Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I genuinely believe every single Deputy in this Chamber has come to his or her view on the basis of compassion and justice, no matter what their perspective is. I also believe we enter dangerous waters when we decouple health policy from peer reviewed medical evidence. In a matter of life and death, if it is a choice between the strident voices in this Chamber and the medical expertise of 130 psychologists, I know where my trust is going to lie. I would like to quote briefly from the peer reviewed meta-analysis from Dr. David Ferguson who is philosophically pro-choice:

There is no available evidence to suggest that abortion has therapeutic effects in reducing the mental health risks of unwanted or unintended pregnancy. There is suggestive evidence that abortion may be associated with small to moderate increases in risks of some mental health problems. [He includes suicidal behaviour in these health problems.] These conclusions have important if uncomfortable implications for clinical practice and the interpretation of the law in those jurisdictions which require abortion to be authorised on medical grounds. In these jurisdictions, the great majority of abortions are authorized on mental health grounds. The present re-analysis suggests that, currently, there is no evidence that would support this practice.

In his comments at the health committee hearings Professor Kevin Malone said:

By foregrounding a theoretical risk of suicide in women, and enshrining "suicidality" in Irish law, the proposed legislation runs the risk of further invisibilising, normalising, and at worst exacerbating the much more real and volatile threat of increased suicide risk in Irish men, and potentially accelerating suicide risk in young women also.

The Minister for Justice and Equality correctly says there was no evidence to challenge the psychologists' evidence in the X case, but we have dozens of hours of such evidence now. To come to the same decision as the Supreme Court, despite the fact that we have this evidence, would be grossly negligent.

See this speech in context