and what steps do we need to be taking right now to progress the pro-life cause.

It’s important to make a couple of things clear – which may not have been clear from yesterday’s reporting of the decision.

Ireland does not have to legalise abortion because of the ruling

In the considered view of Professor William Binchy, the most important point is that the judgment does not require Ireland to introduce legislation authorising abortion. On the contrary, it fully respects the entitlement of the Irish people to determine legal policy on protecting the lives of unborn children.

Article 40.3.3 says the State should pass laws protecting the unborn’s right to life. We need to recall how we got here. In 1983, the Irish People voted to insert into the Irish Constitution Article 40.3.3 that said the State acknowledged the right to life of the unborn child as equal to the right to life of the mother. It also said the State ‘guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.”

Politicians didn’t bring in such laws, fearing pro-life voters at the polls and the pro-abortion voices in the media

But the Oireachtas since then did not bring in such laws - the politicians were unwilling to bring them forward. They were aware that a consistent majority among the general public wanted clear abortion laws so any politician taking an opposite view ran the risk of paying a high penalty in votes lost at the ballot box.

On the other hand, the politicians were also aware that the dominant voices in the media were largely pro-abortion, so politicians taking a pro-life view ran the risk of paying a high price on the box in the corner of the living room.

18 years on, the medical assumptions underpinning the Supreme Court’s decision in the X case are outdated. It was left to the Courts to address the issue in the X case in 1992. In Professor Binchy’s words, “It is crucial to note that the judges in the X case heard no medical evidence.” The evidence over the past 18 years contradicts the medical assumptions of the X case decision.[1]

In the years since the ruling, the evidence has steadily built up confirming the opposite of what the judges had assumed - women who have abortions are more likely to commit suicide than women who continue with their pregnancy.[2]

The Supreme Court’s X decision has to be revisited and revised. To clear the way for the kind of laws protecting the unborn that Article 40.3.3 calls for, the Supreme Court’s medically out-of-date judgment of eighteen years ago has to be revisited and revised. Again, to quote Professor Binchy’s words,

“The Irish people must now make a choice. If they were to choose to endorse the Supreme Court decision in X, this would involve legalising abortion contrary to existing medical practice and the best evidence of medical research. If on the other hand, the Irish people choose to endorse the current medical practice, they will be ensuring the continuation of Ireland’s world-renowned safety record for mothers and babies during pregnancy.

Any revisiting of the X case decision would need to take on board the evidence from these new studies that abortion involves significant risks for some women. Based on the current state of medical evidence alone, it would be irresponsible simply to introduce legislation along the lines of the X ruling as it would put at risk the mother’s life as well as taking the baby’s”

So where does the pro-life community go from here?

Quite simply, we go to the politicians and let them know we are pro-life and that, in the forthcoming General Election, we will only be voting for Parties and Candidates with a clear public commitment that they will not introduce or support legislation providing for abortion to be carried out here.

Starting with … the Pro-Life Campaign’s initiative to send postcards to your local politicians. Click here to send yours.

The political reality is this – the ECHR ruling is as was widely expected, and it was in anticipation of just such a ruling that the Pro Life Campaign started rolling out its political initiative to build up pressure on local politicians using postcards stating our voting intentions as pro-life voters.

Now that the decision is out and the election only months away, we need to redouble our efforts to see that everyone we know who is pro-life sends these postcards to their own local politicians.

This is how real political change comes about – by showing one local politician after another that there is a palpable dividend for them in giving you a public commitment to support your demand, and a political cost to failing to do so.

The Pro Life Campaign sees the A, B and C ruling as an opportunity for the pro-life community to bring home to their local politicians the breadth of pro-life commitment in their constituency. Coming only months before a General Election, it is an opportunity not to be missed.

To see Professor William Binchy’s Statement click here

To read and send our online postcard to your local politicians, click here

To donate to the Pro Life Campaign – we really need your support now more than ever, please click here

[1] [David M. Fergusson, L. John Horwood and Joseph M. Boden, "Abortion and mental health disorders: evidence from a 30-year longitudinal study," British Journal of Psychiatry (2008), 2008, pp. 444-451. ‘Position Statement on Women’s Mental Health in Relation to Induced Abortion, Royal College of Psychiatrists’, UK (2008)]

[2] [Mika Gissler, Cynthia Berg, Marie Helene Bouvier-Colle and Pierre Buekens, ‘Injury deaths, suicides and homicides associated with pregnancy, in Finland, European Journal of Public Health 2005 15 (5): 459-463]

European Court of Human Rights finding in the case of A B and C v. Ireland must respect human life at all stages of development.

