 |
| The infamous publication (C) Mick Murphy |
How a phone number lead to a case
about abortion information going all the way to The Supreme Court.
As I type it has just been announced that The Dail has
overwhelming agreed to accept the Second stage of the Thirty-Sixth Amendment of
the Constitution Bill 2018, which seeks to repeal the 1983 Eighth Amendment, by
110 votes to 32.
It is planned to hold the Referendum at the end of May.
Aside from Article 2 of the constitution (which was repealed in 1994), has there been a more contentious part of the statute books, than the Eighth?
It is planned to hold the Referendum at the end of May.
Aside from Article 2 of the constitution (which was repealed in 1994), has there been a more contentious part of the statute books, than the Eighth?
The addition of the Eighth Amendment into the Irish
Constitution has has led to the “X” case and “C” case controversies, as well as
the High Court and Supreme Court Cases taken by the Society for Protection of
the Unborn Child (SPUC) in 1988 and 1989 respectively.
Background:
Every year the University College Dublin Students Union
publishes a Welfare Guide for students, that would contain things such as
contact numbers for the likes of the Samaritans, Donnybrook Garda Station, how
to book an appointment with the doctor(s) on site in Belfield and so forth.
However in 1988, the Students Union decided to add another piece of information to that year’s guide, which was to cause it a whole lot of trouble.
The phone number 794700, is a number that is well remembered by Pro-Choice activists who were prominent within that campaign in the 1980’s; this was the number a person could ring if they were facing a crisis pregnancy, and needed counselling and/or details of abortion providers in the UK.
However in 1988, the Students Union decided to add another piece of information to that year’s guide, which was to cause it a whole lot of trouble.
The phone number 794700, is a number that is well remembered by Pro-Choice activists who were prominent within that campaign in the 1980’s; this was the number a person could ring if they were facing a crisis pregnancy, and needed counselling and/or details of abortion providers in the UK.
As Diarmuid Coogan walked into the Student’s Union
Presidents office in UCD for the first time , still on a high after his
election result, little did he know how fast his mood would change.
Upon looking through the mail that had arrived he came upon a letter from solicitors representing SPUC.
The letter essentially contained a cease and desist notice, calling on the Students Union to withdraw the controversial welfare guide with the illegal information contained.
He called a meeting of the officer board of UCD SU, who then arranged a mass meeting of students to decide how to respond to the threats.
The decision reached by the students was to keep the guide with the information in circulation.
This was a decision that would lead to Gleeson and other UCD SU officials ending up bfore Judge Mella Carroll in the High Court.
At this point the USI and other University Students Unions’s (EG Trinity College and NCAD among others) declared their full backing for UCD.
The number was printed on the front page of the next issue of “USI News”, and SPUC’s lawyers added named officials of the USI , as parties to the case already involving UCD SU.
Upon looking through the mail that had arrived he came upon a letter from solicitors representing SPUC.
The letter essentially contained a cease and desist notice, calling on the Students Union to withdraw the controversial welfare guide with the illegal information contained.
He called a meeting of the officer board of UCD SU, who then arranged a mass meeting of students to decide how to respond to the threats.
The decision reached by the students was to keep the guide with the information in circulation.
This was a decision that would lead to Gleeson and other UCD SU officials ending up bfore Judge Mella Carroll in the High Court.
At this point the USI and other University Students Unions’s (EG Trinity College and NCAD among others) declared their full backing for UCD.
The number was printed on the front page of the next issue of “USI News”, and SPUC’s lawyers added named officials of the USI , as parties to the case already involving UCD SU.
One of the editorials
Mick Murphy wrote in USI News (C) Mick Murphy
The editor of USI News was Mick Murphy, a native of Killenaule County
Tipperary, who studied Mechanical Engineering at what is now knows as Cork
Institute of Technology, and served two terms as National Campaigns Organiser.
He is now a Solidarity councillor for the Tallaght Central electoral area on
South Dublin County Council.
I spoke to him about the infamous court case, and asked him about the infamous
phone number, “Well that {the phone number} was illegal, it couldn’t be in the
phonebook, it couldn’t be anywhere.
If you rang it, people would give you information about abortion, they’d
counsel you, tell you where to get an abortion”
I asked him why that information was placed in both the UCD
Welfare Guide and USI News respectively, “Students Union national policy would have
always been for abortion rights.
