David Cullinane
Waterford · Sinn Féin · Ireland
“I met many of those patients and people with the illness yesterday. Many of them were here in Leinster House. They told me, as they have in the past, they cannot walk and they cannot swallow and, as the Taoiseach acknowledged, it is also very difficult for their families who have to watch as their condition worsens and the disease progres…”
“In fact, in the programme for Government the Government committed to reviewing that process because it was accepted it does not always work. The technical review group obviously now needs to be convened and needs to meet urgently. Emily cannot afford more delays.”
“Yesterday, as the Taoiseach knows, the HSE drugs group met to consider reimbursement of Skyclarys, the first approved treatment that can slow the progression of Friedreich's ataxia. Patients hoped for a positive decision. This process has been ongoing for years.”
“They were left desperately making phone calls, checking for updates, asking journalists and asking politicians if they had heard anything. They were treated appallingly. Then, when the news did eventually filter though, they were left devastated.”
“Richard Walsh, consultant neurologist and co-director of the National Ataxia Clinic, has described this drug as a ground-breaking development. He has said that he would prescribe it if it were available in Ireland and that it may reduce the rate of disease progression.”
“"We are not going to regain any of the abilities we've lost, but Skyclarys will give us time. Time when you're dealing with our progressive relentless disease is everything. We all deserve time with our loved ones." Those are the words of Emily Felix, a 28-year-old trainee solicitor from Kilkenny who is living with Friedreich's ataxia.”
The complete record
Every one of 786 lines we hold for David Cullinane, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 16.
“There is no part of the country about which it can be said a top class service is being provided but there are parts of the country where it is really bad, and the south east and Waterford is unfortunately one of the worst-performing. The Minister of State talked about the system relying on private contractors, and it is, but no public system should depend on private contractors. The problem is that we simply do not have enough dentists and orthodontists working in the public system. That is a reality. When the Government says it cannot hire or find them or get them into the public system, that is what workforce planning is about.”
“I thank all of the speakers for their contributions. It has to be said, among Government and Opposition Members, including the Ministers, there is a recognition that we have a real problem, and that children and adults, but particularly children, are waiting too long. The problem is that this is not the first debate we have had on this issue. It is not the first time that issues and problems with dental and orthodontic wait times have been raised in this Dáil. I mentioned that the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health had a number of sessions on this and published a report. I have been talking about this issue for the best part of ten years or more. I recall dealing with this issue when I was a member of Waterford City and County Council, many years ago.”
“It has been a problem for years and public patients and medical card holders are simply told to "Go whistle somewhere, do what you like, go private, we cannot do anything for you". That is all I hear from the Government on this and it is not good enough. All of those problems need to be fixed, which is why we put forward not just this motion but the alternatives involving more training places, hiring more public orthodontists and dentists and fixing the problems with the dental treatment service scheme.”
“A total of 11,000 children are on waiting lists for braces of which 40% are waiting over two years; some of them are waiting as long as six, seven or even eight years; children in pain are waiting for treatment; and children with disabilities, who also have additional needs for dentistry, are often waiting. We have dealt with those issues on the floor of the Dáil. The screening system has collapsed and is not working, which is not good for children. The public system for medical card patients has not been working for some time. I have to be honest. I do not know if it is ideological coming from this Government but there is no will on the part of the Government to fix it.”
“When one looks at the breakdown of how long children are waiting, one can see that there children who are deemed to be grade four or five - the most urgent cases - waiting five, six, seven and in some cases, eight years for treatment. How is that acceptable? How has that been allowed to happen? It is worse in some parts of the country. The Minister of State comes from the south east as do I. It is one of the worst performing areas. We have been raising this time and again with the Minister, the previous Minister, the HSE and the Department but every time we raise it, we are told there will be a new strategy and an updated plan and new measures will be put in place but it is not happening and it is not working. The facts speak for themselves.”