2010-12-19T23:36:00.000-08:00

Remarks by Professor William Binchy at the

Pro Life Campaign Press Conference

Buswells Hotel, Dublin 2

12.30pm, 16^th December 2010

Today’s judgment from the European Court of Human Rights will require detailed analysis over coming days but some clear points emerge immediately. The most important is that the judgment does not require Ireland to introduce legislation authorising abortion. On the contrary, it fully respects the entitlement of the Irish people to determine legal policy on protecting the lives of unborn children. The Irish people must now make a choice. If they were to choose to endorse the Supreme Court decision in X, this would involve legalising abortion contrary to existing medical practice and the best evidence of medical research. If on the other hand, the Irish people choose to endorse the current medical practice, they will be ensuring the continuation of Ireland’s world renowned safety record for mothers and babies during pregnancy.

The evidence over the past 18 years contradicts the medical assumptions of the X case decision. [1] [2] It is crucial to note that the judges in the X case heard no medical evidence. In the years since the ruling, the evidence has steadily built up confirming the opposite of what the judges had assumed - women who have abortions are more likely to commit suicide than women who continue with their pregnancy. [3]

The suggestion that because of this country’s pro-life ethos pregnant women are denied necessary medical treatments is simply not true. In fact,

Ireland is a world leader in safety for pregnant mothers. The latest UN report on the safety of mothers during pregnancy found, of all 172 countries for which estimates are given,

Ireland

leads the world when it comes to safety for pregnant women.[4]

Women are safer in Ireland when pregnant than in countries like Britain and Holland, which permit abortion on demand. Given our record in maternal care, the question has to be asked, why are some people proposing to blur the time-honoured distinction between necessary medical treatments in pregnancy and the deliberate targeting of the baby in the womb with the aim of ending its life?

The most recent opinion poll findings show that 70% of the public support constitutional protection for the unborn,13% oppose it and 16% don’t know or have no opinion.[5]

What marks this finding out from polls showing support for abortion is the distinction it makes between necessary medical treatments in pregnancy and induced abortion, where the aim of the procedure is to target the life of the unborn child.

By all means, let us debate the abortion issue openly, honestly and with all the facts in front of us. But equally, we cannot shy away from the implications of what legal abortion would involve and the brutal reality of abortion, legal up to birth, in countries like

Britain

What’s at stake in this debate is the value of life, and the sad experience is that once laws permitting abortion are introduced, they diminish the society’s respect for the inherent value of every human life, born or unborn.

What we need now is a calm, respectful national discussion, in which the latest medical and scientific evidence is fully considered leading to a solution at a Constitutional level, which will ensure the full protection of all human beings, mothers and unborn children, on the basis of respect for their equal dignity and worth.

ENDS

[1] David M. Fergusson, L. John Horwood and Joseph M. Boden, "Abortion and mental health disorders: evidence from a 30-year longitudinal study," The British Journal of Psychiatry (2008), 2008, pp. 444-451

[2] Position Statement on Women’s Mental Health in Relation to Induced Abortion, Royal College of Psychiatrists, UK (2008)

[3] The European Journal of Public Health 2005 15 (5): 459-463, Injury deaths, suicides and homicides associated with pregnancy,

in Finland by Mika Gissler, Cynthia Berg, Marie Helene Bouvier-Colle and Pierre Buekens.

[4] Report on Maternal Mortality by World Health Organisation, UNICEF, UNFPA and the World Bank, (2007, 2010)

[5] Millward Brown Lansdowne survey on a quota controlled sample of 950 people aged 18+ between 27th January and 6th February 2010.

Donegal By Election - Use Your Vote to Protect Human Life

2010-11-10T15:15:00.000-08:00

The Donegal South West constituency by-election will take place on Thursday 25th November 2010.

The Pro Life Campaign urges those who believe in the right to life and who will be voting in this by-election to only vote for candidates or parties with a record of defending life from its earliest beginnings.

The Pro Life Campaign will be seeking the views of each candidate in the by-election. We will then publish the answers from each candidate on this website and via our Facebook and Twitterpages.

The threats to unborn human life at present in Ireland are as grave as Ireland has ever faced. The Supreme Court has ruled in the R-v-R case last december that the lives of human embryos in clinics or laboratories are not protected under Article 40.3.3 of our Constitution. The Government is preparing new legislation on this and unless pro-life people act now, we could be faced with legislation allowing the destruction of human embryos in clinics and laboratories. And it is possible that the outcome of the A, B & C -v- Ireland case in the European Court of Human Rights will trigger a new push for legislation allowing abortions to be carried out in Ireland.

It's essential that pro-life people send a strong and united message to our politicians telling them that our vote cannot be taken for granted and urging them to protect human life from its fragile beginnings.

To inform yourself of the stance of the various candidates and parties in the forthcoming election, visit our website before voting or follow us on Facebook or Twitter.

