Michael Harty (Clare, Independent) | Oireachtas source

However, it is up to each individual to make an ethical and moral judgment as to the rights and wrongs of termination of pregnancy in the circumstances in which they find themselves. Thus, should the eighth amendment be repealed, the nature of the legislation to provide for termination of pregnancy will be centre stage.

The recent Supreme Court judgment has clearly decided that the only right of an unborn child is the right to be born. Should the eighth amendment be repealed, that right will no longer exist. The stark reality is that the unborn will have no rights whatsoever in the Constitution. Any rights will have to be defined by legislation. I believe that will be a major issue in the debate.

Currently in Ireland, termination of pregnancy is legally allowed only if the life of the mother is at risk, not the health of the mother, in cases of fatal foetal abnormality and not for rape. I believe repeal of the eighth amendment is necessary to allow for those eventualities. At present, there is a serious contradiction in that it is legal to have information about termination and to travel abroad to have a termination, but it is not legal to have a termination here in Ireland. That is seen as acceptable to some as it gives the impression that termination of pregnancy is not happening to Irish women, but of course it is - it is just not happening on the island of Ireland.

We have to realise that we are no longer isolated from the outside world and we cannot pretend that we can place barriers to insulate ourselves from the outside world. How do we balance these moral, ethical, social, religious and deeply personal issues? How do we balance the right of the unborn baby with that of the mother and still recognise the reality of what is happening today with regard to termination either by post with unsupervised medication or by travelling abroad for surgical termination? I do not believe we can balance those rights in our evolving society with changing medical advances.

The decision of a woman to terminate her pregnancy without reference to reason or without specific reason prior to 12 weeks is a deeply personal decision which has inevitable consequences for the developing human being. There is no biological uncertainty that there is a developing human being involved whose life will be lawfully terminated as the baby will not have any right to life. The 12 weeks issue will be the lightning rod on which this debate will revolve. The 12 weeks limit is being introduced to accommodate the reality of the several thousand women who choose to terminate their pregnancies for myriad reasons, and I do not believe any, or certainly not many, undertake such a termination lightly.

Regarding rape, in reality, no woman who has been raped should ever progress to a developed pregnancy as they should all be able to access the morning after pill within 48 hours of being assaulted to prevent implantation.

I have a number of issues with the policy paper the Minister has produced. The first is the definition of appropriate medical practitioners. The legislation would include all registered medical practitioners on the medical register. I believe that is too loose because it does not require the medical practitioner to have any particular expertise. That needs to be defined and teased out.

Second, regarding certification and notification of terminations made to the Department of Health, we should ensure that this information will be anonymous and that identity will not be public knowledge. That is extremely important.

The issue of conscientious objection for medical or nursing personnel also needs to be clearly defined. In the event that the eighth amendment is appealed, it is proposed that a general practice-led service for the termination of pregnancy up to 12 weeks will be provided by means of the prescription of medical termination medication. This is a hot issue among general practitioners, with 58% of respondents to a recent survey of general practitioners indicating they did not wish to participate in a GP-led termination service. The Minister must carefully consider this issue. Is a general practitioner-led service in place in any other jurisdiction? My understanding is that in most countries where termination of pregnancy is permitted, it is provided in clinics, rather than in the community. What training, supports, diagnostics and medical indemnity will be provided to general practitioners who participate in a GP-led termination service?

Access to diagnostic ultrasound is highly restricted in this country. Will confirmatory ultrasound examination be required to assess gestational age? If so, will this be readily available in a timely manner to women who present wishing to terminate a pregnancy?

General practice has been seriously underfunded and was disproportionately subjected to funding cuts under the financial emergency measures in the public interest legislation during the austerity years. Underfunding commenced under the former Minister for Health, Ms Mary Harney, and was accelerated under the subsequent Minister and current Senator James Reilly. It continued under the current Taoiseach when he was Minister for Health and persists under the current Minister. How will a community-based termination service be delivered by a crumbling general practice service, even if general practitioners wished to provide a service?

See this speech in context