John Lahart (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I will first address Mr. McGarr. His company was a finalist in the category of personal injury-medical negligence law firm of the year and it specialises in medical negligence, personal injury, probate and employment law.

Dr. Boylan and I share many objectives. He gave his very valuable time to the cross-party group that had concerns about this, of which I was a member. I thank him for giving his valuable time. We also share an interest in women's health and we were on the same side on the eighth amendment. I share the sentiments the Minister expressed yesterday in relation to the history of the treatment of Irish women in health terms, not just by the church but also the State, over the past 100 years or so. I have had concerns, as Dr. Boylan has, over the past year. I have been following this matter closely and Dr. Boylan made his time available to us and to me, personally, and I am grateful for that too.

I will go through some of Dr. Boylan's statements and start with Mary Aikenhead and how St. Vincent's companies being obliged to uphold the values of other Mary Aikenhead organisations. It is not to uphold the Catholic doctrine but the values of Mary Aikenhead, which are human dignity, compassion, justice, equality and advocacy. Nobody can argue with any of those.

Poor Mary Aikenhead died in 1858. The church's formal position on abortion was established about 15 years later. I do not think Dr. Boylan can say it is not credible that she would envisage procedures such as termination or sterilisation. I do not think that we can credibly attribute what Mary Aikenhead would have thought on this. My view on that is as valid as Dr. Boylan's. He said that it is not credible that these values, including the provision of services such as elective abortion, are directly contradictory to Catholic teaching. The Vatican papers are like something out of "The Da Vinci Code". What vehicle does Dr. Boylan see the Vatican using to impose Catholic doctrine on a State-owned and State-run hospital, which has a constitution that insists not only that these services should be available but also that they must be available? How does he see it imposing this?