Chinese mother forced to abort baby in eighth month of pregnancy

2010-11-10T15:10:00.000-08:00

We have all heard of China's 'one child policy' but have we ever thought through how it translates into family life? Have we made the imaginative effort to feel how it would be to live as a family under such a regime? Maybe we imagine we would be forced to listen to a lecture by an earnest official? Surely they wouldn't break into a family home and drag a pregnant woman out the door screaming and kicking, bring her to hospital and forcibly inject her to kill her baby?

On October 10th, in southwest China, Xiao Aiying, who was eight months pregnant, was put through just such an experience of assault, abduction and forced injection to punish her and her husband for having a baby, and intimidate others into obeying this obscene law.

Click here to watch the two minute news report which features a profoundly disturbing interview with Aiying's husband.

Major pro-life victory at Council of Europe. Ireland's Senator Rónán Mullen plays key role

2010-10-08T04:51:00.000-07:00

Yesterday evening, in a dramatic surprise victory spearheaded by Luca Volonté, Chairperson of the European People's Party group in the Council of Europe, and Ireland's independent Senator Rónán Mullen, an attack on doctors' and nurses' right of conscientious objection to performing abortions was roundly defeated.

The attack was contained in a Resolution proposed by Christine McCafferty of the UK Socialist Group based on the Report for which she had been the Rapporteur. It proposed draconian limitations on the freedom of conscience which has always been recognised by law as a sacrosanct right of doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals, and a cornerstone of the trust we have in them to act according to their honest conviction as to what is really in their patient's interests.

The McCafferty Resolution, which was widely expected to be carried, would have put pressure on Council of Europe Member States to bring in measures requiring healthcare professionals to perform or facilitate abortions or be officially blacklisted by the State.

In a shock reversal, however, the interventions co-ordinated and led by Luca Volonté, Senator Mullen and other Council of Europe colleagues turned the tide of opinion and in the dry words of the official record,

'At the end of a debate on the subject during which the text presented by the Committee on Social Affairs was substantially amended, the adopted resolution states that "no person and no hospital or institution shall be coerced, held liable or discriminated against in any manner because of a refusal to perform, accommodate, assist or submit to an abortion"'

The result has been widely and warmly welcomed by the pro-life community as a victory for common sense and good professional ethics and medical practice, and as an encouraging example of people of conviction, courage and persistence, making a real and significant difference, not only lobbying outside in the corridors of power and on the airwaves all over Europe, but also in the Chamber of the Council of Europe itself.

Read the Resolution reaffirming doctors' and nurses' right of conscientious objection to taking part in abortion here

Read the original draft report here

Virginia Ironside says a 'good mother' would put a pillow over the head of a disabled child!

2010-10-08T04:48:00.000-07:00

Columnist with The Independent Newspaper (London) Virginia Ironside has said that a 'good mother' would put a pillow over the head of her baby if he/she had a disability. Naturally this has caused outrage in Britain even though abortion is legal there up to birth where the baby has a disability. The comments were made on a BBC morning television show last week. What’s worse is that the other studio guest is Vicar Joanna Jepson, who was born with a birth defect which was corrected by surgery in her teens.
Click here to watch the 1 ½ minute video.

"this is a game-changer" Scientists hail giant leap forward in adult stem cell research

2010-10-08T04:43:00.000-07:00

An article by researchers at the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, published at the end of last month in Cell Stem Cell, presents a series of ground-breaking advances used to take skin cells, de-specialise them into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS cells), and re-programme them into muscle cells, overcoming drawbacks in earlier methods such as inefficiency and genetic interference that led to fears they might cause cancer.

The pro-life community has welcomed the breakthroughs as showing yet again how the advances in science are made without deliberate destruction of human embryos. It is to be hoped that Minister Harney and her officials will take this on boards as they prepare the legislation due out, we are told, before Christmas.

Robert Lanza, a stem cell researcher at Advanced Cell Technology, Worcester, Massachusetts, who was not involved in this study, commented, “All I can say is ‘wow’ – this is a game-changer. It would solve some of the most important problems in the field.’

Marius Wernig, from Stanford University, another stem cell researcher not involved in this study, if other researchers confirm their methods of generating iPS cells without any genetic modification, ‘then it would be a big advance’ and ‘would be the first practical method for generating iPS cells that could be used for transplant therapies.’

Kathrin Plath of UCLA, said the research was ‘very impressive’, and seemed to be the best way yet developed for generating iPS cells for transplant tissue. She said they would be trying out these techniques at UCLA.

Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto University, Japan, one of the original researchers who first produced iPS cells said the same, adding that the processes described in the article if validated could become the standard method for generating iPS cells.

