Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

I will formally move amendment No. 31 and I will refer to a number of other amendments in the grouping. From the outset, Solidarity has pointed out that this will be an unnecessary barrier to many women and pregnant people. We said that it was not discussed in any great depth by the Joint Committee on the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution and any time it was raised, every expert swiftly said that no such delay should be implemented. The WHO opposes these barriers being put in the way of women accessing abortion and healthcare. We have established that it was a political decision, which came after the committee reported, to make it easier for some Deputies to accept the legislation.

However, it was ill informed because no real discussion had taken place about it. This is being done away with in France, for example, where abortion legislation is much older. In any country where these waiting periods apply, they always act as a barrier to the most vulnerable in society - the poorest women and people who live in isolated areas, who may not, by the way, have a GP near them to supply this service and who have to travel. It will hit ordinary working women, who will have to take a half day or a day off work for the first GP appointment, take more time off for the second appointment and then take time off to have the abortion itself, which could involve a few days. We currently have many people in precarious work who do not have official leave or even sick leave, and we are making life much more difficult for them. It is already a difficult situation for people to manage, particularly for those who are working or who may have children, in that they will be asked to make an unnecessary second visit. As has been pointed out, people who are in abusive relationships or controlling relationships will also find it very difficult to get to a GP surgery on two occasions, given they need transport and time on their hands. This is just not needed.

Many of the points have been made before and we will not labour them. People voted in the knowledge that this was in the legislation. However, there was no necessity to put it in legislation. It did not have to be nailed into a law. Once it is nailed into a law, we all know how difficult it is to amend it or change it if we find it is a major problem. It could have been put in medical guidelines as an option for a GP to recommend that somebody needed more time to think, for example. We could all tell our anecdotes about talking to people on the doorsteps but it certainly was not a big feature for the people I spoke to. Even if people were aware of this, what was proven by all of the exit polls at the referendum was that people voted "Yes" to give people a choice. It was a very pro-choice sentiment, probably more so than the Government realised. Trusting the person to make this decision was the overriding point that came back at the doors. Since this has been proposed, we have had the whole situation with cervical cancer and a recognition there has been a paternalistic model of not trusting women, not giving them full information and not treating them as agents with brains and thoughts to make these decisions for themselves.

I will make two final points. This will not just be a three-day delay. The reality is that GP surgeries open five days a week. If a person rings up for an appointment on Monday or Tuesday, they will then have to go back for the second appointment and, as the surgery will be closed on Saturday and Sunday, many people will have two extra days added on to the delay. In addition, doctors do not want this as they know how unworkable their surgeries are going to become. As it stands, there are queues and long waiting times, particularly in urban areas. This is not wanted by GPs as an added burden. Anywhere these waiting periods have been brought in, it has proven to be much more than three days.

Trump and people who are attacking abortion rights all around the world start by bringing in or proposing these kinds of measures. Why do they do it? It is because they want to erode those rights and make it much more difficult for somebody to have an abortion, if that is their own decision. We should recognise that when people pick up the phone to ring their doctor to make an appointment to discuss something like this, they have thought about it; in fact, they have thought about nothing else. I object to the idea that the Minister needs to tell them to go away and think for another three days when that does not apply to any other group in society who wants to access medical care. We should start trusting women and pregnant people to make these decisions for themselves.

If we are going ahead with them, I support the other amendments in the grouping, which at least would make it somewhat easier in practice to access these services.

See this speech in context