“I have no problem with an element of that but when it gets to a point where more or as many international students come to be trained and we are not training as many domestic dentists as we need, who will actually stay here, work in the public system and treat patients, that is a problem. The first thing we have to do is to make sure we have enough dental training schools and enough training places and we clearly do not. We need to encourage more dentists and more orthodontists to come into the public system. I have been dealing with parents for the past number of years and I have to say what they tell me when I deal with them is that their children are on waiting lists that are going nowhere.”
“Yet in a lot of cases, fillings are actually the answer. If that is happening, that is, again, shocking. That scheme has collapsed for some time and only about 800 dentists out of about 2,200 private dentists are operating that scheme so, obviously, there is no confidence in it on the part of dentists. An alternative needs to be put in place. I put forward alternative proposals and solutions to the Government on this time and again, including in a very substantial policy document I did in this area but also in similar debates in the Dáil and elsewhere. We need to train more dentists. The reality is that a significant amount of international training takes place in our training colleges and dental schools.”
“To add insult to injury, despite a scheme the Government put in place, and which we should all value, encourage and support, to ensure children get proper screening in schools - the Government policy being that each primary school child would get two screenings over their journey in primary school - the majority of children are not getting those screenings. Some get one screening but very few, if any, get both. Again, it is a symptom of a system that is not working. The public dental treatment service scheme has collapsed. Dentists have walked away from it because they do not think it is working. A number of dentists, including one from Deputy Doherty's constituency in Donegal, have contacted me to say that they get paid for extractions and can have an unlimited number of extractions under the current scheme but can only do two fillings.”
“The HSE and the Department went as far as apologising to parents in letters, which I have received, and indeed at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health because they are simply not giving children the care they need. We have 11,000 children waiting for braces and tens of thousands of children waiting for access to an orthodontist. They are on an assessment list, they have not been assessed or they are waiting to see a dentist for all sorts of different reasons. The public system clearly is not working and is clearly failing patients.”
“The public dental service in this State is absolutely shocking and clearly is not working. I have dealt with this now for a long number of years. I have tabled parliamentary questions. We have raised it in the Oireachtas Committee on Health. We have had the Irish Dental Association in along with the HSE and the Department. I have written countless letters on behalf of constituents not just in Waterford but across the State whose children are waiting years on orthodontic and dental waiting lists for braces and treatment. Some of those children are in pain and yet are waiting so long for access to a dentist and an orthodontist.”
“I move: That Dáil Éireann: notes that: — there are more than 11,000 people, mainly children, on waiting lists for dental and orthodontic treatment with the Health Service Executive (HSE), including for braces and for dental surgery under general anaesthetic, and that more than 8,000 of them are waiting over a year for an appointment; — half of primary school children are leaving school without ever having received a screening appointment, with average waiting times of four years for an appointment, and upwards of four and a half years in some areas such as Waterford City; — access to dental care for medical card patients through the Dental Treatment Services Scheme (DTSS) has become severely limited, with less than half of dentists signed onto the scheme; and further notes: — the Joint Committee on Health report entitled "Report on Dental Services in the Healthcare System" published April 2026; and — considers that the National Oral Health Policy Smile agus Sláinte fails to prioritise the development of public dental services; calls on the Government to: — publish an action plan targeting an urgent reduction in years-long waiting lists for dental and orthodontic care so that children get the preventive and corrective treatment that they need, when they need it; — invest in public dental services which will prioritise school screening and medical card holders, including the development of a public-only dentist contract; — modernise the DTSS and integrate this with the GP Visit Card to widen access to preventative primary care services on the basis of need, and not the ability to pay; — revise Smile agus Sláinte to include the development of public dental services and publish a timebound implementation plan; — establish a multi-disciplinary working group on the development of a public model of dental and oral health service provision; — develop a strategic workforce plan for dentistry, including an increase in training places across all dental care professions; — allow direct access to dental hygienists and dental nurses for appropriate care within their scope of practice without a referral from a dentist following the development of the necessary regulatory guidelines and oversight, and engage with professional societies on this; — introduce a new Dental Act to update the out-dated legal framework of the 1985 Act, in line with the recommendations of the Dental Council of Ireland, which should also place new entitlements to access dental care services on a statutory footing; and — improve the collection and publication of data on special care patients, which includes patients with intellectual disabilities, to ensure transparency and accountability for waiting lists in this area and ensure timely access to care under general anaesthetic for these patients who need it.”
