Abortion and how Ireland forgot it was a democracy

Do you believe in democracy? Do you believe it's a good form of government? Do you, like me, criticise other countries when it appears that their electoral/voting practises are corrupt and rigged and the people aren't listened to?
If you said yes to all of the above then you believe in a form of government that gives equal representation to all citizens, a form of government which listens to and represents the people of the country.

There are countries whose citizen's aren't so lucky. There are countries where the democratic process is not respected, where elections are rigged, where gerrymandering occurs and where peoples rights and voices are not respected. Ireland is one of those countries.

Ireland fought for the right to independence against our old colonial neighbour. Ireland fought for the right to freedom to be represented in government and eventually to have its independence and its own government, in its own country, that listened to the voices of all of its people.

SOMETHING WENT WRONG

The first inkling of there being something foul in the state of this country was in 1992 when a fourteen year old child was raped and became pregnant as a result. The girl and her family had travelled to England in order for her to have an abortion but were summoned back by an injunction sought the Attorney General Harry Whelehan and granted by the High Court. This injunction was appealed to the Supreme Court and was overturned by a majority of four to one. The Supreme Court ruled that a woman had a right to an abortion under Article 40.3.3 if there was a real and substantial risk to her life (but not her health) including the threat of suicide. Later that same year the people went to the polls and voted for a)'the right to travel' (to another jurisdiction for abortion), b)'the right to information' (regarding abortion) and c)the right to abortion if there is real and substantial danger to the life (but not the health) of the woman. Crucially in this referendum the people also rejected the Twelfth Amendment which sought to remove the risk of suicide as grounds for an abortion.

THEN NOTHING HAPPENED!

The people voted but it appeared the government didn't care. One of the main tasks of any country's government (particularly in a democracy) is to legislate on what the people have voted on and adjust the constitution accordingly, but this didn't happen. The government buried their heads in the sand and refused to act and refused to listen to the will of the people. 

Nothing happened until 2002 when the government and Taoiseach Bertie Ahern (because of a promise made to his mother) decided to hold another referendum to remove the threat of suicide. This proved that not only were the government not listening to the people's views on the previous referendum, they were in essence riding rough shod over the previous vote before it had even been legislated for. Once again the people voted to retain the risk of suicide as a real and substantial risk and once again the government failed to do their duty and legislate.

In 2010 three women, know as A, B and C took a case against Ireland to the European Court of Human Rights. The Court ruled in the case of C that Ireland had violated article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights because it was uncertain and unclear whether she could have access to abortion in a situation where she believed that her pregnancy was life threatening. The court also noted the "significant chilling" effect of Irish legislation (with regard to abortion). The ECHR recommended that Ireland would have to clarify whether and under which circumstances an abortion may be performed to save the life of a pregnant women.

This country has the nerve to call itself a republic and a democracy and yet sees fit to ignore

A Supreme Court Ruling

Two Referendum

A European Court of Human Rights Ruling

 How can we criticise processes in places like Russia, the Middle East, Zimbabwe etc., when we appear to be a democracy in name only, when our own government doesn't respect our voices. Regardless of whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, the democratic process has to be upheld and the voices of the people have to be heard and respected. This debate is not just about abortion, it is about respecting the democratic process that our country was once so proud of and making Ireland into a democracy that we can be proud of once again.

Let's talk about sex

Specifically, let's talk about sex and disability. @MrPaddyDoyle tweeted a link last night (It is the Daily Mail but don't run away just yet) regarding a film starring John Hawkes and the lovely Helen Hunt, it tells the story of a physically disabled man who hires a 'sexual surrogate or therapist' in order to teach and help him have sex.
People with disabilities are often portrayed as being somehow otherly, they have overcome greater things than the rest of society,they are kind hearted (or angry and mean until a protagonist comes along to 'save' them and turn them into the good person they really are), they are lovable and they love everybody, they are (insert your own meaningless platitude here). People with disabilities are seen as innocent and good minded and, if your average person or mainstream media was to be believed, they never think about sex, let alone participate in it.

