Dr EOGHAN de FAOITE, responding to earlier correspondence to the Irish Times,
from Claire Brophy (September 19th) points out that she is factually incorrect regarding the A, B, C v Ireland case. Dr de FAOITE raises some
critical issues that the pro-abortion lobby like to sweep under the carpet. See Irish Times 24/9/2012
Dr de FAOITE writes;
C did not have cancer when she became pregnant and she most
certainly did not have to travel to England for an abortion “so that her cancer
could be treated”. C had completed chemotherapy for “a rare form of cancer”
when she came pregnant and had sought information from her GP, “as well as
several medical consultants” on what treatment options would be available to
her should her cancer happen to relapse during pregnancy. No medical evidence
on the supposed life-threatening nature of a condition she might develop was
offered to the court and no information regarding which medical specialties she
had allegedly consulted was offered.
There exist specialists within medicine for a reason: it is
a subject too extensive for every doctor to know everything. If a patient’s
healthcare needs are beyond your capabilities you refer to your specialised
colleague for expert input, such as in the case of cancer complicating
pregnancy. Did this happen in the case of C? We simply don’t know. Perhaps the
IFPA could enlighten us before people criticise Irish healthcare.
What we do know is that we have already heard from
specialists who are far more qualified in the area of gynaecological oncology
than I or Claire Brophy. Speaking at the International Symposium on Maternal
Health in Dublin, Dr Frédéric Amant, who for his groundbreaking research into
the safe delivery of chemotherapy during pregnancy was described by Lancet
Oncology as “leading the agenda on cancer in pregnancy” concluded that, “in the
case of cancer complicating pregnancy, termination of pregnancy does not
improve maternal prognosis”. This mirrors the comments of our own home-grown
expert in oncology, Dr John Crown, who tweeted earlier this year, “I don’t think
I ever had a case where abortion was necessary to save mom”. The experts have
spoken.
Finally, there’s no room in this debate for the
unsubstantiated claims made by Ms Brophy and by Patricia Lohr (September 13th)
that women are travelling to England for “life-saving abortions”. I would
invite them to reveal the British department of health statistics, which are
available under FOI, any case whereby an Irish woman accessed a “life-saving
abortion” in England on account of being refused life-saving treatment in
Ireland.
