2026-04-28

I move: That leave be granted to introduce a Bill entitled an Act to enact recommendations of the Marie O’Shea report into the operation of legislation on the termination of pregnancy, providing clarity on terminations for medical reasons, removal of the 3 day waiting period, and ending the criminalisation of doctors. Next month marks eight years since we voted overwhelmingly to repeal the eighth amendment. It was an incredibly powerful moment for this country but while the eighth amendment is gone, too many of the barriers it created to abortion care remain embedded in our law and our healthcare system. The reality is that women are still travelling, still navigating crisis pregnancies far from home and far from their support networks, and are still being failed by a system that was meant to care for them. That is not what people voted for. There is an argument often made in this House that we must leave the legislation as it stands because it reflects what was put to the public in the referendum. This argument does not stand up to any kind of scrutiny. Ireland voted to take abortion out of the Constitution and into the hands of legislators in these Houses. No legislation is set in stone and no law is beyond improvement. The public know that. The legislation also explicitly included a mandatory review after three years because, of course, gaps could emerge with the new law and would need to be addressed. The Marie O'Shea report clearly identified those gaps and it is now on us to close them. That is what this Bill aims to do. When I knocked on doors in Cork South-West during the repeal campaign, people told me over and over again how much the stories of women who had been forced to travel impacted them. The Terminations for Medical Reasons group, TFMR, did extraordinary work during the campaign. Its members told their stories and bared their grief and trauma in the hope it would mean no other woman and no other family would have to go through what they went through. Eight years ago, people stood in polling booths all across this country and voted with those women in mind, yet every year, approximately 240 women are still forced to travel to the UK to access abortion care. Many of them are travelling because they received a devastating diagnosis, often after the 20-week scan. Currently, doctors must be certain that a foetus will die within 28 days of birth in order to provide abortion care. That certainty is very difficult to achieve and it leaves doctors with no other choice but to force women to travel abroad. There is no clinical justification for it. It is cruel and inhumane. Women deserve dignity, compassion and a healthcare system that addresses their needs rather than directing them to a ferry port. In the Marie O'Shea report, consultants were very clear on the impact that the continued criminal criminalisation of doctors was having. They have been left to navigate the grey areas of abortion law with the threat of criminal prosecution hanging over them, which results in overly cautious and risk-averse decision making and a tendency towards refusing to provide the care. Doctors are scared, and rightly so. Anyone would be with their licence and livelihood on the line. There is no other area of healthcare where practitioners are exposed to criminal liability if things go wrong, and it is not fair on doctors. It is deeply unfair on the women who are denied care as a result. One of the most glaring issues in the current legislation is the three-day mandatory waiting period. It pushes women closer to the 12-week limit and puts additional strain on already stretched GP services. No other area of healthcare requires this. It is not grounded in science or any kind of evidence. It is only grounded in a profound mistrust of women. It is paternalistic and patronising and it needs to go. This Bill proposes something far more reasonable, in that the waiting period is optional, not mandatory. At its core, it comes down to a fundamental question: do we trust women or not? Do we trust doctors or not? These changes are not radical. They are reasonable, necessary and long overdue. The public voted for a compassionate evidence-based system of care. We have made progress but we are not there yet. This proposed legislation is an opportunity to take another step closer to that goal, not by reopening old arguments, but by addressing clear and identified gaps, and not by asking women to speak louder, but by finally listening to what they have already told us. The time for review has passed and now we need to act. I want to thank my colleague Ellen Casey for her dedicated work on this Bill.

Very good. Thank you Deputy. Is the Bill being opposed?

It is not opposed.

Since this is a Private Members' Bill, Second Stage must, under Standing Orders, be taken in Private Members' time.

I move: "That Second Stage be taken in Private Members' time."