Medical abortion to be made availible in the North.

jill_valentine

LordSutch wrote: »

Exactly my thinking too, surely people can just travel over to Britain like they have always done?

Can they indeed?

Not if they're trying to do it discreetly so they don't have to answer for their decisions to every gombeen in town. The ferry + train takes blood ages to get anywhere and it can be a miserable experience if the weather's bad. I wouldn't fly anywhere unless absolutely necessary. Leaving aside the cost, physically travelling to another landmass is an unnecessary concern that somebody who's having that kind of crisis doesn't really need.

And again, why should they have to? Why impose unnecessary difficulty in the process for no reason? It's - somewhat inaccurately - taken for granted that women in Ireland largely can access abortion and religious types aside everybody seems to accept that. We just prefer that the women in question do it somewhere out of the way.

It's the miniature American flags for some solution, and it's ridiculous. It's an embarrassing way for a country to export its services, shirking the workload on individual citizens so that the state doesn't have to be a grown up about it.

Morag

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Kingdom#Northern_Ireland

The 1967 act does not apply to Northen Ireland so there is no time limit there like England and Wales.

The Abortion Act 1967 does not extend to Northern Ireland.[11] The pieces of legislation governing abortion in Northern Ireland are sections 58 and 59 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 and sections 25 and 26 of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1945 (which are derived from the corresponding provisions of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929).

The Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 allows abortion when necessary to protect the mother's physical and mental health. But, performing an abortion in Northern Ireland is an offence except in specific cases.

Abortion in Northern Ireland is only legal in exceptional circumstances where the life of the pregnant woman is at immediate risk and if there is a long term or permanent risk to her physical or mental health.

In a written answer to Jim Allister the Northern Ireland health minister Edwin Poots disclosed that 394 abortions were carried out in Northern hospitals for the period 2005/06 to 2009/10 with the footnote that reasons for abortions were not gathered centrally.

An offence under section 58 is punishable with imprisonment for life or for any shorter term.

Politicians from the unionist and nationalist parties in Northern Ireland joined forces on 20 June 2000 to block any extension of the Abortion Act 1967 to Northern Ireland where terminations are only allowed on a restricted basis.

LordSutch

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Available travel is never a great argument for denying local supply for local demand. You could argue the same about anything, universities, children's hospices, etc, etc. The whole point is progress, evolution; society changes and thus so does what is viewed as acceptable/necessary/wanted even within that society. The "let's keep it this way cos it's always been this way" school of thought ignores the changing political, social, religious landscapes which are pretty much unrecognisable from a generation ago.

Yes I agree with you, and I suppose my thinking was swayed by a comment made in post #108 re Protests, which made me think of trying to avoid trouble in the North at all costs!!! hence, "let them carry on travelling to Britain like they have always done" but you are right of course, as is the poster #123.

K-9

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I don't mean to speak for HTD but I read it that the point was only a fraction of those 1000 women are going to fit the criterion in order to get an abortion at the clinic...

To HTD, I'd agree - but then there's the thousands per annum from south of the border too so it's not just those in the north that will consider it local. As well as that, I don't agree it's something that requires X amount of women to justify having. If it's legal to travel to procure an abortion, I see no reason why it can't be legal to travel a shorter distance to procure an abortion - anything else seems rather obtusely hypocritical to me...

But if you are going North to get an abortion, well to put it politely, there are better places, if you consider the laws involved.

Put it this way, while the announcement is fine in principle, it will be a few weeks before you know if this means anything. I'd be very surprised if in a few weeks, this means anything to a RoI women looking for an abortion.

Alliance are the only party to strongly come out for it, SF are in a political think thank on how to address tough questions in Government.

Ickle Magoo

K-9 wrote: »

But if you are going North to get an abortion, well to put it politely, there are better places, if you consider the laws involved.

Depends on the circumstances, I think. If under 9 weeks and able to go on the bus in the one day to take a pill then I suspect that's going to be the more popular than travelling to another country for a general anaesthetic.

Of course, the laws involved currently are going to restrict who can avail but I suspect it's going to be a case of getting the provebial toe in the door and then as religion/religious politicians loose their grip/public opinion continues to change, those laws will have to be relaxed.

eviltwin

benchppress wrote: »

why is that now?[/QUOTE]

Why would you want to make someone feel worse about it? What does that achieve? Once the abortion is done, its done. What purpose does it serve to make a woman who might be having a hard time coming to terms with it feel worse? Its not going to change anything.

You make a decision, you feel it's the right one, but you don't want to acknowledge criticism for it? Shows you are guilty.

