Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the three witnesses. There there are varying views in their three presentations. Large parts of legislation are quite agreeable to the vast majority of professionals and the broader public but the issue of self-destruction is something that divides Irish society. I wanted to get the varying views of our three witnesses on this. First and foremost, if there was no constitutional obligation because of the X case to bring forward legislation on self-destruction, should it be included in any event if one were introducing legislation in this area? In other words, do the witnesses believe there is the potential of a threat to one's life because of suicide and should it be legislated for, even if the X case was never heard in the first place?

The Irish Medical Council's guidelines of 2009 include suicide as a ground for a termination. I get the impression from Dr. Coulter-Smith that he believes there is never a reason to terminate a pregnancy because of the threat of self-destruction. I want to get clarity on that point.

In the broader context, what we are trying to do here, as Dr. Mahony has pointed out, is to bring forward legislation that saves the lives of women and gives clarity to the professionals who are dealing with them. There are varying views on how that should be done but the Government has decided to legislate. In that context, are the witnesses satisfied with the legislation before them in the practical terms in respect off making interventions to save the life of a woman and that it will not inhibit them in doing that and that it will give them protection? Are they satisfied it will not inhibit them in dealing with an emergency case, a non-emergency case or a case of self-destruction?

I wish to ask the witnesses a question that I have asked the previous witnesses and it is about an issue to which Dr. Mahony has referred. We need to get clarity on this issue, which I have already got, but I raise it for the benefit of the broader public who may be following the proceedings and others who have an interest in this matter. It is the area of foetal viability and when the foetus is on the cusp of viability. Obviously in emergency situations, a decision must be made there and then but in non-emergency situations or in a case of self-destruction, do obstetricians in the course of their duty in trying to save the life of the woman look at the viability of a foetus and believe that if they could extend the time of intervention it would give the foetus greater viability?

People have asked me to raise the issue of how a termination of a pregnancy is performed. It has been described as an interruption of pregnancy. In Britain there is an intention to destruct the foetus whereas the opposite is the case here. Every effort is made to save the foetus, regardless of gestational age. I would like to get clarity on that. Is a pregnancy terminated normally through inducement or caesarian section? I understand they would be the normal ways of inducing early pregnancy. I would like clarity on that issue. I met many members of the public in recent weeks and these are issues on which they would like certainty and the witnesses are the people best placed to give it to us.