Ms Jennifer Schweppe:

I thank members for the invitation to present this morning. In my written submission I set out six substantive issues which I believe need to be addressed by legislation. I have also highlighted several ancillary issues, some of which relate to issues already in some way examined by the courts, such as travel and information, and some of which address issues which have not yet been before the courts. I will discuss those at the end.

I am basing my submission, as I have based all my academic writing, on the assumption that we are legislating for Article 40.3.3°. I am not here to question its presence in the Constitution; I am simply here to outline how we fulfil our obligations, which are set out in the Constitution. I base my submission on the law as it is established and the Constitution as it is interpreted. I am not here to question the findings of the Supreme Court in the X case or any other case, but I will highlight some lacunae in the law or inconsistencies in judicial pronouncements where appropriate.

There has been reference to the risk of suicide justifying a termination. On this matter I believe the X case represents the law. There is no room for debate with regard to the issue of suicide. Only the people, through a referendum, or the Supreme Court, on appeal, can change this position. Further, it is insulting to women to suggest that they will flock to doctors and assert suicide in an effort to pull the wool over their doctors' eyes simply to get an abortion. Furthermore, it is insulting to the medical profession to suggest that the wool would be pulled over its eyes.