Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

There are two parts to amendment No. 16. The first of these relates to the reasonable opinion of medical practitioners. I refer here to opinions formed not just in good faith but also on reasonable grounds. I understand, from discussing the matter with legal people, that reasonable opinion on reasonable grounds could be interpreted separately and that including the term "on reasonable grounds" actually strengthens the degree to which judges might interpret the defence of the unborn. It is for this reason that the term is included. I tabled a similar amendment on Committee Stage. Both it and amendment No. 16, which is currently under discussion, suggest removing the reference to the need to preserve unborn life as far as practicable and replacing it with the phrase "which has regard to the right to life of the unborn". The latter is taken directly from the Constitution. I may be wrong but I believe that on Committee Stage the Minister, Deputy Reilly, - although it could have been the Minister of State - emphasised the fact that the phrase "as far as practicable" would be removed from the legislation if the amendment I had tabled at that point were accepted. In this context, the Constitution says, "The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right." I do not believe, therefore, that attaching the phrase "as far as practicable" to that of "to preserve unborn human life" interprets the intention of the constitutional amendment accurately. I am of the view that the phrase "as far as practicable" applies to the obligation of the State, in its laws, to defend and vindicate the right to which I refer. I see a certain distinction in that.

The Irish version of the Constitution is probably even clearer in respect of this matter. It states, "Admhaíonn an Stát ceart na mbeo gan breith chun a mbeatha." The term "ceart na mbeo gan breith" is much clearer than the English version. What is meant by the word "unborn" needs to be defined and some people would dispute that meaning. The rights of the living who have not been born is the literal interpretation of the Irish version of the Constitution. I am of the view that this is a more accurate description and it strongly underpins the equal right to life. The Irish version also states "an ceart sin a chosaint is a shuíomh lena dhlíthe sa mhéid gur féidir é." We have to defend the latter, which is also an aspect of the English version. However, we must also defend the ceart na mbeo gan breith. I suggest that what is contained in the Irish version of the Constitution provides a reason for giving further consideration to this matter. Many of the procedures that will be legalised and the instances in which their use will be allowed will specifically depend on the interpretation of judges of that section.

The second part of amendment No. 16 comprises the phrase "the pregnant woman has undergone an ultrasound". If the amendment were accepted, there would be a requirement under section 9 to have an ultrasound carried out. I wish to explain why I have worded the amendment in this way. Senator Mooney tabled a similar amendment on Committee Stage which was debated and subsequently withdrawn. I listened carefully to what the Senator stated and I considered the matter and discussed it with people in the psychiatric field in the interim. I included this provision in amendment No. 16 as a result of my concerns on this matter. In the United States one in every four pregnancies is aborted. In New York the figure is one in two, which is appalling. Regardless of one's perspective, I do not believe one could provide any justification for one in four or one in two babies being aborted. I am concerned about the effect of abortion on women who have undergone the procedure. When one meets such women and listens to their stories, one cannot but be moved.

I wish to quote the president of Feminists for Life in respect of this matter.

This is a genuine feminist, not the pseudo-feminist from whom we often hear on this topic. She said that feminists are opposed to force, abortion is a denial of feminism and that exploitation of women, including abortion, is interfering with nature. That is the reason I raise this and the reason I tabled an amendment on the ultrasound. This person went on to say that some women who fought against slavery fought for rights of women and also fought against abortion in the early stage of feminism in the US, and that is their history. She made a point, to which I referred on Second Stage, that whereas financially independent, educated women generally will not need abortion, we pass on this to disadvantaged women. She reckoned abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women and that it affects so many others including men, siblings and grandparents. I remember members of Women Hurt saying in the audio visual room that an average of 45 people are affected by every abortion.