You can watch Dr Derrick J. Rossi, lead researcher, explaining the breakthrough here

You can read the breakthrough article here

"How the first nine months shape the rest of your life"

2010-09-29T10:21:00.000-07:00

In the cover headline to its current issue, Time magazine invites the reader to identify with the child before birth - How the first nine months shape the rest of your life. The opening page of the article does the same, placing three lines of text over the mother's womb that read

The Womb.

Your Mother.

Yourself.

The writer, Annie Murphy Paul, is a journalist who covers science. Her article is about how science is now understanding the many ways in which our experience in the womb before we are born affects our health prospects and probabilities throughout our lives.

She comments, 'two years ago when I began to delve more deeply into the field, I had a more personal motivation: I was newly pregnant. If it was true that my actions over the next nine months would affect my offspring for the rest of his life, I needed to know more.' (p. 46)

The full-page cover photo shows a woman 10 days before birth. The unborn baby sucking her thumb is there in all her full-colour, icon-like golden glow on page 47, and on the contents page there is a photo of a newborn being weighed with the caption, 'the baby shortly after she left her first formative environment'. (page 5)

A small red box at the top left of each double page of the article carries the woird SCIENCE to remind you that this is science not opinion.

And the whole opening page (p. 44) of the article is taken up with a photograph of the pregnant mother's tummy 'great with child', photographed from the side, with only three, dramatically stark lines of text, like a poem:

The Womb.

Your Mother.

Yourself.

The article explores different ways our experience before we are born may affect us - pollutants, drugs or infections the mother is exposed to, and her health, stress level and state of mind; and the areas of possible impact currently under studt include heart disease, obesity, diabetes, depression and schizophrenia.

To see the online version of the article click here

Revised EU Directive on animal testing highlights Ireland’s urgent need to ban human embryo-destructive research

2010-09-24T04:35:00.000-07:00

The European Parliament passed a draft Directive earlier this month, requiring Member States to use alternatives to animal testing where available and rejected calls to rule out methods using cells of human embryos involving the deliberate destruction of those human embryos.

Johanna Touzel, speaking for the Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Community, said it was paradoxical to protect animals from suffering by methods requiring the destruction of human embryos, and warned that Member Sates that did not have an explicit ban on embryo destructive rsearch could find themselves forced by EU law to use alternative methods requiring the destruction of human embryos.

This comes as a wake-up call for Ireland, which has no law protecting the human embryo outside the mother following the Supreme Court ruling in the frozen embryos case, R -v- R.

Background

On 8th September 2010, the European Parliament voted to revise Directive 86/609/EEC on the protection of animals used in research. Where alternatives methods exist to testing on animals, the Directive requires Member States to introduce legislation making the use of these alternative methods obligatory.

The European Commission issued a set of questions and answers on the revised Directive. The thirteenth question is, ‘Would it be obligatory to use alternative methods involving human embryonic stem cells if these present themselves as alternatives to animal tests?’

The answer makes it clear that ‘the requirement to use alternative methods in place of an animal method’ is ‘a legal obligation that has been in place since 1986.’ And Articles 4.1 restates this.

The answer also says that where a Member State has legislation prohibiting the use of human embryonic stem cells ‘the revised Directive cannot overrule any such national prohibitions.’

The answer also says that the use of human embryonic stem cells as an alternative method of testing to using animals would be obligatory if it was recognised as an alternative testing method by EU legislation.

It seeks to reassure by saying, ‘No such legislation exists, nor is its adoption to be expected in the light of the above considerations.’ But Article 13.1 explicitly envisages legislation recognising alternative methods of testing. And the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods is part of the European Commission as may be seen from its website.

The Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Community, however, point out in their Press Release that in the European Commission’s own Alternative Testing Strategies – Progress Report 2009, which discusses the alternative testing strategies that are currently being developed, 5 of the 21 new methods involve the use of human embryonic stem cells obtained by deliberately destroying human embryos.

Furthermore, the Press Release points out that these new technologies based on destroying human embryos have been financially supported by the EU through the 6th and 7th Framework Research Programmes.

The Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Community had asked for an amendment to be introduced into the revised Directive that would have excluded human embryonic stem cells testing from the alternative testing methods, but the European Parliament did not make any such amendment.

Further resources click here

Brendan O’Connor’s inspiring article on the birth of his daughter with Down Syndrome

2010-09-24T04:33:00.000-07:00

On 12th September, the Sunday Independent carried an inspiring article, ‘A prayer for my daughter’ by its columnist and RTÉ personality, Brendan O’Connor, on the birth only weeks before of his second daughter, Mary. It evoked a huge reaction from readers – the following week, 13 of the letters received were published.

The day before the Irish Independent’s Weekend magazine had carried another shorter, yet profound article by columnist, Mary Kenny, about looking after her husband who is deteriorating following a stroke.

