Paul Bradford (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Absolutely. Amendment No. 30 in the name of Senator Healy Eames would, if accepted, give rise to section 9 - as currently constituted - being removed from the Bill. The Minister of State and, as we have been informed, all first year law students are aware that the Supreme Court's judgment in the X case in respect of suicide was uncontested and, therefore, places no binding in law upon us.

I am of the view that I can stand over the two arguments I have just offered. Notwithstanding that fact, however, and if it were so disposed, the House could pass the legislation minus the suicide clause and defend itself fully for doing so in the Supreme Court on the basis of all of the medical and psychiatric evidence from across the globe that has become available in the 20 years since that court made its decision in the X case. The evidence to which I refer clearly shows - without any doubt or possibility of contradiction - that abortion is absolutely not a treatment in respect of the threat of suicide and that it may actually pose a significant risk to the long-term health of women.

I will park that legal argument, because it is a matter for another day, and reflect on the proposal which has been put forward by Senator Healy Eames. The Minister of State knows better than I - this is becoming one of the mantras used in this debate - that the clause in question will only apply where abortion is the only possible treatment. It is quite clear that it is not the only treatment and during hearings of the joint committee held over two days, successive witnesses stated that it is not a treatment. As something of a political scholar, I am of the view that it is amazing that we are enshrining in law as a treatment something which we have been informed is not a treatment.