Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

-----while her body decayed. Dr. Peter Boylan spoke movingly at the launch of the Together for Yes campaign, which the Minister attended, about the horrific nature of that case, which was caused by the eighth amendment.

The process that has led us to the introduction of this Bill through the Citizens' Assembly, which I commend, and the Oireachtas joint committee has been robust. It reflects a change in public opinion over the decades since the eighth amendment was passed as well as a recognition of the harm that the amendment has caused to women, doctors and medical practice.

I will discuss the committee's recommendations briefly. I urge others to read its excellent report. The committee's reason for recommending that abortion be made available without specific indicators up to 12 weeks is clear. It did so on the basis of the reality that it had heard about of women already accessing the pill online without medical supervision and with all of the dangers that entailed up to 12 weeks. It also heard about the impossibility of providing in legislation for terminations in cases of rape. Speaking as a member of the Labour Party's commission some years ago, we struggled with how to legislate for abortion in cases of rape. It is impossible. There is no diagnostic test for rape. Short of asking a woman to go through an interrogation or second ordeal after being raped, it is not possible. The committee heard expert evidence to that effect. It was a valid and robust reason to recommend the 12 week period.

What was also clear was how strongly the medical evidence was in support of repeal, to the point that, as Senator Noone mentioned, it was impossible to find a medical expert who would testify for retention of the eighth amendment, so severe has been the amendment's impact upon medical practice. It is worth referring to the evidence.

Beyond the medical evidence and practical realities of women's lives, I wish to speak briefly about another reason for the committee's recommendation, that being the international human rights obligations of which Ireland has been found to be in breach in numerous cases, for example, the 2010 A, B and C case and, more recently, the Amanda Mellet and Siobhán Whelan cases, in which the UN Human Rights Committee and Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, OHCHR, made the extremely serious finding that Ireland had breached those women's rights in cases of fatal foetal abnormality. They were described as having been subjected by the State to intense physical and mental suffering because they had to travel to another country while carrying a dying foetus. We must also remember that the shame and stigma associated with the criminalisation of abortion are major factors. Any woman who orders the pill online faces the shame, stigma and fear of criminalisation. The OHCHR also pointed to having to leave the babies' remains behind to be delivered later by courier and the State's refusal to provide necessary and appropriate care. Ireland was found to have been in breach for a range of reasons in those two recent decisions. Those two brave women illustrated the need to change our law on abortion.

There are many imperatives for holding this referendum, which the Oireachtas committee has made clear. I echo other Senators' calls to all colleagues to take a stand on this matter on a cross-party and cross-political basis. We are asking anyone who is in favour of repeal and the committee's recommendations to stand with us tomorrow morning at an event at 11 a.m. An email has been sent out about that.

Just as we should trust women by changing our law on abortion, so too should we not be afraid to ask the people to trust us as legislators to pass legislation that establishes the legal framework necessary to provide women in a caring and compassionate manner with the reproductive health care that we all need. We must be able to say that legislators are the appropriate lawmakers. Indeed, we are constitutionally the lawmakers in the State. For too long, we have neglected and abdicated our responsibility and handed it over to unelected judges.It has not been appropriate that women's health care has been regulated in that way, through the courts, through the vagaries of particular court cases or through tragic circumstances that have arisen in so many cases. I hope that in 2018, as we celebrate the centenary of women's suffrage and mark 100 years since women got the right to vote, it will finally be the year where women will win the referendum, with a "Yes" vote, to ensure that we can legislate for women's reproductive health care, that we can legislate to ensure that women have the compassion and care they need, that we reflect a changing society and that we end the chill, for the sake of our daughters and for their generation. Mr. Gerry Edwards spoke movingly at the Together for Yes launch that we have stopped dropping pregnant women and girls at the doors of Magdalen laundries. We now need also to stop dropping our pregnant women and girls at the departure gates of our airports and ports. Those are really prescient and moving words. We should all bear them in mind as we stand together for repeal and to pass this Bill.