What the articles have in common is a visceral bluntness, a shocking directness and honesty in articulating difficult dimensions of intimate human experiences, but an authenticity that connects with us as we read them, a ring of truth that involves us in the family stories they are telling. What is surprising about the two articles is that each leaves us with the same impression of a toughness of character in the writer and a highlighting kindness in the writing.

Mary Kenny’s piece describes the difficulties of taking care of her husband who is suffering from a progressive condition. Almost defiantly she sets before us the hard reality of her life caring for him – ‘I carry out my carer’s duties because it’s my duty: I’m the obvious person to do it.’ Right after she asserts how this has changed her. ‘Caring changes your value system. Kindness has become much more important to me than almost anything else. Abstract talk about “rights” and “equality” strike me as containing a great deal of hot air, whereas “kindness” and “genuine respect” for the person really do mean the world.’

And that’s just the right phrase, isn’t it, kindness means the world - gives us the right meaning of our world. ‘Governments have legislated to support the disabled, but no amount of law will produce kindness. And it’s kindness that matters. It lifts my heart, nowadays, when I encounter kindness – and it does happen.’

Brendan O’Connor’s piece is more extraordinary in the way it captures, as it were, in slow motion, his heart’s u-turn following the birth of his daughter, the way it turned his life inside out and upside down, dismantling the perspective he had lived out of up to that moment, and, to his surprise, landing him in a wider world, a world with a richer meaning, a world whose outer extent and inner atmosphere are defined by kindness.

‘Thursday two weeks ago, we went into Holles Street in the morning, tentative but full of hope; and by two o'clock, our hearts were broken and our lives were turned upside down.’ The discovery that Mary had Down Syndrome was a before-and-after moment. Looking back, he sees ‘life before Mary’ as ‘a different life indeed, when we were innocent and foolish and thought we knew what worries and troubles were.’

Like Mary Kenny, kindness has taken on a new importance. ‘I have learnt many things in the last few weeks. One thing is that kind words can be so important and such a consolation. I never gave much of a damn for kind words before.’ The consultant’s words to them, “Mary is Mary”, struck just the right chord. ‘But with those three words he came through for us in the most unexpected way. For some reason it soothed us as we stood there dazed, and in a waking nightmare.’ Kind words from all sorts of doctors, nurses, friends and some unexpected sources would help get us through the next few days.

He gives the example of a text message from the woman in their older daughter’s creche – ‘she sent the most beautiful text about how they looked forward to welcoming Mary there. For Sarah, it meant a lot that these people, who have embraced Anna so much, were also going to embrace Mary.’

In a series of amazing sentences he describes the transformation he was undergoing.

After we had our first child, I thought I saw the world very clearly for a while -- I saw clearly who my friends were and who I valued. After Mary, I thought I could almost see the difference between good and evil. And some people you just didn't want near you and some people you knew were good.

So now I know that people are amazing. And I have more of an idea what love and friendship and family and kindness are. Some days, in my more elated moments, I would think that having spent 40 years looking for the meaning of life, sometimes in the most self-destructive ways, Mary had taught it to me in a few days.

I don't know that I can put it in words yet but I think the meaning of life may be about now, and love, and not giving a damn about things that don't really matter.

The texture of the new world he has entered is one of greater realness, compared with where he was before. ‘Real life has begun. I have woken up. It's not all easy but it is real.’

And the principal reality that has entered his life is the new person, his daughter, Mary. It is she who has brought him into this new world. ‘But do I wish she had never been born? Do I wish that we had just been happy with one? Do I wish we could have our old life -- which I have idealised out of all proportion -- back? Not any more. She's here now, a part of our little family. And we'd be lost without her. She has burrowed her way into our hearts so there is no imagining the world any other way. And even if she broke our hearts a bit when she came first, she's fixing them up a bit every day.’

The concluding paragraph of this amazing article is a ringing affirmation, of trust in the new world he has entered, in which the word ‘okay’ is repeated like the word’ yes’ in Molly Bloom’s soliloquy:

The funny thing is, you know very quickly when something happens whether everything is going to be okay. And even in my shock and agony in that operating theatre, I think I suddenly knew everything was going to be okay. And it is. There might be sadness ahead and there might be challenges ahead. But everything is going to be okay. Everything is going to be okay. Better than okay.

Every human being brings something new into the world with them, the very mystery of their unique being as a human person, thereby making the world a bigger, better place. Kindness is the larger, better part of humanity, and vulnerability invites kindness from the human heart. Brendan O’Connor’s article gives us a rare opportunity of observing this expanding of world and deepening of heart as it happens.

Read Brendan O’Connor’s article here

Pro Life Campaign calls Irish Times Poll on Assisted Suicide 'misleading'

2010-09-22T06:53:00.000-07:00

The Behaviour & Attitudes poll on assisted suicide published in The Irish Times on 17th September claims that 55% of the public support assisting terminally ill patients to end their lives with 32% opposed.

