Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
Updated 22.01
A CROSS-PARTY group of TDs submitted an amendment to the proposed abortion bill this morning which would allow terminations for medical reasons be performed in Irish hospitals.
A number of representatives from the Terminations for Medical Reasons (TFMR) group joined them at Leinster House today to urge the government to accept the amendment.
Sarah McGuinness – who lost her baby Molly on the 17 December 2009 at Liverpool’s Women’s Hospital – pleaded with elected deputies and senators “to listen to the majority” and “put an end to the cruel treatment”.
Speaking at a press briefing, she said:
For over a year now, we have been dedicating our lives to fight for a change to this barbaric practice of exporting vulnerable women and couples and families to neighbouring countries for the medical care and the support they deserve. We believe that this is not good enough for an elected government to pass up the opportunity to legislate simply because they have decided themselves not to act in the people’s interest.
(YouTube: Sinéad O’Carroll)
Another member of the TFMR group, father James Burke, also shared his family’s story, telling the government that they no longer had time for empathy.
“We need action,” he said.
When Burke and his wife Amanda Mellett were given their diagnosis in December 2011 at the 21-week scan, they decided to make the “horrible journey” to Liverpool, where she went through 36 hours of labour.
Three weeks later, their daughter’s remains were delivered to their door.
“The courier was holding what he thought was a package we had ordered from Amazon or something like that. Inside the cardboard box was a wooden box with Aoife, our daughter’s name, and her date of birth on it.
That is the compassion that Liverpool Women’s Hospital went to for us, for Irish couples who are not even in…their country. They looked after us so well but yet our government completely refuse to accept this and say there is nothing they can do.
(YouTube: Sinéad O’Carroll)
Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett leads the cross-party group driving the amendment and, today, he paid tribute to the “great courage” of the bereaved families.
“It is utterly appalling that women who have to endure that heartbreak, also face the stigma that the treatment they were forced to seek abroad is a criminal offence in this county. I call on all TDs who support these women to support the amendment.”
A number of government TDs, including Fine Gael’s Simon Harris, Andrew Doyle and Catherine Byrne, previously indicated their support for the women at an information session on Kildare Street in May but it is unclear if they will vote for the amendment next week. Today, deputies Joe Higgins, Seamus Heaney, John Halligan, Patrick Nulty, Catherine Murphy, Thomas Pringle, Joan Collins and Róisín Shortall, as well as senators Averil Power and Fiach MacConghail were present to highlight their backing of the amendment.
Halligan pledged to “not let this go”.
“There is an onus and responsibility on all of us,” he said, describing current practices as “barbaric”.
If we can’t succeed on getting this amendment into the Bill, come Autumn, we will find some mechanism in bringing this before the Dáil again – be it a Bill or another amendment to the Bill that will probably be past. You have our word that we will not stop until this is dealt with.
The group has voiced the possibility of bringing a new Bill to the government in autumn to deal solely with terminations for women with fatal foetal diagnoses.
About 1,500 cases are reported each year in Ireland with about 80 per cent of the women travelling abroad for treatment.
(YouTube: Sinéad O’Carroll)
If passed, the amendment outlines that two medical practitioners – one obstetrician and one perinatologist – would need to jointly certify that the foetus is suffering from a fatal foetal abnormality and is not compatible with life.
There is also provision for a GP consultation, with the pregnant woman’s agreement.
“We do not accept that this amendment runs foul of the Constitution,” Barrett said, adding that there was “no clash of rights”. “Our argument is that the clash does not arrive in these circumstances as we are talking about foetuses that are incompatible with life.”
He believes the amendment can work within the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013 and within the current Constitutional framework.
One of the legal experts who drafted the bill, Jennifer Schweppe, gave three reasons for how the amendment could be deemed constitutional. She explained that Article 40.3.3 has only been examined in the strict confines of the X Case but that is not the only interpretation available.
She said that the term ‘unborn’ in the article does not mean the ‘capacity to be born’.
Currently, the Constitution equates the life of the unborn to the life of the pregnant woman. According to the lawyer, where the foetus has no capacity, the Constitution “cannot possibly try to equate those two lives”.
Finally, Schweppe said the Constitution only requires the State to vindicate right to life in so far as it is practicable. She aruges that it is not practicable to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term when each day she and her family knows there will be no baby at the end of the 40 weeks. Pregnancies and labour are very hard on a woman’s body, she added.
