Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am grateful to the Cathaoirleach for his latitude. I am galloping through these points and I think he would agree that they are all sincerely and credibly asked. Deputy Higgins was happy that the Medical Council was confining itself to principle-based guidelines. If the statement that a doctor must not take part in the deliberate killing of a patient is not a principle, what else is?

Can Dr. Crowe give an example of another specific prohibition or exhortation relating to treatment that was removed from the guidelines? It was suggested that this was one of many changes.

Dr. Crowe said the Irish Medical Council came to its decision by consensus. If one or two doctors or one or two other members of the Medical Council, of the ethics committee or of the full council, had opposed this momentous decision to excise the statement to which I have referred, would there have been a vote, and would Dr. Crowe have been in a position to give us the result of such a vote here today?

Finally, I am very disappointed that the Irish Pharmacy Union is not here today to deal with the issue of conscientious objection. There is a lot of concern that conscientious objection in this country is already very limited. There is a question as to whether, if there were a change in the law, institutions would have protection or whether, if, for example, a pharmacist, a doctor, a nurse or somebody just operating on the administration side believes that this is genuinely not proper medical procedure, or if it is against his or her professional and ethical instincts, whether religious or not, he or she can or should be able to avoid having any hand, act or part in the matter. As regards saying to somebody, "Okay, you need not provide the potion, but you must point to a colleague who will or tell the person he or she can get it at No. 10 across the road", is Dr. Crowe satisfied that that is adequate provision for conscientious objection?