Averil Power (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute on this important legislation. I was an adopted person. I have always been deeply conflicted on the issue of abortion. When people speak about unwanted pregnancies I cannot but reflect on the fact that I was one. I was the unplanned daughter of a single woman for whom keeping me was never a real option in the Ireland of 1978.

I am grateful for the fact that adoption gave me a chance both to be part of another family and to get to know my birth mother and half-siblings later in life, and when some on the pro-choice side speak of abortion as a simple women's rights issue without a thought for the life of the unborn child, it upsets me greatly. However, so too does the utter lack of compassion that extreme pro-life groups show towards women in distress, particularly when that lack of compassion encompasses women whose lives are at risk, victims of rape or incest, or those whose babies cannot survive outside the womb.

Abortion is never desirable, but sometimes the consequences of unavailability are worse. Despite significant advances in medical science and the excellent care provided by our hospitals, situations arise in which continuing with a pregnancy may cost the mother her own life. Thankfully, such cases are rare, but they are very real. There is no doubt in my mind that in such circumstances everything possible must be done to save the mother's life, including termination of her pregnancy where this is necessary.

As matters stand, an Irish woman has a constitutional right to an abortion where continuing with her pregnancy represents a real and substantial risk to her life. This was clearly established 21 years ago in the X case. However, the failure of successive Governments to legislate for the X case has meant there is still no proper framework in place through which requests for such terminations can be decided upon.

Abortions have been carried out in Irish hospitals since the X case. We do not know how many have taken place and in what circumstances or if, in the absence of regulation and reporting, some hospitals are carrying out more than they should be. Equally, we have no idea whether others are being overly restrictive and putting women's lives at risk by denying them life-saving treatment. This Bill is designed to rectify that problem. It will ensure that, regardless of what hospital a woman is in, the same procedure will apply, the same clear criteria will have to be followed and the same safeguards will be in place to protect both the mother and her unborn child. The Bill provides that every effort must be made to save both lives where this is possible. An abortion will not be sanctioned unless it is absolutely necessary to avert the risk to the mother's life.

It has been claimed by some groups that this Bill provides for late abortions, right up to birth. That is simply not true. The legislation clearly states that once the foetus has reached the point at which it could survive outside the womb, early delivery will be used instead of termination. Every effort will be made to ensure the baby survives, as would be the case with any other premature baby.

The protections that the Bill provides for the unborn child are absolutely vital. The baby has a right to life too and every step should be taken to bring it safely into the world, but in the event of conflict, where the mother's life is at risk, priority must be given to saving her life.

Several Members have expressed concerns about section 9 and its provision for termination of pregnancy where the risk to the mother's life comes from suicide. I expect amendments will be tabled on Committee Stage to delete this provision, as they were in the Dáil. I will not support those amendments for a number of reasons. First, it is simply not possible to legislate for the X case without including a provision for suicide. As Members will be aware, the X case was to do with suicide. X was a 14-year-old child who had become pregnant as a result of a brutal rape and was determined to kill herself rather than give birth to her attacker's baby. To exclude suicide from the Bill would be to completely ignore the substance of the X case and refuse to do our constitutional duty as legislators. It would also amount to a deliberate and anti-democratic denial of the will of the people as expressed in successive referendums in which they have rejected attempts to row back on the X case.

The second reason I cannot support these amendments is that it would be utterly hypocritical of me to support the deletion of section 9 from the Bill when I cannot honestly say that I would not support the decision to request a termination by somebody in the circumstances faced by X, for I know in my heart that if a 14-year-old girl I knew was raped and I was convinced she would end her own life if forced to go through with the pregnancy, I would do everything I could to support her. I would talk it through with her and I would try to convince her to go for counselling before making any decision. I would hope she could find a way to continue with the pregnancy and either keep the baby or put him or her up for adoption, but, ultimately, I would understand if she could not, and I believe that most Irish people would too.

For the reasons I outlined at the start, I believe that abortion is always a tragedy. However, losing the lives of both mother and baby is far worse. Over the course of this debate, several Members have referred to suicidal ideation in distrustful and cynical tones. The implication, whether one intends it or not, is that mental health problems are not as serious as physical ones. This is deeply worrying. For too long, those with mental health problems have been stigmatised in this country. As a result, many suffer in silence instead of seeking help. Tragically, increasing numbers of men and women are taking their own lives. In fact, suicide now claims more lives than road accidents. No doubt the stigma and shame associated with mental health difficulties have been significant contributory factors to this needless loss of life. For this reason, it is insensitive and downright dangerous to dismiss the issue of suicide in the way that some have in debating this legislation. I accept that mental health problems are more difficult to diagnose than physical ones and that is why I believe it is appropriate that the Bill provides for a much more restrictive procedure where termination of pregnancy is being sought on grounds of suicide. In such cases, three medics must unanimously agree that granting a termination is the only way to save a woman's life. It should be remembered, whether this Bill passes or not, that abortion is already legal in this country on grounds of suicidal ideation. Nothing in this Bill changes that fact. The only difference is that as matters stand, an assessment by a single psychiatrist could facilitate an abortion.

Some commentators have claimed that women will feign suicidal thoughts in order to access abortion. Not only is this deeply offensive, it is also utterly unrealistic. Let us not forget, as was pointed out earlier, that abortion is freely available in the United Kingdom. Faced with a choice of being interrogated by three doctors in an Irish public hospital and having a suicide diagnosis on their medical records for life, I believe that most Irish women will continue to travel to the United Kingdom, even after this legislation is passed. Personally, I cannot see the provisions in section 9 being used except in extreme circumstances such as where the woman is restricted from travelling because she is a minor in the care of the State.

It has also been claimed that the provisions of the Bill are opening the door to abortion on demand. In support of this claim, Members referred to the fact that when legislation was introduced in Britain in the 1960s the outcome was ultimately more liberal than envisaged. That may indeed be true, but the United Kingdom is totally different from Ireland in that it does not have a written constitution. It is precisely because the Constitution contains explicit protection for the right to life of the unborn that more liberal abortion legislation can never be introduced in this country unless the people vote for it in a referendum.

My party decided to allow a free vote on this Bill. I initially argued that we should do so in November last because I believe that no Member on either side of the debate should be forced to vote against his or her conscience on an issue such as this. It is a dreadful shame that the Government parties have not taken the same approach. I do not agree with Deputy Lucinda Creighton on this issue - in fact, Lucinda and myself have not agreed on most issues since our days together in Trinity College as students - but she did an excellent job as Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs and it is ridiculous that she was forced to resign that post for taking a stand on an issue that would simply not be subject to the Whip in any other democracy.

For my part, my conscience tells me that I must vote in favour of this legislation for all the reasons I have outlined. It is not a decision at which I have arrived lightly. I have listened to the informed debate on this issue for many years. I have met different interest groups on both sides of the debate. I have read all of the letters and e-mails that have been sent to me, and I appreciate the fact that so many over the past few months have taken the time to do so and to share with me their personal stories and their views on such a sensitive topic. The circumstances of my own birth mean that this is a particularly emotive issue for me.

I will never support abortion on demand but, as I stated at the outset, I recognise that a termination of pregnancy is sometimes necessary to save a woman's life and believe that a proper and consistent framework must be put in place to deal with such situations. This Bill does exactly that - nothing more, nothing less - and that is why I will be supporting it.