Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON HEALTH AND CHILDREN díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 1 Dec 2009

Crisis Pregnancy Agencies: Discussion with Choice Ireland.

I welcome Ms Sinéad Marie Ahern and Ms Maura Lane from Choice Ireland to the meeting. I draw the attention of witnesses to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but the same privilege does not extend to the witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

We have the organisation's detailed presentation and would be obliged if one of the delegates would give a five-minute synopsis of it. Our focus is exclusively on the matter of rogue pregnancy agencies that Choice Ireland has raised with us, on which we would be very interested to hear the delegates' views. Following their presentation, I will ask the members for their comments.

Ms Sinéad Marie Ahern

I thank the Chairman, Deputies and Senators for inviting Choice Ireland to discuss the issues surrounding rogue crisis pregnancy agencies.

A crisis pregnancy is defined as a pregnancy which is neither planned nor desired by the woman concerned, and which represents a personal crisis for her. The Crisis Pregnancy Agency, which was set up by the Government, is charged with helping and supporting women in this difficult situation. This body recognises that crisis pregnancy counselling is a key support for women in this difficult situation. Crisis pregnancy counselling in Ireland is currently provided by a number of agencies, which can be divided broadly into three groups: two option agencies, which provide information to women in crisis pregnancy on adoption and parenting; three option agencies, which provide information to women in crisis pregnancy on adoption, parenting and abortion; and a third group, which while it provides information to women in crisis pregnancy, rather than providing it in an objective and non-judgmental ethical fashion like the first two types of agencies, it frequently uses lies, intimidation, bullying, delaying tactics, breaches of confidentiality, provision of false information and such tactics to specifically sway a woman away from terminating a pregnancy. The key difference is that the two and three option agencies exist more as a sounding board and are non-judgmental and non-directive, whereas rogue agencies are those which aim to pressure a woman in a crisis pregnancy to make a particular decision.

A number of tactics used by these agencies has been identified. They use misleading advertising. They often suggest that they will provide referrals directly to agencies providing abortions, and referrals to family planning services, which they do not. They also suggest that they will provide ultrasound services, which often they do not. They also use graphic videos and images showing abortion procedures, instruments and pictures of foetal remains, which can be very distressing for women in crisis pregnancy. A key tactic they often use to intimidate women to convince them not to terminate a pregnancy is to give them false medical information regarding the potential consequences of abortion.

During my personal investigation of these agencies, I was told that were I to terminate a pregnancy I would be statistically more likely to abuse any children I might have in the future. I was also told that I would be more likely to become sterile due to organ perforation or infection following the termination procedure. I was told that I would be four times more likely to contract breast cancer throughout my lifetime if I terminated the pregnancy, but that if I continued with the pregnancy, I would be protected from breast cancer for the rest of my life. I was told that I was much more likely to open my family up to congenital depression and alcoholism. Such agencies give false medical information that intimidates women not to make a particular decision.

They also tend to communicate inaccurate information regarding the procedures women need to go through to terminate a pregnancy. They advise women that they can cannot be referred for a abortion until eight or 12 weeks post-conception, which delays the process for them. They also refer women for an unnecessary ultrasound, which delays them further before they can make contact with appropriate services. There is also a history of these agencies breaching confidentiality. They contact women's family and friends, and clinics with which women have made appointments, and inform them that the woman concerned is considering having an abortion, which is a huge breach of confidentiality by health care professionals.

We do not know how many women are affected by these agencies every year. We know there are agencies operating in a number of major cities and that they operate outreach agencies where women have been asked to meet rogue crisis pregnancy counsellors in car parks, hotels and other odd locations. From research carried out by the Crisis Pregnancy Agency, we know that 8.6% of women surveyed had come in contact with rogue crisis pregnancy agencies, which suggests that approximately 4,000 women a year are affected by contact with these rogue agencies. We know that one agency, which was at the centre of the baby A adoption scandal, reported seeing 2,000 women between 1994 and 1999. The Crisis Pregnancy Agency has said that, for the most part, women who come in contact with these agencies are not referred on to appropriate services. Therefore, many of these women and their experiences are lost through such contact with these agencies. We are not too sure how widespread the problem is.

