Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 44 is one I would have expected the Government or the pro-choice supporters of the Bill, or both, to propose. It tries to ensure full access to all possible information when a woman is considering having an abortion and that she will give full and voluntary consent to the procedure. Relevant knowledge is essential to give full consent. The amendment makes it clear that voluntary and informed consent would be necessary in all cases, other than where there is an immediate risk to the life of the woman or of serious harm to her health, as set out in other sections. As I made clear earlier, the amendment accepts the reality that we are not going to be able to divert the Government from the cruel course it has set. In that light and the light of our acceptance of the inevitability that these unjust procedures will be legalised as a result of the Bill, we seek modest, limited amendments, the support for which, we believe, goes far beyond the pro-life constituency.

The amendment would compel the HSE to provide full information for women on the medical care and counselling support available, the obligations of the father of the child, adoption services and so on. It would also provide women with a statutory right to take action against anyone who breached their right to access such information and claim damages against them.How can supporters of the Bill or the rights of women seriously oppose such measures? Why should a woman not be in a position to avail of relevant information?

Thankfully, the Bill has retained the three-day waiting period, although, it would appear, by the skin of its teeth. That is the sole, single, solitary, token restriction on the abortion on request regime brought about by this Bill. During the referendum campaign, the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Coveney, said the purpose of the three-day period was so that women could receive the kind of information contained in this amendment. It seems strange, therefore, that his party colleagues are not willing to put his suggestion into action by voting for this amendment.

There has been a disturbing tone running through much the debate on this issue and similar issues. There seems to be a suggestion that providing a woman with alternatives and knowledge about alternatives to abortion or offering support to her if she keeps her baby is somehow an attempt to demean her, cause shame or even attack her womanhood. In the Dáil, I heard everyone from the Minister for Health to Deputy Coppinger and several other Deputies parroting this kind of mantra. Deputy O'Reilly said of a similar amendment that the intention was to highlight the shame, judgment and all the other things that go along with this. How does it show shame or judgment to offer women information about every possible assistance to which they are entitled? It shows how far we have come and how willing we are to reject the notion that giving women the best possible chance to be mothers and giving babies the best shot at life are somehow bad things. That is the view taken, namely, that this requirement to give information that facilitates informed consent is considered to be a bad thing. It seems that abortion is to be treated as the first and only option.

There was a time internationally when people like Hillary Clinton said abortion should be safe, legal and rare. Under pressure from the abortion industry, that became safe and legal because to suggest there is anything wrong or even regrettable about abortion offends the prevailing ideology. I think Nell McCafferty was quoted a number of years ago expressing the view that abortion was regrettable but necessary. Many people have moved on and do not want to allow it to be discussed as something that is regrettable, even though there is evidence that the consequences are not just terminal for the unborn child but can be very bad for mothers who suffer from abortion regret.

The mere provision of information that there are alternative courses of action is now portrayed as an attack on so-called reproductive rights. This leaves women woefully short, underserved and badly served by the State and the proponents of this legislation. We can do so much more for women and families who find themselves in difficult circumstances as a result of crisis pregnancy. This amendment would put all of that on a statutory footing.

This amendment does not apply to emergency grounds. It is about providing that termination of pregnancy - the procedure aimed at ending the life of the foetus - occurs with the voluntary and informed consent of the pregnant woman. It provides that the information to be given to the pregnant woman would be oral and in person, would be medically accurate in respect of the proposed termination of pregnancy method and the immediate and long-term medical risks associated with the proposed termination of pregnancy method, no more and no less than what the science and the latest knowledge provide. It would also provide information concerning the medical risks associated with carrying the child to full term. This is an even-handed amendment. However, the point is that it cannot just be a leaflet left in a surgery, negligently or carefully as the case may be. This is taken from Irish case law on informed consent. People who go on about paternalism and disempowering women should not object to treating women as rational, discerning persons who would benefit from being given information.