Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dispatches, C4 last night

  • 18-10-2007 8:02am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 2,943 ✭✭✭


    (not sure if here is the right forum)

    Did anybody watch this last night.

    I don't wan't to open the Abortion debate, but the programme was pretty tough to watch in parts, granted one could argue it was necessary to show what happens as much as possible.

    Also, did anybody think that they were hugely biased... They didn't even seem to want to show both sides of the argument.

    Anybody else have opinions on this??


«13

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 68 ✭✭dior1catboy


    I saw it, and I've had one, I couldn't watch the very graphic bits and covered my eyes when they were showing the footage that hadn't been shown before, but I have to say, I thought it was very well done and very informative.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,943 ✭✭✭Burning Eclipse


    I saw it, and I've had one, I couldn't watch the very graphic bits and covered my eyes when they were showing the footage that hadn't been shown before, but I have to say, I thought it was very well done and very informative.

    It certainly was informative, and what it tried to accomplish, it accomplished well.

    I just think it was very one-sided, I don't think it worked as a piece of balanced journalism. That said, it opened my eyes to facts I wasn't previously aware of, so in that respect I'm glad I watched it!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,198 ✭✭✭Baldie


    I tuned into this about a half hour in when the doctor was doing an abortion. I had to turn it off after a half an hour. Very hard stuff to watch when we've just had a baby 4 months ago. I can't belive they are doing abortions up to 26 weeks. That's madness!!!!!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭MooseJam


    Glad I didn't watch it, the poor babies, abortion is bad mmkayy


  • Registered Users Posts: 656 ✭✭✭davidoco



    Also, did anybody think that they were hugely biased... They didn't even seem to want to show both sides of the argument.

    It did start to seem very biased when they kept returning to the issue about when pain kicks in. It was near the end of the programme before they mentioned that 90% of abortions take place before 8 or 10 weeks.

    I thought the mother of two using phrases like "I supposes" "maybe" was starting to make it look like one of those Sky One programmes where they drag out Z list celebs to comment on A list celebs. They just put words in her mouth.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    Yes, I did watch it.
    The graphic footage was made and used by the anti abortion lobby in america.
    Yes it was very one sided.


  • Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    C4 seem to take a side on some of there programs rather than be impartial. Makes for a more emotional show I suppose.

    Is dispatches repeated?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,711 ✭✭✭Hrududu


    It was very biased.

    There was one part in particular where a guy doing 4D scans pointed out that the 20 week old fetus was crying. When the scan had just shown it move its hand over its face. At least they pulled him up on that sh*t, but otherwise it was very heavy handed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    Yes it clearly had an agenda how they dealth with the reps from bpas when considering the emotional and the women distress of the women who present for 23 week terminations was very telling.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,943 ✭✭✭Burning Eclipse


    ScumLord wrote: »
    C4 seem to take a side on some of there programs rather than be impartial. Makes for a more emotional show I suppose.

    Is dispatches repeated?

    Think you can watch it on some channel 4 on demand thing. Don't know if it's gonna be repeated...

    Moosejam, I'm not sure what your going for there.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭MooseJam



    Moosejam, I'm not sure what your going for there.

    I was just saying I think abortion is bad, shouldn't be done etc etc


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    Ok you have stated you opinion , good for you.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭MooseJam


    yes I have, have you got a problem with people stating their opinions


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,288 ✭✭✭✭ntlbell


    Thaedydal wrote: »
    Yes it clearly had an agenda how they dealth with the reps from bpas when considering the emotional and the women distress of the women who present for 23 week terminations was very telling.

    Preventing people from committing murder how dare they have an agenda!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,562 ✭✭✭cance


    oh dear oh dear,

    this thread is going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better.


  • Registered Users Posts: 864 ✭✭✭Unshelved


    They were using extreme cases to make a dubious point. Here are UK (England & Wales) abortion statistics from 2001 -

    Total abortions at under 9 weeks : 75 501
    Total abortions at 9-12 weeks: 79 368
    Total abortions at 21-23 weeks: 2037

    Total abortions at 24 weeks: 24

    (Source: www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_health/AB28_2001/AB28_2001.pdf )

    Taking into account the number of late abortions that must have been performed due, for example, to the mother's health, or the viability of the pregnancy, it really is a small number compared to the overall number that took place before the 12-week mark.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    Well with some fetuses beng susposedly viable at 24 weeks, you dont' see the anti aboriton lobbiests offering to pay for the 5 to 8 months of icu neonatal care required to ensure that a premy baby can function with out the machines and medices so that it could be adopted
    and the list of medical proplerms and conditions that a child which undergoes such intensive treatment suffers was never mentioned. The BPAS rep had to point out the 50% mortaliy rate for those who can be placed in neo natal icu.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    ntlbell wrote: »
    Preventing people from committing murder how dare they have an agenda!

    /me shrugs

    I wonder if I will get a baby killer hate mail/pms, it's been a while from the last one but really after 14 years it tends to loose it's edge.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    MooseJam wrote: »
    yes I have, have you got a problem with people stating their opinions

    Yes if they are doing to to derail a thread which the originator of asked people not to do as this is a thread about a tv program and how it's content was handled.


  • Registered Users Posts: 70 ✭✭Mind Hunter 85


    just to add the figures for
    Total abortions at 13-19 weeks -18718

    i think thats still a substantial number


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    Every time I see numbers like that I wonder why the hell there is not proper sexual health and contraception eduction in school and why contraception is not advailible free to all under 25s :(


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,288 ✭✭✭✭ntlbell


    Thaedydal wrote: »
    Yes if they are doing to to derail a thread which the originator of asked people not to do as this is a thread about a tv program and how it's content was handled.

    so if you put a thread in AH all you have to do is kindly ask for not to go off topic????

    after all these years you haven't learned much really.


  • Registered Users Posts: 864 ✭✭✭Unshelved


    ASTA20, you're missing my point, which is that the total number of post 24-week abortions in that year is miniscule compared to the pre 12-week number. The programme used the example of post 24-week abortions to distort the argument, when in fact a tiny number of these abortions actually take place.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,288 ✭✭✭✭ntlbell


    Thaedydal wrote: »
    Every time I see numbers like that I wonder why the hell there is not proper sexual health and contraception eduction in school and why contraception is not advailible free to all under 25s :(

    you want harding working average joe's to pay for all under 25's to get their rocks off?

    eh...ok...


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    yes.. because it's going to pay for their children too...

    also how the hell do you murder a foetus? they're not people.


  • Registered Users Posts: 541 ✭✭✭hopalong85


    Mordeth wrote: »
    yes.. because it's going to pay for their children too...

    also how the hell do you murder a foetus? they're not people.[/QUOTET

    They are alive. Matter of opinion as to whether you view a foetus as human tbh.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    so are chickens, do you see what we do to them?

    humans have human rights, when the foetus becomes a human then it gets human rights. You can discuss all you want about when that happens (which I'm pretty sure, is what people do, which is why women aren't generally allowed abortions after a certain period), but you don't just get a cell that starts to divide and call it a human arbitrarily.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭MooseJam


    Mordeth wrote: »
    yes.. because it's going to pay for their children too...

    also how the hell do you murder a foetus? they're not people.

    o rly, so when exactly do they become people in your opinion


  • Registered Users Posts: 541 ✭✭✭hopalong85


    Mordeth wrote: »
    so are chickens, do you see what we do to them?

    humans have human rights, when the foetus becomes a human then it gets human rights. You can discuss all you want about when that happens (which I'm pretty sure, is what people do, which is why women aren't generally allowed abortions after a certain period), but you don't just get a cell that starts to divide and call it a human arbitrarily.

    I don't think that's a fair comparison really. An unborn foetus will become a human being. This issue really comes down to personal opinions, that will never change.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    ntlbell wrote: »
    you want harding working average joe's to pay for all under 25's to get their rocks off?

    eh...ok...

    Cos it is a hell of a lot cheaper then paying for teen pregnancies via welfare.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement