Page 989 - Week 03 - Thursday, 3 April 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Assistant Speaker, you were here during the Fifth Assembly when we had the debate on a woman’s right to choose on the issue of abortion. I said at that point that I did not think that any debate could be harder. But I do have to say that this possibly is harder than that debate, especially as none of us in this place are scientists. There are complexities that surround the terminology. If you have got a teaching qualification, which I do, a primary teaching qualification, or you work in a trade union background, which I have also done, or you have got a law qualification or you have worked in other areas, you will not necessarily have a great deal of understanding of these complexities. So it is complex trying to wrap your head around the issues that surround embryonic stem cell research.
Many have said today that this is a complex issue. But I do not believe that it really is a complex issue. I think that it is actually quite a simple issue, and certainly my husband, Brendan, keeps telling me it is a very simple issue. I believe that it comes down to your attitudes or your beliefs on when life begins and whether humans have the right to assist with the creation of life. I personally do not see embryos created by assisted reproductive technology as life; rather, I see it as the potential for life.
While I respect the views of Mrs Dunne and my husband, they are not my own. When two people come together in a partnership of marriage, obviously I think any of us who have been in the situation know that there has to be give and take. There certainly is in my marriage and I do not for one moment regret that.
I place on the record that I have no problems with IVF, but my husband does. I think it has certainly become public in the last couple of months that we are looking to adopt a child and that is because the one process that we could possibly go through that is sanctioned by the Catholic Church and is acceptable to my husband, GIFT or gamma intrafallopian transfer, is something that I cannot use.
As I said, we want to adopt. I do admire Brendan for his strength, belief and his convictions, especially given that we do face this challenge, especially as he is a human geneticist and especially as the research shows that human cloning and embryonic stem cell research could actually provide a cure for his fairly rare form of leukaemia, which, fortunately, he is in remission from. He is in remission from it but if he were to go out of remission and have that leukaemia come back and there was a cure that was found by such research, I know that he has the strength and conviction that he would not accept such a cure. I do understand that, and I respect him for that.
I know that that is something that Mrs Dunne has said in this place before with regard to her own family suffering cystic fibrosis. They would not accept any such cure that came about as a result of embryonic stem cell research. That is an incredibly hard thing for somebody to say, especially about their children. I understand that.
When this matter was debated in the Senate, Brendan wrote to every senator and laid on the table his situation and the fact that he would not accept any such cure that came about in this way. I respect him for it. I support him in it. But if I was faced with the same situation, it would not be my choice.
As I said to him last night, I cannot impose his views on how I vote, given that they are not my views and even though I am happy to go with the give-and-take in our
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .