Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I understand. I will take the opportunity to speak to amendment No. 45 which deals with the matter of parental notification. I stress that it relates to parental notification and not parental consent. Given that the age of consent for medical treatment in Ireland is 16 years in virtually all cases, surely this age of consent should also apply to this most serious matter of termination of pregnancy, which ends the life of unborn children. We cannot or should not allow a position to develop whereby children under 16 could have a termination of pregnancy without, in the normal course, the knowledge or consent of their parents. We would not allow this for any other serious procedure and we should not allow it in this case.

Parents have a right to know about such a serious matter as a crisis pregnancy arising in their children. It has potentially far-reaching consequences for those children from a medical and emotional perspective. Abortion is a life-ending event for the unborn baby but it can very often be a life-changing event for the mother. The Minister has not been willing to engage with the facts that underlie the proposal to provide abortion or with the different kinds of positions that can be involved other than to mention them for the effect of an emotive argument. He has not been willing to tease through the reality of what legalising abortion can mean in cases that are different from each other. With regard to abortion on the grounds of a risk to life or a risk of serious harm to health, the point has been made, though not engaged with by the Government, that where an abortion occurs as a response to a mental health challenge or crisis, there is no evidence to show that abortion is beneficial. That is according to the best available literature reviewed and analysed by objective scholars. The evidence conflicts on whether abortion can cause adverse mental health sequelae. What is true is that abortion is associated with elevated adverse mental health sequelae in particular cases where women are young, for example, or unsupported and so on.

In speaking about parental notification we are talking about exactly the kind of position where there might be adverse mental health sequelae or where these are more likely than in other cases. Therefore, it should apply a fortiorithat parents would be notified about this procedure because of their responsibility for the welfare of their child. We should not allow a position where children face into a crisis pregnancy alone and without the knowledge and support of their parents. I accept there are cases where parents will want their child to have an abortion and there have been cases where parents have forced their children to have an abortion. There are cases where parents have taken the view that abortion is the best thing for a child. I disagree with that view but I would never question the primary responsibility of a parent to see to the welfare of his or her child, supported and not replaced by the State. It is not right normally to provide for a position where a child could have an abortion without a parent's knowledge or consent. It is not at all right that this legislation should be silent on the matter of parental notification. I have confined my amendment to notification and I have not gone so far as to require parental consent.

This is a limited amendment proposed in the knowledge that the deafening silence from the Government and its unlistening ear are a reality in our Seanad discussion of this Bill. Irrespective of whether people agree with me that parental consent should normally be required for abortion in the case of an underage person, most people should agree that it should not happen without parental knowledge, unless there are exceptional circumstances that are provided for with our amendment.

There are 21 countries in Europe with a requirement for parental notification for women under 18 years and 36 states in the United States have a similar law. These are jurisdictions where there is effectively abortion on demand. I have asked the question several times now with respect to other amendments so I must ask it again. The very European countries that the pro-choice Members of this House have extolled for years or decades as being some kind of utopia for women's reproductive rights have provisions virtually identical to those contained in the amendment I propose, so why is it being opposed? If it is good enough for women in countries with liberal abortion regimes, why is it not good enough for Irish women?

There was a spurious and over-the-top objection to a similar amendment on Report Stage in the Dáil. Deputy Coppinger stated:

In many cases, it was being raped by their fathers that caused them to become pregnant. Essentially, this amendment would open the way for the rapist to have a veto over the right of a girl to have an abortion.

The referendum may be over but comments like that show that hysterical scaremongering is set to continue.