In surveys, myths about women with disabilities have been identified as follows (many of these also extend to men with disabilities):

• Women with disabilities don't need sex
• Women with disabilities are not sexually attractive.
• Women with disabilities are 'oversexed.'
• Women with disabilities have more important needs than sex.
• Girls living with disabilities don't need sexuality education.
• Women who live with disabilities can't have 'real' sex.
• Sex must be spontaneous.
• Women with disabilities should not have children

Can you imagine attributing the above to any other societal group? It just wouldn't happen. Sexuality is a huge part of the human experience and yet people are squeamish and in denial when it comes to addressing the topic of disability and sexuality. I am not putting myself on a moral pedestal here either by the way. I will admit my own failings when it comes to thinking about how people with disabilities explore and are aided in exploring their sexuality. This is mostly on a personal level though  with regard to my sister. Whether this is because she has Down Syndrome or whether it's the regular attitude that one has towards  thinking about your 'baby' sister's sexuality (I do know she's twenty three but she'll always be my baby sister). However much as I am loathe to think about this aspect of her I know it's there. Why wouldn't it be? I'm older than her, she has seen me have boyfriends, she has seen me get married. She knows I share a bed with my husband. How ridiculous would it be for me to think that she wouldn't also want these things? I have seen her at discos with her boyfriend. At the same discos (run for people with Special Needs) I have also seen the "passion police" having to get involved before things get too hot and heavy. The smooching I've seen at these discos leads me to believe that while non-disabled people were busy desexualising people with disabilities they forgot to tell them. The reason why I say that my failure to deal with the matter at hand is a personal one is because as a teacher and advocate of equal rights it horrifies me when I hear that others think that people with disabilities have no need for sex education and it horrifies me when I find that they think that people with disabilities don't have a sexual side.

The fact that people would seek to ignore this part of being a human in people with disabilities shows that they are thought of as an 'other'. That they think they may be on the fringe of humanity. Sex is an integral part of the human experience. It is intimate, emotional, physical. It can create bonds and strengthen personal relationships. It's fun! We need to stop desexualising other people because of our own hang ups. We also need to be aware that while sex is all kinds of wonderful it also has a dark side and people need to be ready, mature and it is vital to ensure that those with an intellectual disability are not exploited. If we can't discuss the good side of sex, how are we ever to protect vulnerable people from the dark aspects of it?

So let's do it! Let's talk about sex.

Stop hijacking legitimate discussions

Over the past week on various social/news media I noticed a not so new trend. If one deigns to open a discussion regarding anything to do with women, somewhere within the first five comments will contain the line "(subject topic) also happens to men, why does (this person/publication) ignore this."

The first time I saw this last week was in The Ladies Lounge on boards.ie in a thread about harassment. The discussion opened was discussing the level of harassment sexual and otherwise that women encounter both in Ireland and abroad. Lo and behold before the discussion really took off within the first page a male poster had came to announce that harassment also happens to men. The women in TLL, to my knowledge, had never stated that it didn't and TLL also seems a highly appropriate place to start such a thread for women (the hint being in the name of that particular section on Boards). However, undeterred posters unanimously agreed that such harassment also happens to men and invited the aggrieved poster to share his experiences (also to note TLL does not discourage male posters) or if it was something that he felt really strongly about to start his own post on harassment towards males either in TLL or elsewhere on Boards. It turned out that the poster in question had never been harassed but gave a few tid bits of anecdotal evidence of x/y/z happening to people he knew. He did not feel strongly enough to start his own thread or contribute further to the original thread beyond repeating his mantra that harassment also happens to men.

