Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their compelling evidence and for clarifying a number of important points for us. First, that psychiatrists have the experience and expertise to assess suicide risk, that it is something they all do routinely and that in particular they are used to operating within the statutory framework of the Mental Health Act and of adjudicating on detaining people against their will on the basis of their clinical assessment. That is very helpful to us in the context of some of the comments we heard on Friday. It is also helpful to hear from them that abortion is not a treatment for mental illness but rather it may in rare cases be required in order to avert the risk of suicide. That is the language of the Supreme Court and of the heads of the Bill. That is helpful as that is what we need to work within.

Psychiatrists have also pointed out the highly restrictive nature of the legislation, and as a result the reality that for the majority of women who travel – the 4,000 women - every year for abortion will continue to do so and will not avail of the highly restrictive procedures in this country. Dr. Doyle put it extremely clearly that the majority of the very small number of women or girls who will avail of the measure will be those in the care of the HSE who are unable to travel otherwise. The comments on the amendments on children are very important.

I wish to ask a couple of specific questions on other points about amendments. In head 4 there are currently two specific restrictions on psychiatrists requiring that both of the psychiatrists will be employed at a centre registered by the Mental Health Commission and that one would be attached to an institution where a procedure is carried out, in other words, a maternity unit. Concern was expressed on Friday that this was too restrictive, as there would be too small a pool of psychiatrists from which to choose. Could the witnesses comment on the point and whether we should broaden the definition?

As a criminal lawyer I am extremely concerned about the definition of the criminal offence involved in a head that has not yet been referred to today, head 19, in particular the criminalisation of women. Some of the witnesses have pointed out the reality that many young women in particular are availing of abortion pills over the Internet resulting in self-induced abortion in this jurisdiction. Under the current wording they would be subject to criminalisation and a 14-year penalty. As psychiatrists, do the witnesses believe that would have a chilling effect on women seeking help in after care?

My final question is for Dr. Sheehan. I apologise if I misunderstood him, but is he suggesting that a girl like X who is suicidal because of her pregnancy and has been denied an abortion would never commit suicide? How would one care for a young woman or girl in that situation who wants to kill herself because she is denied abortion. She is very clear about that. Does he suggest she would be detained involuntarily for the duration of her pregnancy? That is a serious suggestion. I apologise in advance if I misunderstood his meaning.