James Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Quite the converse. I just told the House that there is no definitive treatment for suicide.

It should also be clarified that while in some circumstances a woman has a right to have the pregnancy brought to an end, doctors, in their reasonable opinion, must have regard to the need to protect the right to life of the unborn and preserve unborn human life, where practicable. The emphasis on preserving unborn human life means that a doctor will be obliged, as far as practicable, to end the pregnancy in such a way as to preserve the life of the unborn. The Bill does prohibit the killing of a viable foetus. To be clear, no woman, doctor, citizen or non-citizen in this country has a right to end the life of a viable foetus. A woman is entitled to terminate the pregnancy only.

It has been suggested the legislation should include a clear provision with an explicit reference to viability. In this regard, it is important to note that the precise point of viability may change, depending on how many factors relating to the development of the foetus come into play. Gestational age is just one. When I started practice, 28 weeks was regarded as the limit of viability. It is now 24 weeks, heading for 23. It is preferable that no artificial, fixed definition of viability be introduced in order that the circumstances of each woman can be assessed to determine whether viability has been reached as part of the overall decision-making in the management of her case. It should be noted, however, that the decision to be reached is not so much a balancing of the competing rights but a clinical assessment of whether the mother's life, as opposed to her health, is threatened by a real and substantial risk that can be averted only by a termination of pregnancy. Therefore, it is clear that all other treatments must have been considered and some tried, subject to sound clinical judgment.

Several Senators would have liked to have seen other grounds included in the legislation, particularly in respect of heartbreaking cases where there is a diagnosis of a fatal foetal abnormality, or where the pregnancy is as a result of rape or incest. While I can understand the Senators' concerns in this regard, these provisions cannot be included because the purpose of the Bill is not to confer new rights regarding the termination of pregnancy but to clarify existing rights.

Some Senators have expressed their concerns about the potential criminalisation of pregnant women and the penalty to be imposed for the offence of intentional destruction of unborn human life. While it is recognised that the potential criminalisation of a pregnant woman is a very difficult and sensitive matter, this provision reflects the State's constitutional obligation arising from Article 40.3.3°. It would also be inequitable to have, as a matter of course, a significant penalty for the person performing an unlawful medical procedure but none at all for the woman who is willingly undergoing such a procedure. A woman can currently be prosecuted for a non-lawful abortion under the Offences against the Person Act 1861. It is stated she shall be liable “to be kept in penal servitude for life”.

Let me address some of the contributions made. I regret, in a way, the political nature of the letter issued by Fine Gael before the last general election, but it did state there would be an all-party committee on the case of A, B and C. It stated abortion would not be legalised. This Bill does not do that; rather it clarifies the position. It is, however, already legal. I am very sorry for those who wish to believe otherwise. The Supreme Court and the Constitution speak louder than any of us here will ever do.

The third issue concerned the provision of services for women when they needed them. That is what the Bill is about also.

We have already covered the issue of the programme for Government which concluded that there should be an expert group. That has led us to where we are today.

Notwithstanding some of the comments made, I have listened intently, as have my colleagues, the Ministers of State, Deputies Alex White and Kathleen Lynch. Amendments have been made to the Bill as it has proceeded. I sometimes regret that I feel there are some who listen only to one side of the argument without considering the other in the context of the legal opinions quoted.