The next time that this aggrieved response caught my attention was in an article on The Journal by Lisa McInerney, titled All sexual harassment needs to thrive is for good men to do nothing. The article headline was obviously utilising the famous quote about evil and may not even have been decided on by Lisa herself. The first part of her article details her own experiences of public harassment and how for it to thrive all it takes is for everyone else to simply do nothing.
She then goes on to discuss the Everyday Sexism project and #shoutingback which has been used on Twitter to encourage people to share their stories of being sexually harassed. Again first few posts in "harassment happens to men too". Lisa McInerney even acknowledged that there were a number of male contributors to #shoutingback but that the overwhelming majority of the posts were from women. She details mostly women's experiences, possibly because she is a woman, possibly because everyday harassment is something that almost every woman has experienced and possibly because it is easy to write from that situation because it's one in which the majority of women have found themselves in. I would be unable to write about male harassment, I don't know what it feels like. I (and Lisa McInerney and other women) do, however, know how it feels to be woman who is harassed. I know how violated I've felt when I've been groped in a bar, I know the fear and the taste of metal in my mouth when I was followed home by two men in broad daylight who had two other men waiting for them. I know the revulsion and nausea when I thought about what might have been. I know the fear of being a woman walking alone at night. I know what it's like to keep an eye on my drinks and my friends and ensure no one walks home alone.

Another article I read (embarrassingly enough I can't remember where) detailed that four out of five women have to be turned away from Sonas (which deals specifically with women and children) due to lack of funding and again the typical responses cropped up in the first couple of comments.

The Journal published a piece before Christmas where Amen, the charity representing male victims of domestic abuse, warned that men in these situations are in a very vulnerable position at Christmas time. How many women commented that this also happens to women? None. Instead some of the comments took an even nastier turn linking domestic violence against men with the "feminist agenda". This deliberately misconstrues the meaning of the word feminism but that's a rant for another day.

As I said above my female friends and I have discussed harassment, rape, physical abuse etc. None of my male friends have ever discussed their experiences (if any) with me. Now before we get to the comments section, here goes: domestic violence against men and male rape are serious topics, as serious as the same against women. It is to the shame of this country that we have yet to open up a proper discourse on these topics and it does immeasurable harm to both men and women. Domestic violence against men needs to be discussed in an open manner so that men who find themselves in such a situation will be more likely to seek help. The shaming of men suffering domestic violence needs to stop. It is not just a women's issue and funding needs to go into all centres for men, women and children living with domestic violence.  Instead of defensively hijacking another discussion with "this happens to men too". Why not join the discussion and give your experiences or discuss the rates of abuse against men? Why not write your own post about violence against men? Why not donate to Amen? Why not open a proper discourse about violence perpetrated against men and let these men who are unable to speak know that you are there to support them?

Instead of stubbornly putting these things down to the "feminist agenda",let's work together to ensure that people realise violence against anybody is simply not right. Men and women living with domestic violence need to be supported in more meaningful ways.

Belated Happy New Year

I've been a very bad blogger since Christmas/New Year with work and various illnesses getting in the way but I promise I will have a brand new post on Wednesday! 

Zoltan Zinn Collis

I was saddened to hear of the death of Holocaust survivor Zoltan Zinn Collis on Monday last. Zoltan was one of the last surviving Holocaust survivors and he settled in my home town of Athy. Zoltan Zinn was born in Slovakia in 1940, son of a Jewish labourer and a Hungarian Protestant woman. His father was suspected to have died in Ravensbruck in 1945. He had two sisters and one brother. His youngest sister died at age one and a half years old in transit to Bergen-Belsen. At a talk in our youth club, Zoltan recalled that a Nazi soldier, realising that the infant was dead, took her from her mothers arms and threw her out of the carriage. Zoltan's brother Aladar developed TB and died in Bergen-Belsen in 1945. On April 15th 1945 Zoltan's mother died, this was the same day that the Red Cross had come to save them.
The head of the Red Cross at this time was an Irish doctor called Bob Collis. Dr. Collis was accompanied by a Dutch nurse Han Hogerzeil (who was later to become his second wife) and called Dr. Collis to look at "the most enchanting scrap of humanity" she had found. It was Zoltan, who, upon meeting Dr Collis promptly informed him in German "My father is dead, you are now my father". Dr Collis kept his word to Zoltan and took him, his sister Edit and three other children back to Ireland without travel documents. Homes were found for the three other children and according to Zoltan, two of these children became the first legal Irish adoptees. Zoltan and Edit stayed with Doctor Collis. 