“The Minister mentioned givinostat and Skyclarys. Delays in this area have an impact on patients. I think we all accept there must be a process to protect the taxpayer and secure value for money and, of course, the independence of it and the scientific underpinning but the current reimbursement process is not designed properly for rare diseases. Applying the same cost-effectiveness model used for common medicines creates predictable delays and unfair outcomes because that system is not suitable for assessing orphan drugs. It is not good enough to tell people with rare diseases that they are too expensive to help. Ireland needs a dedicated, timebound reform of the rare disease medicines pathway.”
“We need proper clinical links, referral routes, shared learning and all-island co-operation to maximise the capacity and expertise shared across our health services for these very small groups of patients. For some very rare conditions, the number of patients is so small that collaboration across Ireland, across Europe and between specialist centres is essential. Complex rare disease cases should have accessible key workers who can manage them. The time and emotional burden of a rare disease is enormous. Families should not be left to manage it all by themselves and to co-ordinate appointments, therapies, medicines, travel, disability supports, social protection supports, school supports and home care on their own. I want to talk about access to medicines for rare diseases because it is an area that needs to be reformed.”
“Rare disease patients are too often met by a system that has no or limited knowledge of their conditions, where to refer them or how to support them. This means that symptoms can be missed, referrals delayed and families left scrambling for answers. Earlier diagnosis will require better awareness across primary care, emergency care, paediatrics, adult services and community services. It also requires investment in genetics and genomics, which the Minster mentioned, genetic counselling, laboratory capacity, data systems and specialist workforce planning. We cannot promise earlier diagnosis without building the capacity to deliver it. Care networks are just as important. Patients should not have to rely on luck, personal advocacy or overseas contacts to access expertise. Care pathways must be strengthened.”
“The publication of the rare disease strategy was, therefore, a very important and welcome step. It is a long overdue strategy and is essential for realising earlier diagnosis, care co-ordination, registries, research, access to medicines and harnessing the capacity of the health service and medical research to improve lives. The test will be in the implementation and delivery of measurable progress. A second test will be whether the HSE and the health and social care trusts in the North can genuinely come together to maximise access to care and expertise, given that we are talking about very small groups of patients who will be better served if we optimise services through all-island delivery. Awareness is the first challenge.”
“The shortcomings and successes of the health service and medical research define their lived experience. This too often manifests as a long wait for a diagnosis, if one ever comes; long distance travel across the country and abroad to find a suitable expert; and fighting for access to scans, therapies, medicines, educational supports, home supports, disability services, mental health supports and, at times, medical cards. Parents and families become case managers, counsellors, researchers, advocates and campaigners because the State has not put the right supports in place for these communities. People living with rare diseases face that on top of the same capacity problems, waiting lists and delays in physical and mental health services that we know exist right across the board.”
“I want to start by commending the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach and the role he has played in campaigning for better supports for patients with rare diseases. Rare diseases affect more people than many realise. A rare disease is defined broadly as a life-long or life-threatening condition affecting no more than one in 2,000 people, which essentially means a condition that affects no more than 3,500 people on our island. Taken individually, these conditions are rare. Taken together, they affect one in 20 people across Ireland. This means hundreds of thousands of people, parents, children, carers and families whose lives are shaped by conditions that too often the health service is not properly equipped to understand, diagnose, treat or support. For those families, rare disease is not an abstract policy area; it is daily life.”
“It is a long-term condition with a profound impact on quality of life, work, relationships, fertility and mental health. This is exactly the kind of condition the long-term illness scheme should be capable of recognising. I hope that when we move this Bill on Second Stage, the Government will be in a position to support it and add other illnesses to the scheme.”
