Catherine Martin (Dublin Rathdown, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

Is lá cinniúnach é seo do mhná na hÉireann, dóibh siúd atá torrach nó a bheidh amach anseo, agus do na daoine agus na grúpaí ó cheann ceann na tíre a bhain éacht amach i mí na Bealtaine seo caite. Today is an historic day. Today, for the first time since 1983, we commence the process to legislate without constitutional constraint to bring compassionate healthcare to pregnant people in Ireland. We owe this day to the people who campaigned tirelessly over the past 35 years and to all those who shared their very personal and traumatic experiences. As we have much work yet to do on this proposed legislation, I will be brief in outlining some concerns the Green Party has about it.

First, I am concerned about the language used in the section concerning offences and, as other Deputies have mentioned, the location of this section within the Bill, but I will bring those concerns to Committee Stage.

The Bill also outlines that three days must elapse from the certification of the person seeking termination by a medical doctor before a termination is carried out. The Minister has pledged that people from Northern Ireland will have access to abortion services here. I and my Green Party colleague and Member of the Legislative Assembly in Northern Ireland, Clare Bailey, have brought our concerns about this specific issue to the Minister's attention. How would that access to abortion services be feasible if two appointments with a doctor may be required? For some travelling across the Border this would mean a three-hour round trip. That is just to get across the Border. It could be longer depending on where the nearest medical practitioner who will assist them is located. That is two three-hour round trips and two days off within a week. This does not represent a feasible option for many given the time required and the expense of travel. How is this compatible with the pledge made to those in Northern Ireland?

There are also concerns for people in rural Ireland who may have to travel significant distances to find a medical practitioner who is willing to help. It is also a concern for people who lack the financial resources or ability to travel or to take time off work. We must put ourselves in the shoes of those who find it difficult to take the time to visit a doctor and we must ensure the legislation does not put more barriers in front of them. There have been suggestions of changing this provision to allow the three-day waiting period to commence from the time of booking the appointment. We must again tease out how this would work in practice. How would we ensure the confidentiality of the patient? To ask for an appointment three days out may allow the person taking the call to infer the purpose of the visit. How is a doctor to know when the appointment was made without first asking those at the front desk? I ask the Minister to provide clarification on these concerns and to ensure that, if a three-day waiting period is included, it supports decision-making without creating arbitrary barriers.

The Bill constantly refers to the “pregnant woman”. I have spoken to the Minister on this matter before and he has been receptive to changing the phrase to “pregnant person” to be inclusive of trans and non-binary people. While I appreciate that legalistically speaking the phrase “pregnant woman” can be interpreted to mean someone of another gender and does not represent a barrier to accessing services, a simple change of language is symbolically important. It would be an important gesture of recognition and inclusivity. There is much work to be done on this legislation over the next few months but I remain hopeful that we in this House can approach that work in a considered and thorough manner.

See this speech in context