Zoltan began talking about his experiences in 1995 when the 50th anniversary of the Holocaust was marked. He spoke in schools, universities, youth clubs etc. all around the country hoping to ensure that we "never forget". I remember when Zoltan visited our youth club in Athy a number of years ago. It was something else to see our normally boisterous members transfixed and so silent that one might have heard a pin drop. Just silence and the quiet tones of Zoltan, this man who most of us had seen around our small,sleepy town telling his extraordinary story.
As one of the last handful of Holocaust survivors in Ireland he said he felt a strong obligation to speak to people about the 12 million that died. He was very eager that he didn't want to sound like "a saint or something" but determined to get these stories out there for other people who weren't so lucky. He was very conscious that when he mentioned it that people might think 'Oh not the bloody holocaust again'. He was also very conscious of the events going on in  Darfur or Sri Lanka, the Bosnian conflicts, Lebanon, Palestine and that precious little had changed in the world today and that something was very wrong in the world when someone like George Clooney had to plead with the UN  to do something in Darfur.
That night in the youth club, no one was thinking 'not the bloody Holocaust again', that night was emotional, extraordinary and alongside the horrific subject matter was interspersed Zoltan's wit, particularly when talking about himself. This wonderful man, small in stature and physically transformed by TB, stood in front of us and told us his story.

Zoltan wrote the book Final Witness: My Journey from the Holocaust to Ireland, and I would highly recommend picking up a copy.

Zoltan Zinn Collis died on Monday 10th December 2012 aged 72, survived by his wife Joan, sister Edit , brother Robbie, his daughters Siobhán, Caroline, Nichola and Emma, grandchildren Tony, Adam, Molly and Cillian, great-grandchildren Chloe, Tori and C.J. relatives and friends.
He will be sorely missed in our little town.

Finally, definitely, at last

Zoltan Zinn Collis

Targeting the most vulnerable

I'll get back to writing about SPUC next week, but in light of Ireland's Budget, I feel the need to focus on some of the points that will hit people, particularly the most vulnerable, hardest.

The targeting of people who have a disability hits particularly close to home for me.
The Respite Care Grant is paid to those caring for someone with a disability, this grant is paid to more than 77,000 families in the country, 20,000 of whom receive no other support from the state for providing full-time care for a family member. It is used by carers to buy home care or pay for residential respite care, in order to give them a break from their caring role. Mostly during the recession it has been used to pay bills or buy other necessities for people. The annual grant has been cut by €325 to €1,375. Many carers work 24/7, 365 days of year. Carers reduce the cost of caring for the government. They free up beds in hospitals and nursing homes and they reduce the costs of medical personnel. They assist with the medical needs and psychological needs of loved ones. They provide  900,000 hours of care daily, carers save the state €4 billion every year. They are often praised, and rightly so, as unsung heroes. Unfortunately praise and rhetoric don't pay the bills! The government talk out of both sides of their mouth on this, they sing the praises of carers on one day and then cut their meagre incomes the next. It is sickening that Pat Rabbitte refers to this €325 decrease as a "modest" cut, but then I assume €325 would be a modest cut on his salary.

Along with the Respite Grant cut, a number of weeks before the budget, the HSE cut the gluten free product allowance for Coeliacs. Gluten Free breads, pastas and cereals are more expensive and those on low incomes could avail of them by medical card or through the Drugs Payment scheme. It is worth mentioning that people with certain disabilities are more prone to Coeliac Disease. During this run of cuts, other medications were also targeted. Two medications prominently used by older people were taken from the scheme. Glucosamine,which deals with wear and tear of the joints in osteoarthritis patients and Omega 3 triglycerides ,which are beneficial in conjunction with cholesterol-lowering drugs, and are often prescribed by cardiac doctors. In my own family, both my sister and my mother have Coeliac Disease, my mother is also my sister's carer. Gluten free food costs, on average, four times more than their ordinary counterparts. That €325 cut is starting to appear less and less "modest".
As well as taking foods off the medical cards and Drug Refund schemes, to add insult to injury, for those (un)fortunate to still retain their medical card the prescription charge has been trebled. James Reilly,who once said he wanted to abolish the prescription charge, raised the charge from €0.50 to €1.50. This may not sound like much to most people but to put it in perspective, a person covered by a medical card, who previously paid no more than €10 a month, will now be liable for up to €19.50 per month. It was also revealed that the nursing homes support scheme — a Fair Deal that began providing financial support for people assessed as needing long-term nursing home care is also being changed. Currently, the loan is paid after death with a levy of up to 15% on the person’s estate over three years. The levy is now being increased to 22.5% over the same period.

