Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister for Health. He has ten minutes.

Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did not realise I had only ten minutes. I was handed a 40-minute speech, which I got down to about 15 minutes. The Acting Chairperson can cut me off if necessary or, with the indulgence of the Seanad, perhaps I could have more time.

Michael McDowell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Party spokespersons were given 12 minutes. The Minister should be given at least the same speaking time.

Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Hear, hear.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The debate is limited to two hours. It is up to the Minister.

Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am delighted to be in a position today to bring the Health (Assisted Human Reproduction) Bill before Seanad Éireann. This is ground-breaking legislation. For hundreds, and possibly thousands, of families around Ireland, it will provide the route to full parentage for children, mums and dads all over our country. It will introduce, for the first time in Ireland, a regulatory framework for assisted human reproduction, AHR. One of its many benefits will be the extension of fully State-funded IVF to intending parents using donor materials, including same-sex female couples.

The legislation will support thousands of people in Ireland who wish to have children through AHR. It will clarify the legal position of those children and provide an ethical framework for research and new reproductive technologies. It introduces pathways through which surrogacy can be pursued with full parental rights into the future.

All considerations in respect of AHR treatment and surrogacy are underpinned by the protection of the rights, welfare and best interests of any children born as a result. We have worked to ensure that identity information of children is preserved and to safeguard against the sale, trafficking and exploitation of children. The provisions of the Bill are designed to prevent abusive or exploitative practices involving surrogate mothers and to protect their rights, interests and welfare.

I am not aware of any other jurisdiction globally that has legislated for a type of process for the regulation of international surrogacy similar to that provided for in this Bill. The legislation will provide clarity and peace of mind for many who have been in limbo for far too long and for those considering assisted human reproduction journeys, including surrogacy.

This Bill is the result of years of work and intensive engagement between my Department and other Departments, the Oireachtas, including Members who are here today, and civil society groups, to insert new provisions on international surrogacy and to ensure the provisions we have for domestic surrogacy and assisted human reproduction work for mums, dads and children.

The complexities of these policy areas mean it has not been possible to address everything. Some of the matters that arose during Committee and Report Stages in the Dáil require further consideration. In this regard, I inform Seanad Éireann that I propose to bring forward a supplementary Bill in the autumn. I intend that the general scheme with heads of Bill will be approved by the Government and published before the summer recess. This amending Bill will, among other things and subject to further consultation with the Office of the Attorney General, provide clarity for Irish residents undertaking donor-assisted procedures abroad to obtain a declaration of parentage and for Irish citizens domiciled abroad who have undergone surrogacy or donor-assisted human reproduction abroad to have their parentage recognised where it is not already. This will be achieved by amending other existing legislation.

The approach we have taken with this amending legislation is to make it as inclusive as possible. We have had constructive engagement with Members of Seanad and Dáil Éireann and civil society groups who have raised questions around how we can make the legislation as inclusive as possible, include procedures that are done abroad and include Irish citizens who are living abroad. A huge amount of work has been done with a very clear intent, while always putting the child front and centre and always considering, when it comes to surrogacy, protection of the surrogacy and being able to include as many families - mums, dads and children - as possible.

I would like to address one issue now. In recent days, a concern was brought to my attention by Senator Seery Kearney. I know this has been an issue for some of the parents who are very much looking forward to going to the courts to achieve parental orders, which of course they will. The concern regards the burden of proof required for retrospective parental order applications. The Bill states that the intending parents should meet various criteria, one of which is to establish that the surrogate lived in the jurisdiction concerned for at least one year prior to entering the surrogacy agreement. The policy intent here is clear. An intending parent or parents must make reasonable efforts to establish this. However, it will inevitably be the case that in some applications this will not be possible, for example, if the surrogate cannot be located. In this case, the clear policy position of the Government is that the courts have discretion to grant the parental order anyway, once the court is satisfied that reasonable efforts have been made. The legal advice I have is that the Bill, as currently drafted, already provides this discretion to the courts. However, I know there is genuine concern among some mums and dads who have waited years for these parental orders. For this reason, I am taking an additional step. As well as having legal advice that this matter is already covered, I am stating very clearly in Seanad Éireann that this is the intent of the Bill. I will also include a further amendment in the amending Bill to ensure there can be no misinterpretation on this issue.

There are other issues such as allowing for dispensing with the consent of surrogate mothers or intending parents in surrogacy in exceptional circumstances and how best to deal with the interim period, which is a live issue. I know there are intending mums and dads whose timing, in terms of embryo transfer, would ideally be in this interim period. We are very aware of their concerns and we are listening to them very carefully. In fact, I have just had a conversation in the last half hour about them. First, we are going to have as short an interim period as possible. The interim period will extend from the commencement of the Bill, which I would like to see happen in July, to the establishment of the regulatory authority. I am putting my Department under immense further pressure to get the regulatory authority set up early in the new year. In the normal course of events, the hiring process would not start until the authority was fully established under law and various statutory instruments were in place. We are not doing that. We are taking a faster approach. We are looking at hiring interim teams and establishing the authority on an interim basis while the amending legislation proceeds. Step one, therefore, is to have as short an interim period as possible.

There are then some decisions that need to be finalised. Complex considerations around this issue are the reason we are considering further in the amending legislation what happens in the interim period. Unfortunately, we will have a period between the retrospective commencement and the date on which the authority is fully set up.

I say to intending parents that I hear them and the Government hears them. We know that for some of them the timing is such that they may be ready for embryo transfer in September or October. We know they may have a genuine concern about the surrogate moving on to work with different intending parents. We hear them loudly and clearly. These concerns have been brought to me and we are looking to make this as inclusive as possible. Ultimately, everything we are trying to do here is in the interests of the child and the current or intending mums and dads.This Bill also will support parents in the future undergoing AHR treatment. The legislation will support the health and well-being of all children born through AHR. Children born through surrogacy will, under this legislation, have the right to access information on their gestational and genetic origins, and this is very important.

The commencement of the legislation will also support further expansion of the initiative to provide AHR treatment, including IVF, in the public health service. I was happy to introduce publicly funded IVF for the first time into Ireland last September. One of the most important features of this Bill in that regard is to allow for the establishment of a new independent regulatory authority, the assisted human reproduction regulatory authority. Somewhat confusingly, it is referred to it today as "AHRRA", because that is the acronym, which, of course, sounds like "Aire", the Irish word for "Minister", which is used liberally as well. For this debate today, the "regulatory authority" is what I will call this institution, rather than the AHRRA.

The Bill, as passed by the Dáil, comprises 198 pages and 234 sections. This underpins the complexities involved. It also demonstrates the substantial considerations and work completed to get us to this point.

Part 1 of the Bill covers standard provisions. Part 2 sets out certain general criteria. Part 3 covers a broader range of matters relating to gamete and embryo donation and the issues of parentage and non-anonymous donation. Part 4 allows for a person under the age of 18, who is due to undergo medical treatment which is likely to cause a significant impairment to his or her fertility, to be provided with AHR treatment to facilitate the subsequent storage of his or her gametes or tissues. Part 5 outlines the circumstances under which AHR treatment providers will be permitted to offer posthumous assisted human reproduction. Part 6 sets out the strict criteria under which specific types of pre-implantation genetic testing, PGT, human leukocyte antigen, HLA, matching and sex selection would be permitted. Part 7 sets out the circumstances under which domestic surrogacy may be permitted in Ireland. Part 8 sets out provisions for the establishment of the regulatory framework under which Irish residents could partake in surrogacy arrangements in other jurisdictions and avail of State assignment of parentage granted by the Circuit Court. Part 9 provides for the establishment of the new regulatory authority. Part 10 includes detailed provisions in respect of the functions of the regulatory authority related to licensing. Part 11 contains further details in respect of the functions of the regulatory authority related to enforcement of compliance. Part 12 sets out provisions for recognition of certain past surrogacy arrangements, both domestic and international. These legislative provisions seek, insofar as is appropriate and possible, to implement the recommendations of the special Oireachtas joint committee on surrogacy in this regard and are also informed by the Verona principles. Part 13 provides for consequential and other amendments.

Schedule 1 lists the matters that the regulatory authority may consider in determining licensing of providers. Two of the Schedules deal with the regulation of embryo and stem cell research in that Schedule 2 lists specific types of such research which are prohibited under the Bill, while Schedule 4 sets out criteria that the regulatory authority shall have regard to in determining licence application to undertake research involving embryos and stem cells. Schedules 3, 5 and 6 list criteria that the regulatory authority shall have regard to in determining licence application to provide AHR treatments. Schedule 7 provides details in respect of redress for an employee of a licence holder who has been penalised or threatened to be penalised by his or her employer after reporting potential contraventions of that employer's licence.

I was not watching the debate in terms of the Seanad and timing. If I could explain, because it is the first debate we have had in the Seanad on this, we are doing something somewhat unusual with this Bill. In the normal course of events, matters which are still under consideration or which we are still teasing out with the Attorney General would be included in the primary legislation in the single Bill. There is a reality here, which is there will be a general election some time in the next five to nine months. There are hundreds, and some people tell me thousands, of families of families around Ireland today whose children's mums and dads do not have full parental rights within their family. There is an urgency to this Bill. I and the Government committed to these families that we would give them a route through the courts to full parental rights and give these children all of the protections and all of the rights that these parental orders have with them. I wanted there to be no question but that this Bill would be passed and so I took a decision to say we have some outstanding legal complexities. We are working them through. There are three Departments involved, namely, the Departments of children and Justice and my own Department of Health. The Attorney General is closely involved. Some of them pertain to an interim period, some of the pertain to the prospect of issue but I wanted us to be absolutely clear that the retrospective piece, which we will commence, would happen in this Oireachtas term because, as people who are watching may or may not know, when a general election is called all legislation falls. It does not matter how close it is to the finishing line, it is gone and you have got to go right back to Second Stage in the Dáil. Any new Government coming in and, as Senators will appreciate, any health Minister coming in, will be met with a huge number of demands and maybe this is a priority for him or her and maybe it is not. It would be for me, were I to be reappointed, but we do not know that. Therefore, I have taken a slightly unusual approach to this to say we will get this through now and that is why there is an urgency to this. The Dáil and Seanad will rise in the coming weeks. We are only on Second Stage. We still have Committee, Report and Final Stages to do in the Seanad and I wanted to make sure, for all of those children and for all of those mums and dads, that this is done and they have certainty, which they have waited for and for which they have campaigned for so long. That is why we are approaching it in this different manner to the usual way we might do some of these Bills.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before I move to the first speaker, I welcome St. Helen's Senior National School from Portmarnock. They are here today as guests of Deputy Alan Farrell. I hope they enjoy their visit here today.

Lorraine Clifford-Lee (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before I start, I welcome Cathy Wheatley from the Irish Families Through Surrogacy and Ivana Holub, who is a surrogate and who gave evidence before the Joint Committee on International Surrogacy. They are very welcome. I know this is a very big day for them.

I thank the Minister, for his run-through of the Bill but mainly for prioritising this issue since he came into office four years ago. Something that I and my colleagues - I see Senator Ardagh sitting behind me there - have been passionate about is providing a publicly funded IVF scheme. It is groundbreaking, as the Minister said in his introductory speech. It is the result of engagement. It is a tribute to the Minister that he has engaged with people across parties here in both Houses of the Oireachtas, special interest groups, medics and academics. It is great that we have the Bill before us today.

There is great urgency attaching to this Bill. We need to get this through. We need to deliver for people, in particular, who are waiting for publicly funded IVF. This is their last shot at parenthood and we need to give it to them.

We have other families who do not have full parental rights. Children are suffering. Their mums and dads are suffering. There is no certainty and we are putting them into a very precarious position if we do not progress this legislation with urgency. I am glad to hear of the special arrangements that the Minister has to tie up some other issues at a separate date. Let us move forward with what we have, take people out of limbo, give people clarity and peace of mind, and have a modern robust humane system of assisted human reproduction in this country.

I was struck in the recent local and European election campaigns by the number of candidates referring to the low rates of fertility in Ireland and suggesting that Irish women are not breeding enough. There is certainly pressure on from far-right elements in this country to remove reproductive choice from women and it is something we should resist with all our might. We have come an awfully long way in this country in recent years and I will not stand here and give in to any far-right elements who are trying to remove choice from women.We should be giving extra choice, helping and assisting families to have the number of children they want to have. This is about families across the spectrum, including LGBT families and single parent families. We need to be assisting people and families. All studies have shown that the majority of women do not end up having the number of children they actually desire, through one reason or another including whether they have not been able to access IVF supports in a timely fashion, they have not been able to afford it, or they have not been able to access surrogacy. We should be supporting families and allowing more reproductive choice. I am really glad that throughout this Bill the Minister has done that, resisting calls to remove choice from families, thus giving more choice to them, and allowing people to become parents. That is a positive and progressive step for this country and for those individual families. Let us not set women back generations and remove choice. Let us give more choice.

I welcome the Bill. I hope we will have a positive, constructive, sensitive and respectful debate. There are families that are so emotionally attached to this work we are doing. The fundamentals of those families are being impacted by this legislation. Words matter and sentiments matter. Let us not try to get some clickbait material from this debate. Let us think about the children and the families who are depending on a respectful debate, depending on this regulatory framework, and depending on progress in this country. I commend the Minister on all the work he has done. Now let us get on and do our work as quickly as possible, as thoroughly as possible and as respectfully as possible.

Rónán Mullen (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Cathaoirleach Gníomhach agus cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. It gives me no pleasure to say that while I very much recognise that there are people who are very attached to this Bill, who want to see it pass and who think it is a great thing, there are many other people of goodwill in this country who genuinely subscribe to an inclusive vision of human rights and human dignity who are absolutely horrified by what is in the Bill and who regard it as a shameful Bill. It gives me no pleasure to have to disagree with friends and colleagues in this House or elsewhere but the truth about it has to be told.

I have many serious concerns about the Bill that are all evidence-based and rooted in science. I recognise that not everybody will share my precise list of concerns, the highest of which are to do with the terrible problem of international surrogacy. I will list briefly the big concerns I and many others have, which many will share. The Bill proposes the legalisation of experimentation on human embryos. It empowers the production of surplus embryos that are human beings, which is a scientifically evidence-based statement. The Bill shows complete disregard for the right to life, despite all the cant that one hears from national and international bodies about the respect due to human embryos.

The Bill proposes legislation for domestic surrogacy and proposes a denial of a child's right to be nurtured by his or her natural parent, his or her birth mother. It also proposes the enabling of international surrogacy, which by definition cannot but be commercial however people try to deny it and say it is all about reasonable expenses only. There is no realistic way to identify an altruistic surrogate in another jurisdiction. The Bill allows for the commissioning of poor women in poor countries to provide their babies to richer individuals, financially advantaged single people or couples here in Ireland. That can only be described as a form of modern day trafficking and slavery. The Bill introduces a fiction of reasonable expenses to empower the expansion of international surrogacy, which is a multibillion euro industry as things stand. The Bill involves the expense of running this brave new AHR agency to facilitate surrogacy. That will all fall on the taxpayer.

