-----------------------

I was appalled to read the misleading letter from the HEAR campaigner in this week’s Examiner.

To be so patronising towards a young woman who volunteered her own account of travelling to the UK for an abortion in order to inform others, in my opinion, is unacceptable.

It was the young woman’s choice to have a termination just as it was hers to recount her experience in the newspaper - in a very honest, knowledgeable and articulate way, I might add.

HEAR, of course (and as usual), missed the point entirely - the point being that the young woman exercised her right to CHOOSE what was right for her!

Name and address supplied

-----------------------

Further to my letter which appeared in the Examiner on February 7, I am writing again to put right one of the facts I used, which I got entirely wrong.

I said that the case of Roe v Wade in the USA had an effect on the UK which legalised abortion in 1967. I was completely wrong with my dates here, as the Roe v Wade case was in 1973.

It was a stupid mistake and I should have checked it out first. A good friend pointed out my error, and I thank him for it. I learned a valuable lesson.

I also said in my letter that one of the most vocal proponents of both feminism and abortion at that time was a woman called Frederick Mathewes-Green who later changed her mind and is now pro-life.

It is worth referring to this again (this time with the correct facts) to point out that the ‘Roe’ in the case mentioned, which did indeed change America and help legalise abortion, is now herself also actively pro-life.

In 2013 Norma McCorvey, (the real name of Jane Roe) said on American TV: ‘Helping to legalise abortion was the biggest mistake of my life.’ (You can check my facts out on the internet quite easily as I should have done).

Norma McCorvey was a vulnerable girl who was used by clever people with a political agenda (to legalise abortion), and only realised this in hindsight. Another little known fact is that Norma McCorvey, has never in fact had an abortion.

I simply want to point out how one’s mind can change.

The girls and women who mistakenly believe that they are just getting rid of ‘a cluster of cells’ or ‘the contents of the uterus’ which is how a baby is often referred to if it is not wanted, can be traumatised later when they come to understand that they have killed their own son or daughter.

There was a time when I was not sure one way or the other about abortion. I thought perhaps there were certain situations that would warrant it, but in 1983 I became very definitely pro-life.

People who know me assume I am pro-life because of my faith.

This is fundamentally true, but I didn’t have any particular opinion until about 10 years after I became a Christian.

I never really thought about whether or not I agreed with abortion, I simply had no views at all.

However in 1984 my sister had a little boy. He was born before the ‘cut off’ point for abortion, and could have been legally aborted in the UK.

My nephew only lived for 24 hours.

I was shown a photograph of him, and from then on, I had an opinion.

What I saw in the photograph was a little baby – a person – my nephew.

He died before he had the chance to live his life, but he was a person, he is not forgotten and he has a name.

I knew then without a doubt what abortion is. I will never be shaken because of whatever the ‘clever’ people say.

I know what I saw with my own eyes.

Abortion is the taking away of a life before it has a chance to live.

Susan Richardson, Belle Vue Park, Peel

-----------------------

I was disappointed to read Mr Webb’s response to Mr Kerruish-Kelly published on February 7.

Those of us who support Brexit are now urgently in need of people to start to talk about the benefits that come from Brexit not continuing to reflect paranoia about the EU– which is the sterile UKIP line.

Most people who voted for Brexit want to be positive and forward looking rather than dwelling in past British or European history.

The EU and its constituent members clearly aren’t totalitarian bodies.

The EU will hopefully continue to be a huge and varied market for British goods.

People’s positive attitude is reflected in the fact that whilst 36% of the total UK electorate voted for Brexit, UKIP itself only managed to scrape in 0.2 per cent of the seats in the UK Parliament.

The real worry is that 30 per cent of the UK electorate could not be bothered to vote on such a fundamental issue.

Rather than discussing 1215 and Magna Carta we need to be focusing hard on how to stimulate UK manufacturing, how to get back into markets we were once prominent in, how to maintain out the near 50 per cent of UK exports going into the EU, how to prevent the UK Public Service from stultifying growth – which they are very capable of doing, how to encourage needed skills from within and without the UK and how to take advantage of the significant fall in the value of Sterling post-Brexit.