“There are so many conditions that are not on the long-term illness scheme but should be. One major example of this is endometriosis. Endometriosis is a serious chronic disease and can cause severe pain, heavy and painful periods, infertility, internal scarring and damage to organs including the bowel, bladder and kidneys. It affects at least one in ten women in Ireland and yet it can take years to receive a diagnosis. Steps have been taken to address this under the endometriosis framework. We are all working across this House to improve access to care in Ireland for women but supports for medication and equipment for non-medical cardholders is a major emission from the work under way in the HSE. Endometriosis is not short term and it is not cheap to manage.”
“This is a principle we all signed up to but, unfortunately, there has been little change in medical card entitlements since 2005, and there is no commitment in the programme for Government to address this. This is why we are introducing this legislation. We have no faith that the Government will take any meaningful action to deliver universal healthcare that is free at the point of use. People with long-term and chronic conditions cannot be left on the long finger for another decade while they wait for change. This Bill is straightforward. It requires the Minister for Health to undertake periodic reviews of the conditions, medications and equipment on the long-term illness scheme to make sure it is fit for purpose. It would require the first review to start within a year and subsequent reviews to take place every three years.”
“The long-term illness scheme was established under section 59 of the Health Act in 1971. The last time a condition was added to the scheme was in 1975. In the meantime, 51 years of advancement in medical knowledge has been ignored and those suffering from chronic or long-term conditions who cannot get a medical card have been left without support. This, of course, would not have been an issue if the Government had advanced universal health care, but the medical card thresholds have not been touched in over 20 years. We all agree that the long-term illness scheme should not be needed because anyone who needs care should receive it on the basis of need and not the ability to pay.”
“I thank all Deputies who have spoken with respect and in the spirit of co-operation, listening and engaging. I respect all the different opinions which have been raised and I will ignore all the political charges that were made against my party and will not respond to them because I think this is about moving forward and making sure that what we voted for is what women get. For me that is the most important part of this legislation and this debate.”
“Actually, the author of the independent report recommended that there would be an expert-led stakeholder review of that particular issue to look at the wording and to come back with recommendations for legislators. I believe that whatever changes we make have to be right. There cannot be any unintended consequences which is why I am grateful that the Minister and the Government are making resources available for me to be able to perfect the Bill which is before us. I believe it will pass and if it does pass, I want to make sure that it goes to Committee Stage and ultimately passes. I agree that other issues have to be dealt with. I ask the Minister for Health to set up that review panel to look at those other issues, make recommendations and then let us evaluate them on their merits with the independent data that we have.”
“Some people say that the HSE data indicate that 10,000 children are alive today because of the three-day wait. That is simply not fact and simply not the case. Nowhere in any publication or in any parliamentary question response does it say it that. There are conflation of data and a misunderstanding of actually what the HSE was saying. People know that and it needs to be put on the record. Equally, I want to deal with the other issues that people raised suggesting that this legislation does not go far enough and that there are other recommendations in the review, as there were. One of those was on the grounds of fatal foetal abnormalities.”
“Compassion and respect has always underpinned my approach to this issue. Like the Minister of State, I campaigned for repeal. I knocked on doors and I argued, debated, listened, agreed and disagreed. In fact, some of the best exchanges I had were with people I disagreed with because they sharpened my awareness of the complexity of this issue and the fact that people come at it differently. At every single door I knocked on where I disagreed, I respected the opinion of the person who made an alternative argument. At the end of the day, the people voted in overwhelming numbers for change and for abortion services in certain circumstances. In that spirit, I have to say that some of the claims made today by some TDs in this Chamber are just factually wrong.”
“This Bill clearly sets out the Sinn Féin policy that was endorsed at our Ard-Fheis earlier this year. This Bill strikes the right balance. It is the right change to make. It is overdue. It respects women's decisions. It removes an unnecessary barrier to care. There are many other issues that these Houses should and must work through, arising from the review of the Act. I commend this Bill to the House.”