The question was posed as follows: “Doctors in some countries are allowed under strict circumstances to assist terminally ill patients who are in intense pain and who repeatedly express the desire to end their own live to do so. Should doctor assisted suicide be legalised under such circumstances in Ireland?”

Responding to today’s findings, Dr Ruth Cullen of the Pro-Life Campaign said:

"The result is not surprising as the question posed was highly emotive and was clearly going to elicit a predictable response. Also, given the wording of the question, I feel it was misleading for the Irish Times to headline the result with ‘Majority believe assisted suicide should be legal.’

If there were a fully informed debate on this issue, I have no doubt a majority would oppose what amounts to de facto euthanasia. If doctor assisted suicide were legalised in this country it would completely change the nature of medicine and the doctors’ duty to preserve human life.

It would also inevitably lead to some of the most vulnerable people feeling they were a burden on society and had a duty to die as the State would be sending out a clear message that it was legitimate to hasten the end of some lives.

There is a marked difference in the ethos of care of terminally ill patients in countries like Ireland where assisted suicide is not legal and countries like Holland where a once restrictive euthanasia regime has quickly escalated in scope" Ms. Cullen concluded.

Ends.

For more information contact the Pro-Life Campaign Press Office on 01-6629273

Judge blocks US funding of destructive embryo research - And what Ireland must do

2010-08-27T09:20:00.000-07:00

This week in Washington DC, a federal judge blocked the implementation of President Obama's executive order allowing federal funding of research requiring the destruction of human embryos, saying it was against federal law.

Judge Royce C Lamberth said the legislation enacted in 1996 by Congress, the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, prohibited ‘research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero.’

In 1999, in an attempt to get around this clear ban, Harriet S Rabb, a lawyer with the US Department of Health and Human Services came up with an argument that the ban only covered the killing of the embryo, but that the research involving the cells that the embryo was killed to extract was not banned.

Judge Lamberth rejected this: ‘The language of the statute reflects the unambiguous intent of Congress to enact a broad prohibition of funding in which a human embryo is destroyed. This prohibition encompasses all “research in which” an embryo is destroyed, not just “the piece of research” in which the embryo is destroyed’, which was Rabb’s argument.

The Obama administration has pledged to appeal the decision.

The decision by UCC and other Irish third level colleges to allow research on their campuses using cells that needed human embryos to be deliberately destroyed to get them relies on the same ethically phoney distinction.

And the same thirst of the embryo research industry to get their hands on a steady supply of human embryos to extract elements for use in research is evident in the ghoulish recommendations of the 2005 Report of the Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction which the Irish Supreme Court deferred to so conspicuously in its R -v- R decision. The Ethical, Scientific and Legal Issues concerning Stem Cell Research: Opinion, issued in 2008 by the Irish Council for Bioethics, made similar recommendations based on equally fallacious arguments.

Every year since the Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction published its discredited Report, however, in one professionally conducted opinion poll after another carried out for the Pro-Life Campaign, the Irish public has shown itself, by a substantial majority, to be consistently and coherently in favour of the Dáil enshrining protection of the embryo in legislation, as has been done in other EU jurisdictions like Germany and Italy.

Not only that, it is the ethically non-controversial adult stem cell research that is bringing in the breakthroughs in the clinical management and treatment of a range of conditions, not the ethically objectionable embryo-destructive research.

This was confirmed in a review piece by Associated Press Science Writer, Malcolm Ritter, at the start of this month. With the heading, ‘Adult stem cell research far ahead of embryonic’, the article states:

"For all the emotional debate that began about a decade ago on allowing the use of embryonic stem cells, it's adult stem cells that are in human testing today. An extensive review of stem cell projects and interviews with two dozen experts reveal a wide range of potential treatments.

Adult stem cells are being studied in people who suffer from multiple sclerosis, heart attacks and diabetes. Some early results suggest stem cells can help some patients avoid leg amputation. Recently, researchers reported that they restored vision to patients whose eyes were damaged by chemicals.

Apart from these efforts, transplants of adult stem cells have become a standard lifesaving therapy for perhaps hundreds of thousands of people with leukemia, lymphoma and other blood diseases".

You can read the Associated Press article here

Let’s hope the ethical difference between treating someone with their own cells, on the one hand, and on the other hand, destroying another member of the human family in order to get some of their cells to use in research or treat someone else, will be grasped by the Minister for Health and Children, Mary Harney and her officials as they draft the embryo legislation expected this autumn. And let’s hope, too, that they will see and seize the golden opportunity to promote Ireland as an international centre of excellence in adult stem cell research.

