Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Bill that is being introduced by Deputy Clare Daly is part of the unfinished business from the Bill that was debated here in June 2013. At that time, there was much discussion and a vote on an amendment that would have made provision for terminations in Ireland in cases of fatal foetal abnormality. Today, we are discussing very tragic cases in which women and parents are told that the foetus - the baby in the womb - does not have a chance of surviving outside the womb. As far as I am concerned, this Bill has a very narrow remit. It is not about abortion on demand. It is about very specific cases.

It is undoubtedly heartbreaking, harrowing and unbearably sad for any parent who is expecting a child to be told of a fatal complication with the pregnancy. When we speak about fatal complications, we do not mean mental or physical disabilities, Down's syndrome or the possibility of autism or a visual or hearing impairment. If the term "fatal complication" included any of those things, I would not support this Bill. I support the right of the unborn to be born. In the case of a pregnancy where the medical opinion and facts show there is no chance of life outside the womb, there should be a right to a termination in this country without the additional stress and expense of travelling abroad.

I think we need to know someone who has had the heartbreaking news of a diagnosis of fatal foetal abnormality broken to them to understand the devastation that is experienced in such circumstances. I refer to people who have known the joy of being pregnant, looking forward to the birth, buying the baby clothes and the pram and thinking of names, only to be given a picture of the scan and told the medical fact that the unborn will not survive outside the womb. Such people then have to choose between carrying the unborn to full term, with the possibility of miscarrying in the meantime, and travelling to the UK for a termination with all that entails.

We need to consider whether constitutional protection can be afforded to a foetus that does not have the capacity to be born alive. In one case, Mr. Chief Justice Murray found that the fertilisation of the ovum is the first step in the procreation process and that to extend constitutional protection is to assume the capacity to be born. If this is not the case, as in the case of a foetus found to be suffering from a fatal abnormality, the lack of a capacity to be born as such changes the rights of the foetus in relation to the mother. Cases before the courts are indicating that the original legislation is not comprehensive and is not allowing for certain cases. A brave and forward-looking Government is required to lead with amendments to repair unintended deficiencies in the current legislation.

I would like to address the argument that it is constitutionally inappropriate to place the rights of the unborn on an equal footing with the rights of the mother when the foetus is found to be unviable. Those involved in the drafting of this Bill have made the legal argument that "foetuses suffering from fatal foetal abnormalities constitute an exception to the prohibition on termination of pregnancy under Article 40.3.3° on the grounds that in these circumstances the balance between the right to life of a woman and the unborn shifts in favour of the woman". While the original point of the legislation is to protect the life of the unborn, a kind of legal vacuum or difficulty occurs when the unborn's life is not a viable prospect.

Under existing legislation, the duty of the State is to defend the rights of the unborn in so far as it is practicable. Clearly, non-viability has an impact on the practicability and on the mother's rights under Articles 40 and 41 of the Constitution and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Any attempt to balance a life that is full and complete with a life that has been or will be cut short due to tragically unfortunate circumstances, as in cases of fatal foetal abnormality, heaps misery on women and parents who deserve compassion, sympathy and care in such very difficult circumstances.

I agree with the argument that this cannot be left to the legal profession. It has to be up to the Government to lead on this. We know the Attorney General has advised that the Bill is unconstitutional, but others disagree. Ms Schweppe, who assisted in drafting this Bill, has said that "the State is under no obligation to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term where there is no prospect of life". It takes a great deal of courage and strength for women and parents to decide to terminate a pregnancy in the knowledge that the unborn will not survive outside the womb. Under the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, Irish women have the right to make the journey to the UK for a termination, but I do not believe citizens of Ireland should have to travel abroad in these circumstances. It is cruel to force a woman to carry an unviable life to full term. In many cases, foetal complications can cause miscarriage, which in itself can lead to further health problems, regardless of the trauma of the whole experience of having to travel.

The very narrow remit of this legislation extends to those unborn who cannot survive outside the womb. It is about allowing women and parents whose unborn will not live outside the womb to have that termination in Ireland. As Deputy Clare Daly, it is about clarity for people in this very difficult situation. I find it a total contradiction that medical advice can be given about travelling to another jurisdiction for a termination, but that termination cannot be held in this country. I want to acknowledge all the work Deputy Daly has done on this Bill. There is a dire need to look at this properly.

See this speech in context