Choice Ireland calls for a two-pronged approach to tackling these agencies. First, we seek the regulation of clinics. The recent patient safety report provides for a mandatory licensing system in Ireland to cover both public and private health care providers, which would oblige health care providers to meet the standards and practices of ethics mandated by their professional bodies. We hope these guidelines could be extended to people offering crisis pregnancy counselling. We also call for a crisis pregnancy agency to be subject to monitoring to ensure compliance with these standards. We would also like to see changes in the way crisis pregnancy agencies are allowed to advertise. Many of these agencies advertise themselves in a particular way that suggests they provide abortion information to women.

There have been a number of international cases where the issue of rogue crisis pregnancy agencies have been tackled through the use of very simple legislation. For example, the city of Baltimore on 16 November passed a city ordnance whereby anyone offering crisis pregnancy counselling who does not provide referrals or information regarding determination services or family planning services must clearly post a notice to this effect in their waiting rooms or outside in both English and Spanish. We in Choice Ireland call on the Government to introduce legislation ensuring that agencies providing crisis pregnancy counselling are governed by ethical guidelines similar to those governing other health care services. We also call on it to ensure that all agencies must advise potential clients of information on abortion services, must advise potential clients that they do not provide information on abortion services, as described under the 1995 Act, and that agencies that do not provide abortion information are clearly labelled.

I thank Ms Ahern for her presentation. I support her call for regulation, licensing and proper control of advertising. Obviously, this is a hugely sensitive area and the last thing people who go to crisis pregnancy agencies need is deceit and false information. They are already in a difficult situation. I spoke to somebody who was shattered by the experience, particularly by the video presentation that some of these agencies present.

The Crisis Pregnancy Agency was set up to balance a variety of different organisations and was very successful. It wound up its operations last week and is being incorporated back into the mainstream. The agency succeeded in bringing together several different types of organisations that gave advice. It had set up a very good system which offered the two or three options. The two option system is just for parenting or adoption. Clearly, there are options for people who have differing views on this issue. The fact that these rogue agencies can exist here and are dealing in that way with people who are very vulnerable is unacceptable. Unfortunately, Ireland has been very slow to deal with anything related to abortion, but we will have to address this issue because of the effect of these agencies. Frequently it means that somebody does not go for the correct advice or for the type of advice they thought they would get when they went to these agencies.

The committee should address the issues raised in this presentation and bring to the attention of the Minister or the HSE or both the need to ensure that this area is properly regulated, particularly now that the Crisis Pregnancy Agency is no longer in existence. I welcome the presentation. The issue must be addressed.

I welcome the presentation. I agree with Deputy O'Sullivan. Not only has this area not been regulated but other areas I am familiar with, such as psychotherapy and counselling, are also not regulated. I recently discovered an eight day course that provides a diploma for psychotherapy and counselling. This area should be included under the professional services legislation of 2007 that related to 12 organisations. I understand there was only an effort to include one of those organisations under the legislation. The legislation would ensure that those involved in crisis pregnancy advice were regulated by the State and that there are certain criteria regarding factual, sensitive and true information being given in all advice regarding crisis pregnancy. I have no doubt that this should be included in professional services regulation under the 2007 Act.

I thank Ms Ahern for her presentation and submission. It is clear from both that some of these people are preying on vulnerable people who are in a crisis and feel they have nobody to whom they can turn. They turn up at these agencies where these unsavoury tactics are used. It is a dreadful situation. I have no difficulty about speaking to the Minister about this, and I guarantee that I will do it. There must be certain criteria established before people can set up shop, so to speak. I have no qualifications in dentistry so I will not start pulling people's teeth. If one intends to provide a service, one must be properly qualified and have one's certificates and qualifications available. As Deputy Neville said, an eight day course certainly does not give one the necessary qualifications to give advice and treat people in the psychotherapy area. There are issues in that regard.

There is also the legal issue of people wilfully peddling misinformation and putting the fear of God in the hearts of people who are in crisis. There should probably be an investigation of that as well.

I thank our guests for their attendance and presentation. This is not something one hears discussed every day of the week on public radio or in the usual places where issues of public concern are discussed. Regulation is clearly important. When people find themselves in a very serious crisis the last thing they need is to have that compounded by the trauma of people giving them wrong and very graphic information. If legislation and regulation are put in place to govern this area, it will be about enforcement. We should not expect people who have already been traumatised to go and make a formal complaint. They probably will not have the time in those circumstances anyway. When examining this we will also have to examine the issue of enforcement. We should not have to rely on people pretending their circumstances are what they are not to catch these people out. People are traumatised enough without having to go through that.

