Seanad debates

Monday, 10 December 2018

Health (Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy) Bill 2018: Committee Stage

 

2:00 pm

Photo of Simon HarrisSimon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Now and again I have to go to the bathroom, a Chathaoirligh. Thank you for facilitating me in that regard.

My colleague, who is well able to speak on behalf of the Government, will have outlined my position to the House. I do not believe that the wording should be changed. This is based on the legal advice I have received from the Attorney General and the engagement I have had with the clinical community. This includes the leading obstetricians in the country and people who provide me with clinical advice, in particular, my chief medical officer.

The wording used in this section, as the Minister of State, Deputy Catherine Byrne, outlined to the Seanad, has been considered from a medical perspective. It has been done with a view to ensuring flexibility for medical practitioners. I have pointed out to some of my colleagues in the House that I am not approaching the Bill from the point of view of broadening the grounds but rather based on what we committed to doing. Equally, I am not engaging in this for the purpose of trying to restrict the grounds or make the Bill more restrictive.

Under the terms of the Bill medical practitioners can take a decision in consultation with the woman to carry out a termination on the grounds that it would be appropriate, using their appropriate clinical judgment. The idea that it must be necessary implies that it must be superior to all other options and amounts to providing a bar that would make it very difficult for our medical community to meet. Senator Mullen may not like the use of the word "chilling" but that is a chilling effect. That is a word I will continue to use because it is one that doctors have told me they have operated under for far too long. It amounts to asking the doctor to be satisfied absolutely and definitively that it is entirely necessary.

I do not in any way doubt the bona fides of the Senator and I know he will not doubt mine but I believe the unintended consequence of this proposal would be to almost make it unworkable. It amounts to asking a doctor to meet a test that the treatment is categorically necessary rather than appropriate. To use any wording other than that currently in the Bill, especially more restrictive wording, could have implications for obstetric practice. I say as much confident in the knowledge that the view is shared by leading obstetricians, my chief medical officer and the Attorney General of Ireland in the context of providing advice to me. For that reason I do not propose to accept the amendment.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.