Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I believe I heard Dr. Craven correctly. He stated that a conscientious objection does not arise when there is evidence-based practice and a duty to both patients. What about the Supreme Court judgment in the X case which was not based on medical evidence or best practice? In Dr. Craven's view is this judgment ethical?

I agree with Dr. Fletcher that we have an ethical obligation to value women's lives. Is there an equal ethical obligation to value the life of the unborn? I am somewhat uncomfortable with Dr. Fletcher's recommendation No. 1, about the definition of the unborn. She said this should be defined in order to exclude those foetuses which have lethal abnormalities. Medical error is not uncommon and doctors frequently get things wrong. I met a mother recently who gave birth to twins. In the UK she had been advised to have a termination on the basis there was a strong likelihood the babies would be Siamese twins. They are now healthy eight year olds. In formulating her view, I wonder what research Dr. Fletcher has done and whether she has asked mothers and women who have carried babies that had lethal abnormalities what status they would have put on the unborn. I know many women are delighted to be pregnant, even though they may not give birth to a live baby, or a "take home" baby, as it is sometimes called.

My final question is for Ms McDonagh. Earlier I asked Mrs. Justice McGuinness about the introduction of time limits and she said we should have a go, in spite of the fact that it might be deemed unconstitutional. Would that be Ms McDonagh's view? Yesterday, for example, Dr. Peadar O'Grady, representing Doctors for Choice, suggested a limit of eight to nine weeks. If time limits are introduced would it follow that under head 4, after a prescribed time limit all unborn babies would be safe?

I beg the Chairman's indulgence for a final question to Ms McDonagh, to hear her legal wisdom. In the event of premature induced delivery, post viability, where the baby may be severely disabled, could the State be deemed liable, given it would be working against best practice under head 4?