I welcome the presentation. I was taken aback by some of it. There definitely must be some type of regulation in this area. Young women and particularly young girls are at their most vulnerable and traumatised in a crisis pregnancy and it is the time they are more open to advice from such agencies. The word "rogue" is a very strong word to apply to crisis pregnancy agencies. I am sure there are crisis pregnancy agencies that are genuine and doing good work helping women in crisis. Perhaps the delegates would elaborate on the use of the word "rogue". How many are rogues or carrying out roguery as I understand roguery? Definitely, regulation must be introduced to ensure that these people are professional and have sufficient qualifications to carry out their duties. Do the delegates believe there is a religious perspective to these rogue crisis pregnancy agencies? Are they saying it is a religious undertaking rather than a general one?

I welcome our guests. I was not present for the presentation but I have read the submission. I have met Ms Ahern in the context of debates on abortion in various colleges. We come from different perspectives but we hope to engage respectfully with each other's ideas.

There are a couple of undeniable truths in this area. One is that all human beings deserve equal respect, nourishing and cherishing. Our Constitution guarantees the equal right to life of the unborn and of the mother. It is critical, therefore, that any agencies involved in advocacy of any kind should have regard to that constitutional mandate. There are two lives to be protected and cherished. While I welcome our guests and believe they are entitled to their views, there is disconnection between agencies that are openly advocating for one side of the abortion issue being the ones who seek to blow the whistle on what they regard as unacceptable practices on the other side. Although I have been critical on occasion of aspects of what the Crisis Pregnancy Agency does, any criticism in this area would be better coming from that agency than from Choice Ireland.

Let us be clear that any person going for counselling deserves to be cared for and told the full truth in a gentle way that respects them. Agencies which do not receive any funding and which are opposed to abortion are what was referred to. There may be a small number of such agencies. There may be other agencies which do not receive funding, which are utterly respectful. If there is concern that some agencies involved in counselling women are in some sense stealing a march or trying to overbear the person's will; that may well be a fair point. However, there is also an onus on Choice Ireland to accept that there is an irony in the situation. Choice Ireland is happy to attack certain unregistered anti-abortion counselling agencies, which do not receive State funding. I wonder, however, if the organisation is as willing to challenge so-called pro-choice agencies that receive State funding and which refuse to inform women, for example, of the latest peer review studies which show an increased risk of long-term negative psychological consequences of abortion on women. I do not hear that coming from the pro-choice lobby.

We have an even greater concern, however. We have a constitutional and legislative set-up, which enables the dissemination of information about services which are lawfully available in another state. In practice, that means there are agencies which are campaigning for abortion without any time limit, as in the British context. In the case of disability, there is no time limit under British abortion law. There are agencies - for example, the Irish Family Planning Association, which I believe is part of Choice Ireland - that receive State funding for pregnancy counselling, while at the same time openly advocating legalised abortion here. How contradictory that is of our settled constitutional position. Let us face it, they do not just advocate abortion on the grounds of the Supreme Court decision of 1992, they want a much less restricted regime. It seems to me that those agencies are in such violation of our constitutional position, that the question must be asked as to whether they should receive State funding at all.

On a point of order, we agreed as a committee that we would stay with the issue we are discussing here today.

It was very clearly about legislation.

We need to do that.

Senator Mullen was not here at the time. I assume he is going to conclude.

I accept that, yes. Perhaps I need to be more succinct. If there is to be regulation, we need the kind of regulation which is even-handed and which ensures that the person receiving counselling is always respected. However, that has implications for agencies that are counselling women at the moment which may not be willing to tell them of the latest evidence of increased risk of mental health problems. In 2008, a New Zealand study was done by an academic called David Ferguson, who would describe himself as pro-choice. Having done everything necessary to make it an impartial study, he came up with a figure of a 30% increased risk to mental health associated with abortion. That study was published in the December 2008 edition of the British Journal of Psychiatry. I invite members of the committee not to take my word for it, but to check it for themselves. The authors said the study’s findings have important implications for the legal status of abortion in societies such as New Zealand and the United Kingdom, where more than 90% of abortions are authorised on the grounds that proceeding with the pregnancy would pose a serious threat to the woman’s mental health. They also pointed out, and this is a significant point——

On a point of order, I wonder of what relevance this is to the issue of Choice Ireland.

