Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am asking this because the Minister stated that he wants clinical practice to be able to evolve. He is proposing the removal of a presumption in favour of continuing the giving of care to protect the unborn in situations where a directive is silent as to what is to happen during pregnancy. He said that he wants to get rid of this and wants to allow clinical practice to evolve. The only interpretation that a reasonable person can take from that is that he wants it to be open to practitioners not to continue with life-sustaining treatment to avoid a deleterious effect on the unborn. That is why he is getting rid of this. I do not see how he can say there will be the protection or preservation of the life of the unborn in defiance of an AHD refusal of treatment when one has to go to court to make an application. In the absence of an application being made to the court, the default position will be just to carry through the directive. That is what the Minister said. He wanted strict equality between pregnant and non-pregnant persons. The logic of that is there will not be a presumption in favour of protecting the child in that situation because the presumption is that one must act as though the pregnancy was not there and, therefore, one refuses the treatment and the child dies in that situation. That is the logic. He appeared to give the House the impression that continuing treatment tending towards the protection of the unborn child in that situation will continue. I do not understand how he can say that in the light of what he is proposing to remove from the 2015 legislation and the clear requirement for an application to the court to do anything other than what the AHD provides in the case of a refusal of care.