Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I am pleased to be here to participate in this very important parliamentary debate on the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill. I have been following the debate for a couple of days. Women like me, who have been involved in the women's movement all our lives, have been following it for more than 20 years. It is clear that while the Bill enjoys broad cross-party support, it does not please everyone. This is no surprise. We said, when we had the debate on Savita Halappanavar's tragic circumstances, that what we could do would be very limited, in respect of the Constitution. This Bill was never going to please everyone. There are those who have grave concerns about the inclusion of section 9 dealing with a risk to the life of a pregnant woman arising from suicide. There are others who, like me, would have liked to see other grounds being included such as where there is a diagnosis of a fatal foetal abnormality or when the health of the pregnant woman is in serious danger because any woman who has any experience in this area knows that some women's pregnancies have had an enduring and profound lifelong effect on their health. I understand, however, the reasons behind the provisions enshrined in the Bill and the reasons some provisions cannot be included. This is because the sole purpose of the Bill is to make provision for procedural rights for a pregnant woman who believes she has a life-threatening condition in order that she can have certainty on whether she requires this treatment. The purpose of the Bill is not to confer new rights to termination of a pregnancy but only to meet existing rights, that is, within the constitutional provisions and the Supreme Court's judgment in the X case and in order to implement the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the A, B and C v. Ireland case.

Before I proceed, it is worth reminding ourselves of the findings of this judgment. Three applicants, A, B and C, all of whom had crisis pregnancies, brought proceedings against Ireland before the European Court of Human Rights claiming violations of Articles 2, 3, 8, 14 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In its judgment, delivered on 16 December 2010, the Grand Chamber determined that there had been no violation of the convention in respect of the first and second applicants, Ms A and Ms B. It determined that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of applicant Ms C. The court found that Ireland had failed to respect Ms C's right to private life contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, as there was no accessible and effective procedure to enable her to establish whether she qualified for a lawful termination of pregnancy in accordance with Irish law. The aim of Bill is to provide such a procedure. Pregnant women whose life is at risk have a right to be able to access appropriate medical treatment, including a lawful termination of pregnancy, when they fulfil the necessary medical and legal criteria. The Bill represents the culmination of a process set in train in the programme for Government. This agreement committed the Government to establishing an expert group to examine these issues and advise on how this matter should be properly addressed.

The expert group's report was published at the end of last year and provided a clear roadmap for action. While the report did examine a number of options for implementation of the judgment in the A, B and C v. Ireland case, it was my reading of it that legislation with regulations was the preferable route to satisfy the requirements of the implementation process of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights. Legislating for the X case judgment is, however, a serious and legally complex issue. I believe the Bill strikes a balance between providing an accessible procedure for establishing whether a pregnant woman might undergo a medical procedure which will end the life of the unborn and ensuring safeguards are put in place for the protection of the unborn, where possible. As the Minister for Health last week provided a detailed run through of the provisions of the Bill, I will not cover the same ground, but I will take the opportunity to address some of the confusion and concerns raised in the past few days and months.

For example, concerns have been raised around the need to insert a gestational limit on carrying out the medical procedures covered by the Bill. In this regard, it is important to stress again that the proposed legislation only covers situations where there is a real and substantial risk to the life, as distinct from the health, of a pregnant woman which may only be averted by a termination of pregnancy. To be clearer, it will only allow a pregnancy to be terminated in situations where it is expected that a woman will otherwise die. It should also be clarified that in such situations, while a woman has a right to have the pregnancy brought to an end, the provisions made in the Bill intend to ensure that in circumstances where the unborn may be potentially viable outside the womb, doctors must make all efforts to sustain its life after delivery. It should be noted, however, that the decision to be reached is not so much a balancing of competing rights, rather it is a clinical assessment of whether the mother's life, as opposed to her health, is threatened by a real and substantial risk that can only be averted by a termination of pregnancy.

Taking a more holistic approach to the whole issue, I am aware that some of my colleagues in the Opposition have raised the issue of greater supports for crisis pregnancies in general. I am conscious that the ongoing debate and media coverage of the issue of abortion in the past few months have not been conducted in a vacuum but might have affected the thousands of Irish women who every year go abroad to access a termination of pregnancy for various reasons. In this regard, I remind my colleagues and the general public that there are supports available. Like Deputy Catherine Byrne, I felt the former Supreme Court judge Mrs. Catherine McGuinness made very valid and telling points about the number of Irish women who go to England every year to terminate pregnancies. We should not judge them. There is a reason behind every one of these decisions and no decision is taken in a way that would lead us to believe it was done in a light-hearted manner. I do not believe that for one minute. It does not just apply to young girls or women who are raped. There are all sorts of circumstances and reasons for this decision.

The HSE crisis pregnancy programme funds 15 service providers to provide counselling services in over 50 locations nationwide. Several of these services also provide access to free post-termination counselling and medical check-ups. I urge all women who have a termination of pregnancy to avail of these services, to which they are entitled and which are provided free of charge. Listening to Deputy Michael Healy-Rae say women who have had a termination of pregnancy do not discuss it owing to the shame and hurt they feel, one would wonder why. The language and images used once again during the debate have been appalling.

One cannot expect people to step forward knowing that this is the type of abuse they will get.

The main purpose of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013 is to restate the general prohibition on abortion in Ireland while regulating access to lawful termination of pregnancy in accordance with the X case and the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the A, B and C v. Ireland case. It is my sincere hope that it will provide clarity to women and doctors on the process that is available to them to ascertain whether a termination of pregnancy can lawfully be carried out. If there are minute numbers of women who feel suicidal as a result of a pregnancy, then what are we afraid of? No one has said there is not an issue with suicide and pregnant women. While it is very rare, it does happen. To vote against this legislation on the basis that it will not happen is reckless in the extreme. It is recklessness with regard to women's lives, and those days are long gone.

I commend the Bill to the House.

See this speech in context