Jillian van Turnhout (Independent) | Oireachtas source

If the Senator wishes to look at the record, he will see that I clarified that issue earlier.

We have heard a great deal about what happened at the committee hearings. Having attended the six days of the hearings, I can say there was contrary opinion. This suggestion that everybody agreed is regrettable. There was contrary opinion, as I pointed out in my speech on Second Stage. We should be very careful about making sweeping statements.

In regard to the amendments, Members have questioned why we are doing this. Article 40.3.3° states that the State "guarantees in its laws". We do not always uphold our constitutional obligations in our laws, but we must and I believe we must do so clearly for the X case. The Cosma case was raised, which surprised me. It was said that the Minister, Deputy Alan Shatter, did not deal with it effectively, but I watched it in the Dáil. During the committee hearings, however, a senior counsel and a former Supreme Court judge dismissed that. I do not need to study law to know that a High Court ruling on an asylum case does not gazump - I do not have the legal terminology - a Supreme Court ruling. I do not need to study law to know it is the Supreme Court.

The issue here is suicide in pregnancy. I spoke on this on Second Stage and I will not repeat what I said as I am conscious that other Members wish to speak. However, I have a difficulty with this section because we are separating it from section 7. This is about risk to life. Throughout this debate I have had the feeling - and "feeling" is the right word - that this is about a woman who has certain feelings or thoughts. That is not what we are talking about. We were given some very real examples at the committee hearings. We heard about the woman who is anorexic and wants to get rid of the pregnancy. She had taken three overdoses. This is not somebody who has gone to a psychiatrist and said she was not feeling great. We also heard about the woman who is pregnant due to incestuous abuse and about the growth inside her. We heard about the woman who is in an abusive relationship. There are reports which show that when women in an abusive relationship get pregnant, the violence very often escalates. We heard about a woman being kicked repeatedly in the stomach. She did not want this for her child and wanted to kill herself. This is not about a woman who has this idea to circumvent the law. That woman is on the aeroplane and is gone. This is about a risk to life. There are very rare cases, and the wording deals with that.

People talk about clinical markers. How do we commit people involuntarily if there are no markers or no way to diagnose? How do the doctors make that decision? It is a medical practice. There is an idea that mental health is not medical. Physical and mental health are interlinked.

I will conclude because I am conscious that other Members wish to speak. As we clearly heard at the committee hearings from obstetricians and many of the psychiatrists, they will always work towards saving both lives. They will work to secure foetal maturity, which is the ideal, and viability, which is the second option if the first cannot be achieved. We are talking about the exceptional cases here.

There are other issues I would have liked to raise, such as the establishment of the review committee and the penalties in section 22 for the destruction of the unborn. However, I will raise them on Report Stage as there is a long list of speakers.