I don't get this....guilty of what exactly?

I have no problem talking about my experience now, its 4 years later and I've moved on. My point was that a woman who is dealing in the here and now of an unplanned pregnancy who has decided to have an abortion is more than likely feeling very vulnerable, she doesn't need to be made to feel worse by people who know nothing about her or her situation.

Lingua Franca

I've seen this

benchppress wrote: »

I don't understand this rationale. You make a decision, you feel it's the right one, but you don't want to acknowledge criticism for it? Shows you are guilty.

Imagine a fella next door killed a kid in a car crash and he asked you not to make him feel bad about it was an accident, he only had three pints.

...kind of argument from anti choice folk right here on this board several times before. And all it has taught me is that prolifers really get off on being total assholes to already miserable, despairing people.

If the fella next door to me killed a kid in a car crash then I certainly wouldn't be petting him on the back for it, but I wouldn't go out of my way to stick the knife in, either. I am assuming this is a normal person who screwed up, is wracked with guilt and facing serious criminal charges here. I'm not a malicious person and I don't get off on making other people feel bad.

This thread has also taught me that pro lifers write analogies like albatrosses flick soup at the circus.

Morag

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Depends on the circumstances, I think. If under 9 weeks and able to go on the bus in the one day to take a pill then I suspect that's going to be the more popular than travelling to another country for a general anaesthetic.

It's not A Pill it's a series of them then over 48 hours, at exact times and during which the woman will miscarrry.

http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/health_advice/facts/abortion.htm

An abortion pill. This is for pregnancies up to about nine weeks old and involves taking two drugs – called mifepristone and prostaglandin – 48 hours apart. These have the effect of causing the womb to contract and shed its lining so that the embryo is lost through the vagina. This can be painful and some women feel sick or have vomiting and diarrhoea with these drugs.

So it's not just pop a pill, it's far from a walk in the park and these women will have to be aware it will be a process. How painful it will be and how ill they may feel will vary from woman to woman and there is a 2-5% that it will be an incomplete miscarriage and they will need treatment afterwards.

No one goes through this on a whim or cos they were too lazy to use contraceptives.

Chimpokomon

Lingua Franca wrote: »

prolifers really get off on being total assholes to already miserable, despairing people.

Except they're not all miserable and despairing, are they? At least two posters have admitted that the new clinic provides a reassuring 'back-up'. Despite being apparently in loving committed relationships, they would have no issue destroying their firstborn with the person they love just because the timing isn't right. Bullsh*t. You can make it work, growing the f*ck up and stepping up to the plate would be a start. My parents were 23 and penniless when they had me, and yet I'm still here.

The 'abortion of convenience' mentality has already permeated and that is truly distressing. The idea that many more lives like mine could now be 'postponed' is horrific to me. It is not disgust, or hatred that motivates my pro-life stance. It is genuine grief.

BTW you don't need to bother shooting me down in flames, I already know that pro-choice is the only accepted viewpoint on this forum.

ash23

Chimpokomon wrote: »

You can make it work, growing the f*ck up and stepping up to the plate would be a start. My parents were 23 and penniless when they had me, and yet I'm still here.

You know what, I was 20 and penniless when I had my kid and I'm an amazing mother. However I also accept the fact that it was pretty frickin hard to bring her up and I was blessed with being fairly intelligent and sensible, having fairly few personal problems and having a family who were supportive of me.

Not everyone is ABLE to "step up to the plate". Not everyone who has an unplanned pregnancy and progresses with it is a failure as a parent. Nor is everyone a success.
Nobody has a crystal ball and nobody knows what they will do when presented with that positive pregnancy test until it happens to them. So personally, I have no real time for anyone who sits on their perch and judges others having never actually BEEN in that position.

I made a choice. It wasn't abortion. But it was MY choice and I hate that women are being deprived of their right to choose.

I always was pro-life and thought it was selfish of someone to have an abortion. Until I got pregnant and then I was faced with having to make the decision. And even after the child was born and I coped really well, I became even more vehemently pro-choice. Because it damn near broke me at times. I was so young and it has been so unbelievably hard at times that I have sat and cried in despair. And that is with all the blessings and support that I have. Not everyone has that. I would never presume to know how another woman would cope. Words are cheap and saying "step up to the plate" is a very easy thing to say when you have no idea of what it involves for an individual.

Das Kitty

Chimpokomon wrote: »

I already know that pro-choice is the only accepted viewpoint on this forum.