I know there was some good natured cribbing about the price of wine etc. on Budget Day but please remember all those who have been hit so hard that wine and beer are the least of their worries.
Unlike the government, don't forget that this government promised :"to ensure that the quality of life of people with disabilities was enhanced and that resources would be allocated reach the people who need them".
I challenge any government minister to walk a mile in their shoes!

What SPUC thinks? Part one

I wrote about the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child (SPUC) last week, detailing their involvement in Ireland and highlighting that (like almost all other 'pro-life' groups) that the majority of  their followers are US based, thanks to Geoff's Shorts. While doing my research on SPUC I couldn't help but note that they have some strange ideas about many issues so I felt they deserved another post or two.

SPUC's attitude to equal marriage rights

SPUC are unsurprisingly anti-same sex marriage, citing the various platitudes that we've come to know and hate during their campaign. They strive to create a difference between 'real' marriage and 'gay' marriage. Most reasonable people know there is no difference. However, SPUC maintain that they have to protect 'real' marriage in order to protect the unborn, citing that their statistics show that unborn children are "four or five times more likely to be aborted outside of real marriage". Now aside from the slur that same-sex marriage isn't 'real' marriage according to SPUC, could someone also enlighten me as to how same-sex marriage could lead to more abortions? If two men get married then, by virtue of their biology, neither of them could get pregnant, accidentally or otherwise, and therefore are highly unlikely to procure an abortion. Likewise,unless in the case of a tragic incident, if two women marry they would only find themselves with child after a long and carefully considered process, making it highly unlikely that they would seek an abortion; far less likely than a heterosexual woman in a traditional marriage who had gotten pregnant by accident.
I'm inclined to go with George Carlin on this one "Leave these f**kin people alone for chrissake!"
SPUC's campaign against marriage rights can be read here, although personally I would much prefer if you read Jason Wakefield's piece on The 31 arguments against gay marriage (and why theyre all wrong)

SPUC and contraception

Most people agree that abortion and contraception are fairly obviously linked. Most reasonable people agree that access to contraception and access to adequate sex education are vital in decreasing abortion rates. This is where the majority of pro-life groups divert. Religious pro-life groups like SPUC are vehemently opposed to contraception and what they refer to as 'explicit' sex education. 

Is this what they mean by explicit sex education?

Now to a certain extent I can accept if someone believes that contraception is wrong. However I loathe the false information regarding contraception that gets spewed from pro-life groups such as SPUC. SPUC have launched a "Safe at School" campaign, which sounds nice and all - I mean everyone wants children to be safe at school,right? However rather than being a campaign against bullying or how to be careful when crossing the road SPUC seem to view the teachers as the main danger. According to SPUC children as young as five are being "primed to become sexually active". Now in the past I have been involved with teaching sex education to secondary school students and let me tell you it's about as awkward for the teacher as it is for the students. I take the approach of giving clear facts,open and frank discussion but I certainly have never 'primed' any student to become sexually active. This is where SPUC start diverting again. Teenagers are curious about sex and the majority will have lost their virginity at or before the age of seventeen. Most parents and educators agree that the best thing we can do for them is to equip them with the facts and knowledge that will keep them safe.

SPUC are obviously against teaching students about contraception and alongside their opposition they begin to lie. According to SPUC many contraceptives, such as the contraceptive pill and the IUD coil, are abortifacients which is blatantly untrue. Education for Choice rightly ask "Is a young person ‘safe at school’ if they are deterred from using contraception for fear they may be causing abortion? Is a young woman who is told using contraception won’t be necessary following abortion ‘safe at school’?"

Since I haven't blogged this week, and since researching SPUC is quite head wrecking, I'm running this as a part one and will continue on with some more on SPUC soon.