(YouTube: Sinéad O’Carroll)
Family members also travelled to the city centre for today’s conference. Douglas Bowie, who introduced himself as a father and retired GP spoke of his daughter Ruth’s devastating case. Her baby was diagnosed with fatal anencephaly (meaning there was only a partial skull) and travelled to England for a termination.
“If she had continued with the pregnancy, she would have effectively been a life-support machine,” he said. “Every day in hospitals, doctors and families have to make decisions to switch off life machines.
“Is this not a similar position?” he asked.
Also at the briefing was Deirdre Conroy, the woman known as Miss D who took her case against the State to the European Court of Human Rights after she had to travel for a termination. She had lost one of her twin babies in the womb and the other had been diagnosed with a fatal abnormality. She lost the case as the Attorney General argued that had she asked the Irish High Court if she could legally obtain a termination here, there was a significant chance it would have been lawful.
Senator Power said it is important the current government is reminded about her situation and the argument put forward by the State at the time.
Requests from TFMR to meet the Health Minister in recent months have been declined.
Below is the full wording of the amendment, which it is proposed, could be inserted as a ‘new Section 10′:
(1) It shall be lawful to carry out a medical procedure in respect of a pregnant woman in accordance with this section in the course of which, or as a result of which, a pregnancy is ended, where -
(a) the medical procedure is carried out by an obstetrician at an appropriate institution, and
(b) subject to section 19, two medical practitioners, having examined the pregnant woman, have jointly certified that the foetus in question is suffering from a fatal foetal abnormality.
(2) Of the 2 medical practitioners referred to in subsection (1)(b) –
(a) one shall be an obstetrician who practices as such at an appropriate institution, and
(b) the other shall be a perinatologist who practices as such at an appropriate institution.
(3) If practicable, at least one of the medical practitioners referred to in subsection (1)(b) shall, only with the pregnant woman’s agreement, consult with the woman’s general practitioner (if any) for the purposes of obtaining information in respect of the woman from that general practitioner that may assist the medical practitioners in their decision as to whether or not to make a section 10 certification in respect of the woman.
(4) Subject to section 19, the certifying obstetrician shall -
(a) forward, or cause to be forwarded, the section 10 certification to an appropriate institution, and
(b) make such arrangements as may be necessary for carrying out of the medical procedure to which the section 10 certification relates at the appropriate institution.
First published 15.15
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Real lone patents. Not the ones that claim it and are a couple with separate accounts and a free gaff and benefits.
@Sickof thisshit: ….of which there are legion!
@Sickof thisshit: free gaf? If you live your whole life in a council house you’ll pay more in rent than its worth and then it either goes to your children who pay it all again or it goes back to the council. No such thing as a free house but it’s a privilege to own one.
@Dale Voinz: most lone parents would be paying around €30 per week or ~1500 per year. Say they are in the house for 50 years, that comes to a total rent of €75k so not quite the value of a house, then include maintenance, upgrades to the house, e.g. energy efficiency works etc and then you see what a good deal it is especially if the partner is living there off the books (you just have to look at the cars in council estates to see who’s riding the system).
@Dale Voinz:
@Dale Voinz: I think your calculations are a bit off
@Dale Voinz:
It’s a privilege to own one in a commie country.
In a free first world country it’s a reward for hard work
@The next small thing: minimum is 37 a week and your calculating that 1 adult lives in that house their entire life, kids out at 18 or after education and that person never worked a day in those 50 years, not 1 single day. That type of person would most likely have a disability and can’t work because 99% of council households are not paying that bare minimum. Calculate it on the opposite end at thr max rate of €500 (not taking into account inflation, as rents get more expensive and mortgages get easier over time) then €500 x 12 x 50 = €300,000. The council are not building homes at that cost. But anyway, I’d rather pay €500 a month to not live next door to someone like yourself and probably vice versa, so be grateful to live in such a great country to means right to housing is a thing :)
@Dale Voinz: again not great maths. Most 3 beds cost more than €300k. Better yet try find a mortgage for €300k at €500 a month with no upkeep costs plus no interest. You forget people who buy a house for €300k are paying interest at between 2-5%, so they end up paying another 150k or more ontop.
