Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I support this Bill. Anything that assists any of our citizens who are in need of assistance, be it financial, social, emotional or spiritual, in respect of their health needs deserves our support. I supported the principle behind the Labour Party period products legislation some months ago and had planned to speak on that, but I had to travel home to Galway for family reasons at the time. We should always extend whatever reasonable resources are available to any citizen who has a particular medical need that he or she is unable to meet.

The Bill reflects and recognises the strong sense of emotional and physical loss that can occur when a pregnancy is lost through miscarriage. Whether it occurs naturally or is induced or procured, the end of a pregnancy is a traumatic event for a woman. Every miscarriage is different and no two women or sets of parents will respond in the same way to their circumstances, but I believe what I have said represents the situation of the great majority.

I strongly support leave being extended to women who require particular treatment related to their pregnancy or after childbirth as envisaged by section 5. The country needs to do far more for expectant mothers and mothers in the early months after they give birth. Their needs have been totally lost in a political system that has consumed itself in recent years debating how to end pregnancies instead of supporting pregnant mothers and their children.

I do not subscribe to the narrative that we have always had a culture of silence around these issues. I grew up in a context where there were no such taboos. We often do down our country. Certainly, cultures change and patterns change, but it can be something of a myth to say we have always had a culture of silence about these things. Many people in our country and abroad were ready to discuss these things.

I have three questions about this legislation. Would it bring about an anomalous inequality? I am asking the question in a constructive spirit. The Bill grants leave to any woman who has a miscarriage up to 28 weeks. I support that; there is no reason to oppose it. Yet, would it be strange for the Oireachtas to legislate for this when we consider that, as the law currently stands and as the law will stand if the Bill is enacted, if a woman's husband, partner or child dies, she is entitled to no statutory leave of any kind. In that instance the woman would be relying purely on the compassion of her employer, the terms of her employment contract or perhaps on the custom and practice in the sector in which she works to get leave on foot of the bereavement. While I welcome the specific proposal I wonder whether it would be strange to introduce statutory compassionate leave for the loss of a pregnancy without also granting such leave for the loss of a spouse, infant child or older child. Is the loss of a pregnancy worse to a mother or a couple than losing a spouse or child? For many women, it would of course be an equal trauma but I do not believe anyone would contend it would cause more grief or physical trauma than the loss of a spouse or child. For that reason perhaps the legislation could be said to jump the gun.

A second issue relates to section 5 which would allow leave where the employee has "miscarried a child having a gestational age of 28 weeks or less". I welcome the wording of that section because it clearly refers to there being a child in the first 28 weeks of pregnancy.It does not state miscarried a clump of cells, blastocyst, piece of tissue or any other offensive term. It states "miscarried a child". This Bill explicitly recognises the humanity of every unborn child up to 28 weeks and we should all welcome that. This is a fact that is unanimously agreed by doctors and scientists alike but it has often been disputed in this House and elsewhere for reasons of political dogma. The word "child" is not once mentioned in the Health (Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy) Act 2018. This was a deliberate decision. It was part of and in pursuit of a separate tragic development in our policy and law. I am glad to see it explicitly recognised in section 5 of this Bill that every pregnancy up to 28 weeks is about a child. I welcome that.

However, I am concerned about a potential ambiguity in respect of the word "miscarriage". Broadly speaking, miscarriages happen in two circumstances - those that occur naturally, which are the majority, and those intentionally induced. It is clearly intended that reproductive leave should apply to miscarriages that occur naturally but is it also intended to apply to miscarriages that are medically induced under the 2018 legislation? Both the Bill and the explanatory memorandum were removed from the Oireachtas website over the weekend for some reason so I had to rely on the version of the Bill that was available on the Labour Party website. Senator Bacik's accompanying press release avoids the point but does state several times that the Bill applies to "early miscarriage or other reproductive health-related reasons". I wonder whether it is within the definition of "miscarriage" under section 23B(1)(a) or whether it relates to treatment from a registered medical practitioner in the State and is intended to include abortion. I am very happy to give way to Senator Bacik if she wants to clarify that point.