Students would have fought the referendum in 1983 for the Eighth”, absolutely opposed to it, implacably opposed to it, and remained opposed to it”.
(..) We’ve always had abortion here, in terms of the termination of women’s pregnancies has been around for as long as women have been having children.
So that wasn’t a new thing, it was only a question of the why’s and the wherefores, and USI just actively opposed it”.
In hindsight the USI publishing the phone number led to serious repercussions for the organisation, but I wondered if they understood the consequences they faced at the time of going to print?
To this Murphy opined, “We did by then because SPUC had already taken UCD to court, and we went around in Autumn 88 and sought a mandate from students to publish, and we did and we carried on publishing it then”
The High Court case took place in the autumn of 1988 and lasted a couple of days, upon which Judge Carroll ruled in favour of the students organisation, a decision SPUC appealed to the Supreme Court.
That case took place almost a year later, and this time the courts ruled in SPUC’s favour.
I asked Mr. Murphy about that judgement;
“Well it {the judgement} was because it was inconsistent with the Eighth Amendment; If you take the Eighth Amendment, if you were to take the Eighth Amendment literally, which is what you are supposed to do.
If you are protecting the lives of the unborn, you shouldn’t be giving out information about how to abortions in England”
Students would have fought the referendum in 1983 for the Eighth”, absolutely opposed to it, implacably opposed to it, and remained opposed to it”.
(..) We’ve always had abortion here, in terms of the termination of women’s pregnancies has been around for as long as women have been having children.
So that wasn’t a new thing, it was only a question of the why’s and the wherefores, and USI just actively opposed it”.
In hindsight the USI publishing the phone number led to serious repercussions for the organisation, but I wondered if they understood the consequences they faced at the time of going to print?
To this Murphy opined, “We did by then because SPUC had already taken UCD to court, and we went around in Autumn 88 and sought a mandate from students to publish, and we did and we carried on publishing it then”
The High Court case took place in the autumn of 1988 and lasted a couple of days, upon which Judge Carroll ruled in favour of the students organisation, a decision SPUC appealed to the Supreme Court.
That case took place almost a year later, and this time the courts ruled in SPUC’s favour.
I asked Mr. Murphy about that judgement;
“Well it {the judgement} was because it was inconsistent with the Eighth Amendment; If you take the Eighth Amendment, if you were to take the Eighth Amendment literally, which is what you are supposed to do.
If you are protecting the lives of the unborn, you shouldn’t be giving out information about how to abortions in England”
 |
| Clare Daly (now TD) speaking at USI Nationa Rally outside Leinster House (C) Ewtro Ireland. |
Three years on from that Supreme Court case, we had the
Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution
of Ireland referendum, that legalised the right of someone to travel abroad to
have an abortion, and to access information about same .At this time there was
a major outcry in Ireland when a fourteen year-old girl, who had been the
victim of rape became pregnant.
A lot of people solely attribute the “X Case” to the Referendum being passed, but did the earlier court battle also have an effect?
The Solidarity Councillor opined; Yes, it was ultimately about the right to information, the right to travel.
In our case it still went on for another ten years, it was still going on up until the late 1990’s”.
(An appeal against the order was successful on March 10th 1997)
A lot of people solely attribute the “X Case” to the Referendum being passed, but did the earlier court battle also have an effect?
The Solidarity Councillor opined; Yes, it was ultimately about the right to information, the right to travel.
In our case it still went on for another ten years, it was still going on up until the late 1990’s”.
(An appeal against the order was successful on March 10th 1997)
The issue of Abortion has come full square back into the
forefront of national discourse and debate with a referendum seeking to repeal
the Eighth Amendment scheduled to take place at the end of May.
 |
| Dail vote in favour of carrying out the referendum (C) Gavin Reilly |
“I’m really excited at the prospect of the Eighth Amendment being repealed after all these years.
As I {have} said nothing really changed here, women just travelled to Britain or wherever.
I would say the people in this country are by this stage are uniquely equipped to discuss this issue, because they have already been discussing it every which way , and had a lot of national debate on it”
The Dail has voted to allow the referendum to take place, and it is now all systems go on both sides to try and convince the majority of voters to either keep or repeal the Eighth Amendment.
Squeaky bum time how are ya!