So it’s time to get out of the trenches and be positive and forward looking.

Incidentally whilst I don’t want to focus on history, in the interest of factual accuracy Mr Kerruish-Kelly is absolutely correct that the British Government did not honour its treaty obligations to Poland when, in collaboration with the Germans, the Soviet Union invaded Poland on September 17 1939 – just 16 days after the Germans initial attack.

Ironically the British Government also refused to let the Free Polish forces march at the Victory Parade in London after the war – the only allied forces refused this privilege.

Not a happy reflection on British honour.

We can do better than that!

Peter Fellows, Heaton, Bradford

-----------------------

We were saddened, though not surprised, to hear that fewer gardeners are spotting hedgehogs (Courier, February 10).

We have long known hedgehog numbers are in decline.

Since the turn of the century numbers have dropped by around a third in urban areas and a half in rural ones.

A major factor in their decline is loss and fragmentation of habitat.

We have joined forces with People’s Trust for Endangered Species on a project called Hedgehog Street, designed to help with the habitat crisis. We ask people to create 13cm square gaps in the bottom of their boundary fences and walls to join up usable habitat, and to ask their neighbours, and their neighbours’ neighbours to do the same and so on until the whole street is accessible to hedgehogs!

To date we have had over 42,000 people sign up as ‘hedgehog champions’!

There are lots of simple things we can all do to help hedgehogs, that could make a massive difference, to find out more (or to sign up as a champion) see www.hedgehogstreet.org

Fay Vass, Chief Executive, British Hedgehog Preservation Society, Hedgehog House, Ludlow, Shropshire

-----------------------

I’ve just read your article on the decline in hedgehog numbers (Manx SPCA column, Courier, February 10).

I am writing because UK statistics like these are often used when talking about hedgehogs, however they are not necessarily representative of Isle of Man hedgehog populations.

We have not had any such study carried out on island and therefore cannot say whether or not hedgehog populations are in decline on the Isle of Man.

I think the tips to help protect hedgehogs are wonderful and should be carried out regardless of the decline. I do however feel that the statistics in the article are misleading to the general public. And that it should be stated that these are UK statistics, and that we don’t have data for the Island (or if we do, those statistics should be used).

Pashala Yates, Communications Co-ordinator, Manx Wildlife Trust

Editor’s note: The Manx SPCA column is contributed by the Manx SPCA, for which we are very grateful. It is not written by any of our reporters.

-----------------------

In response to Mr Peter Russell’s letter in the Examiner on February 14 entitled ‘A letter and then a text message’ I wish to post the following response:

With the greatest of respect Mr Russell, prevention is far better than a cure in this case.

Whilst punishing patients for wasting appointments after failing to show might seem a good idea, at that point the appointment, be it a 15-minute one or an hour long one etc is already lost at a cost of tens to hundreds of pounds to the health service in lost clinic time and addition to causing waiting lists to grow.

Placing the offending patients at the bottom of the list again will only increase waiting lists further and those patients will often fail to show again and again further disadvantaging patients that need the appointments.

Sending a reminder letter and text (including postage) likely costs tens of pence.

If the reminder system prevents even a small percentage of patients from failing to show, it will save the health service thousands in lost clinic space and help waiting times.

The hospital has to be seen to address the issue of non attending patients and simply reminding people is proven to work.

Especially as patients who may have forgotten about the appointment and now have other commitments will be encouraged to call in and cancel so the appointment can be given to another patient rather than simply not showing up.

In my opinion, it’s simple economics, sensible and designed to improve access for patients whilst maximising the use of hospital time and reducing wasted appointments.

For the sake of a 10p text, a sheet of a4 and a stamp, it’s worth every penny!

Stephen Griffiths, Hailwood Avenue, Douglas