THE EDITOR, Sir:

I FOUND it important that I respond to Frederick E. Nunes' letter of March 25 on abortion and Barbados. Barbados is not a conservative island. The acceptance of homosexuality aside, Barbados also has virtual support for prostitution and was on the verge of permitting prostitutes to ply their trade openly during World Cup Cricket to boost attendance. There are two bars on every corner, and the dancehall songs that even Jamaicans consider too violent or lewd are blasted from cars and played at every lyme and party. A recent study showed that 86 per cent of young persons aged 13-18 were sexually active. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act comes as no surprise in light of the values of the Barbadian society.

In October 2007, church leaders and the general public in Barbados gathered to air their criticism of the Barbados Family Planning Association (BFPA) and the legalisation of abortion. This came in the wake of the association receiving an international prize from the controversial Planned Parenthood Federation in the United States and a US$25,000 prize. The BFPA has also come under attack from the general public for virtually soliciting abortions through advertisements.

Living in Barbados, I have witnessed firsthand the "abortion culture" among my Bajan peers. There is no accountability or responsibility when it comes to sex because, outside of low sensitisation to the AIDS dilemma, the common line is that "it is only $x for an abortion". This nonchalant attitude is accompanied by frequent letters to the editor in the local papers on emotional strain related to pressure from partners to get an abortion, and advice on post-abortion stress, despite the fact that the act states that patients must be referred for counselling after an abortion.

Barbadians Dr Frederick Nunes and Dr Yvette Delph conducted a study in 2007 on abortion, tracking 19 doctors working at the QEH, the public hospital. During four weeks, 244 abortions were conducted by the doctors, and they claimed that the number was far less than how many they normally conducted - between 417 and 517 per month. We can contrast this number with the 513 teen pregnancies that took place in 2005.

Question of necessity

Perhaps the most controversial development from the legalisation of abortion is the Institute of Regenerative Medicine, which uses purchases of aborted foetuses for stem cells. It costs around BDS$54,000 for the cosmetic treatment to halt the ageing process. I assume that the only difference with having an act is that you begin to curb the 'backroom' abortions that supposedly butcher women, which are performed by the same doctors who will get permission to do so. The fact is that in Jamaica, abortions are taking place and under current law, it is illegal. Successive governments have consistently turned a blind eye to the illegality. One would be hard-pressed to prove that the illegality is unjust and, therefore, should be disobeyed on the grounds of natural law.

My main issue is the question of necessity. There is shame associated with teen pregnancy on one hand, and inconvenience on the other, whether financial or otherwise. The main aim of legal abortion (that which addresses the majority of the population), therefore, is to get rid of the shame or the inconvenience, and the casualty is the life of a human being. If that is the main aim, moral debate aside, that is not enough to take life and the opportunity for life for a foetus that cannot yet make the choice.

I am, etc.,

MARC F. RAMSAY

marcramsay@gmail.com

Kingston 6

Via Go-Jamaica