Regina Doherty (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I tabled amendment No. 44 because concerns have been expressed at meetings of anaesthesiologists with regard to the Act perhaps being too restrictive compared with similar legislation in the UK, namely, the Mental Health Capacity Act 2005. It is in the context of doctors in emergency situations having to make what they consider to be pragmatic decisions.

The Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland gave me an example of a scenario wherein three teenagers over the age of 18 would sign an advance directive not to be resuscitated if brought unconscious to the emergency department, where each pair of teenagers from the trio acted as witnesses for the third, making the directives all legally valid. One teenager is subsequently brought in unconscious, perhaps it is drug-related or accidental, and the advance directive is found in his or her pocket. Under the UK Act, a doctor, knowing that the patient is fully salvageable and may be helped, can make a pragmatic decision to treat the patient and save his or her life, suspecting that the patient perhaps did not intend to apply the advance healthcare directive in this particular scenario or perhaps changed his or her mind. Under the Irish Act, a doctor would not be allowed to do that with the current wording of our legislation.

I have further information that I can certainly furnish to the Minister and his officials. I would be very grateful if he could have a look at it. I will not divide the House today. I will move and withdraw the amendment, to allow some consideration of it so that we can perhaps bring it back on Report Stage. I would be very grateful if the Minister could look at what may be the unintended consequences of the legislation we are talking about today in that kind of scenario, and what has happened in the UK to rectify it.