Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

There is a little confusion about this because essentially what we are trying to do is to insert in the legislation something the Minister has told us is constitutional. It is not a question of trying to do something that in any sense contravenes the Constitution or of doing something additional. We are simply saying we recognise it is constitutional and, therefore, we feel it is necessary to insert it in the legislation. It is not about putting a time limit on any medical intervention to save the life of a woman. There might be a misinterpretation of the intention or the clear reading of the amendments that have been tabled. Rather, it puts a time limit on the destruction of the life of the unborn and a clear obligation and onus on the medical professional who intervenes to save the life of the unborn.

I have a document from the Minister's office that was sent to me yesterday. The second sentence reads "as currently drafted the Bill does prohibit the killing of a viable foetus and including a reference to viability is not necessary". The acceptance is there. The Bill does prohibit the killing of a viable foetus. What I have tried to do in my amendment is to define viability for the sake of clarity and enable the Minister to set it out in regulation, taking into account best medical practice and obliging the Minister to take all available advice to set out what that viability actually means. That is all we are asking him to do. The amendment does not for one second restrict or prohibit the capacity of a medical professional to intervene to save the life of the woman. It simply says that after a certain period when viability is reached, there is a clear legislative, not just constitutional, onus on that medical practitioner or practitioners to save the life of the unborn. That is all. It is simple. It is black and white.

See this speech in context