“It can create real difficulty for women: for women who have travelled for long distances; for women arranging time off work or childcare; for women in crisis; and for women living with coercive, controlling partners, or domestic violence. For many women, having to return days later is not a small inconvenience but it can be a very serious barrier and has been identified as such. Removing the mandatory waiting period does not mean that the termination must take place on the first day. It does not remove a woman's ability to take more time if she wants to and in those circumstances she should and she must be supported. What this Bill does is remove the requirement that the State must force every woman to wait, regardless of her circumstances, her decision, her health or her needs.”
“We recognise in law and in policy that women should have access to abortion services on the basis of their own choice. This was the compassionate position put before the people in 2018 and it is the basis on which services have been provided since. The question before us now is whether the State should continue to impose an arbitrary delay after a woman has already made her decision and presented to a doctor. I do not believe that it should. This waiting period does not provide care. It does not provide support. It does not make any service safer. It simply makes access harder, especially for those who can least afford delay.”
“This is important because the clear feedback from women is that they were bring pushed beyond the 12-week threshold by the three-day mandatory wait or were unable to secure a second appointment on time, which denied them their choice to end a pregnancy. Sinn Féin has always been clear and consistent that we did not approve of the mandatory waiting period; that it puts women in difficult positions; and that it is not compassionate to women who have suffered rape or sexual assault, to women who learn of their pregnancy late or to women who are subject to controlling or abusing partners and for whom that first appointment may be the only appointment they get. The three-day wait was examined as part of the review of the operation of the Act. Its removal is one of the clearest recommendations arising from that process.”
“Under the current law, when a woman attends a doctor seeking a termination of pregnancy within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, the doctor must certify that it has been fewer than 12 weeks since the end of the pregnant woman's last period. A woman must then wait for at least three days before the doctor can carry out the procedure. The termination cannot happen at all if a woman subsequently times out of the 12-week period due to the mandatory delay. Instead, our Bill allows the termination to take place as soon as may be desired by the woman in her own time. This allows women who have made up their mind to access care when they seek it and still allows time for reflection for a woman who still needs time to think about this decision.”
“It does this by deleting section 12(3) and by amending section 12(4) to remove the requirement for three days to have elapsed before a termination can be carried out. It does not require an abortion to happen on the day of a first consultation but when a woman is certain that this is what she wants, it allows her to make that decision for herself in her own time about her own pregnancy without a mandatory delay. I am open to working across the House on an amendment to clarify this further in the Bill, and I hope to do so. I understand there may be a number of technical amendments needed by Government if and when this Bill goes to Committee Stage.”
“In 2018, the people voted in a historic referendum to appeal the eighth amendment and to remove legal barriers preventing women from exercising choice over their own pregnancies. This Bill is about respecting and trusting women in exercising that choice to access the care they need when they need it. It is about recognising that women do not take this decision lightly, that this is something they consider deeply and that they do not need the State or politicians to force them to wait for longer, as if they cannot be trusted to make decisions about their own pregnancies for themselves in their own time. This is a straightforward and targeted Bill. It does just one thing. It proposes to remove the mandatory three-day wait for access to an abortion during early pregnancy.”
“I want to raise with the Taoiseach the urgent need for approval for Newtown School in Waterford to proceed with tender and construction for a new school building. The school has served Waterford for over two centuries. It entered the free education scheme in 2014 when it agreed to expand to accommodate 600 students funded by the Department. The old building, Wyse house, on the site is in urgent need of emergency works and a new development is needed to accommodate the growing student numbers. To be fair, the school contacted all TDs asking us to raise this issue. It asks that the Government prioritises the development project, which includes moving this to tender and construction, but it also asks for emergency funding to deal with the state of the building at the moment where it needs to be improved.”
“I am extremely disappointed that the motion moved by Teachta O'Reilly and all of the measures we have outlined – practical, deliverable and realistic proposals that would make a real difference right now for people with disabilities – are not being accepted. It is a slap in the face. There is no other way to characterise it, and it is deeply upsetting and disappointing.”
“The Government turns its back on people with disabilities, who simply ask that exceptional needs payments and emergency payments be provided to deal with the reality of the cost-of-living crisis right now, today, tomorrow, next week and next month. The Minister, reflecting the usual position of the Government, is saying it will kick the can down the road and might do something in 2027. I do not see too many people holding their breath that it is going to happen. I am afraid that for far too long when it comes to disability, we have not treated children or adults with the respect they deserve. We are not treating them on the basis of equality and we are certainly not doing everything possible to ensure they can live full lives in the same way as everybody else. That is the least they deserve.”
“We have moved countless motions in this House on children with disabilities who must wait for assessments of need, who must wait for access to a therapist, who cannot get a special school place and whose parents are battling for them. If they have a mental health issue, they must wait for access to mental health services. As they enter their teens and adulthood, they find it difficult to get employment. When they get older, they have unique issues, difficulties and challenges as well. They expect that the State will have their backs. Despite the many billions of euro that the Government has every year in surpluses, which people hear a lot about, we cannot look after the most vulnerable in society.”
“The one clear message the Government is sending out today to people with disabilities, because of the long-winded amendment the Minister is tabling, is that people with disabilities have to wait, wait and wait again. His message to them is that they should accept second best. It is the same for carers, the people who look after them. However, it is particularly the case for people with disabilities, who everybody in this House accepts have additional needs and additional costs because of those disabilities. People with disabilities want to be treated and respected on the basis of their individual abilities. At each and every step of the way, from when they are born through childhood and into adulthood, they face battles.”
“There was a real sense of community among those people. They have been working together for years with a mix of social enterprises and service providers. Can Enterprise Ireland and the IDA look at sites that would be appropriate?”
“The horrendous fire in Tycor in Waterford city was obviously devastating for local residents, but most especially for the social enterprises, small businesses, service providers, a school of music, and a company that provided costumes for theatre. Much was lost. I met many of them yesterday. I know that the Minister was in, but I also met them afterwards. They have a number of asks. The first is that everything possible be done to get them back on their feet and get those businesses up and running again. I spoke to the CEO of Waterford City and County Council this morning and he said that what was needed was a fund that should be administered by the local authority. Money has to be put on the table. That could enable supports to be given to those organisations quickly. They also need premises.”
“We will work constructively across this House on the recommendations of the review, which need to happen to ensure the services we voted for are fully operational and accessible so that women who choose to avail of an early-pregnancy abortion have access to GP-led services; that where there is a risk to life the mother is prioritised; and to ensure that where there is a fatal condition affecting the foetus that women are not forced to carry unviable pregnancies, but that where a child can live and the family has elected to keep the pregnancy during the 12-week period, that the child is given every chance to survive and indeed thrive.”
“It proposes to significantly undermine the legal framework that was put before the people. Tremendous work was done by the committee on the eighth amendment and then by the health committee of the Thirty-second Dáil to bring this legislation together and to deliver services for the women of Ireland, which also addressed the concerns of people on safeguards and protections, in particular, for children with disabilities. We have approached this constructively.”
“In a repeat of those circumstances there should be no barriers or objections to saving a woman's life. It astounds me that the Bill clearly goes far beyond the recommendations of the review. It disrupts the consensus-based approach that brought about repeal and presumes to rip up many of the safeguards that were presented to the people in order to convince them to repeal the eighth amendment in the first place. A genuinely constructive approach to improving services for women would have involved engagement across the Opposition to support the targeted Bills that are on the Order Paper for removing the three-day wait, tabled by me, Deputy Coppinger, and others, who have been trying to be constructive in removing the three-day wait period. This Bill has no democratic legitimacy. It is not productive. It is not designed to become law.”
“That is how we balance protections for clinicians, parents and children. We acknowledge people's right to conscientious objection and the importance of protecting that, while ensuring that in emergency cases the life and health of the mother must take priority. I am not convinced of the need for the proposed amendment on this issue. The point is already addressed in the existing law. The issue here again is a lack of statutory guidelines. We need to be very clear on this issue. When there is a risk to the life or health of the woman, there is an obligation on medical practitioners to try to save her life. We need to avoid any repeat of the tragedies that happened under the old system, like what happened to Savita Halappanavar. Her story is part of why we have the legislation we have today.”
“We have a long history in this country of scandals in women's healthcare and the treatment of women and children by some parts of the health service. The criminal provisions retained in the 2018 Act are there to ensure that medical practitioners do not knowingly and willfully act illegally outside or beyond the scope of the Act. The law is the law and the medical practitioners should not be given carte blanche to act outside of the law. That would be ludicrous. Criminal sanctions were included in the Act to ensure that only those services endorsed by the people and by the Oireachtas are made available in this State. The way to address issues of criminalisation is through the application of clear, robust statutory guidelines on the provision of services under each different ground.”
“I agree that no woman should be forced to carry an unviable pregnancy. I also agree that no woman should be forced to travel for services that should be lawfully available on this island, but it would be wrong to insert such an open-ended, untested and loosely drafted definition that puts families and children in a position where abortion is an option not because the child will not survive, but because the child might die because the State has not invested in the care the child needs. We are concerned by proposals to remove offences for medical practitioners who knowingly and willfully act illegally beyond the scope of the Act. Abortion services in Ireland are decriminalised for an early pregnancy and otherwise for risk to the life or health of the mother or in the case of a condition that is likely to be fatal.”
“They are fatal because successive Governments have failed to put in place the health services those children need to survive. Many conditions are present at a higher level in Ireland than in other jurisdictions, because instead of providing families with the supports and services they need for their child to survive and thrive, they have the option of an abortion because the child has an anomaly. I do not support that. I support families who have chosen to keep the pregnancy to have the best chance for their child. I support those children being able to live a good and healthy life. We do not support any slip into the territory of abortion on possibly fatal grounds. We do not believe that disability is a ground for an abortion or that this is in any way a progressive position.”
“In the context of late-term abortions for fatal anomalies we are talking about pregnancies a person wants to keep, and made the choice to keep during the 12-week period. For these pregnancies we need to work with clinicians on guidelines to give effect to the intentions of the current definition, to consider only minor amendments to that definition to improve its operation and not its scope, and to work together to improve health services for children to ensure that where a family elects to continue a pregnancy they are supported if their child is born with a condition. There are many conditions that can be recognised as fatal under the proposed definition, not because they have to be but because the services to save the child's life are not present or functioning.”
“Most problematically, the amendment ignores the intention of a clear and tight definition and the process recommended by the review is ignored. We should not insert untested and loosely drafted definitions into the Health (Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy) Act without having followed the right process. The review recommended the convening of stakeholders, including medical practitioners, other relevant healthcare professionals, patient representatives, lawyers and, of course, women, in order to obtain a better understanding of the challenges in section 11 and ensure that the multidisciplinary foetal medicine teams are properly resourced with the appropriate skills mix.”
“This Bill makes the same mistake with its definition of a fatal condition. We do not support the proposed definition for a condition likely to lead the death of the foetus, otherwise known as fatal foetal abnormality. This amendment is not grounded in the statutory review of the Act, which recommended a review with stakeholders to consider alternative grounds that would be clear to apply in practice and in keeping with the spirit of the legislation. The proposed definition in the Bill is untested and circular. The term "fatal" is not defined. There are no limits on it. It leaves the philosophical question of life and the balance of probabilities entirely to clinicians, which is not right and an abdication of our duty in this House.”
“This is something that can be done quickly and should be done during the course of this Dáil term. We fully agree with the need for robust clinically sound statutory guidelines to protect and direct clinicians in providing lawfully permissible services. The absence of guidelines was identified as a serious barrier to many clinicians providing care. Guidelines are essential to address issues identified with the operation of terminations under sections 9 and 10 relating to risk the life of the mother and section 11 of the Act where a condition is likely to lead to the death of the foetus. Terms such as "risk" and "serious harm" and the lack of reliable pathways were identified as problematic due to the lack of legal definition which asks clinicians to make philosophical judgments and puts them at risk of acting beyond the Act and illegally.”