A brave new world

national | miscellaneous | news report Tuesday February 26, 2002 12:57 by Anne Ruimy - rocky road environmental magazine editor at rockyroadmagazine dot com Anne Ruimy, Mullagh, Co. Clare, Ireland +353 (0)65 708 7144

Behind Ireland's Abortion Referendum

While the article does not take sides on the issue of abortion, it points out that, while other countries are debating or are in the process of changing their bioethics legislation to take into account the recent advances in biotechonologies, the proposed bill contains a loophole that would legalise human stem cell research in Ireland by suggesting that human life starts "after implantation in the womb of a woman".

Behind Ireland’s Abortion Referendum: A brave new world.
by Anne Ruimy (1)

The world must be looking down at Ireland’s upcoming "Abortion Referendum" with amusement. Even at the end of the Celtic Tiger decade, Catholic Ireland appears stuck in another century. While France, Germany, the UK and US among other countries are debating or are in the process of changing their bioethics legislation to take into account the recent advances in human stem cell research, Ireland will be holding a referendum in March to allow women the right to have an abortion. In limited cases.(2)

The Celtic Tiger years have come to an end. But the Fianna Fáil/Progressive Democrats coalition in government that brought on or maybe just reaped the benefits of the information technologies-led economic boom, has no desire to see Ireland returning back to the donkey-and-cart years after the recent dotcom meltdown. Therefore Ireland must quickly re-position itself for the next big thing. So behind this referendum mere months before the general elections, without the time or the will to really promote or even explain the issues at stake to the people (3), at the risk of another fiasco similar to the rejection of the "Nice referendum" last June, one is compelled to seek hidden motives. As with many policy decisions since the start of the current economic slowdown, one needs looking no further that the following motive: Get the Celtic Tiger roaring again !(4)

"The investment community is always looking for the next big thing," said Richard Garr, president of NeuralStem BioPharmaceuticals Ltd. "And stem cells are definitely a candidate to be the next big thing" (5). Ireland is doing just this: positioning itself to be able to attract investment in the latest in biotechnologies. Not least because stem cell research is among the proposed research priorities under the 6th EU Framework Research Programme 2002 to 2006. Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment Mary Harney, commenting on a new public private partnership between Enterprise Ireland and Irish firm Seroba BioVentures, said: "Biotechnology is predicted to be a major basis for economic growth this century." (6)

But there is one hurdle along the way. Human stem cell research conflicts with most countries’ bioethics legislation that define human life as starting from conception. In France, eleven personalities including philosophers, sociologists and geneticists stated in an open letter that the competition between laboratories is driving countries to legalise the experimentation and industrial exploitation of human embryos as fast as possible.(7)

The bill put to Irish voters in the upcoming referendum proposes to recognize women’s rights to freely travel to another country for an abortion, to obtain an abortion in her own country in the case of danger to her life, and to obtain information about abortion. The wording is vague, the issues relatively non-controversial. Some would say that changing the Irish Constitution was long overdue. There is however one item that stands out by its precision and apparent incongruity. A section of the bill spells: "In this Act, ‘abortion’ means the intentional destruction by any means of unborn human life after implantation in the womb of a woman," while a subsection precises further: " ‘Woman’ means a female person".

As was the case during previous abortion referenda, Irish public opinion is divided. Interestingly, the split does not divide religious against women rights groups clearly or in expected ways. The Well Woman Centre urges a "No" vote (8). Peter Byrne, Director of the Family Prayer Movement, Redemptory Monastery, Limerick recommends a "Yes" vote (9). As for Father Tom Ingoldsby of the Salesian House in Ballinakill, Portlaoise, he is rather confused. "I recently sent a letter in which I argued for a "Yes" vote in the Abortion Referendum. On further examination and consultation, I find that in conscience, I cannot vote "Yes" […](10)

Leaflets produced by the Catholic Pro-Life Alliance distributed to rural post-offices detail the motivations behind their own "No" recommendations. They include the following, little-publicized argument: "The government claims that this section is to legalise abortifacient drugs. However we know that the real reason is to allow experimentation on babies in science laboratories, like rats." Beyond the polemical language, there might just be some truth to this argument.

Given the right conditions, unlike most cells in the body, stem cells can reproduce themselves time and time again. Given the right conditions, they can move beyond their original immature state and develop into various different sorts of adult cell types. And given the right conditions, which at the current stage of advancement in research means implantation in the womb of a woman, they could potentially develop into a human being of a totally new type.

With the potential to derive stem cells from adult as well as embryonic tissues, research will not necessarily lead to the destruction of unwanted embryos. It will not necessarily lead to cloned human beings, as "therapeutic", unlike "reproductive" cloning, generates human tissues that would not be viable - outside the womb of a woman. In fact it may even eventually save lives of unborn babies, as research might lead to increasing the proportion of embryos that will develop until birth - inside the womb of a woman. But behind the diversity and complexity of techniques, there is a danger that the human race will lose its humanity.

Environmentalists have denounced and sometimes physically resisted the advance of genetically modified foods, sometimes nicknamed "frankenfoods". Partly as a consequence, the biotech industry is backing out of this research domain. Partly only. Similarly to the information technologies world, where the buzzword "broadband" has replaced "dotcoms," the next boom in biotech can only come if a totally new technology comes along, with far superior potentialities. This new technology is human stem cell research. And the Celtic Tiger wants its share of it.

Environmentalists who opposed the modification of plants and animals ending up on our plates should realise that what will be modified next is the very essence of our humanity. The future ahead is human reproduction in test tubes, probably combined with genetic modification of human beings. As in other developed countries, the debate about unborn human life in Ireland should not be confined to the protection of embryos in their mother’s wombs. The debate should include the protection of humanity as we know it.

Jeremy Rifkin, President of the Foundation on Economic Trends in Washington DC, summarizes the evolution in human reproduction thus: "While the pill revolutionized sex, removing it from the process of reproduction, artificial insemination, then later in vitro fertilisation, egg donation, surrogacy and, soon, cloning further separate the components of reproduction from the biological act of mating. The artificial womb completes the process." (11)

After the upcoming Abortion Referendum, or should we call it Human Stem Cell Research Referendum, the next Irish referendum will perhaps not need to mention women’s wombs at all.

Notes:
(1) Anne Ruimy is the editor and publisher of rocky road, a new Irish environmental magazine (www.rockyroadmagazine.com).
(2) Twenty-fifth Amendment of the Constitution (Protection of Human Life in Pregnancy) Bill, 2001, as passed by both houses of the Oireachtas. Referendum to be held 6 March 2002.
(3) Taoiseach rejects TV debate on abortion, The Irish Times, February 17, 2002.
(4) See also: Globalisation At War by Anne Ruimy, in rocky road magazine issue 1, November 2001.
(5) Investors pick winners in stem cell advances, International Herald Tribune, August 6, 2001.
(6) Biotech jobs are targeted, Irish Independent, 12 February 2002.
(7) Le Biopouvoir a l’assaut des lois de bioethique, Le Monde, 18 January 2002.
(8) Women’s Centre urges ‘no’ vote, Irish Independent, 13 February 2002.
(9) Letter to the Editor, The Clare Champion, 15 February 2002.
(10) idem.
(11) The End of Pregnancy, in Comment & Analysis, The Guardian, 27 January 2002.