The House of Representatives debates abortion: ‘I can advise everyone to listen. It’s about the visions of life’

The plenary hall in the temporary parliament building.Image Bart Maat / ANP

In their coalition agreement, the government parties call the reflection period for abortion a ‘personal consideration for MPs’. The CDA and ChristenUnie must have foreseen during the formation that this would not turn out to their advantage?

‘The tradition of the Christian parties is to block medical-ethical matters in a coalition agreement. This also happened in 2017, with the previous cabinet in this composition. The wording has now been chosen to leave initiative proposals that had already been submitted to the House as free issues. This means that MPs can vote as they see fit and conscientiously.

‘ChristenUnie and CDA have been well aware that there is now no blockade in the coalition agreement. As a kind of peace offering, the same wording has been chosen for an initiative proposal by Kees van der Staaij of the SGP, who wants better information and guidance for women who have an unwanted pregnancy. But that bill is still at a much earlier stage. There is an entire procedure before it is even put to the vote.

‘On the one hand, you might think that it is strategically useful for D66 and the VVD to introduce this bill immediately at the start of the coalition. But it’s also a bit of a coincidence that it’s already on the agenda.’

Are only the Christian parties against abolishing the reflection period?

‘On an earlier motion on this subject, only the three Christian parties and Denk voted against. Forum for Democracy now also seems to be against it. I don’t know how JA21 or the BoerBurgerBeweging will vote. But with the signatories of the bill (D66, PvdA, GroenLinks and VVD, red.) you have exactly 75 votes. The SP and the PVV also seem in favor: then you even have a large majority. That was also the case when a motion with the same meaning was voted on a year ago.’

Do you suspect that this issue will lead to internal tensions in the Rutte IV cabinet?

‘No, this was discussed during the negotiations on the coalition agreement. It might have been a problem if the Christian Union’s health minister had been there. But that is not the case: Ernst Kuipers is from D66. The state secretary of that ministry is from the ChristenUnie, but he knows what he has signed for. I don’t think this will cause any more political problems.’

And among the supporters of the Christian parties?

‘It hurts there. But they also see there that you cannot keep imposing blockages indefinitely. They will continue their line of promoting alternatives to abortion, from support for mothers living alone with a child to adoption.’

How did that reflection period actually end up in the law?

‘In 1911, abortion was made a criminal offense in the Netherlands, to prevent immorality. But abortion has always existed. Before the Second World War, doctors already did it, but so did unqualified people. For women, that was often terrible. In the 1960s came the Pill and the feminist wave, with the Boss in your own belly movement. At that time there was a doctor from the Wilhelmina Gasthuis in Amsterdam, which has since been merged into the AMC, who stated on television that he would help women who were in “existential need”. That actually became the first abortion clinic in the Netherlands.

‘This is how a semi-legal abortion practice was created. In 1976, VVD and PvdA came up with a private member’s bill that was adopted by the House of Representatives, but rejected by the Senate. Three years later, in the first Van Agt cabinet, the VVD and CDA reached a compromise: the Termination of Pregnancy Act. In 1984, that law came into effect with a five-day cooling-off period.

‘It sounds very paternalistic, but the law states: ‘A woman who is not entirely sure that she actually wishes to terminate the pregnancy, a situation that is by no means exceptional, will have the opportunity for a few days to reflect further and possibly reconsider her initial decision. intend to return.” It suggests that a woman who has an unwanted pregnancy is emotionally unstable. That was the tenor then.’

Both Houses now seem to agree with the abolition of the reflection period. So what is Thursday evening’s debate about?

‘About the formulation of the bill as it stands. That it does not become a hasty practice, but remains a careful process. And the Christian parties, especially the ChristenUnie and the SGP, will emphasize the protection of the unborn life. For them that is a guideline in politics.’

‘I can recommend everyone to listen to the debate. It is about the visions of life and the unborn life and how to deal with them. These are the most supported debates in the House of Representatives.’

The debate is over prime timefrom 7 p.m. to 10 p.m.

‘Yes, although those debates do tend to run a bit longer. But it is nice to see how the political groups deal with such a subject and choose their own position. Debates about the donor law were also the best I’ve seen in recent years. It’s about something that concerns everyone. It’s about questions of life and death.’

ttn-23

Bir yanıt yazın