'Save the Baby Girl' - Monitors put on Ultrasound Machines in India to prevent female foeticide

2010-08-27T09:14:00.000-07:00

A recent BBC News interview showed a doctor in India doing ultrasounds with mothers. Behind him on the wall was a large sign Disclosure of sex of foetus is prohibited under law. But the 2003 law has been largely ignored, with doctors colluding with mothers wanting to identify baby girls before birth so they can abort them.

The report showed a new device called the Silent Observer which records all use of the ultrasound units and uploads it onto a government website where it can be monitored.

Further research yielded a report on this initiative which requires all ultrasound centres in the Indian state of Maharashtra to install and use the Silent Observer and requires online reporting and uploading of the testing done with the ultrasound – a sort of spy in the clinic, to deter doctors from facilitating female foeticide.

The scale of the gender imbalance is highlighted in the fall in the relative number of girls under six years of age. ‘A defining indicator of the grim scenario is the sharp decline over the last decade in the child sex ratio for the age group 0-6 years … from 945 in 1991 to 927 in 2001. Alarmingly, the urban areas, more literate and therefore perceived as being more modern, have shown a huge 29-point drop from 935 in 1991 to 906 in 2001.’ In the state where the ‘Save the Baby Girl’ pilot project was started, Maharashtra, the female sex-ratio fell from 946 in 1991 to 917 in 2001 and the drop was found to correlate with the number of ultrasound centres.

‘The gender composition in south and East Asian countries has worsened over a period of time. The skewed sex ratio indicates gross violation of women’s rights.’ And they acknowledge exacerbation of the problem by modern technologies – ‘The sex determination of foetus by technologies like ultrasound scanning, amniocentesis and in vitro fertilisation has aggravated the situation to an alarming level’ adding ‘if Asia’s sex-ratio was the same as [the] rest of the world, in 2005 Asia’s population would have included almost 163 million more women and girls.’

The root cause, however, is the social and cultural view of the woman as inferior to the man that leads girls to be seen as a costly burden which families have to pay heavily to get rid of in a dowry so that ‘the birth of a girl is seen as a calamity to be avoided.’

The violence against women that gendercide is described as ‘A pernicious form of violence against females in some parts of India has been - and still is – the elimination of the girl through female infanticide. Various methods have been used to extinguish the girl after birth, such as starving, poisoning or crushing her under the bed, etc. We should note that the task of female infanticide was laid upon the woman/mother, as she was considered responsible for bringing the baby girl into existence.’

This ‘Save the Baby Girl’ project is to be welcomed as a step in right direction towards equality of treatment of baby girls in India before and after birth.

You can watch the 4 minute BBC News report here

You can read the full article about this initiative here

'A kind of miracle' - Ciaran Finn-Lynch, the first child in the world to receive a windpipe transplant helped by his own stem cells

2010-08-13T07:59:00.000-07:00

Earlier this month, 11-year-old Ciaran Finn-Lynch, originally from Castleblaney, Co. Monaghan, was discharged from Great Ormond Street Hospital in London having made medical history, the first child in the world to undergo a trachea transplant in which his own stem cells were used to ensure a donor windpipe would not be rejected by his body

He was born with Long Segment Tracheal Stenosis, which narrows the windpipe. Previous interventions, starting when he was two-and-a-half, had included attempts to rebuild his airway and inserting metal stents. Last November, however, the erosion of a stent caused a ‘massive bleed’, prompting the specialists to look at a treatment using his own stem cells to build up a donor windpipe so as to prevent rejection of it by his body.

The operation, carried out in March, was declared a success when the medical team found that the blood supply had returned to the trachea. Professor Martin Elliott, the leader of the Transplant Team, said Ciaran ‘is a wonderful boy who has become a great friend to us all, and he and his infinitely patient family have charmed us all. … 'His recovery has been complicated, as one might expect for a new procedure, and we have kept him under close surveillance, hence the length of time he has been here. … It is wonderful to see him active, smiling and breathing normally.’

This kind of operation, a donor transplant where the patient’s own stem cells are used to prevent organ rejection, was first carried out on Claudia Castillo, a 30-year-old tuberculosis patient, in Barcelona, Spain in June 2008. Professor Martin Birchall said that the success of that operation left us 'on the verge of a new age in surgical care'.

The Irish Independent reports further comments of Professor Birchall on Ciaran’s operation. He said 'This is a completely new approach … the first time this has ever been done in a child. … He is left with a healthy organ made with his own stem cells which in a way is a kind of miracle.’

To read more and watch a 1 minute interview on Ciaran’s operation by Professor Martin Birchall, Professor of Laryngology from University College London, click here.

Saved by the blink of an eye

2010-07-16T07:13:00.000-07:00

Last October, Richard Rudd, who is 43 years of age and has two teenage daughters, was severely hurt in a motorbike crash. He was kept breathing by a ventilator. He seemed completely paralysed and non-responsive. His family remembered him saying he wouldn’t want to live in such a state and gave permission for the medical team to switch off the ventilator.