The Bill creates a precedent, which is an important point, for international surrogacy law across Europe. It advances the facilitation of this very modern form of slavery at a time when we should seek to outlaw this practice worldwide, as is the case in most European countries and as is emphasised by many respected international organisations, documents and instruments that this should be the case. Here again we are being provided with complex legislation and very little time to consider it. We have seen this tactic played out a few times now by this Government, supported by a weak Sinn Féin opposition. We have the cosy consensus created between political parties, NGOs and votes being avoided. To my knowledge not a single vote was called in the Dáil on this 200-page legislation. All of this of course has passed without the general public being properly consulted or made aware and, it has to be said, with a largely compliant mainstream media that has focused only on human interest stories while refusing to try to tease out the debate and hear the concerns of all sides and experts on all sides, etc. The Bill passed through the Dáil without a vote at any stage, yet it is clear there are serious lacunae. The Government wants this House to deal with the Bill in under a fortnight with 200 pages for technical scrutiny thrown at us the week before elections, having taken a full week off for the elections. There are precious few hours to deal with it. This is turning the Dáil and the Seanad into a rubber-stamping exercise. Is it any wonder that people have very little respect for politicians? What is the Seanad for if it is not to scrutinise legislation line by line? Why are we being treated in such a cavalier fashion? Why does the public not know what is going on with this damaging legislation? There are very few countries in the world where surrogacy is legal. Greece is the only EU state that permits it. Why am I beginning to feel that our sleepy Parliament is again being used as a Trojan horse to enable the popularisation of surrogacy? It is for good reason that EU countries do not have surrogacy. They see it for what it is: a modern form of slavery. A child is always a gift and should never be the basis of a commercial contract in any way whatsoever. The proposed acceptance of this practice is really an outrage and an offence to anybody concerned with the rights of women, the rights of poorer women in particular and, indeed, the rights of children whose denial and hampering of their life experience in everything from breastfeeding to the society of at least one of their genetic parents and to the right of the society of their birth mother who nurtured them for nine months and bonded with them in the womb. All of this is intentionally to be deprived to the child upfront and in advance as part of surrogacy contracts.

The South Carolina slave code was comprehensive. It talked about chattels, personnel and people being owned but there is an element of ownership and selling going on here no matter how this issue is sliced and diced. It is a concern for people, from conservative-minded people to liberal-minded feminists, that this is what is going on here. The bottom line is this: rich people do not carry babies for poor people. The Minister mentioned that one of the concerns in the Bill is the surrogate moving on to different intending parents. Does this not let the cat out of the bag in showing just how transactional all of this is? He did not mention any discussion that took place or any need to consult with the general public about what they think of this recipe for a very 21st century form of slavery. If the Bill was regulating the procurement of body parts of willing donors from abroad on the payment of reasonable expenses running into thousands of euro, we would see it for what it was: trafficking in body parts and the exploitation of the poor by the rich. As I said, rich people do not carry babies for poorer people. Poor people do so because they are unable to resist economic exploitation - the surrogates mentioned by the Minister who might move on to different intending parents. Let us not fool ourselves. There is no genuine autonomy. For the same reason that we rightly criminalise the selling of people in prostitution and refuse to accept that there can somehow be free consent to one's own exploitation, the same issue arises here. Poor people need the money. This is a risky way of getting it and they are ready to take that risk.

Shame on the Minister and shame on his Department for countenancing this as a part of our law in a country that protests its support for civil rights and human dignity. Laws are supposed to protect the weak and vulnerable to prevent this from happening. This law promotes and enables a form of trafficking in children. This is commercial surrogacy by the back door, which is a big business exploiting poor women and the rights of children. It is being enabled here under the guise of reasonable compensation. Yes, it is tragic that some families and some people are unable to conceive, yet we cannot compromise on the universal rights of mothers and children for that sake and for the sake of lesser, even if important and sensitive, considerations. We have no right to commodify children and I say that to the civil servants involved in this as well as to the Minister and the politicians. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights"; there is none of that here. Surrogate motherhood is based on the exploitation of women's bodies and their reproductive capacities for the benefit of third parties. It is a humiliation of women.It undermines the very notion of human dignity, and for the whole of society.

I would like to ask one question. Where is our Ombudsman for Children in all of this? The Ombudsman for Children said that where surrogacy arrangements had already taken place, human rights instruments would demand that there be recognition of the relationship between the intending parents and the children. I get that because the child's best interests, once it has happened, should be taken into account and should have the primary place. However, we cannot do that in a way that incentivises the ongoing reality of this practice. There should be an amnesty for where it has already taken place but there should be penalties for any future involvement with international surrogacy and if it does happen, those penalties should continue to apply. Guardianship and the securing of a child's equal rights in every case, one by one, is the way to balance that difficult situation. This is a practice that should not be happening, but when it does happen we should not victimise the children. We cannot do that unless we insist that there will be penalties for being involved in international surrogacy, even if there is to be a retrospective recognition of the relationship as the least worse outcome and in order to protect the child's best interests.

The Ombudsman has been shamefully absent on this. How can it be in pursuance of children's rights? To be fair to him, he did say that the agenda to prohibit international commercial surrogacy was understandable. However, what a weak and lily-livered word "understandable" is. It is necessary to oppose international surrogacy and anything that could be commercial surrogacy by the back door. The Ombudsman for Children has been silent on the strategies needed to oppose, counter and discourage it in this country and other countries. It is still the majority view. I think only Greece has it in the EU.

The United Nations special rapporteur, in her study on surrogacy in 2018, said that surrogacy arrangements constitute sale of children whenever the surrogate mother of a third party receives remuneration or any other consideration in exchange for transferring the child. I think that is happening in this Bill but by sleight of hand, notwithstanding the protestations that this does not involve commercial surrogacy.

It would also appear, and the Minister may be of assistance to me here, that this legislation as drafted might allow a father to be declared a mother. How does this intersect with the operation of the Gender Recognition Act 2015? In the definition, the male gamete is described as something to have been produced in the body of a male. Is it the Minister's intention to say, for example, that a person who has changed their gender and who has a preferred gender now as female, though remaining capable of producing a male gamete, is not to be allowed to be the parent, or may that person be a parent as a single commissioning parent procuring an egg from a donor and then having a third-party surrogate carry that baby to term? Is the Minister's intention then that this biological male could present himself to the world and, indeed, seek registration under the civil registration legislation as the mother of that child? Is that his intention? I would like clarity on that because it would certainly show very little regard for the recent decision of the people in the referendum in which the concept and meaning of motherhood, and the value to be attributed to motherhood, were a central part of the debate. I say that knowing that the term "mother" is not constitutionally defined. However, it would certainly show clear ongoing contempt by the Government for motherhood and its value if, as a direct or indirect possibility of this Bill, a biological male could seek to be an intending parent, as mother of a child to be produced by a surrogate mother. We will just have to hear what the Minister has to say on that.

To those who say it is very hard-hearted to oppose this Bill when we have all these people who would love to have children - and I sympathise with them - remember the pain, suffering and abuse of the surrogate mothers involved as well. One such mother, Rachel, said:

Most hurtfully I was not invited to the twin's christening. I was used for my uterus, and then discarded when I was no longer needed. It was the most degrading and horrific experience. My mental health collapsed ...

I never talk about what happened to anyone, not even to close relatives, as I do not want to relive what happened to me.

[...]

Women should not be encouraged to endanger their emotional and physical health and safety ... Women matter.

Not under this Bill.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before we move to the next speaker, I welcome pupils from Ballyclough National School near Mallow in County Cork. I hope they enjoy their visit today.

Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It was ten years ago last month that I sent my first email to a predecessor of the Minister's asking for a legal framework for surrogacy in Ireland. I begin, therefore, by congratulating the Minister and his team for the exceptional work that has gone into this Bill. I am very grateful to the Department of Health officials - Pamela, Edward, Colm and others - the members of the interdepartmental group, the Ministers for Justice and Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth and, especially, the Minister for Health for his commitment to drive a legal framework to provide oversight and regulation for the fertility treatment of residents in Ireland. I acknowledge the work of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on International Surrogacy, which diligently worked to make recommendations for an ethical framework for surrogacy based on the internationally accepted Verona principles.

I acknowledge those who are in the Gallery. The amazing champion of Irish Families Through Surrogacy, Ms Cathy Wheatley, is here representing that incredible organisation of mammies and daddies who have passionately and selflessly lobbied for this legislation, along with Irish Gay Dads and Equality for Children. I extend a special welcome to Ms Ivanna Holub, herself a surrogate mother. All of them are my fellow travellers and noble advocates and all of them are holding their breaths for this legislation.

I acknowledge in particular those who are here to support me personally - my closest friends and colleagues, my family, my husband David, my daughter's siblings, my stepchildren Ian and Michelle Kearney and, most of all, my parents Pat and Patsy Seery.

I have told my story of playing at being a mother as a child. I never imagined that motherhood would not happen or that my pathway to being a mammy myself could be strewn with tragedy and loss. However, it is not just about me or the other mothers and second dads, those who are already parents and those who dream of being parents. It is not about them. It is also about the ordinary heroes on these journeys like my parents, my daughter's grandparents, Pat and Patsy Seery. They were grandparents through the wonderful science of fertility treatment, grandparents who withheld and masked their own grief while comforting and supporting their only child through the heartache and disappointment as we faced loss after loss and defeat after defeat, who lit candles and cried out to God for the injustice of grief, who travelled abroad for the IVF treatments and eventually, happily, to the birth of our baby, who sat in a hospital anxiously awaiting the birth of their only grandchild, who are completely devoted to her and who, under the laws of this State, have no legal standing in their relationship with her. They are denied legal recognition. That is until now, with this Bill the Minister is bringing through.

We will get into the debate and the provisions and details of the Bill on Committee Stage. However, it needs to be said that this Bill provides for a very wide range of oversight and provisions regulating assisted human reproduction in all of its forms. It is to be welcomed and celebrated. The Bill establishes an assisted human reproduction regulatory authority to license fertility service providers and to research donor assisted human reproduction and surrogacy both nationally and internationally. It also makes provisions for past surrogacy parental orders. It is imperative for the IVF treatment scheme.

When the first test tube baby, Louise Brown, was born in 1978, a whole new frontier of hope and possibility was opened up for couples experiencing infertility. No one I know believes they have a right to a child but everyone, including me, believes that we should have a way of being able to try for a baby to give substance to the inherent human instinct to have one's own child. Science has afforded the otherwise hopeless in that journey the opportunity to try to become parents. The capabilities of science should not be without guidance and oversight. It is right that there are guardrails imposed within which science should operate and that the human dignity of all involved is protected and promoted. This Bill does precisely that.

Surrogacy for women who want to be mothers is not a first choice. In fact, no woman wants to see another woman carry their baby. No woman wants someone else to feel the first flutters of her baby kicking in someone else's body. Our bodies remind us monthly of that yearning and that failure. Any woman who desperately wants to have a baby wants to carry that baby herself. When the constitutional convention voted on marriage equality in 2013, a total of 81 members recommended that the State enact laws incorporating the changed arrangements that necessarily flow from the recognition of marriage equality with regard to parentage, guardianship and the upbringing of children.Apart from adoption and fostering, the only way for a same-sex male couple to have a baby is via surrogacy.

Women volunteer to become surrogates for a whole variety of reasons. I established an online support group for parents and intending parents in 2014 and was surprised by the number of women who contacted me to ask me how to become a surrogate. I had to reply with the stark truth warning about the legal realities in Ireland of becoming a surrogate. I do not deny that there are those who seek to exploit and coerce women into becoming surrogates, nor do I deny that there is a small number of desperate intending parents who do not sufficiently interrogate the human rights of the surrogate, or that an even smaller number do not uphold the right of children to know their origins and biological identity. This Bill addresses those concerns comprehensively, cogently, carefully and conservatively. I looked at the online nameless warriors, the followers who claim Members of this House as their champions and claim to be the voice of surrogates, while viciously and disgustingly discussing the families, children and motivations of those of us who advocate. They spout lies, misrepresentations and bigotry, pushing an agenda of discrimination, stigma and hate.

This Government made a policy decision to ban commercial surrogacy both domestically and internationally. While I understand that policy decision and the need to avoid any implicit associated moral hazard, it needs to be said that it is wrong to characterise all surrogacies with a commercial element as being unethical. It is wrong to create an inference that any birth involving a payment to a surrogate was, by default, exploitative. It is wrong to permit even the slightest stigma to attach to the children born from such arrangements or their parents. It is wrong to presume that such surrogates were totally without agency.

We must acknowledge that the policy decision, which I support, is very likely to cause disproportionate hardship to same-sex male couples, who have much narrower choices of where to go to be supported in having a family together. While I am optimistic that surrogacy in Ireland will open up for them and that ethical choices will still remain, there is fear, legitimate hurt and anger among our LGBT brothers at the disproportionate impact of that decision on them.

The legislation provides a legal avenue for the recognition of parental relationships between parents and their children by creating a three-year window in which existing families whose children are denied the life-long parental standing and legal relationship with both of their parents can apply to the High Court for parental orders. There will be significant anxiety until the first of those parents walk out on the steps of the High Court with their parental orders in their hands. Families already have had gruelling and financially costly experiences in getting parental recognition for the biological fathers of their children. When applying for guardianship and custody, many of us have been to court on two separate occasions, trying to ensure that our children have all the parental protections they deserve and that they have equality. At that last moment, we have had the experience of the Chief State Solicitor's Office changing the rules based on its own changing interpretations at the last minute, without legislation and without explanation.

I welcome the Minister's clarifications. He could not be clearer and more direct today in ensuring that his policy intent and the supplemental provisions will give no one a right to veto a parental order application against the best interests of a child and that the criteria for past surrogacy applicants will not be so onerous that only a few will be able to meet them.

I pay tribute to Selina Bonnie, the amazing reproductive rights advocate who died earlier this year. I want to be sure, in her name, that no one with a disability is excluded from accessing fertility treatment. I also wish to acknowledge those who feel left behind for now in this legislation. We will continue the battle and hope that the supplementary Bill in September will address their concerns. They are the same-sex female couples whose children remain excluded from parental recognition for both of their parents. The cervical cancer survivors from the 221+ group, many of whom have experienced relationship breakdown from the strain of their misdiagnosis and subsequent dramatic surgeries and treatment, need donor-assisted surrogacy to have a child but are unable to qualify under the criteria set out because, alone, they cannot provide a biological link for their much longed-for child.

I sat through every minute of the legislation as it made its way through the Dáil. There was not a vote because all sides of the House agreed that it is urgently needed and it is comprehensive in its provisions. Much will be said in this House about it being too liberal, while the concern of the Lower House was that it is not liberal enough. I also note that there were previous reports and pre-legislative scrutiny. This has gone on for at least eight years, with scrutiny and public opportunity to input into this.

I want to end with a short verse written to a surrogacy-born child that I came across in my journey. In reading it, I pay tribute to the wonderful women and the men, but particularly the women who have endured terrible sorrow and loss on their way to that precious moment of holding their babies.

Not flesh of my flesh

Nor bone of my bone

but very remarkably all of my own.

I will never forget for a single minute

You were not born under my heart

but in it.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Senator Seery Kearney for sharing her personal experience.

Marie Sherlock (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | 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.

Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They are wrong.

Marie Sherlock (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I hear the Minister say this is wrong and I am delighted.

Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

None of that is true.

Marie Sherlock (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I look forward to his clarification. He might point to exactly how those children are provided for under section 39.

To conclude, we welcome the Bill overall. We do not want to see any delays to it. We want to see the gaps that have been identified in the Bill addressed. Senator Seery Kearney covered many of them. We now need to get on with the job of ensuring the regulatory authority is established.

