Thomas Pringle (Donegal South West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I refer to the amendments on fatal foetal abnormalities.

In the past year or so I have heard the testimony of women who have travelled to Liverpool to have terminations because they had a diagnosis of fatal foetal abnormality. It was very difficult to listen to that testimony and, for me, very difficult to accept that in 2013 Irish society would force women to make those journeys with a baby they had been looking forward to having, knowing that baby had no chance of survival outside the womb and they had to make a very difficult decision. Our society and our community would not accept that they should make that decision here, in the comfort of their family and familiar surroundings. We force them to travel to Liverpool to have terminations. Thankfully, they were treated very well there and received the compassion they should be getting at home.

In the past year I have also listened to the testimony of women who were given a diagnosis of fatal foetal abnormality but decided to continue with the pregnancy and have their babies who subsequently died, some within minutes, some within hours, some within days. That was a choice they could make, however, one we have denied to other families. Thankfully, I have three healthy children and have never been in that situation. I do not believe any family or couple, or any Irish woman should be put in that situation and be forced to travel to England to have a termination in Liverpool. We should be able to deal with this, as I believe we can. The Supreme Court in 1992 did not test this definition or argument; no evidence has been heard in its regard then or since. Are we going to wait for a woman to take a case in the High Court, appeal it to the Supreme Court and have the definition changed in that court, and then wait another 20 years before we can bring forward legislation to implement the court's decision - if it makes that decision? I do not believe we should. We can accept these amendments and, if necessary, have them tested in the Supreme Court. As I understand it - the Minister of State, Deputy White, will correct me if I am wrong -- this amendment could be accepted and the President could ask the Supreme Court to adjudicate on it. If the court ruled against it, that section would fall from the Bill but the actual Bill would stand. That would be a very quick solution to this problem. I do not believe the Attorney General is infallible or that the legal advice we have in support of these amendments is infallible but I believe the Supreme Court should be in a position to test it. By doing that, putting it to the test, we would be doing a service to everybody in our society. It is vitally important to show that compassion. We should not continue to force women into making that extremely difficult decision.

See this speech in context