I thought it was clear. My apologies, Chairman.

The Chairman should inform Senator Mullen of what the committee agreed in advance of this meeting.

Senators Mullen and Bacik have arrived late and are not members of the committee. I was anxious to facilitate them in making a contribution, if that is what they want to do. I ask Senator Mullen to conclude and I will give equal time to Senator Bacik. When the deputation came to us, we advised it to stick strictly to the subject matter before us, which is the alleged existence of rogue pregnancy agencies.

It is broadening out into something we did not want.

It is and we are not getting into that today.

We should keep it confined.

I must advise the committee that we have two other groups to meet and we have a pretty tight time schedule. I ask Senator Mullen to conclude.

I am grateful, Chairman, for the opportunity to contribute, although I am not a member of this committee. However, as a Member of the Oireachtas I have the right to attend any committee.

On a point of information, Senator Mullen referred to a particular organisation, which does not have the opportunity to respond here, on broad issues that are not relevant to the issue we are here to debate. I think that is regrettable.

It might have been more appropriate to bring along the other side of the argument, for example, the pro-life campaign who would have views on this. In conclusion, we need to focus not just on so-called rogue agencies, although that should be in the context of a proper debate on what is best practice concerning the counselling of women in this situation. It is interesting to note that in Germany, for example, there is a requirement on counselling agencies to talk about the independent life of the unborn child. With great respect, Choice Ireland needs to be challenged on that point lest it is overly myopic in its view of what constitutes best practice.

In the interests of balance, we have given six minutes to Senator Mullen, so Senator Bacik can avail of the same period of time if she wishes.

I hope I will not be as long-winded as Senator Mullen. I will try to be a little more relevant to the topic at issue. I very much welcome the opportunity to speak here and I thank the Chairman for giving me that chance. Like Senator Mullen, I apologise for being late and for missing the presentation. I welcome Sinéad Ahern and Maura Lane, and support the work they do in Choice Ireland. I particularly welcome the work they have done in exposing the appalling practices of so-called rogue agencies. I have read their excellent presentation, which gives a clear account of the sort of deception such agencies practise. As Deputy O'Sullivan said, Senator Mullen named an organisation, the Irish Family Planning Association. As a former director of that organisation, I should say that it has an outstanding record of engaging in non-directive pregnancy counselling. It is important to put that on the record. It is one of the agencies that is funded by the Crisis Pregnancy Agency.

It is interesting that Senator Mullen can quote studies on mental health and so on, but many of these studies have been robustly refuted over the years.

On the issue of rogue agencies, there is clearly a need for regulation and I know that others have supported that. Choice Ireland has put a strong case for regulation in its presentation. They have given some examples of draft legislation in other countries. Do they have a particular model of best practice that we might adopt here? They have not named agencies, but I understand that agencies have been named in other fora and through the media. They include a group called Ask Majella in Limerick, and the Women's Resource Centre in Dorset Street, Dublin, which have been operating as rogue agencies within the definitions given by Choice Ireland. What is the best model of legislation, in Choice Ireland's view, for stopping the deception that is being practised on unsuspecting, vulnerable, pregnant women by agencies like the two I have named?

Thank you, Senator. Can Ms Ahern reply to those points?

Ms Sinéad Marie Ahern

Absolutely. I think Deputy Aylward asked why we chose the moniker "rogue agencies". While we seek to have all agencies regulated, the moniker was to differentiate clearly between the practices of agencies operating unethically and others, such as Cura and Life, which have a strong Catholic ethos. The latter agencies do not advocate abortion, but would still practice in a non-directive, supportive and ethical manner. We wanted therefore to find a way of distinguishing between agencies that practise in that way, and other agencies. That is why we used the term "rogue".

We are not sure about the prevalence of these agencies. Choice Ireland has investigated agencies located in Cork, Limerick, Donegal and Dublin. We have also received reports from crisis pregnancy counsellors operating around the country of outreach services operated by these organisations. Women who phone, but who are not near a centre, will be asked to meet a crisis pregnancy counsellor in a hotel or car park. These centres are widely dispersed and many of them are not permanent, so it is next to impossible to——

What is the motivation behind these rogue agencies?

