Hansard

The overall effect of this group of amendments is to strengthen the process that a health authority must follow when a woman experiences a pregnancy loss before or on completion of 24 weeks’ gestation. Amendment 1027 adjusts the drafting of the bill to make it clear that section 50 applies in the case of pregnancy losses that occur before or on completion of 24 weeks’ gestation. Amendment 1028 ensures that where a woman who experiences a pregnancy loss authorises another person to make arrangements for the disposal of the remains in a particular way, that person must make the arrangements in the way that was specified by the woman. Amendment 1029 ensures that as soon as a woman makes a decision about what she would like to be done with the remains of a pregnancy loss, a health authority must record that decision and take reasonable steps to secure the woman’s signature in relation to the decision. Amendment 1031 relates to situations in which a woman changes a decision that she has made under section 50. The effect of the amendment is to provide legal certainty that the new decision that the woman makes is to be treated as though it were a decision made under section 50. Amendment 1032 addresses a potential gap where a woman authorises a person to make the arrangements for the disposal of remains and that person then asks a health authority to make the arrangements. The effect of the amendment is to require the person to specify that the health authority must make the arrangements in the way that was specified originally by the woman. That will ensure that the woman’s wishes are carried out. Amendment 1033 ensures that where a woman chooses to make her own arrangements for the burial or cremation of the remains of a pregnancy loss, the health authority will give her the remains. Similarly, where a person who is authorised by the woman to make the arrangements wishes to make their own arrangements, the amendment ensures that the health authority will give that person the remains. Amendment 1034 makes a drafting change to provide clarity about the process that a health authority will carry out. It replaces a reference to disposing of remains with a reference to making arrangements for their disposal. That adjustment better reflects the actual process in which the health authority will make arrangements for disposal but not carry out the disposal. Amendment 1035 allows a person who authorises a health authority to make arrangements for disposal to specify that they do not wish the seven-day waiting period to apply before arrangements are made. That will allow the remains to be buried or cremated as soon as possible and ensure that there are no unnecessary delays in cases where burial is required to take place quickly for religious or cultural reasons. The amendment will not require a person to indicate why they do not wish the seven-day period to apply. Amendment 1036 allows a health authority to take various steps when no arrangements have been made at the end of the six-week period from the date of a pregnancy loss. New subsection (2) places the health authority under a duty to consider whether it would be in the woman’s best interest to contact her to try to ascertain what she wants to happen to the ashes. The amendment is structured in that way to reflect the wide variety of circumstances that might have led to that point. For example, a woman might not have been able to reach a decision about what she would like to happen to the remains. In that instance, the health authority may continue to support the woman to make a decision. The amendment does not place a timescale on that outcome. In other circumstances, however, a woman might have given no notice of what she would like to happen to the remains and might have had no contact with the health authority since the loss occurred. In such an instance, the health authority may conclude that the woman has indicated that she does not want to be involved in the process, and the health authority may therefore choose to make arrangements for the disposal of the remains. 10:15 New subsections (2E) and (2F) provide the health authority with the power to make arrangements for the disposal of remains where no decision has otherwise been made. Amendment 1036 places considerable emphasis on the health authority’s judgment of a certain situation, particularly where it has an on-going relationship with the woman and knows that she is still trying to reach a decision about what should be done with the remains. The health authority is under no obligation to make arrangements for the disposal of the remains. As the health authority will have been involved since the loss occurred, it is appropriate to give it flexibility to act according to a variety of situations that might occur and which require different responses to ensure that the best outcome is achieved in each instance. Such decisions will largely be based on the health authority’s relationship with the woman. The Scottish Government will provide guidance to health authorities to support the operation of the process. Amendment 1049, in the name of Malcolm Chisholm, seeks to allow a health authority to make contact with a woman who has experienced a pregnancy loss about arrangements for disposal where arrangements have not been made within the initial six-week period. It requires a health authority to seek a woman’s views about disposal and to give her more time to make the decision about arrangements for disposal, should she request it. I accept the principle behind this amendment; indeed, that is why I have lodged amendment 1036, which, being built around a woman’s best interests, will ensure that health authorities have to seek a woman’s views where arrangements for disposal have not been made after pregnancy loss and give her time to come to a decision about the matter. As a result, I do not think that amendment 1049 is necessary and I invite the member not to move it. Amendment 1037 allows a health authority to discuss options with a woman where it is known that a pregnancy loss will occur but it has not yet happened. In such instances, it can be beneficial for the woman to consider what she would like to happen to the remains before the loss occurs. The amendment allows a health authority to discuss matters before a pregnancy loss occurs, but it does not require the authority to do so if it does not believe that that would be in the woman’s best interests. Amendment 1050, in the name of Malcolm Chisholm, requires that electronic registers must be kept by health authorities in relation to pregnancy loss. I fully accept the principle behind the amendment and, as such, I have lodged amendment 128, which will be considered by the Local Government and Regeneration Committee tomorrow and which, although having the same effect as amendment 1050, will go wider by requiring all information kept under the bill to be stored in electronic form. I therefore do not think that amendment 1050 is necessary and I invite the member not to move it. Amendments 1039 and 1041 remove the power to create offences from the regulation-making power in section 55, while amendment 1043, which inserts a new section after section 55, sets out on the face of the bill offences in relation to registers kept by health authorities on pregnancy loss. Amendment 1040 inserts a new provision requiring health authorities to keep registers on pregnancy losses indefinitely, which is consistent with the approach taken to other registers made under the bill. Amendment 1042 provides a definition of “health authority” for the purposes of section 55, while amendment 1038, which inserts the word “or” between section 55(2)(a) and (b), is a drafting adjustment that provides drafting consistency with other parts of the bill. I move amendment 1027.