Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Cuirim céad fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. A cháirde, seasaim anseo inniu os bhúr gcomhair le mo thacaíocht a thabhairt don reachtaíocht fíor thábhachtach seo. Fáiltím roimh an deis mo smaointe i leith na reachtaíochta seo a chur in iúl. Tá cuid mhaith daoine ag rá gur cóir an díospóireacht seo a fhágáil ag na mná agus nár cóir go mbeadh tuairim ag na fir faoin ábhar. Cé go dtuigim an pointe sin, ní aontaím leis. Baineann an reachtaíocht seo le sláinte na mban, le sláinte leanaí agus baineann sí le gach fear, bean agus páiste ar an oileán seo de bharr na himpleachtaí atá inti ó thaobh sláinte poiblí, seirbhísí tacaíochta do mná atá ag iompar clainne agus ár gcuid freagraíochtaí dár gcomh-shaoránaigh.

There is a great deal of debate as to what expertise we, as Senators, have to offer citizens regarding the scrutiny of legislation and debates on the implementation of laws that affect all of them. When it comes to this legislation, I cannot claim any specific expertise but I can bring my life experience to bear on the momentous decision we are being asked to take. As a father of five who was present for the birth of all my children, I probably have a unique insight into the anxiety that surrounds couples at birth and the interaction with our health services in this regard. My wife and I have also had to deal with the trauma of miscarriage and the emotional upheaval that goes with losing a child. This is an experience many people have had to deal with and it is part and parcel of our humanity and the inevitable and inscrutable cycle of life and death.

Thankfully, all my experiences with the health services were positive. This is particularly important to emphasise, as all my children were born in University Hospital Galway, which has rightly been subject to intense scrutiny of late because of the appalling way in which Savita Halappanavar was treated there. I hope that, at the very least, her case will ensure no woman will ever have to suffer such a systemic failure again in an Irish hospital. Based on my experiences, however, I must, in particular pay tribute to the midwives, nurses, anaesthetists, doctors and junior doctors who were fantastic during the births of my children. I believe this is the experience of the majority of people who interact with maternity services in Ireland and this is borne out by the success rate for child births in this country and the low mortality rate among mothers and children during child birth.

I refer to why I support the legislation. Thankfully, it would never have applied to the births of my children. We never had to deal with a situation where the life of the mother was in danger. These occasions are rare but that is what the legislation pertains to. Thankfully, we never had to deal with a situation where the health of the mother was in danger. These cases are more common but the legislation does not allow for intervention in those cases. I know people who are in this position currently. In their case, the legislation would not apply as the life of the mother is not in danger, although the prognosis post-pregnancy is alarming. Thankfully, my wife and I never had to deal with the situation of suicidal ideation during pregnancy, which is part and parcel of this debate but we had to deal with post-natal depression and all the upheaval and anxiety that goes with that. This gave me an insight into the fragile and complex nature of a woman's mental health, particularly around child birth, and it is an area that has been distilled down to a simplistic and naive analysis by some who oppose the legislation.

Thankfully, my children were born to parents who were overjoyed at their births and relieved no complications resulted for them or their mother. This is not the case for every child born in Ireland today. When I analyse the legislation, I try to put myself as far as possible in the position of those to whom it will apply when it is enacted. The legislation is limited in its approach. It provides for medical intervention in pregnancy in specific circumstances, not when the health of the mother is in danger, not if the women is pro-choice and wants to end the pregnancy, not when she has been subject to rape or incest and not when the husband thinks the life is in danger but when in the professional opinion of experienced medical doctors, her life is in danger. Only then can an intervention be made. An intervention in any other circumstances is a crime with a maximum penalty of 14 years in prison.

Life is not black and white and medicine is not a cut and dried science. Doctors differ and patients die. Every case can have its own complications and peculiarities just as every one of us has individual differences and every child born is an unique individual with his or her own personality and physiological needs and challenges. My own experience has been of five incredibly different births. We have experienced long drawn out labours and a labour that had us rushing to hospital just in time for the birth of one child. This legislation deals with cases in which there are difficulties and complications. This could happen to any woman at any time. Medical complications do not discriminate on grounds of race, social class, intellectual ability or other factors. Any of our wives, sisters, daughters or friends could find themselves in need of intervention of this type and I want doctors to have legal clarity as to what they can or cannot do, not just for those close to us but for any woman having a baby.

Doctors face great dilemmas every day and I have immense respect for their ability and commitment, particularly in our inadequate hospital system in which they and nurses find themselves under tremendous pressure. Inevitably, a small number of doctors will find themselves faced with a pregnant woman whose life is in danger. Every doctor has a duty as a result of the Hippocratic oath he or she has taken to do all he or she can to save human life, wherever possible. The dilemma doctors will face will involve a woman whose life is in danger when there is another life to consider. They will use every option available to them to try to save both lives. This legislation will support them in doing so. Where they consider it is not possible to save both lives, they will have the option of trying to save the life of the mother by intervening in the pregnancy. They will make every effort as part of that intervention to save the life of the child in question. Neither the life of the child nor the mother can be guaranteed, no matter what intervention the medical team makes. Medicine is not that simple. Life is not that simple. If it were, this legislation would not be so contentious.

This legislation clarifies, rather than changes, the constitutional position on these matters. Primary legislation will clarify the responsibilities of doctors in this regard. If my wife's life had been in danger during childbirth, I would have been dependent on the expertise and judgment of the medical professionals dealing with the birth. In circumstances such as these, decisions often have to be taken under extreme pressure and very quickly. Any factor that causes a lack of clarity legally or ethically must, therefore, be tackled by us, as legislators, to allow such decisions to be taken as expediently as possible.

Much ill-informed debate on this Bill would seem to imply suicidal ideation is a fictitious element and not a real sickness, that it can be dealt with by some counselling and that is not really a threat to life. I do not concur with that analysis. The safeguards in the legislation, stipulating that two psychiatrists and an obstetrician must make a call, and the appeals mechanism will be more than enough to ensure sufficient care will be taken in this area.

I am a practising and active Catholic, albeit with a relatively liberal ideology. I have discussed this legislation with many good friends, among them members of the clergy. Some support and some oppose the legislation, but that does not make them better or worse Christians. There have been very vocal campaigners at polar opposites in the campaigns we have witnessed. There are very small minorities at either end of the spectrum, whereas the vast majority of citizens favour the Bill, for many of the reasons I have outlined. The majority agree with the Supreme Court's rulings and the voices of people of good conscience who voted in two referendums with the effect of stipulating that this legislation is not only right and necessary but also very much overdue.

Ar an mbunús sin, táim ag tacú leis an reachtaíocht seo agus táim ag impí ar mo chomh-Sheanadóirí an rud céanna a dhéanamh. Tá an reachtaíocht seo píosa fada ag teacht, ach tá sí ag teastáil go géar. Molaim an Rialtas as í a thabhairt chun cinn. Ní raibh an díospóireacht seo éasca. Tuigim na pointí atá ag teacht ó ghach aon taobh agus tá ómós agam do na Seanadóirí ar fad atá ag cur a gcuid tuairimí chun cinn anseo. Tá an lá seo fíor thábhachtach, tá an reachtaíocht seo fíor thábhachtach agus tá sé fíor thábhachtach go dtabharfaidh muid gach tacaíocht di.