In his great encyclical Evangelium Vitae, Pope John Paul taught that pro-life legislation "Could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done" by the existence of a pro-abortion law.

Harte argues that the Pope was referring to just means aimed at limiting the harm and not unjust means ("imperfect " legislation). Accordingly, one may not simply opt to restrict abortions as much as possible. Such attempt frequently exclude the "last and least" unborn children: the disabled and those conceived after rape.

Before I started reading the book, I was one of those who believed that it is appropriate to support any legislation that would limit the number of abortions. Now I am not so sure. What message are we sending when we appear to be saying that we care for the right of the healthy unborn but not the unhealthy ones—the most vulnerable of the vulnerable? Being pro-life must surely mean that we want to protect the rights of all unborn children.

As an analogy, would it be right to go to Holland and, in the face of an already existing euthanasia law, campaign to restrict euthanasia for those who are fed up of life but not those who are terminally ill?

I do not see how it is possible to reduce abortion to 22 weeks but at the same time allow abortion up to birth in cases of disability. Such support for "imperfect" legislation as a lesser evil goes against a basic moral principle: it is never lawful to do evil that good may come of it.

So what, according to Harte, may a pro-life legislator do? He could seek ways to repeal as many pro-abortion clauses from a pro-abortion law as possible with the intention of promoting a complete ban. The book also reminds us that there are other ways of being pro-life: looking after the disabled, for example.

At a time when there is a need for the pro-life movement to reflect on the current state of things, this book is very welcome indeed.

Dr. Pravin Thevathasan MRCPsych

Theotokos Catholic Books - Book Reviews Section - www.theotokos.org.uk