@Shane (Vaya): my comparison was on the other end of the extreme. A couple with no kids in a one bed working paying 500pm for 50 years, not to mention you’re probably not getting a new build and in a not so great area then only to hand it back to the council. But yeah I suppose that would be a “free gaf” lol. My math are fine, I think it’s your reading that’s the issue
Not doubting there’s some who feel the pinch, but there’s quite a few who will get the Botox,Lip Fillers and may even fly to New York to get the Christmas Presents in,I could keep going.
@martin lawlor: why you people don’t go and live on welfare is beyond me seeing as it’s so great
@john salmon: You people John?
Who would that be?
Read the comment again before playing the victim.
@martin lawlor: Absolutely, isn’t it a good thing the headline doesn’t say ‘not one single person on lone parent or renting has any disposable income to do anything they want, ever’ so?
@Megan Ward: A 100% Megan, as the headline says and I quote “Cover their Needs”. Now I for one do want to see anyone struggle regardless of their income etc; but the reality on the ground for some is definitely more properrous than other’s and I say some,before someone plays the victim again.
@martin lawlor: Sorry meant to say do not want, fat fingers, my bad
@martin lawlor: Yeah, and grass is green. We all know people who seem to have the life of Riley without working, that doesn’t really change the findings of the study and being unemployed or a lone parent still isn’t appealing to me or most people, I’d wager.
@Megan Ward: If I was to take a study of a 100 people outside a Bookies and asked them all had they a problem with gambling what do you think the findings would be?
Point being these studies are usually not reflective of reality or what’s perceived to be reality.
I’ll go back to the point where I said “Some” ,quite a few actually.There’s a lot of people who would prefer to not be in the situation they are in and I agree but for some its a mindset irrespective of what you or I would prefer.
@martin lawlor: With my experience in knowing them I think a gambling addict has far more incentive to lie about the issue, even to a stranger, than a person has to lie about whether their income is covering their costs or not. There’s a shame, stigma, and denial around addiction of all kinds that doesn’t quite exist in the same way for ‘Hmm, things are quite tight and I’m struggling a bit’ or ‘Hmm, my basics are covered but I don’t have a lot left over’ or ‘I’m doing fine’. Maybe some would spoof for shits and giggles, most would see no reason to lie.
Of course surveys and statistics are limited in their usefulness, but I don’t find it hard to believe that these people are struggling more on average just because I personally know a few huns who have enough money to get their lips and lashes done regularly without a job or yup bros decked out in designer.
@Megan Ward: Well Megan,based on that logic, I’m an Alcoholic,I’m Obese and I earn a fortune.
@martin lawlor: I’m obese, earn a middle of the road salary, and am terrible at saving money because I spend too much on holidays, gigs, and festivals without taking breaks to put money aside, up to you to decide whether those are things I’d go with if lying :)
@martin lawlor:
They deserve it if they worked for it. Unlike the professional welfare jockies
@john salmon:
Pride
@martin lawlor: you people who like to knowingly spread the lie that life on welfare is a bunch of roses.
@Megan Ward: You missed the Point Megan.Im not an alcoholic or obese ,nor do I earn a fortune.
Now if there was a study carried out the statistics might say different.
Now tell me who’s wrong me or the study?
It’s not about lying it’s about what you perceive as normal to you.
This studies do not delve into the spending habits etc of the people they survey.
@martin lawlor: Yes Martin, it was fairly obvious that you were going with ‘well I’m just going to spout something that isn’t true’. If you think that ‘lone parents, households with children, single adults and renters’ (to quote the article as is) aren’t more likely to struggle with basic needs across the board, I don’t know what to tell you. We could argue all day about the potential of different people answering the survey lumping things that we would consider discretionary into the ‘basic needs’ category and a margin of subjectivity, but if there’s any reason the survey is useless it’s because its findings are something that would seem obvious. Obvious, just like the fact that some people on social welfare have more for discretionary spending than some working people and yet it gets spouted here like it’s ground-breaking news.
A wider statistic does not negate the very real struggle that many working people (whether renting or homeowners) in this country face financially, nor does it give every single social welfare recipient, single adult, renter or parent a pass to say that they don’t have enough money for basics if an analysis shows otherwise.
Your point seems to be ‘well I see lots of these people have enough money for fillers and trips to New York so the survey is probably bull’, correct me if I’m wrong.
@Megan Ward: I agree with all you have said Megan.
I never used the word Bull, like most ERSI studies they are based on the opinion of the people surveyed without delving into the background and statistics that forms that opinion, what’s regarded as needs etc.
It’s headline grabbing at it’s best not fully factual.
I like many have been one of those working people who struggled to pay rent in the past etc and have faced many uphill battles ,I pick my socks up and keep going like many.
@martin lawlor: Perhaps I’m putting too much faith in people to be honest with themselves and the survey taker about what is objectively a basic need. Have a good Christmas, I’m treating myself to a Journal ban over the next few weeks!
@Megan Ward: You seem a very smart woman Megan and pose a very good articulate debate.Have a wonderful Christmas and Happy New Year.
@martin lawlor: exactly
It’s not just lone parents and renters who are feeling the pinch!
I am a lone parent AND a renter,am more concerned with having security in regards to my rental agreement,if you are feeling the pinch get a job ,still feeling the pinch GET A BETTER JOB
@sean weir: Fair play Sean,full respect.
@sean weir: my you should get a better job and buy a house
No such thing as lone parents.
Deadbeat Dads on the dole more like.
Need to cut welfare to slags that won’t name their baby daddys in court.
@Paul: Disgusting comment.
Reductive,inaccurate and misogynistic.
@Audreyanne Brady: It’s misandrist.
@Nodon: It manages to be both,somehow.
Lone perant with two kids
Would have to get a job paying around 1100 euro gross a week to match the welfare package.
@H Woo: It’s not PC to mention the Welfare Wages Wedge I in Wokeland, I mean Ireland. Sssss
For less than 10m euro the Govt could roll out this excellent community mothers programme in the 50 largest towns across the country which would support young families struggling from isolation and inability to navigate the social system. Instead it’s snail’s pace deployment even though Govt has adopted and launched it. Could be done in the morning.
@James Gorman: Here’s a tip. Fix the writing on the linked website.
Who thought that using nearly invisible lettering is a good idea
@James Gorman:
Defund the NGOD
@H Woo:
Defund the NGOs
But isn’t the headline suggesting a subjective rather than objective situation? ‘Needs’ needs to be defined, quantified, e.g. my needs are in all likelihood different from Tom’s, Dick’s or Harry’s, while basic needs are common for all, beyond basics there would be different individual situations.
It’s lone parents and people on low incomes living week to week trying to stay afloat. There’s a myth that if you work in this country you’re better off its depends on you’re salary in most cases it’s much as much the dole and rent allowance if you take into account no extra benefits high rent and low income. Waste of time may aswel count the birds.
@Paddy C: Had to close a business as unable to get staff to work through the books. Very capable people requiring/asking one day through the books and the rest cash. To pay cash the employer has to earn double required money pay taxes on it and then give the worker the money and it’s illegal. To pay100 cash the employer must earn and pay taxes on 200.
The main political campaigns will be for removing obstacles more house construction and sex education discouraging sex outside marriage.
Lot of hard cases out there that need help, but as for the others, having to pay for people that have made bad choices and lack motivation to get off welfare is very annoying, and these are Irish people.
We are supposed to be the richest country in Europe behind Luxembourg and one of the world’s richest, more than Sweden, Denmark, on paper… But even if it’s not like that, we are certainly one of the richest and still, our incomes don’t meet our needs, what’s for the rest of the world?
@J Ven:
We are top heavy with scroungers and that’s the reason why your taxes are to high and deserving services are underfunded.
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
It seems listing the costs for disability is deemed ‘ offensive ‘ wow
Single parent income is no joke . Yeah of course there are those who are making off like bandits & deceiving the state but they’re a small minority. Most worry about having enough to make ends meet . I was raised by a single father of five on benefits. Hardly how he would have wanted it but it was it was . Killed himself in the end due to stress & mental illness. So maybe before we go assuming they’re all layabouts & grifters of a sort, take a breath and consider what gets people in the situation in the first place
There was an article somewhere that a “comfortable retirement” costs 33k,/year. Most people don’t even have that during their working years. Load of s…. and fearmongering about the future.
A single person with one child in Ireland is entitled to circa €27800 a year in total cash benefits plus medical card. Its not a kings ransome, but its still a very significant sum of money to recieve, despite never having to work a day in your life..
have your say