Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the debate, the tone of the debate and the contributions by Members of the Oireachtas who have different views on what ought to happen in this case. I commend the previous speaker, Deputy Harty, on such a careful, reasoned and compassionate contribution to the debate. His contribution has been in the context and tone of many of the other speakers. Without a doubt, for many people, this is a difficult personal issue. It is an emotional, medical and legal issue and one that might have lifelong consequences for individuals. The work of the Citizens' Assembly and the committee on the issue has set the scene for what I hope will be a very thoughtful and positive debate on the eighth amendment.

I want to be clear at the outset that I opposed the introduction of the eighth amendment in 1983. I recall being the subject of some vociferous criticism from people who had the opposite opinion because I had a baby in my arms. People simply could not get their heads around the fact that woman who had children and who loved their children could also see circumstances where a woman's right to choose is important to her life, the life of other children she might have, the life of her family or to other commitments. I am really pleased the country is going to be asked to consider the eighth amendment and whether it should have a place in our Constitution. My position has not changed. I do not believe the insertion of the eighth amendment into the Constitution was in the best interest of women or babies. I would like to see its repeal.

Let me be very clear about the repeal. I go back to the original advice given by the, sadly, recently deceased Peter Sutherland who was then Attorney General. He strongly advised that the Irish Constitution was not the place for a section like the eighth amendment and that no matter the intentions of people, once it went into the Constitution, it would have profound legal and social implications and so it has proved to be. I do not know that some of the people who argued for the retention of the eighth amendment ever wanted to see what happened to Savita Halappanavar happen. That was just one of a number of cases that recurred over and over again every couple of years and which brought into the public domain the private suffering this caused to many people. We do not fully know about it. We know some of the stories because friends, relations, families and neighbours knew. Although much of this was secret, much was very well known at local level. In a certain sense, it is absolutely amazing that the Joanne Hayes case and what happened in the Kerry babies tribunal has returned as a matter of discussion and debate. At that time I was living in Africa, working in development in Dar es Salaam. I met somebody who was working in the ESB walking along the beach in Dar es Salaam wearing an "I'm a Kerry baby" t-shirt. This was in the days before the Internet, easy communications, online newspapers and so on. Pat, my husband, and I wondered what it was about. When told about it, we could not get our heads around it. We drove to the Irish embassy house to see if they had any copies of newspapers so we could try to understand what it was about. We have many dark secrets in Irish social history which until recent decades nobody knew anything about. No one ever worked in an orphanage, and no one ever sold meat, fruit, vegetables or food to an orphanage or provided services.

When I was first elected to the House in 1992, the story of people like Christine Buckley, who spent much of her early life in Goldenbridge, came out. Most of the Members of the House then were male. They told me they did not know we had orphanages. I did not know how they did not know that but I had to take what people were saying at face value. From the introduction of adoption in Ireland in the early 1950s to when it broadly came to an end in the 1980s, with the exception of overseas adoptions, over 50,000 adoption orders were signed for babies who were adoptable. There were a lot more fostering arrangements and yet nobody knew about any of it. Of the women in the Magdalen laundries, nobody knew anything at all other than in recent times when we heard about the pain and suffering. I am not saying the eighth amendment caused that but the eighth amendment and the narrow and censorious attitude towards women who had children out of wedlock effectively destroyed much of their lives and the lives of the children were restricted unless they were lucky enough to find a good foster home or a good adoptive home. That happened for many people, including me. Never let us forget that is what all that sadness and pain in Ireland is rooted in.

We have been looking at the revolutionary generation from 1916 to 1922 and extraordinary women like Dr. Kathleen Lynn, who founded the first children's hospital. When it came to the 1930s and 1940s, perhaps because of the dreadful economic circumstances of the early years of independence, instead of going forward and recognising a broad framework of rights for the citizens of a newly independent Ireland, we went backwards and became a closed, almost theocratic type of culture. I hope we come to address this, perhaps on 25 May, because addressing it is long overdue. I want to be clear about this - I support the repeal of the eighth amendment and the proposal of the committee that abortion should be available up to 12 weeks with the support of medical representatives and GPs. It is an excellent idea. It is important that people have proper medical support, advice and information available to them.

It is also important that we take account of medical technology. It is approximately ten years since chemists began dispensing the morning-after pill. At the time, I received many letters. I do not doubt the bona fides of the people who wrote to me, namely, chemists who were concerned, appalled and outraged that the morning-after pill would be made available in chemist shops throughout Ireland. I was told that it was not acceptable and would never happen. In fact, it did. It happens every day. It is done in privacy. Chemists supply a very important service. GPs also supply a very important service in this regard.

See this speech in context