Fintan Warfield (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House and I also welcome the introduction of the Bill. It provides a good opportunity for us to discuss and speak about this and related issues. It has taken too long for some families and it is important we get it working as soon as possible. Sinn Féin will support the Bill. It provides a much-needed regulatory framework for assisted human reproduction treatments and related research, which we have sought for a number of years. Importantly, it provides for domestic altruistic surrogacy arrangements which will help many families in the State avail of surrogacy where they require it without needing to travel abroad or engage in complex non-standardised agreements.

One of the most important aspects of the Bill is the establishment of the regulatory authority. We believe it is the right approach. The authority will regulate and provide information on the range of AHR treatments and services open to patients across the health sector. Its principal function is to ensure the health and well-being of children born as a result of AHR treatment, persons undergoing treatment and intending parents. It must be an holistic approach and the fact that an authority is to be established signals that intent. It is welcome that there will be such an authority to safeguard rights that can provide information to prospective patients. It must be established as quickly as possible, with its board and CEO being appointed as soon as possible, allowing for other appointments to take place in due course. Staffing and resourcing of the authority is a key concern. I note the Minister's comments on that today.

I also raise the public provision of services. We need to make sure that opportunities for AHR treatment are available to those who may not be able to afford it. The Minister will be aware, that families who need access to fertility treatment such as IVF and other services to aid them to have children must access it privately. It costs a lot of money. It can cost €10,000, €20,000 or €30,000. Sometimes families go through two or three rounds of treatment before they are successful. Many cannot afford to do so and that is wrong. While there is a huge cost to it, we must look at expanding it as a public service.While the Bill and the regulatory authority will bring some cohesion to the sector and ensure higher quality services, most certainly, many families will simply not be able to afford the cost. Once the Bill is enacted, I ask the Minister and Government to make his an absolute priority to develop the public services available to families who cannot meet the cost of going private.

We also need strong protections to ensure adequate oversight of this fast moving area of medicine. We must ensure adequate protection for the thousands of people who wish to have children safely through AHR. We must clarify the legal position of children born using AHR. We must also ensure that research on new reproductive technologies is carried out within a prescribed ethical context. Ireland and Lithuania remain the only EU countries not to offer State funding for assisted reproduction, even though the World Health Organization has recognised infertility as a medical condition.

I have had the pleasure of meeting campaigners over the years. We have all heard from mothers, who two or three years down the line, are not considered their child's legal guardian while fathers, just because of the biological nature of their relationship with the child, are immediately deemed to the child's legal guardian in the eyes of the law. This needs to change immediately. The Government has to listen to families about their concerns and experiences, and the Government must deliver the changes that are needed. Currently, the mother or second parent is not entitled to those rights and must settle for guardianship, which expires when their surrogate child reaches the age of 18. This legal limbo means, for example, that until the mother of a surrogate child is granted guardianship rights, she cannot give consent for her child, for example, to go on a school trip, open a bank account or even apply for his or her first passport. Once the child reaches 18, he or she will also not have a legal standing when it comes to making important health decisions about their parents. If the mother or second parent passes away. this child would have the same legal right to their parents' estate as a complete stranger. These are the issues that this legislation should resolve. We need a regulatory framework that upholds the rights of children born through surrogacy as well. We need to ensure it prevents children born through surrogacy being left in legal limbo or being stateless.

I acknowledge the work done by the Joint Committee on International Surrogacy, the work that my colleague, Deputy Kathleen Funchion, has done in this area and my colleague Senator Mary Seery Kearney. During the height of Covid, this House held its meetings in the Dáil Chamber. I recall that one of the first conversations we ever had was me thanking the Senator for her first speech on this issue and I recall that my first conversation with her was about this issue. I say well done to the Senator on all the work she has done on this area. I also say well done to the Minister and the Government on the work that they have done.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We now move the five-minute slots and the first speaker is Senator Catherine Ardagh.

Catherine Ardagh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is probably one of the biggest Bills that I have ever seen come into this House. I thank the Minister and his Department for putting significant work into this Bill, for getting it passed in the Dáil and placing it before us today.

In 2020, Senator Fiona O'Loughlin and I tabled a Commencement matter on publicly funded IVF at the time the Seanad held its meetings in the Dáil Chamber. It is something we have been passionate about and working on since then, along with academics, and clinicians such as Professor Mary Wingfield who helped us with our Bill. To get to today is truly remarkable and I thank the Minister for that. Publicly funded IVF is happening without this legislation. There is no waiting. We have fertility hubs around the country, and I understand there will be a stand-alone IVF centre in Cork. All this is hugely welcome.

I thank my colleague Senator Mary Seery Kearney who, as she said, has championed this cause since 2014. For more than a decade she has sought for surrogacy to be regulated on an ethical basis in this country. Yet all I have seen today, from the far right, is Members coming in here to jump up and down, while licking their lips, at the thought of clickbait on Twitter later on. That is all they are doing.

Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Hear, hear.

Catherine Ardagh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What have they done to ensure we have an ethical framework for surrogacy in this country except make us stand up today, licking their lips thinking they will have loads of clickbait later on their Twitter accounts?

Rónán Mullen (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Shame on the Senator.

Catherine Ardagh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Senator Mary Seery Kearney has championed this cause for more than a decade. She had sought to ensure there is an ethical framework for the parents and the children born following international surrogacy and domestic surrogacy in Ireland. Shame on Senator Mullen today.

Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Hear, hear.

Michael McDowell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a peculiar relationship with this legislation. At one stage the Attorney General was kind enough to instruct me in the case of MR and DR v. An t-Ard-Chláraitheoir in the Supreme Court, where my function was to uphold that the mother of a child to be registered on a birth certificate was the person who actually bore the child. At that time, the Supreme Court was informed and was shown draft legislation, which was then in place, to deal with surrogacy coming, I think, from the Department of Justice. I am not quite clear where it was to come from; maybe it was the Department of Health. The Supreme Court was told that it was the early intention of the Government to deal with this issue, and that was the bones of 11 years ago. I have, therefore, personal interaction with this problem. I believe strongly in regularising assisted reproduction. I believe strongly in regularising the provision of IVF treatment. I believe strongly that there has to be some regulatory framework for embryological research. This country needs to face up to all of those issues and they cannot be put back any more.

On the question of surrogacy, the case that I have mentioned was very interesting from the point of view that the two parties who sought to have the biological mother of the child registered as the mother on the birth certificate were in the position that the would-be mother of the child had a congenital absence of a womb but had ovaries and was in a position to produce eggs capable of fertilisation by her husband's sperm. She was also lucky enough that a close relative of hers - I think it was her sister from memory - agreed to carry the child out of the goodness of her heart and knowing what a burden childlessness places on many couples. Even where a condition such as the biological mother in that case faced is not the case, there are many other mothers, and I have relatives for whom this applies, for whom childlessness or the threat of childlessness has been a huge problem in their lives, a problem for their families, and a psychological yearning to be mothers and to be the parents of children. I understand all of that intimately. I believe, therefore, as in the case of the one I mentioned that went to the Supreme Court, that there is nothing wrong with surrogacy per se.

I have listened to the speeches that have been made. The one thing I would accord to everybody is that I actually believe that all of the contributions thus far have been made from a position of sincerity. I do not believe that they are made from a position of cynicism. I do not share Senator Mullen's views on IVF treatment. I do not share his view that every fertilised ovum is a human person. I do not believe that and I think that is about as logical as saying that every acorn is an oak tree. It is not in my view a tenable position but he comes to it from a different philosophical, and perhaps religious, perspective.

