𝑭𝒖𝒍𝒍 𝑫𝒆𝒃𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒐𝒏 𝑷𝒖𝒑𝒑𝒚 𝑺𝒆𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏, 𝑵𝒐 𝑫𝒆𝒃𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒐𝒏 𝑻𝒖𝒔𝒍𝒂’𝒔 𝑺𝒆𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒐𝒇 𝑵𝒆𝒘𝒃𝒐𝒓𝒏𝒔

Описание: The Dáil on 10 December 2025 devoted a full ninety minutes to debating the Dog Welfare Amendment Bill, a Social Democrats private members bill that has the full support of the Government.

The debate was marked by unanimous concern for the welfare of pups. Deputy Conor D McGuinness put it plainly. “The current practice where pups are separated after only a few weeks in order to bring the bitch back into breeding condition is harmful to both mother and pup. A statutory ten week mother and pup period is a basic welfare requirement and long overdue.”

No one disputes this. It is cruel to tear a pup from its mother at a few weeks old. It causes stress, weight loss, and long term developmental harm. The Dáil is right to address it.

But what kind of society invests ninety minutes in protecting the bond between a dog and her pup while not giving a single second to the forced removal of newborn human babies from their mothers by Tusla. What does it say about our values that the welfare of pups can animate unanimous concern across the chamber, while the welfare of Irish infants does not even rise to the level of parliamentary curiosity.

The Alliance of Birth Mothers Campaigning for Justice has gathered repeated and consistent reports from mothers whose breastfed babies were taken within days of birth. Over and over again we hear the same pattern. Babies who were thriving at delivery fall below their birth weight in the first weeks after removal. Some require hospitalisation. Others fail to establish feeding routines in unfamiliar environments. These are warning signs that any neonatologist would treat as urgent.

During pregnancy the trauma begins long before the moment of separation. Mothers who are told in late pregnancy that Tusla intends to take their baby at birth experience an immediate physiological stress response. Cortisol levels rise. Sleep collapses. The mother child connection that should be supported with reassurance is instead flooded with fear.

Research shows that maternal stress in late pregnancy affects fetal heart rate, fetal movement, and the infant stress profile after birth. The baby feels this. The baby absorbs this. The baby enters the world already primed for distress.

And then the moment comes. Labour begins. The mother knows she will not be allowed to keep her newborn baby. The experience has been described to the Alliance again and again as a living bereavement.

For the baby the removal is not an administrative process. It is a rupture. Newborns recognise their mothers scent, voice, and heartbeat from the first moments of life. Neonatal science has proved that separation even for short periods triggers measurable stress responses. Yet in Ireland this can happen within days of birth as if it carries no consequences.

We are told this is child protection. We are told this is necessary. But no one in national politics has yet been willing to examine the harm. Not a minute yesterday. Not a second today. The Dáil can fill a morning describing in compassionate detail the distress of a pup removed too soon, but it cannot bring itself to speak about the removal of a human infant who has fed at the breast, who has rooted for comfort, who has known only one voice and one heartbeat since conception.

This is not to dismiss genuine concern for animal welfare. It is simply to point out the stark contradiction. If the welfare of a pup matters enough to command the full attention of our elected representatives, then the welfare of a newborn baby deserves at least the same. The silence is political. It is deliberate. And it protects a system that operates without public scrutiny or parliamentary oversight.

The Alliance of Birth Mothers Campaigning for Justice urges the Oireachtas to apply the same urgency, the same empathy, and the same moral seriousness to Irish infants as it does to Irish pups. The public can see the contradiction. Mothers across the country feel the consequences. It is time for the Dáil to face them.