Soc Dems “proposal to abolish life-saving three-day wait is disgraceful” – Eilís Mulroy
The Pro Life Campaign has strongly criticised the Social Democrats for introducing a bill today to abolish the three-day wait before an abortion and to widen the grounds for abortion in Ireland.
Commenting on the move by the Soc Dems, Eilís Mulroy of the Pro Life Campaign said: “It is not only sad but disgraceful that Holly Cairns is introducing a bill today to do away with the life-saving three-day wait before and abortion and that would expand the grounds for late-term abortions even more. Clearly the Social Democrats don’t regard the 10,852 abortions that occurred in a single year in Ireland as anything to be bothered about or they wouldn’t be so obsessed with paving the way for yet more abortions to take place.
“In her public remarks today on RTÉ radio, Ms Cairns referenced the need to allow people to tell their stories. She should set the record straight on whether she herself has responded to the offer to meet with women who are heartbroken after their abortions and deeply regret the decision, and whether she has also taken the time to talk to women who availed of the three-day wait and subsequently didn’t go through with an abortion.”
Ms Mulroy added: “Micheál Martin and Simon Harris have a huge responsibility in all of this too. They were the driving force behind the repeal campaign in 2018 which promised voters that abortion would be ‘rare’ if they voted for it. Now they’re adopting a ‘nothing to see here’ approach to Ireland’s skyrocketing abortion numbers and are doing nothing to push back against making the law even more extreme. Both men need to be challenged for running away from the issue and taking no responsibility for what is unfolding.
“Meanwhile, Holly Cairns should be asked to justify her latest bill, as the Three Year Review Chair – on whose recommendations it relies – publicly admitted that before making her recommendation she never consulted any of the thousands of women who attended an initial abortion appointment but chose not to proceed after the three-day waiting period. For the Chair of the Review to make such a radical proposal without engaging those it affects most is, frankly, an astonishing omission that completely discredits the recommendation she made.”
.