Catherine Noone (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Alex White, for the debate on this extremely important legislation. Like many colleagues, this is an issue I have struggled with and agonised over in recent months. I wish to make it clear that I will be voting with my conscience on this issue. Given the intense level of scrutiny to which these provisions have been subject and the huge volume of correspondence I have received on the issue, I welcome the opportunity to set out the reasons I will be voting for the Bill. In the past year I have met many women, both inside and outside Leinster House, who have sought to discuss the issue with me, including a large number from the pro-life side. I have also met many who are mystified as to why there is so much sound and fury surrounding what they see as a simple legislative effort which seeks to enshrine practices that are already being followed in many hospitals and reflective of the law as it stands.

While I was convinced initially that guidelines would be sufficient to provide clarity, as the debate has developed, I have become firmly of the view that there is a need to legislate for what is, after all, the current legal position following the X case. I do not accept that the outcome is likely to be in any way as negative as is feared by those with extreme views on the pro-life side. I certainly hope it will not. There has been an attempt in framing this legislation to ensure provision is made for the Supreme Court's verdict, nothing more. Those who are heavily on the pro-choice side see it as not going far enough, while those strongly on the pro-life side insist it goes too far. In the grey area in the middle, that moderate place where most Irish people reside, this legislation makes sense. These are the people on whose behalf we legislate - the majority, not the extremes.

In settling my position on the legislation I have struggled, in particular, with the clause on suicidal intent, which is the controversial aspect of these provisions. I have concerns about this clause, specifically the lack of checks. Although it has been much discussed and the Minister and the Ministers of State have been questioned about it at length, I ask for clarification of what will be done if - as is feared by some but probably and I hope will not materialise - a huge number of women present to the three-consultant panels in these circumstances. Those who oppose the legislation will be watching these figures and will certainly be working to flag any potential abuse of this provision. I welcome such scrutiny. Only time will tell, but I am confident that it will only ever be used in a handful of cases each year.

Certain commentators outlined their fears that the provision under section 9 would open the floodgates to abortion on demand. These fears are not helped - they are arguably encouraged - by some on the extremes. I was disappointed by the actions taken by certain individuals and groups opposing the Bill. The practice, for instance, of using images of Deputies with emotive slogans on posters is disturbing. More disturbing still were the protests that took place outside politicians' family homes. We live a democracy where public discourse on legislation is naturally both welcomed and encouraged. However, these tactics have only served to make many of my colleagues more resolute in their support of the Bill. There is a way to engage people with one's argument and persuade them as to the merit of what one is saying. Many of those agitating on this issue went about their business in precisely that way. However, the pro-life cause was often undermined by the actions of some within their number, which was very disappointing.

Colleagues will attest to the sheer volume of correspondence we have all received on this issue. I was sent an e-mail in recent days which included the following statement:

The name given, Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill, is repugnant. It is logically incorrect as it specifically allows for the destruction of an unborn life. It should be called the termination of a pregnancy and related life in order to preserve the so-called superior life of a mother Bill.

I find this offensive, particularly the reference to the "so-called superior" life of the mother. I wonder how much the author of that e-mail thought about what he was actually saying and how much of a clue he has about what it might be like to be in a situation where there is a conflict between two lives. While men clearly have a huge part to play in life, its creation, protection and destruction, I cannot help but wonder whether this man, if faced with a situation where his own life and that of an unborn foetus were in conflict, would refer to his own right to life as being "so-called superior".

The Bill restates the position on abortion in Ireland and states that the unborn child has equal rights to those of all citizens. Its only aim is to place this legal framework on an already existing narrow provision created by Article 40.3.3o of the Constitution, which was interpreted by the Supreme Court over 20 years ago to allow for the lawful termination of a pregnancy where it is established that there is real and substantial risk to the life of the woman and that risk can only be averted by a termination. The Bill remains within the parameters of the Constitution and serves to strengthen the current legal position, which effectively means one psychologist and an obstetrician can decide a woman is suicidal and in need of this treatment. One aspect of this which has created much debate and provoked significant analysis is the risk of loss of life from suicide. It is worth pointing out the effort that has been taken to introduce safeguards. Under the proposed legislation, three doctors will be required to take part in the assessment process, which when combined with the woman's GP means the woman will have been assessed by four doctors.

I welcome the fact the Bill contains provisions to allow for conscientious objection in the case of medical personnel. This is important as nobody should be forced to do something that is against his or her conscience. As an additional safeguard, the Bill contains provisions to ensure the law is faithfully followed and that there is scope for review. In discussing this issue, we should stay cognisant of the fact that currently approximately 30 terminations take place in Irish hospitals annually, without any coherent regulation. With this Bill, safeguards are introduced and checks will now be in place. In addition, approximately 4,000 women travel each year for an abortion. This is all too often conveniently ignored in any debate on this issue. In some cases the terminations take place in unregulated backstreet or would-be clinics and in some cases have a detrimental effect on the woman's life thereafter. These are the reasons I believe this Bill deserves support. It ensures the protection of women during pregnancy.

I am confident the Bill will give the legal clarity which has been absent to date under Irish law for women and doctors. A sad reality, one with which I have struggled but which must be faced, is that sometimes medical intervention is required to save a woman's life in pregnancy. I would not apologise for this. If a woman presents in this state, I am confident she will receive treatment and everything possible will be done to support her through her pregnancy and that abortion would be very much a last resort. I was very sad to hear Senator Mary Ann O'Brien's story in this regard.

The argument that there will be a massive increase in the number of women claiming they are suicidal is an insult to women. That argument also undermines the psychiatric profession significantly. The legislation is sufficiently restrictive, so much so that I believe that if a women is genuinely feeling suicidal and in such horrendous circumstances, she will be more likely to travel to the United Kingdom than to put herself through this extremely restrictive process.

The rarity of the situation must also be recognised. Because of the lack of statistics, there is no clear idea of the number of women who present in these circumstances. The best estimate I can come up with is based on what I know from my mother, who has been a consultant psychiatrist for almost 40 years and has had a varied and busy practice in the west of Ireland. She has never come across a situation where a pregnant woman has presented as suicidal. I have had numerous conversations with her over the past few months and have genuinely struggled in this regard, but I feel assured that I am making the right decision in supporting this legislation.

Although I have not come to the conclusion lightly, I have concluded that this restrictive legislation will protect the lives of women. Therefore, I lend it my support.