Seanad debates

Wednesday, 28 March 2018

An Bille um an Séú Leasú is Tríocha ar an mBunreacht 2018: Céim an Choiste agus na Céimeanna a bheidh Fágtha - Thirty-sixth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2018: Committee and Remaining Stages

 

10:30 am

Photo of Rónán MullenRónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

-----or at least the laugh that it deserved, but I noticed he did not get it.

I listened carefully to what the Minister said last night and regarding his reassurances seeking to undermine the notion that 12 weeks is very permissive. A one day, two day or three day waiting period does not offer any meaningful protection for an unborn child, boy or girl, if one believes that it is a human being.

I also emphasise that the Minister sought to distinguish the law that the Government will bring forward in due course from the British law on the basis that it is now being proposed that, post-viability, there would not be a termination of the life of the baby. I think that is what the Minister said. What does he think it is like for an unborn child when they are brought into the world prematurely in situations like that? I think they would be very sick. The Minister should speak to the issue of what type of care he would envisage there. It leaves a lot to be desired from a human rights perspective.

The Minister does not seem to think that an abortion prior to viability is a late-term abortion. What does he think it is? One of the disadvantages of what we call a debate on this matter here is that we do not get answers to questions, we do not get to test each side's arguments to see if there is any substance to them. I hope the upcoming debate will not only comprise one-on-one interviews with Ministers in studios and that there will be an opportunity to test what they are saying because sometimes what they say does not stand up. I am sure the Minister has prepared his brief very well but my experience of the Government is that there has not been any listening to the women who felt betrayed by the abortion culture, who felt that they were not given the support they needed before they had their abortion and who went on to regret their abortions. No attention seems to have been paid to the fact that the best research indicates it is not advisable to link abortion with a mental health ground, as they do in Britain yet the Minister proposes to do the exact same thing. That research comes from people who have no problem with abortion in principle.

If I was in a studio debate with the Minister tomorrow and asked him about the developmental stages of the unborn, would he be able to tell me at what stage the pads for a baby's fingerprints start? Would he be able to tell us that today? I ask him that, with all due respect, because I note he has not acknowledged the humanity of the baby. Are people who want to deny the humanity of the baby, and change our law such that there is no protection of any kind for them in the Constitution, interested in looking step by step at how the baby develops in the womb, that is, human life with potential, as I like to call it? Those are just a few points that occur to me.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.