Quantity
DVD : LIFE—A NEW REVOLUTION
One of F&L's largest and most successful educational projects to date was the production of a 40 minute film on abortion— LOST SOUL OF THE 20TH CENTURY.
The film examined the issues surrounding the threats to human life from the moment of conception until birth.. It explores the various arguments regarding abortion and interviews a number of well known personalities and experts in the field .This landmark film has been and will cotinue to be broadcast by EWTN in 2002 and 2003. To date we have distributed 60,000 copies of this film throughout Ireland and the UK.
Following the success of this film Family & Life embarked on a new and updated follow-up. LIFE—A NEW REVOLUTION. (A documentary exploring threats to human life).
This documentary was produced by Family & Life as an educational resource to assist individuals in identifying and understanding various threats to human life from conception to birth including embryo research and experimentation, IVF, abortion, physical, psychological and emotional consequences of abortion and many other issues.
Contributors include:
Professor Martin Clynes - Department of Bioethics, Dublin City University.
Dr Gerard Casey - Department of Philosophy, University College Dublin.
Dr Berry Kiely - Children’s GP.
Dr Brendan Purcell - Department of Philosophy, University College Dublin.
Ms Mary Kenny - Journalist and Broadcaster.
John Waters - Author and Journalist with The Irish Times.
Ms Julie Heffernan - National PRO of LIFE Crisis Pregnancy Counselling Agency.
Fr Kevin Doran - Irish Catholic Bishops’ Spokesman on Bioethics.
Fr Seamus Murphy, S.J. - Lecturer in Philosophy and Ethics.
Ms Kathy Sinnott - Member of the European Parliament (MEP) for Munster.
Ms Josephine Quintavalle - Comment on Reproductive Ethics (CORE).
Dr Phil Boyle - The Galway Fertility Clinic.
Professor Eamon O’Dwyer - Professor Emeritus, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, National University of Ireland (NUI) Galway.
Running Time: 37 minutes (NTSC or PAL )
This documentary (on Video or DVD) is re-produced and distributed free of charge thanks to the generous financial help of Family & Life supporters.
Quantity
Booklet : The ICGP's Redefinition of Medical Care
The ICGP's Redefinition of Medical Care. A Response to "Primary Care Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Crisis Pregnancy". by David Manly. (pp. 28. Aras Mhuire Publications, 2006).
The Reason for This Response
The Irish College of General Practitioners (ICGP) "Guidelines" require a response because of their highly unbalanced and at times careless treatment of a number of important issues.
The main issues are: A. Contraception, in particular emergency, in its various forms is treated as a major element in primary health care, that is safe, without ethical concerns and the only efficacious solution to the problem of crisis pregnancy in Ireland. B.The Guidelines contain no analysis of the nature of a crisis pregnancy or a definition of abortion as a hoped-for solution to these pregnancies. C. The Guidelines presume to redefine the doctor's role according to the ideology of "non-directive counselling" and women's right to choose". D. Their treatment of abortion depersonalises the unborn human being, and minimises the physical and psychological risks of abortion. In particular, the theory about the link between abortion and breast cancer is totally ignored. E. The Guidelines' attempt to marginalise doctors for their alleged transgression of the ethical guidelines of the Medical Council is threadbare and misguided.
The problem with the Guidelines is their pro-abortion bias from start to finish. Apart from a few details the booklet could have been written for a jurisdiction where abortion was legal and freely available. By publishing this document the authors, with the backing of the ICGP, attempt to position general practitioners on one side of a deeply contentious issue. It is most unfortunate that the ICGP and the Women's Health Programme have chosen to appear as part of a political campaign for "abortion rights".
When the ICGP published the Guidelines in 2004, it sullied its good name by taking a highly partisan position on a deeply contentious topic, and did so in a manner that could only be described as lacking transparency and honesty. In doing so, it did a major disservice to doctors and exposed the ICGP as a campaigning organisation for an extreme ideology.
Let there be not doubt about the ethos of this response. No matter how one describes abortion, it remains an ethically-abhorrent action and a violation of the oldest law in human history. To legitimise the action of a doctor who deliberately and purposefully destroys human life is a fundamental regression of medical ethics and practice. Even if , per impossible, all the negative sequelae of abortion could be counteracted, it would still be abhorrent. Abortion is not just bad medicine; it is simply bad.
Conclusions.