I believe that surrogacy legislation is necessary, and that IVF and assisted reproduction legislation is necessary. The time is well overdue, especially as I promised the Supreme Court on behalf of the then Attorney General ten years ago that the matter was about to be dealt with and that it should be dealt within a decade.I take Senator Seery Kearney's point that if this legislation falls with this Oireachtas, who knows when it will happen? All of the parents who are in limbo will remain in limbo. While I accept all those points, I make the point that the fact that we are now being asked to rush it through is not the fault of this House. The function of Senators is to examine legislation carefully. Our function is to go through this, section by section. It is a desperate pity that between the utilisation of heavy majorities in this House - the party Whip and all the rest of it - that the process for which this House was designed under the Constitution and for which it was retained by the people in a referendum is largely to be bypassed. I appeal to everybody to deal with one another in relation to the text of this Bill on the basis of respect and to accept one another's sincerity and to simply go through it, as we should do, to see if it is the best phraseology to deal with what are very complex and pressing human problems with huge emotional overlay.

Fiona O'Loughlin (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister has been a beacon of light and hope for women's health, particularly in the area of fertility. I thank him for that, because this is not simple. It is complex. A lot of work has gone on for many years and behind the scenes but he is the person who has brought this through. I have listened to my colleagues telling their stories and their lived experience. I do not have that experience, but family members and friends have. I have no doubt but that this is an incredibly important milestone for so many because many are living in a legal limbo and a legal quagmire. I have met many of them through the years. When I was first elected to the Dáil in 2016, one of the first people who made an appointment with me was a lady, not actually from my own constituency, who had been a surrogate for her sister-in-law. She did it from altruism in order that her brother and his wife could have a much-loved baby. She spelled out clearly all of the issues they were facing. Even though she was very much part of this child's life as an aunt, she felt it was incredibly unfair that she was the one who had to sign off on everything. I have retained an interest in it ever since and had the opportunity to learn from my colleagues in this House. This legislation is long awaited. From the research Senator Ardagh and I did for our IVF Bill, we know that infertility is a worldwide health problem. Research shows that approximately one person in six suffers, and those figures are growing. It is incumbent on a state to be able, not just to provide financial support, but to provide a framework of legislation around this. This is a comprehensive and far-reaching Bill. It encompasses the regulation of a wide-ranging and centred area of healthcare for the first time in Ireland.

I will contradict what Senator Mullen said. AHR is not regulated in Ireland even though it has been practised since 1987. However, we are one of the only European countries without any form of AHR-specific regulation. We are absolutely playing catch-up in that regard. We want to be able to assist thousands of people who want to have their children safely and legally through AHR, and to clarify the legal position of children born from AHR. We also want to ensure that research and new reproductive technologies will be carried out within a prescribed ethical context. I know that is important to all of us. The new authority being set up by the Minister is very welcome. That will be responsible for regulating more frequently undertaken AHR treatments, as well as licensing and regulating the provision of other practices. For the first time, we will have the regulation of a wide range of practices, including domestic altruistic surrogacy, the regulation of international surrogacy and the recognition of past surrogacy arrangements. That is hugely important.

In welcoming all that I have spoken about, I concur with Senator Sherlock. It is good that there is a section relating to fertility preservation for children, adolescents and young adults. There is unfortunately a small but vulnerable group of patients, namely, children suffering from specific conditions that would most likely make them infertile at a later stage. They are excluded by primary legislation from accessing advances in the treatments available to them. I ask the Minister to look at that, and I will be looking at the possibility of tabling an amendment when we come to Committee Stage.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I owe my colleague, Senator Kyne, an apology. I skipped over him, so I call him next.

Seán Kyne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is all right. I welcome the Minister to the Chamber, and I acknowledge his work and advocacy in bringing forward this comprehensive and complex Bill, and his work and that of his officials over a large number of years. I also acknowledge the Members of both Houses who have been involved in the legislative process. I particularly commend my colleague, Senator Seery Kearney, on her advocacy, including bringing those involved in the surrogacy issue before a meeting of the Fine Gael Parliamentary Party a number of years ago, and on her engagement on this matter with the Minister and her own personal testimonies in the Chamber today and on other occasions, where she has painted a clear picture of what this means to people with regard to their rights and the love they have for their children who have been brought into this world through surrogacy.

I appreciate there are passionate pro-life individuals in this House who have fought and advocated to protect human life. I get that and I recognise that. I cannot then understand the opposition to a Bill that involves bringing life to this world - life that will be loved, cherished and cared for. That is, in effect, what this Bill is about. It is about the proper processes and regulation of bringing life to this world via surrogacy. As the Minister said, this Bill will support those parents undergoing AHR treatment in the future. Children born through surrogacy will have rights under this legislation to access information on their gestational and genetic origins. It will also involve the further expansion of the initiative to provide AHR treatment, including IVF, in our public health systems. Importantly, it will establish the independent regulatory authority for AHR, namely, the assisted human reproduction regulatory authority. That is important for anyone who has concerns about the practice of surrogacy and how it will be enacted. That is also important. It will also be an amending Bill that will provide clarity for Irish citizens undertaking procedures abroad to obtain a declaration of parentage, and for Irish citizens domiciled abroad who have undergone surrogacy or donor-assisted human reproduction abroad to have their parentage recognised when it is not already. That will be achieved through amending legislation, so that is important for those who feel this Bill does not engage and solve every issue relating to surrogacy. This is important legislation that has been worked on for some time.It is a complex Bill but one that will have a life-changing impact on families, rights, recognition, parents and children. I look forward to its progression through the House.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In principle, assisted human reproduction just refers to ways of addressing infertility problems. Up to 10% of couples experience infertility and they deserve our understanding and support. I understand many Members of the House support this legislation. However, it is important that all facets of the Bill are carefully considered. It is planned to take all Stages. This is simply not enough time for legislation of such consequence.

I hope to focus on exploitative practices connected to surrogacy which all of us, regardless of our political affiliations or feelings on this issue, can condemn. Many in this Chamber can agree that when a profit motive is involved there are many opportunities for exploitation. A lot of countries have developed industries for surrogacy that are not well regulated. Ukraine is an example. According to Emma Lamberton, writing in the Journal of Public and International Affairs, which is published by Princeton University, “Exploitation of surrogates is a major concern. More than 150 women apply to be surrogates every month in Ukraine, due largely to financial need”. She also states “Ukrainian surrogacy companies now hold over a quarter of the global surrogacy market ... since a series of human rights violations caused India, Thailand, and Nepal to close their borders to foreigners seeking surrogates”. Our Government has overlooked the exploitation that can be rife in the commercialised surrogacy industry and is compounded now by the Ukrainian war. Lamberton states:

In most surrogacy contracts, women give up all rights related to controlling their pregnancies. While there is no large-scale data, surrogates report undergoing forced abortions of fetuses unwanted by clients, significant underpayment, unsafe and oppressive living environments provided by surrogacy agencies, poor health care for both birth and pregnancy-related complications, and long-term physical damage due to the surrogacy process ... There is also reported psychological damage, with some surrogates feeling forced to violate their deeply held moral beliefs due to financial pressure.

Within our surrogacy legislation we must make provision to disincentivise people from engaging in commercialised surrogacy of this nature, which exploits vulnerable women. In this legislation the birth mother will not be listed on the birth certificate. This has the potential to create a range of legal obligations. Many countries only recognise the birth mothers on birth certificates. This risks creating legal complications for the children of surrogates later in life. If an Irish surrogacy arrangement involves a surrogate mother in a country where only the birth mother is listed on the birth certificate, it could result in complications where the adoption process would then be relied on for recourse and could take months if not years to rectify. I fear if this section of the legislation is not corrected, we could be sleepwalking into another birth information and tracing crisis, especially considering issues with data processing and management in countries with poorly regulated industries devoted to surrogacy. It is imperative we provide some protection and access to information about the birth mother of any surrogate child.

My Second Stage speech would be longer if I were to cover issues related to child exploitation, especially the fates of children who are unwanted or disabled. A guarantee to provide legal representation for surrogates and the children of surrogates who experience unfair treatment must be included in the legislation. Regulation and legislation are clearly required, but IVF should not involved the deliberate destruction of human embryos. It is the case that IVF can be performed without deliberately destroying human embryos. It is unnecessary to create multiple embryos. Clinic personnel should only be allowed to create the number of embryos that can safely be placed in the woman’s uterus. This is something we should give attention to whether we ascribe any sense of personhood to an embryo or not.

I implore Members to take this debate on all Stages, put whatever personal feelings they have about this issue to one side and consider amendments to mitigate the harmful effects of this legislation. It would be an unfortunate state of affairs if this debate comes down to little more than almost everybody in this Chamber saying surrogacy is great and we need as much of it as possible. This legislation takes commercial surrogacy-----

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Go raibh maith agat.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----as an acceptable given fact without any substantial reflection on this practice. A commercial contract, the object of which is a child, with a great power imbalance between the commissioning parent and the surrogate mother is very upsetting. It begins with the rights-----

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Go raibh maith agat, Senator.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----interests and obligations of intending parents, who are the strong party, the purchaser. Then comes the child and finally the surrogate mother. This shows that surrogacy is in the interests of the commissioning parents above all else.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Go raibh maith agat.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Commercial surrogacy is a practice-----

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you, Senator.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----which violates the rights of women and children. I am nearly finished. Please.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Senator, I have three more speakers.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A much more thorough examination of the legislation is imminent.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Senator Keogan-----

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister's speech today favours only the intending parent.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Senator Keogan, thank you.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There has been no mention today of the child or surrogate mother. From a historical perspective-----

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Senator, you have had more time than anyone else.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----Ireland has at times not shown respect to the process of pregnancy and birth. I fear legalising international surrogacy will be another misstep-----

Lorraine Clifford-Lee (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In fairness to everyone in the House, we need to move on.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----in Ireland's dismissal of the birth mother via commercial contract and the removal of a child to-----

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Senator Keogan, I must move on.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----a jurisdiction outside their place of birth.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will be brief and refrain from making many contributions until we get to Committee Stage.

The message is not at all that surrogacy is great, but that surrogacy is unfortunately necessary for some people. It is about the necessity of surrogacy so some people can enjoy a family life in they way they intended to. There is also sometimes a misunderstanding of what altruism means. Sometimes when people say something is altruistic there is a sense that somehow it is charitable or free in nature, which is not true. Altruism has many different meanings across many different philosophical theories. That does not mean somebody should not be reimbursed or cared for. If we look at the surrogate as somebody who is being altruistic, the altruism should also be returned. We are looking at the returning of altruism because we are looking at the moral good then and the well-being of the other person, namely, the surrogate. This means that person may need welfare supports. I know this from having two very complicated births, in the end. I am still attending hospital. I still need care.

As for this idea that the reimbursement tends towards commercialisation and all of these things, for us not to acknowledge what is involved in the giving of oneself to give birth for another person is to do the opposite of returning altruism to the individual whom we are saying has been so altruistic to us. This is about making sure the surrogate has what she needs should any complications arise or any care be needed in the future. We should look at altruism in its fullest sense by looking at what it actually means in terms of how it flows between all the people who are involved in a scenario related to surrogacy.

I will have some amendments. It was a pleasure to be a member of the committee on surrogacy. It was an issue I did not know much about when it came to the legalities. I learned a huge amount and I thank Senator Seery Kearney for the level of understanding of the issue that she has, not just from her experience but also as someone who understands the law, as a legislator and somebody who can navigate legislation beyond her experience of being a mother through surrogacy. She is able to be here as a mother through surrogacy while also having a very deep understanding of the legislative process, people’s rights within that and where they need to go.People in the Chamber lean on that expertise beyond the Senator's individual experience. Nonetheless, I thank her for being so generous with her lived experience because it is helpful in the wider sense.

I do not have any comment on the IVF piece of the Bill. I feel I am a bit late to the party because there is an issue relating to IVF that I had not thought about previously. I hope that I can look at the Bill during the coming Stages and that there will be a conversation. I have always done a lot of work in the prison system. I recently did an 18-month piece of work with a group of men on the theory of the oppressed. A huge amount of work has been created. Some of the men are nearing the end of a prison sentence. Some of them have partners who have waited a long time for them to come home. We do not have a prison system that allows human contact. We do not have an understanding of how family planning works within the prison system. Some people in prisons want to start families. I sometimes think that is an issue that people do not want to talk about because they may have judgments or biases. There are men in the prison system who may get out in three or four years. While that may not be a problem for them, their partners, who may have already waited for a long time, may be concerned about their fertility because they may be entering a certain age bracket, may have their own issues or may need to begin IVF for whatever reason. We should start looking at some of those populations. The HSE is responsible for healthcare in general but the Irish Prison Service is responsible for the health of people in prison. We need to be able to co-ordinate. The Irish Prison Service is a non-statutory body. How do we provide adequate access to family planning for people who are in the prison system or in other congregated settings? Such people may not have access to family planning or advice about starting a family. It is a matter I wish I had thought about sooner. It was the men themselves who included that as a recommendation in a document we will release next year. The men themselves have asked about access to family planning and exploring IVF. It has happened in one or two cases but is not a general service that prisoners can access in a real way. I may come back to this point on Committee Stage.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before the Minister arrived in the House, I frustrated the Order of Business because of this Bill. I did so deliberately. I did so because I am a legislator and a Member of this House. As Senator McDowell said a short time ago, we are here to look at and analyse legislation and to propose amendments to improve it. For Second Stage to be before the House today and for all other Stages to be taken next Thursday is repugnant to that purpose. I know the Minister does not make those decisions but it is important to say that.

An accusation was thrown at me that I had joined the pro-life crowd. I know nobody in this world who is anti-life so I reject that statement out of hand.

I compliment the Minister for bringing forward this Bill. It is time we had legislation. Senator McDowell made the point that he took a case on behalf of the Attorney General ten years ago. I have no difficulty with the legislation coming through.

In my time, surrogacy was a slightly different thing. In large families, a child might be given to a sister or brother who could not have a child. That was perfectly acceptable then and I see nothing wrong with it now. I also see absolutely nothing wrong with a relation being a surrogate for a woman, perhaps a sister, who is in difficulty and cannot have a child for whatever reason. I will qualify that by saying we all must accept that none of us has a right to a child. A child is a blessing that comes to us if we are lucky. I am fortunate enough to have two children and three gorgeous granddaughters whom I love dearly. That is something we should never try to deny anybody.

There are difficulties in the Bill, specifically in the area of surrogacy. Before coming to the House, I looked on the web. It looks from my perspective as if surrogacy is something available to the wealthy and not to the poor. That is simply wrong, in every sense of the word. International surrogacy really bothers me. I see strong regulation in the United States. I looked yesterday at advertisements for surrogacy from Ukraine and Georgia for €65,000. For me, that would be great. If I wanted a child that badly and could afford it, I would go for that. However, it is agencies that are setting up these €65,000 transactions. How much goes to the unfortunate woman who carries the child? It was suggested that €10,000 would be an awful lot of money to the people who live in one of those countries and they would be delighted to get their hands on that money. I want to know what happens to the other €55,000. We can regulate here all we want but we cannot regulate what happens outside our own jurisdiction. That is going to be a problem.

There is an issue of birth certificates. I am mindful of two children who were adopted at birth and asked to meet their birth mother. In one case, the birth mother always grieved that she gave away her child. She was delighted to get the request to meet. She got her hair done and bought new clothes. She met her daughter in a restaurant in Galway and the daughter sat with a notebook across the table from the woman in question. When the mother went into the restaurant, she expected to give her daughter a hug but no hug was forthcoming. The young woman asked if the other woman was her birth mother. She said she was. The daughter then asked a number of health-related questions. When she finished, she closed the notebook, stood up and said, "I don't ever want to see you again ever" and walked away. It left devastation behind.

We must remember that the girls of the generation I grew up in did not have a choice. They were sent to mother and baby homes, disowned by society and run away by their families.

