Professor William Binchy:

The discussion has been very interesting and the questions that were raised have advanced the progress of the debate. Both Deputy Kelleher and Deputy Ó Caoláin raised the question of late abortions. It is very interesting to listen to my colleagues who take a different point of view and who are here as experts today. I hope I am not misrepresenting Mrs. Justice McGuinness or Mr. Callanan, but they seem to advocate no time limits. That is what the Bill has - no time limits, right up to birth. Indeed, Mr. Callanan said that if there were time limits, there could be a constitutional challenge to the legislation. This is worth looking at because everybody agrees that in the late period of pregnancy, if some disastrous or life-threatening condition arises for the mother, the doctors must do everything they can. This is not a point of disagreement; it is a point of complete agreement. The doctors will do whatever is necessary and sometimes there will not be a safe delivery of that child. Sometimes that child will die and that is absolutely, as it were, the way it has to be. There is no dispute about that. It is necessary, in that context, that term limits in this area continue right up to birth so as to allow doctors to intervene at all stages during the pregnancy in order to protect the life of the mother. That is absolutely clear.

However, Mrs. Justice Mc Guinness - I hope I am not misrepresenting her, and she will have the opportunity to clarify her position if I am - takes the view that the X case provides for the termination of pregnancy and, indeed, the termination of the life of the child at all stages during pregnancy. That brings us back to the suicidal ideation situation, which is quite different. It is not about removing the child from a danger zone, from the mother, but about terminating the life of the child. That is what the suicide issue raises. The mother says, in these circumstances, "If this child lives, I die." Doctors in these circumstances are faced with a stark choice. It does not matter how many obstetricians come in here and tell the committee that they will not terminate the life in such circumstances; if the law requires them to do so, subject to conscientious objection, they will have to do so. They will have to do so, for example, at 20 weeks, it is agreed. They will have to terminate the life of that child. That is agreed, so the question is, how many weeks more will they have in which to terminate the life of the child? I repeat - and this issue has not been answered by my colleagues here today or by the Government - that the basic principle of the X case decision is that suicidal ideation, on the basis of the very existence of the child, requires terminating the life of that child, not relocating the child. It is important to get an answer from the Government on that particular point. That is my primary response to the contributions today.