Paul Bradford (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State said he does not wish to be prescriptive. Nothing can be as prescriptive as the language of section 22 which states, “It shall be an offence to intentionally destroy unborn human life.” That is a very black-and-white statement. I cannot see how anyone could have a difficulty with how Deputy Walsh’s amendment would impact on sections 7 and 8. This amendment clearly states it wants to remove the direct intention of killing the unborn.

As Senator Healy Eames said, every Member of this House, the other House and the entirety of Irish society fully supports medical intervention wherever it is necessary to save the life of the mother. If, unfortunately, as a result of that intervention, there is the unintentional effect of the child dying, it is sad but the reality of the intervention.

The direct intention to bring the life of an unborn child to an end is an entirely different area. That is where the whole philosophical aspect of the divide between abortion, termination and medical procedure is coming into play in this debate. The Minister of State’s refusal to accept this amendment is at the core of the philosophical underpinning of this legislation. Section 22 uses blunt language stating abortion is illegal. If we want to keep that as the kernel of the legislation, then I cannot see for the life of me how there could be any difficulty with the insertion of this amendment. We either support the direct intention of killing the unborn or we do not. Maybe the Minister of State does but I certainly do not. I cannot see how there would be any difficulty with the inclusion of this amendment. It would not affect sections 7 and 8 as they do not, in any way, provide for the direct intention of killing the unborn. They simply provide for whatever medical procedures are required to save the life of the mother, a provision supported by every citizen of this Republic. I am concerned by the way the Minister of State utterly dismissed this amendment. How can the Minister of State be so opposed to the phrase “the direct intention of killing the unborn”? His opposition to that phrase frightens me.