Doctors and health officials are examining the case of a pregnant woman on life support which raises fresh legal issues over the right to life of the unborn.
The woman, believed to be in her mid to late 20s, suffered a brain trauma a number of weeks ago.
She was taken to Beaumont Hospital, the national neurosurgical centre. Later, she was transferred to a HSE hospital outside Dublin.
It is understood the pregnancy is in the second trimester and that the foetus is well below the threshold for viability outside the womb. The HSE said it could not comment on individual cases.
The dilemma facing doctors and health officials is whether switching off the machine would breach the constitutional rights of the foetus.
The eighth amendment to the Constitution says the State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and “with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.”
The woman’s family are understood to be considering their legal options.
There was awareness at senior levels of Government and the highest levels of the health service about the case.
Taoiseach Enda Kenny indicated he was aware of a case "which is very difficult".
Mr Kenny was responding to comments made earlier in the week by Minister for Health Leo Varadkar, who said the constitutional restrictions on abortion are too "restrictive" and have a "chilling effect" on doctors.
Mr Varadkar made his remarks during a Dáil debate on a private members’ bill tabled by Clare Daly. Mr Varadkar was aware of the woman’s case before speaking in the Dáil.
Mr Kenny said the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act is relatively new and would have to be assessed and monitored very carefully.
“There are always unforeseen kinds of circumstances, kinds of cases that can arise and I do think that it is important to have an understanding of the difficulties that people go through here,” Mr Kenny said.
“I also think it is important to look at the circumstances of cases that fall outside the range of that legislation which does bring clarity to medical practitioners in life-threatening circumstances.
“That was the basis of a great deal of discussion with experts and opinion makers last year.
“I don’t believe that in the absence of really verifiable medical evidence and information that we should be looking at the issue of constitutional change now.”
Mr Kenny said it was “important to know that you can’t foresee the range of circumstances that apply here. I am aware of one at the moment which is very difficult.
“So given that the Government was the first in over 20 years to actually deal with this and carry out the direction of the Supreme Court to legislate for what the people put into the Constitution, I think we have to monitor this and assess this legislation very carefully and very sensitively.”
Mr Varadkar had said that while the eighth amendment “protects the right to life of the mother, it has no regard for her long-term health.
“If a stroke, heart attack, epileptic seizure happens, perhaps resulting in permanent disability as a result, then that is acceptable under our laws. I don’t think that’s right.”
He also expressed support for abortion in cases of fatal foetal abnormalities.
“Similarly, it forces couples to bring to term a child that has no chance of survival for long outside the womb, if at all.”