Ms Sinéad Marie Ahern

Principally, the motivation is to prevent women terminating pregnancies.

The Deputy also asked their religious affiliations. Ask Majella, an agency that operates out of Limerick and Cork, is affiliated to an organisation known as Human Life International, which is an activist group which campaigns against the liberalisation of abortion laws throughout the world.

Many of the techniques and much of the literature used by these agencies is also used by similar agencies which operate in the United States and the agencies operating in the United States have funding from various Christian fundamentalist organisations. Unfortunately, we have not managed to draw direct links between these organisations and the Irish ones. We do not have that evidence to hand. We think there are some religious links.

Senator Mullen made the valid point that, just as we feel that agencies with an anti-abortion stance should be regulated, agencies providing abortion information should also be regulated. I draw his attention to the 1995 abortion information Act which governs the provision of information on abortion services in other jurisdictions in Ireland. On information relating to services provided in a particular jurisdiction, the information must be truthful and objective and must not advocate, promote or be accompanied by any advocacy or promotion of the termination of pregnancy. It is already——

It is there in the letter.

Ms Sinéad Marie Ahern

It is there in the letter. If one is providing direct information on services, it does need to be provided. In addition, any services that are providing information on abortion services in other countries are obliged to provide information on parenting and adoption at the same time, and there is legislation already governing the practice. We would advocate that all of these agencies be governed by the same ethical lines, regardless of their ethos, regardless of whether there are two or three options, or whether they provide abortion information or not. There should be a completely level playing field in that regard.

Senator Mullen looked at the effect of abortion on mental health. He referred to the Ferguson study from New Zealand. Ferguson has produced a further analysis of that data. I will not go into the details of it, but the gist seems to be that where there are negative psychological outcomes from abortion, they tend to occur in situations where the supports offered are not objective or where women do not receive adequate counselling prior to terminating the pregnancy. It would seem that ensuring ethical practice and a high standard in crisis pregnancy counselling would be an effective——

Is Ms Ahern stating there are no potential mental health downsides? Is she going that far?

Ms Sinéad Marie Ahern

Certainly, none of them——

If she is, she is in breach of the Royal College of Psychiatrists.

We are going beyond the brief of today's meeting. I ask Ms Ahern to stick with the subject matter before us. Are there any other questions that have been raised by members that Ms Ahern wishes to address?

Ms Sinéad Marie Ahern

On the question from Senator Bacik about the best model of regulation, the city of Baltimore model, which has only been passed in the past few weeks by the council, is an extremely effective one. It simply suggests that agencies providing crisis pregnancy counselling must display in a prominent place in their waiting rooms whether or not they provide information regarding services or whether or not they refer directly to services. It is very simple, and anyone who is found to be in breach of these regulations is fined for every day they do not display such a sign.

Deputy Neville suggested extending crisis pregnancy counselling to the list of professions governed by the health care services Act, and I would entirely welcome that also.

The Crisis Pregnancy Agency has laid down a set of guidelines for the operation of crisis pregnancy counsellors and crisis pregnancy counselling agencies. I would also suggest a licensing system that could be administered by a body similar to the Crisis Pregnancy Agency - I am aware it has been subsumed into the Department of Health and Children - whereby a licence might be revoked if these ethical guidelines are not maintained. Alternatively, I suggest extending the recommendations of the patient safety report, which would suggest that all health care professionals should operate a licensing system and that the licensing body from each profession would draw up a set up of guidelines. When complaints are made, the licence can be revoked if practices are found to be in breach of those regulations.

I must ask Ms Ahern to conclude. If there are some outstanding questions that have not been addressed, perhaps she would correspond with us in their regard. Is that okay?

Ms Sinéad Marie Ahern

Yes.

I thank the members for their questions and thank Ms Ahern for the presentation.

On a brief point of order, it was inaccurately stated that Life Ireland was a religious organisation. It is non-denominational. That is just for the record. I do not think one would have any objection to that.

We will suspend for a moment while the next group joins us.

Sitting suspended at 4.25 p.m. and resumed at 4.30 p.m.
Barr
Roinn