Dr. Áine Sperrin:

I am speaking as a member of the Re(al) Productive Justice project at NUI Galway, which has gathered qualitative data from disabled people and legal, medical and social work professionals about disabled people’s experiences of fertility, contraception, pregnancy, birth, abortion and parenting. We have also analysed the legal and policy framework governing reproductive justice in Ireland but as Ireland is only developing this area in regard to assisted human reproduction, we can only anticipate potential issues from the perspective of disabled intending parents. Like Ms Bonnie, I want to highlight to that ableist discrimination is pervasive across all aspects of a journey to parenthood and that these issues should be addressed in regard to international surrogacy and the wider AHR Bill as we think they intersect.

What we consider very telling is that across 80 interviews in the last two years, we had no lived experience of surrogacy relayed to us and only minor references to it were made by professionals. We do not accept that this absence of evidence means that surrogacy is not affecting disabled people, but rather that this is evidence of the absence of surrogacy as an option towards parenthood on an equal basis with non-disabled people. Where assisted human reproduction services have been referred to in our research, a lack of accessible information, excessive cost and the need to travel abroad have created additional and insurmountable barriers for disabled people.

We know there are huge gaps in accessible information around reproductive services for disabled people who have long been presumed not to need it. Under section 12 of the proposed Bill, it is imperative that the AHR information document is available in multiple formats to ensure everyone can access the information equally and as barrier-free as possible. Any framework that is established to regulate international surrogacy must be clearly explained across these formats.

We are acutely aware that there is a cycle of reproductive services being inaccessible to disabled people, disabled people, therefore, not seeking those services and services then assuming there is no demand for accessible measures or reasonable accommodations to be put in place. We have first-hand accounts of this occurring within assisted reproduction services.

We want to highlight that the risk both to the pregnant person and the resulting child should be interpreted fairly under the proposed section 15 and that disability is not automatically considered a risk. We are very concerned that being a disabled parent has been designated as a risk to children within Tusla’s child protection policies. The proposed section 16 assessments seem to us to be preconception parental capacity assessments. These assessments are inherently discriminatory, as told to us by parents who have endured them and professionals who have conducted them. The assessments do not recognise the true parenting potential where appropriate supports are put in place. We know that disabled parents are being held to a much higher standard than non-disabled parents and we are very concerned that this would be replicated when accessing surrogacy.

The project has heard descriptions of social workers sharing information about disabled people and unnecessarily prejudicing the reproductive services which they receive. This ties in with the proposed section 37, where information can be exchanged between an AHR provider and a medical practitioner without the consent of the individual. We have been told about disabled people being required to have another person present during consultations relating to sexual and reproductive health. This violates the individual's right to privacy and is particularly worrying if the medical practitioners were to disclose private surrogacy-related information in front of inappropriate attendees, such as a family member or a disability support worker.

All of these issues, which disabled intending parents might uniquely face, will potentially impact on the real accessibility of surrogacy to disabled people.

I thank the committee for the opportunity to highlight these issues that the project has come across.