Marie Sherlock (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for bringing this legislation before us. There will be many descriptions of it but there is no doubt that it is groundbreaking legislation. It is hard in some ways to fathom that it has taken 19 years since the Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction to get to this point, that we have had the heads of Bill since 2017, and that, notwithstanding those terrible delays, we have this Bill before us today. Senator Clifford-Lee talked about it being an emotional day. It is certainly emotional for those of us who have been through the assisted human reproduction process. I know Senators Ardagh and Seery Kearney and I spoke about our experiences when discussing the reproductive health leave Bill in 2021, which the Labour Party brought forward. We hope the Government will move on that, because there was cross-party consensus about the need to provide reproductive health leave.

To focus back on this Bill, I am thinking about those of us who are the lucky ones today, who have been through the process, but also the people who have been through the assisted human reproduction process and have not been fortunate. It is so important that we will finally have the assisted human reproduction regulatory authority, because what we have at the moment amounts to something of a Wild West, where we have providers who are profit-driven and are providing a medical service to desperate women and couples, but where there is not proper regulatory oversight. It is vitally important for people going through the process in this country that we move away from that system of very little regulation to having a comprehensive system of regulation. I welcome that we will now have legal certainty for the many couples who have gone through surrogacy. While they are small in number, they are ultimately growing year on year.They have been let down because of the terrible delays we have seen in recent years in providing legal certainty for their cases. Senator Seery Kearney spoke about the gaps that remain in this legislation and we want to see them resolved. Nonetheless, the Labour Party is supportive of the Bill.

I am conscious that under his tenure the Minister has brought forward publicly funded IVF. I distinctly remember the announcement back in 2016 when the former Taoiseach, Deputy Varadkar, who was Minister for Health then, spoke about introducing publicly funded IVF but it has taken until 2023 to introduce it. We disagree with the parameters. We have serious concerns that it relies in the first instance on private providers to provide what should be a public service and that we have waiting lists in excess of 18 weeks, much longer than should be the case. Nonetheless, it is important that we at least have the provision and we hope it will be expanded.

This is a very long Bill and I understand people's concerns when they say we should have more time to consider it on Committee, Report and Final Stages next week. However, I am also hugely mindful of the urgency of getting this through. I will refer to one section day, namely Part 4, section 39 which covers the AHR treatment provided to certain children. This is in the instance of those under the age of 18 who, because of treatment for cancer or other conditions or who because of their condition, end up going into premature menopause or will end up with infertility. I welcome that there is provision for those under the age of 18 to have their gametes obtained for storage or for children's tissue, so that when they become an adult, if they wish to become a parent that possibility is open to them. However, I understand in the original drafting of the Bill, both children going through medical treatment and those suffering from a progressive disorder were provided for and that on Report Stage the Government brought forward amendments that effectively exclude those with a progressive disorder or any disorder. I do not fully understand the medical basis for using the word "progressive". Why are children with conditions where there is associated infertility being excluded under Part 4? Will the Minister inform the House of the legal expertise he relied on to exclude these children from the legislation in the context of significant medical and scientific advances? To what extent is the Minister confident that he is future proofing the Bill? I am not clear on why he would exclude children who have conditions that will lead to infertility or have already led to infertility or to early menopause. Why are they not being provided for?

I am struck that there is a separate conversation going on at the moment about the abortion legislation. Time and again the point has been made that we need to trust the experts, the doctors and not over-legislate or be overly proscriptive because of the extensive scientific and medical advances currently taking place. I do not understand why the Minister is being overly proscriptive regarding children who have conditions that have associated infertility and why they are being excluded. Dr. Mary Wingfield, Ireland's best-known AHR clinician, paediatricians from Crumlin and gynaecologists have contacted the Minister's Department to expressly ask why he is excluding these children and have not received an answer. I hope for some answers today. This is a very small part of a very big and extensive Bill, but it is an important Bill.

I got an email today from a family that states:

Our daughter is 15 years of age and she has a condition called Turner syndrome which causes early menopause and infertility. She is soon to undergo treatment to freeze her eggs as it is very likely that her store of eggs will reduce and disappear over the next few years. This treatment (fertility preservation) will give her a chance of having her own biological children in the future. We feel privileged to be in a position to do this for our wonderful daughter. It is something that we have to do at least 5 times to give her a chance to have a child. As you can imagine it is a life changing procedure for our daughter to go through and will give her so much hope for her future. A recent change in the AHR Bill will make the procedure of fertility preservation illegal for children like our daughter and others who have similar conditions which lead to early ovarian failure. We believe that this is really wrong and discriminatory.

Those parents asked that their story be reflected here today.