Criticism Over Ross Douthat’s Abortion Article

Ross Douthat’s article in the New York Times titled “The Texas Abortion Experiment” was not a greatly flawed piece of writing by any stretch of the imagination, yet reading it one cannot help but feel like he does not understand the enormity of the problems in Ireland. I shall start by saying Europe in general is one matter, for it is true that most countries in Europe do indeed have a time based restriction on most pregnancies. This is partly for the possible trauma inflicted on the baby, but it’s also because it is well documented that the procedure is more painful and dangerous the later the term of pregnancy. Ireland as a specific case, on the other hand, is an entirely different story.

Firstly, he mentions casually that women with the resources can simply go to a different country to have an abortion – Does this not undermine everything he is about to say? It is simply not a credible argument to point to Ireland’s relatively low prenatal mortality rate and relative gender equality and say this is still possible with abortion unavailable, but then point out the fact that abortion is not only available but widespread. I will add that it is widespread too, it's not a matter of "Some go abroad", we're talking thousands of women yearly. Hence, Ireland’s maternal mortality may be relatively low, but this is nothing to do with the absence of abortion.

Secondly, he goes on to dismiss the point that in Ireland women are more likely to be taken advantage of because of the lack of widely available abortion. We’ll set aside for a minute he has already undermined this point by mentioning the availability of abortion in other jurisdictions. The fact is that many Irish people do feel these laws are unfair towards women. For example, a woman who has been raped and becomes pregnant can’t seek abortion, and if she does, she faces a jail term twice the length of that of her rapist. The original version of the law was introduced in 1861, a time when gender equality was mere myth in Europe. Let’s be generous and assume there is no misogynistic intent behind this law, and say it’s there purely for the baby. It does not change the fact this is not a gender-equal law.

Finally, he directly associates liberalism of healthcare as an answer to abortion - “Abortion can be safely limited only when the government does more to cover women’s costs in other ways”. While it is true that a great number of abortions happen because the mother believes she cannot afford to raise a child, simply supplying money in terms of benefits will not fix the problem. I have made this argument before over rogue Fine Gael TD Peter Mathew’s speech in the Dáil. Not only is it unrealistic in all but the richest of countries to pay this kind of benefit, it doesn’t change the fact that raising a child is a full-time job. Once again I’ll be generous and assume that the mother is able to survive on these benefits without a partner – She still is not in the work place, she’s not advancing her career, she’s not becoming powerful. Is it so difficult to assume that a woman might just have aspirations in life beyond having a child?

In short, reading through Doudhat’s article where it covered Ireland was like hearing the observations of a man who owns a mine on the conditions for the people who work for him (Without the assumed difference of status). I felt like he trivialised our situation. You can sort of see how he might understand see it this way, but it’s written from a perspective detached from the reality of Irish life. I believe he needs to come down to the coal face, get his hands dirty, and hear some of the stories with his own ears to gain a true understanding of Ireland.

(Opinion by J.Nolan,  Photo from the New York Times)