Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

If it did so, medics would be on very safe ground because it could be easily demonstrated that abortion would be no treatment and could be highly counterproductive. In more general terms, we know in regard to those situations where a person has autonomy and is threatening their life, that one must always believe a threat of suicide. Senator Gilroy himself and the eminent experts in suicide prevention who attended the hearings at the Sub-Committee on Health and Children pointed that out. Therefore, by definition, a threat of suicide must be taken seriously and must be deemed to constitute a risk to life. Therein lies the danger and injustice of section 9.

This amendment would require that where that threat becoming a risk arises in situations where it would be possible to bring the baby out alive, and ensure that it is born as safely as possible, as distinct from doing a destructive abortion, notwithstanding the aspirations of the person who has presented to the psychiatrist, that there would be such a duty. It seems that it is the antithesis of respect for the equal right to life of the unborn to exclude that duty, both at the level of certification by the medical professionals involved, but also - this was my point to the Minister of State, as I have provided elsewhere - that those carrying out the procedure would be subject to the requirement that they do not intend to end the life of the unborn where such life is viable.

On that basis, I would submit that the overarching constitutional and statutory imperative to which the Minister of State referred, to defend and vindicate the right to life of the unborn, appears to be ignored. I do not know where the Minister of State finds the overarching statutory imperative to defend and vindicate the life of the viable unborn, given that the legislation does not provide for it in terms of what is a permissible lawful procedure.