I have a slight difficulty with where we are going, particularly on international surrogacy. Are we building up cases in which the State will be held liable in the future by those who have been denied access to the woman who bore them and brought them into the world? A certain amount of exploitation is taking place here. We are talking about countries where people earn very little money and have thoughts of making a killing. Is there coercion involved? In a former job, we had the unfortunate task of ferrying young women from a gate to a ship. We know what they were going to the ship for. I remember a husband and father bringing up his wife and daughter to leave them on board the ship for the use of the sailors and collecting them two days later. Coercion happens all the time. Where men are involved with women, there is always an element of coercion.

How do we protect surrogate mothers? That is my issue. How do we protect those women who will carry a child into the world? I am delighted for those who are able to afford the surrogacy and get a child out of who they love. There are other moral and ethical issues. When the child is born with a deficiency or disability, do the parents still take the child or do they say that is not what they contracted for? I am deeply moved by, and concerned by, this Bill. I would like more time to debate the issues in this House without some of the emotion and the insulting behaviour that has gone back and forth. We are all honourable people trying to do our best.

Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank colleagues for the debate, which has been useful. I acknowledge the contribution from Senator Seery Kearney, which made it all very real and human and reminded us why were are here. I also acknowledge Senators Clifford-Lee, Ardagh and O'Loughlin and others who have pushed hard and worked within the Government and the Opposition to advance progress in fertility. Fertility is obviously for both men and women. There has been a concerted effort and I acknowledge all the Senators who have worked so hard, and continue to work so hard, on this issue.I also recognise that we have some fantastic advocates in the Visitors Gallery, including the formidable Cathy Wheatley, whom I did not mention in my opening address. To those watching who may not know, although most certainly do, Cathy Wheatley has been a tireless advocate, along with many others, in pushing this forward and making it happen. I really acknowledge that.

I also acknowledge the many officials across four different Departments who have been involved in this. It is not just long legislation, but incredibly complex legislation that deals with numerous issues related to ethics, jurisdiction, health, parentage and the rights and protection of children. Senator Craughwell has gone now but all of the concerns he raised are comprehensively addressed in the Bill because of the very long time that was spent on it. My own officials in the Department of Health, along with those in the Department of Justice, the Department of children and the Attorney General's office, have spent a vast amount of time on this. This has been a live topic for a long time. A case came before the Supreme Court 11 years ago. We have been working on the Bill for approximately two years. The first two years of this Government's term were obviously heavily dominated by Covid. Between them, the officials have done what would normally take well in excess of six, seven or eight years in just two years. It really has been a very important effort. When those who have been here for a while hear the phrase "interdepartmental working group", we know that such groups are sometimes where good ideas go to die, or where they are sent to exist in limbo for a very long time. However, this group pulled all of the Departments together and it has worked very well.

I also acknowledge my Government colleagues, the Ministers, Deputies McEntee and O'Gorman. The three of us have been working very closely on this. Both Ministers have been very involved, very supportive and very demanding with regard to timelines, which is only right. It has worked well across the three Government parties.

I acknowledge the frustrations that some Senators have raised regarding the time the Seanad has. I accept that. I would prefer a longer period of time. We had three full days on Committee Stage in the Dáil. We also had lengthy debates on Second Stage and Report Stage in the Dáil. I acknowledge the frustration of Senators. This is being done for one reason, which is to make sure the President has the opportunity to sign this Bill before the recess for political considerations we are all aware of. It would simply not be acceptable to tell all of these boys and girls and mums and dads that we are going to roll the dice on whether they get their parental orders. I accept and acknowledge the frustrations of Senators. We have time this week and next week. Indeed, next week's business may well go into the following week. We will be looking at this in the Seanad for several weeks but I acknowledge those frustrations. There is also a three-year review process. While we hope to have got a lot of this right, with something this complex and new - to the best of my knowledge, Ireland is the first country legislating in this way - it is inevitable that some of it will not play out the way that is intended and so we have included a three-year review clause.

Senators O'Loughlin and Sherlock raised a particular issue regarding access to fertility treatments for children when they are going through particular treatments or have particular progressive disorders that mean that, without intervention, they may not be able to have children in the future. Our amendment was based on clinical advice from the HSE. There has been a disagreement. There are significant differences between the position of the particular healthcare clinician who is briefing parents and Members of the Dáil and the Seanad and the collective view of the HSE on a number of issues. They are technical issues that I am not qualified to speak on but I will be taking the clinical advice of the HSE. On this particular issue, we are going to propose a further amendment.

I want to speak directly to the parents Senator Sherlock has referenced. If those parents have been told that it will now be illegal for their children to undergo such treatment, while I hope that whoever told them that was doing so in good faith, he or she was mistaken. I cannot begin to imagine the worry of those parents having received this information from whoever it may have been. I want to be very clear; the clinical advice we got from the HSE was that, rather than saying it is for progressive disorders, we should say it is related to the specific treatment of the child. In other words, the clinicians involved should be given the freedom to say it is appropriate for a given child. The point the HSE was making was that not all progressive disorders cause these issues and that even some of those that do will affect some children and not others. The HSE wanted to make sure that the clinicians had the full power to say that a given child is at risk and to provide this treatment. The case Senator Sherlock described is actually a perfect example of why the HSE wanted this change because, in that case, it is the treatment the girl is going through that is going to cause the issue. The HSE clinicians have therefore said that they want to be able to intervene on the basis of treatment.

As I do not want any parent to have any concern, in the amending legislation - the September Bill - I will include progressive conditions alongside treatment so that there is no question of anyone being left out. It concerns me that parents are being briefed in that way. It is technically correct but I question the ethics of that kind of briefing if that is indeed what happened. It may have been that the parents misinterpreted what was said. I do not know but I want to assure everybody that no child will be excluded. If the treating doctors say that there is a risk to a child for any reason, whether a progressive condition, a non-progressive condition or a treatment he or she has to go through, that child will be covered. That is the policy position.

For obvious reasons, we spent a lot of time talking about surrogacy. I want to come back to assisted human reproduction for a moment. This Bill is really important as it regulates assisted human reproduction for the first time. During this Government's term, we have rolled out a fertility model of care that is really important for intending mums and dads. There are many pieces to it. We talk a lot about IVF but there are three tiers to the model. First of all, GPs are able to engage and extra training and supports are being provided to them. They are able to help a lot of intending parents who are struggling with fertility. We have also set up six fertility clinics around the country. From memory, those clinics can help another 60% of those who are struggling with fertility, at least among the group who can potentially conceive. They provide various treatments. There is then a third level, referral for IVF or IUI.

Senator Sherlock spoke about privately provided IVF. That is a short-term measure to make sure no couple has to wait the X number of years it will take to bring this in but, as was referenced earlier, we are in the middle of setting up the first HSE IVF clinic. It is in Cork and there is a fantastic team down there. We will be transitioning from private provision to public provision but I did not want any couple to be told that this would take years and that they would have to wait so we are doing private provision now.

The Health (Assisted Human Reproduction) Bill accelerates and regulates all of that work. We tend to focus on IVF. This Bill will allow for the State-funded provision of donor-assisted IVF for same-sex female couples. Male-female couples will also be covered by that. We will now be able to proceed with any donor-assisted IVF.The good news is that IVF treatment is only one part of the fertility model of care now in place. There has been a lot of support in the Seanad for the fertility work, be it AHR, IVF, IUI, surrogacy, free contraception and so forth, which I acknowledge. It has been great to have so much consensus in the Dáil and Seanad. I look forward to coming back to the House next week, I hope, if we now pass Second Stage, to continue the discussion and debate.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When is it proposed to sit again?

Lorraine Clifford-Lee (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Next Tuesday, 18 June, at 1 p.m.

Maria Byrne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that agreed? Agreed.