UCD Law Society debate on the Eighth Amendment swings behind Repeal

Tuesday’s packed-out debate on the Eighth Amendment in UCD’s Newman Building, introduced by UCD Law Society records secretary Caoimhe Gethings, had the distinction of being the Society’s first entirely female-speaker debate.

Ruth Coppinger, socialist TD for Dublin West, opened the debate for the Repeal side, followed by Repeal Campaign secretary Sinéad Kennedy and UCD students Juliette Barnes and Hannah Bereford.

Recent UCD graduate Naomi Clarke spoke first for the pro-life side, followed by Clíona Johnson of the One Day More campaign group, current Trinity student Clare McCarthy, and a final address from Cora Sherlock, deputy chair of the Pro-Life Campaign.

Ms Coppinger’s address was direct and detailed. She cited figures on the number of Irish women who access abortion despite the constitutional prohibition either by travelling abroad (10 per day) or by self-administering pills easily available online (three per day).

Ms Kennedy followed this with an account of the practical consequences of the Irish law concerning abortion, recounting the Attorney General v X case of 1992 in which a 14 year old rape victim was prohibited from travelling to England for an abortion by injunction. Ms Kennedy pointed to the recent arrests of two women in Northern Ireland accused of self-administering abortion pills as proof that the prohibition of abortion criminalises women.

Both Ms Barnes and Ms Bereford gave personal accounts of the distress and disempowerment felt by many young Irish women as a result of the Eighth Amendment.

Ms Clarke and Ms Johnson gave moving addresses on the pro-life side, citing examples from their personal lives as grounds for their support of the Eighth Amendment. Ms Clarke told the audience how her younger brothers were born extremely prematurely, at such an early stage of the pregnancy that an abortion would have been allowed in jurisdictions like England and Wales.

Ms Johnson spoke with touching openness about her own tragic experience. Her son, John Paul, died just seventeen minutes after birth, having being diagnosed with anencephaly during the pregnancy. She said that the Eighth Amendment ensured that the medical staff treated her child as an equal patient despite the knowledge that he could not survive outside of the womb.

These touching personal stories afforded a mutually respectful tone to the evening which is perhaps uncharacteristic in debates on such an emotive subject. However, the final address given by Ms Sherlock shattered the fairly bipartisan atmosphere in the lecture theatre.

Referencing The Lord of the Rings, Ms Sherlock likened her campaign to JRR Tolkien’s Gandalf, saying a Repeal referendum “shall not pass”. This drew sniggers from the spectators, coming across either as glib or a poor attempt to appeal to a young audience.

Ms Sherlock then rounded on Ms Coppinger, accusing her of dishonesty for not stating her support for liberal abortion laws in her opening address. This backfired when Ms Coppinger gave a curt affirmative response, which received applause from the audience.

Ms Sherlock continued to accuse Ms Kennedy and Ms Barnes of misrepresenting the facts in the case of Savita Halappanavar, who died in 2012 due to complications resulting from a septic miscarriage after being refused an abortion due to the Eighth Amendment. Ms Sherlock asserted that the cause of death was sepsis, rather than sepsis resulting from the septic miscarriage, which drew an angry response from both the Repeal panel and many audience members. Ms Sherlock continued over her allocated time by several minutes, refusing to yield despite the repeated instruction of the chairperson.

The debate was one of many set to take place across Ireland following Taoiseach Leo Varadkar’s announcement in June that a referendum on the eighth amendment will be held next year.

Kevin Burns, Irish Legal News