Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will speak on amendments Nos. 22 and 27 and pursue a point raised by Deputy Calleary. There is much confusion among the public about gestational limits in the legislation. It is a very emotive issue. I ask the Minister to clarify the point. As I understand, the danger in providing for a gestational limit in the context of a woman whose life is threatened during pregnancy is that a situation is reached when the woman is informed she is past the point of rescue. I have listened to Deputy McGrath and Deputy Terence Flanagan. It is illogical to say that nothing will be done to save the woman's life. However, if the woman's life is sacrificed then so is the life of her unborn child. I ask the Minister to clarify that issue because this is about the treatment of women whose lives are in danger. If a gestational limit is introduced, be it ten weeks, 20 weeks or 30 weeks, a woman who is sick in her eleventh week or 21st week or 31st week, in a manner that threatens her life, will be told she is past the point of rescue. That is a barbaric proposal to be included in legislation which deals with saving lives.

I also have some concerns about the definition of "viable" used in amendment No. 22. It refers to the capacity to survive independently outside the womb by reason of gestational age. If a woman is certified as entitled to a termination at 23 or 24 weeks, that child is viable but not independently viable outside the womb. We need to be careful about having an objective that is desirable but using a manner of expression that may result in our not achieving the objective. I want to tease out that point a little further.

I refer to sections 7, 8 and 9. In the context of amendment No. 49 and similar amendments, I ask both Ministers whether it is an inevitable consequence that an unborn child will die as a result of the certification. If it is not an inevitable consequence then surely these amendments make sense.

See this speech in context