John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am pro-life and anti-abortion. I also support the protection of the mother's life. Every debate on abortion over the years has been very emotive, polarised and, in most cases, carried out in highly-charged circumstances with little respect shown to the opposing view. I would have hoped that this time it could be different but so far the signs are not good.

I was one of those who genuinely held that sufficient guidelines were in place to protect the mother's life. I was clearly of the view that the law and the Irish Medical Council guidelines of allow doctors to intervene to provide essential medical treatment to women and recognise this may sometimes result in the unintentional death of the baby. In all circumstances where a pregnant mother experiences a life-threatening complication, the ethical and legal requirement should be to provide whatever treatment is necessary to protect the life of that mother.

The tragic case of the death of Savita Halappanavar, which touched the heart of the nation and the wider world, has been used by some to heighten the emotion in this debate, without the facts of the circumstances of the case being established. The facts of the case must be established and only when this happens can we use them as an example or can blame be attached.

The media will also be very much under scrutiny when the true facts emerge. How many true facts got lost in the reporting, such as that UCHG had not had a maternal death for the previous 17 years, how some parents of staff working in the hospital were visited in their homes by media outlets trying to get a sensational angle as the story developed and how UCHG staff members were confronted with vitriolic comments on the streets of Galway based on comments made in the media? I thought it could be taken for granted in a democratic country that one was innocent until proven guilty. In this context I note the journalist who broke the story is coming to the view that we should await the outcome of the inquiries before reaching judgments.

It is now being put forward that nothing has been done for 20 years so we should now make a decision and act on it within a few weeks. I do not agree with the analysis that nothing has been done, as two referenda have been held, one of them in 2002 which was narrowly defeated. In 2002 people were confused by the attempt to deal with the X case. This is evidenced by the fact pro-choice and pro-life supporters, who had dramatically opposing views, voted "No".

I will support any measure which will bring clarity to the medical profession attempting to save the life of a mother. However, I am of the view that while one can bring clarity or put Medical Council guidelines into legislation, one cannot possibly legislate for all eventualities. I also believe the suicide issue is too complex to deal with in the short timeframe suggested.

See this speech in context