He was in Britain’s leading brain care unit at Addenbrook’s Hospital in Cambridge, under the care of Prof. David Menon. Prof. Menon held open Richard’s eyelids and asked him could he move his eyes, and when he did, a lifeline of communication for Richard was opened. Using eyes right for yes and left for no the language therapist was able to establish that he was able to understand and remember, and eventually he was able to signal clearly that he did not want the ventilator to be switched off.

The discussions and feelings of the family and medical team were the subject of a BBC documentary Between Life and Death and it is a ‘must see’ for anyone concerned about the decisions such cases raise.

Prof. Menon explains that Richard is not ‘brain dead’ but has a form of paralysis termed ‘locked-in syndrome’, the condition that is described so well in the book The Diving Bell and the Butterfly by Elle editor, Jean-Dominique Bauby, who suffered a similar paralysis, later made into a a film with the same name in 2007, which follows the marginal recovery that enabled him to dictate the book.

The BBC documentary raises all kinds of disturbing questions. In the background is the troubling issue of money. Long term care is very expensive so as a society we need to be clear and strong in resisting any ideology providing rationalisations for the deliberate taking of human life. A disturbing issue in the documentary is the suggestion that the medical team is not asking for the families permission to switch off the ventilator, that they, the medical experts will decide what the appropriate treatment is, and that the family is only giving them information about what the patient’s wishes might have been. This implies that basic care, like feeding and assistance to breath is a treatment.

More to the fore in the documentary are the arguments for deliberately ending the lives of helpless people because they have no quality of life. Early in the documentary, his father says Richard has no quality of life, he is making no responses, that he’d said he wouldn’t want to life like that. But in time he is able to move his eyes and his father accepts that he is now able to smile. And he chose not to have the ventilator switched off. Towards the end of the documentary, his father reconsiders his earlier view. It’s all hypothetical, he said, imagining how you think you’d feel if you were in a similar situation. But now he has seen his son’s eyes light up when they are conversing together, and he smiles. When you find yourself in that situation, his father said, the will to live kicks in. And about the decision to switch off the ventilator when his is not brain dead after all, ‘you probably have no right to do that.’

If society is not willing to put the resources into respecting life in its most vulnerable moments, then how will the breakthrough advances and discoveries ever be made – Richard was completely unresponsive at first for months, but then he began to respond, and as the film The Diving Bell and the Butterfly shows, people working with patients in this condition invent ways to enhance the communication. Respect for life at risk is where the developments happen.

Click here to watch eight minutes of the BBC documentary which includes Richard’s father responding to his son’s wish not to be taken off the ventilator

By 2020, 24 million Chinese men will be 'bare branches', unable to find wives

2010-07-16T07:06:00.000-07:00

Gendercide is in the news again. The current issue of Time (19th July 2010) has a piece by Hannah Beech reflecting on the scale and the unanticipated consequences of the Chinese government’s one-child policy.

In Chinese culture a principal source of a man’s self-esteem is his ability to marry and found a family, and bear children, thereby becoming a fruitful ‘branch’ of the family ‘tree’. But in ten years time, the mutual reinforcement of the Chinese government’s compulsory one-child policy and the cultural discrimination against baby-girls will leave 24 million Chinese men as ‘bare branches’, that is, unable to find women with whom to found a family.

Ms Beech observes that China’s fertility rate at 1.6 births per woman is ‘well below the normal replacement rate of 2.1’. But ‘the country is also saddled with one of the planet’s worst gender imbalances, largely as a result of women aborting female fetuses due to a traditional preference for male offspring.’ And why are Chinese women destroying their girl babies – ‘the pressure to bear a son is all the greater in China precisely because many families are limited to just one child.’

This is having a huge unintended side-effect – ‘by 2020 there will be at least 24 million ‘bare branches’ – men destined to stay single because there are not enough wives to go around.’ And this in turn is likely to lead to escalating criminal trafficking in women.

A second unforeseen outcome of the Chinese compulsory one-child policy is a radical unbalancing of the age-structure that puts China’s economic development at risk. Beech notes that ‘factories are now facing shortages of young skilled labour.’

A third never forecast social crisis coming down the tracks for China from this ill-judged and unjust social policy concerns the elderly. As there are fewer people being born and not enough women to go around for the forming of families, there are going to be more elderly people to maintain and less workers to maintain them. ‘By 2050, one-third of Chinese will be elderly.’ And the pension support for the elderly is very poor in urban areas and immeasurably worse in rural areas.

The situation is actually far worse than Beech acknowledges but it is encouraging to find that a significant awareness of the nature of the crisis and its scale is percolating into the mainstream international magazines.

Read Time Magazine article here