The ICGP Guidelines are pro-abortion. There is less than a passing nod to the Irish Constitution's affirmation of the unborn child's humanity and right to life, and no reference to the medical profession's long-standing opposition to abortion. There is a presumption that sooner or later Irish law will be changed and abortion legalised when in fact international trends suggest the opposite is happening in other countries.
There exists a major assumption that a woman has a sovereign right to end her pregnancy, and this right forbids a doctor or anyone else from attempting to persuade her otherwise, or to hint that abortion is a "poor option".
The Guidelines pretend that doctors with conscientious objections to abortion are the "awkward squad", a minority who only add to women's health problems.
The Guidelines would like to see all doctors give the appearance that the choice of abortion is a "positive option". This would do two things: it would make doctors appear to accept abortion as ethical treatment, and give a woman's decision to abort her child medical legitimacy.
The Guidelines assume that non-directive counselling is the only acceptable medical response when a doctor faces a woman with crisis pregnancy. Non-directive counselling is a device to gag those who consider abortion totally unethical as well as bad medicine.
The Guidelines are unable to state that an abortion is bad medicine. In this they are one with the Crisis Pregnancy Agency.
The problem is that many of Ireland's doctors support the long-held position of the Irish Medical Council, namely, that the deliberate destruction of an unborn life is a major violation of medical ethics. These doctors do not support the pro-abortion position, nor are they willing to be neutral in counselling, nor are they willing to give "Act information" to a woman about an abortion clinic or refer her to a known pro-abortion doctor.
Irish doctors have long understood that they have two patients, once a pregnancy is confirmed. Modern technology and science show plainly that a new, individual, human being exists from the moment of fertilisation, and that abortion necessarily ends that life.
Recognising that the embryo is an individual human being doesn't depend on a particular religious belief or ethical system; it is a judgement based on the physical sciences, conclusively verified by the recent advances in embryology and imaging technology.
The problem for the ICGP arises from the inability or refusal of its Women's Health Programme to recognise that there are two radically incompatible ways of understanding "being with child".
Isn't there an underlying assumption in the Guidelines that nothing should stand between a woman and her "sovereign right" to end her pregnancy?
In publishing its "Guidlines", the Irish College of General Practitioners (ICGP) has foolishly allowed itself to be co-opted into the pro-abortion camp. How can the ICGP ask its members to leave their ethics outside the door of their clinics and become collaborators in abortion?
There is a profound irony in the ICGP's requirement that the patient be given reliable information about "clinics that have a good reputation". For what? Not killing or injuring women? Rather, killing their unborn children efficiently.
Let me conclude with the simple question and request. Are the ICGP's Primary Care Guidelines good medicine? If not, then do not remain silent. Let your objetions be known. Doctors are—and should be—horrified at the extreme position the ICGP has taken in the Guidelines. Either it is a professional body concerned with the continuing education of its members and the health of those they care for, or it is a campaigning lobby working to legitimise radical abortion rights under a psudo-medical cloak.
Quantity
Booklet : The Core Issue
The Core Issue is a report written by David Manly and published in 2001 by Áras Mhuire Publications, an imprint of Family & Life. It is a report, which examines comments on and summarises, the public hearings on abortion of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution.
This booklet falls into three parts: An analysis of the word “abortion”; a commentary on some of the Hearings; and reflections on the legal questions arising.
Doctors understand what an abortion is, and how it differs from legitimate and necessary treatment of some rare disorders of pregnant women. They know that when their efforts end in a tragic outcome, they have not performed an abortion. Ethical analysis has given this an explicit enunciation in the Guidelines of the Irish Medical Council. The law should be able to express the difference in unambiguous legal terms.
The Government has to make a very deliberate decision not to allow “exceptions” in cases of rape and incest, not to mention abnormality. This history of abortion in Britain since 1967 shows that making exceptions inevitably opens the way to abortion on demand.
Why, then, have some members of the Committee and some medical experts failed to grasp the distinctions outlined throughout the Hearings?
So, we return to what Deputy Jim O’Keefe named “the core issue”—is “essential treatment” where in rare cases a child dies, radically different from the “direct termination of a pregnancy?”
The answer can only by “Yes”.
There is a radical difference between the “deliberate and intentional destruction of the unborn child” and the standard medical care of mothers where sometimes an unborn child dies as a side effect of treatment.
This is the view of most Irish people who do not want direct abortion made legal; it is the view of most Irish doctors who view what has happened in Britain and elsewhere with abhorrence. It is a view articulated by the Irish Medical Council and the Irish Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. It should be the view of Ireland’s legislators.