Ms Ciara Staunton:

It is, absolutely. We are not dealing with proof beyond a reasonable doubt but where, on the balance of probability, there is a real and substantial risk at some point during the pregnancy. A woman who is, for example, two months pregnant must be, in the clinical judgment of her doctor, at a real and substantial risk. It is important that the legislation acknowledge the importance of clinical judgment. If a doctor believes a woman's life is at risk, even when eight or nine months pregnant, she is entitled to a lawful abortion. At present, doctors are not sure whether the standard of proof is on the balance of probability or beyond a reasonable doubt. There is much uncertainty. The threat of criminal prosecution under sections 58 and 59 of the 1861 Act adds to that fear and uncertainty. Once it is clearly stated that a woman is entitled to a lawful abortion if there is, on the balance of probability, a real and substantial risk to her life at some point during her pregnancy, that uncertainty will be removed. I am sure Dr. Mills will agree that doctors would feel more comfortable with a test such as that.