Grace Boland: Urges Evidence-Based Review of 2018 Act
Grace Boland addresses the Dáil to urge careful, evidence-based consideration of proposed changes to the 2018 Act on abortion care. She asks the Health Committee and the House to examine the O'Shea report, recent improvements, and the lived experience of women, families and clinicians.
Main contention: Boland argues the debate must be approached with sensitivity and respect, while recognising the legislature's duty to consider evidence. She acknowledges strongly held views across Irish society but stresses that the bill's essence merits scrutiny and debate in the House and by the Health Committee.
Evidence and recommendations: She references the comprehensive O'Shea report and the improvements implemented since it was published. Boland highlights three reasons for further examination: women's health access, the report's findings that parts of the law are not operating as intended, and questions over the mandatory three-day waiting period.
Impact on women and clinicians: Boland notes that clinicians currently face difficulties providing certainty under narrow legal definitions, leaving some women to travel abroad for care in cases of fatal foetal abnormalities. She frames the issue as one affecting women, families and healthcare professionals and stresses unequal access for those in coercive relationships or affected by regional disparities in care.
Parliamentary process and next steps: While accepting some parts of the bill may need amendment, Boland calls for careful scrutiny by the Health Committee and the House. She urges evidence-based interpretation of cited figures and insists on examining why some women did not return for second appointments before drawing conclusions.
Main contention: Boland argues the debate must be approached with sensitivity and respect, while recognising the legislature's duty to consider evidence. She acknowledges strongly held views across Irish society but stresses that the bill's essence merits scrutiny and debate in the House and by the Health Committee.
Evidence and recommendations: She references the comprehensive O'Shea report and the improvements implemented since it was published. Boland highlights three reasons for further examination: women's health access, the report's findings that parts of the law are not operating as intended, and questions over the mandatory three-day waiting period.
Impact on women and clinicians: Boland notes that clinicians currently face difficulties providing certainty under narrow legal definitions, leaving some women to travel abroad for care in cases of fatal foetal abnormalities. She frames the issue as one affecting women, families and healthcare professionals and stresses unequal access for those in coercive relationships or affected by regional disparities in care.
Parliamentary process and next steps: While accepting some parts of the bill may need amendment, Boland calls for careful scrutiny by the Health Committee and the House. She urges evidence-based interpretation of cited figures and insists on examining why some women did not return for second appointments before drawing conclusions.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Tego samego dnia All speeches from this day →
Sharon Keogan
Sharon Keogan: CMPs Need Regulation - 40 Years Behind
Gerard P. Craughwell
Gerard P. Craughwell Questions H145 Helicopter Purchase and Safety
Malcolm Byrne
Malcolm Byrne: Flexibility is Ireland's Cheapest Energy Fix
Noel McCarthy
Noel McCarthy asks for update on idle IDA site in Fermoy
Danny Healy-Rae
Danny Healy-Rae: Pro-life, baby deserves a chance
Thomas Gould
Thomas Gould: Options, Not a Road Safety Strategy
Transcript
Ar maith agat, Comhairleach, I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. This issue is an issue that evokes deeply held and personal views across Irish society and it's important that we approach it with sensitivity, compassion and respect for differing opinions. There will be strongly held views expressed in this debate and I respect that. However, I believe as legislators we also have a responsibility to carefully consider the evidence presented in the comprehensive and evidence-based O'Shea report, the improvements made since the report and the lived experiences of women, families and clinicians. While aspects of this bill may require amendment and careful scrutiny, I believe the essence of what it seeks to address deserves debate and consideration by this House and by the Health Committee. And I say that for three reasons. Firstly, because this is fundamentally about women's health care. We know there are women in Ireland who are still being forced to travel abroad for care in cases involving fatal foetal abnormalities because clinicians cannot provide certainty within the narrow legal definitions contained in the 2018 Act. As a mum to two daughters, I do not believe that compassionate care should stop at the airport gate. Secondly, because the O'Shea report concluded that aspects of the law are not operating as intended and are causing real distress to women and clinicians. And thirdly, because the O'Shea report questioned whether the mandatory three-day waiting period is evidence-based and recommended that it be optional. Figures have been cited here today regarding women who did not proceed with a second appointment. However, it is important that we are careful and evidence-based in how we interpret those figures. We do not know why they did not proceed. It may be that they miscarried, travelled or exceeded gestational limits or experienced other barriers accessing care. And we know that those in coercive relationships and in the postcode lottery that our health care system is, do have unequal access to health care. That is why this issue warrants examination by the Health Committee and further examination by this House.