Just because the majority of responding posters disagree with you, does not mean your viewpoint is not acceptable on the forum. Do you see anyone getting infracted for being pro-life? You're entitled to post your opinion, but you can't expect people with opposing views not to challenge you on them.

In my personal opinion, abortion should be safe, available and rare.

And I personally don't see any problem with someone viewing it as a backup to failed contraception. No one would choose abortion as an alternative option to contraception. No one. Having taken the morning after pill twice myself, even that puts you through the ringer. Then you factor in the cost and inconvenience...

bronte

Das Kitty wrote: »

And I personally don't see any problem with someone viewing it as a backup to failed contraception. No one would choose abortion as an alternative option to contraception. No one. Having taken the morning after pill twice myself, even that puts you through the ringer. Then you factor in the cost and inconvenience...

This. The MAP itself is something nobody would be in a mad rush to have to take again. You make sure it's an absolute last resort. Nobody in their right mind would rely on trips to this clinic as a contraceptive method. It's a step in the right direction, just like seeing boots and other chemists start selling the MAP over the counter was. I do hope it won't be used by the govt in the republic as an excuse to futher delay progress though.

K-9

Das Kitty wrote: »

In my personal opinion, abortion should be safe, available and rare.

That's the best line I've ever read in abortion debates, I may end up borrowing it.

Chimpokomon

You are entitled to your opinion as much as anyone here, but if you are unable to give that without being aggressive and uncivil, you will no longer be given the opportunity to voice that opinion, so calm down or face a break from TLL

Chimpokomon

Chimpokomon wrote: »

Except they're not all miserable and despairing, are they? At least two posters have admitted that the new clinic provides a reassuring 'back-up'. Despite being apparently in loving committed relationships, they would have no issue destroying their firstborn with the person they love just because the timing isn't right. Bullsh*t. You can make it work, growing the f*ck up and stepping up to the plate would be a start. My parents were 23 and penniless when they had me, and yet I'm still here.

The 'abortion of convenience' mentality has already permeated and that is truly distressing. The idea that many more lives like mine could now be 'postponed' is horrific to me. It is not disgust, or hatred that motivates my pro-life stance. It is genuine grief.

BTW you don't need to bother shooting me down in flames, I already know that pro-choice is the only accepted viewpoint on this forum.

I agree with you to a point; the IDEA of abortions of convenience is one I find distressing. However using this as a one size fits all POV is just not realistic. I don't for a moment believe anyone would use this clinic as a "back-up`or for convenience. People might assume that they would or could, mostly those who have never been in the position to need to make that choice. Pro lifers are welcome here as anywhere from my experience, but... do expect to have your opinions challenged.

Ickle Magoo

Sharrow wrote: »

No one goes through this on a whim or cos they were too lazy to use contraceptives.

While I appreciate the link to the info, I have never even come close to suggesting anyone goes through an abortion on a whim or because they are too lazy to use contraceptives....?

krudler

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

While I appreciate the link to the info, I have never even come close to suggesting anyone goes through an abortion on a whim or because they are too lazy to use contraceptives....?

Not yourself but its something that vehement pro-lifers trot out on a regular basis, as if women who have abortions have this "ah shure" attitude to it, its probably one of the hardest decisions a woman or couple will ever make.

Eve_Dublin

ash23 wrote: »

You know what, I was 20 and penniless when I had my kid and I'm an amazing mother. However I also accept the fact that it was pretty frickin hard to bring her up and I was blessed with being fairly intelligent and sensible, having fairly few personal problems and having a family who were supportive of me.

Not everyone is ABLE to "step up to the plate". Not everyone who has an unplanned pregnancy and progresses with it is a failure as a parent. Nor is everyone a success.
Nobody has a crystal ball and nobody knows what they will do when presented with that positive pregnancy test until it happens to them. So personally, I have no real time for anyone who sits on their perch and judges others having never actually BEEN in that position.

I made a choice. It wasn't abortion. But it was MY choice and I hate that women are being deprived of their right to choose.

I always was pro-life and thought it was selfish of someone to have an abortion. Until I got pregnant and then I was faced with having to make the decision. And even after the child was born and I coped really well, I became even more vehemently pro-choice. Because it damn near broke me at times. I was so young and it has been so unbelievably hard at times that I have sat and cried in despair. And that is with all the blessings and support that I have. Not everyone has that. I would never presume to know how another woman would cope. Words are cheap and saying "step up to the plate" is a very easy thing to say when you have no idea of what it involves for an individual.

This is a great post.

Ickle Magoo

krudler wrote: »

Not yourself but its something that vehement pro-lifers trot out on a regular basis, as if women who have abortions have this "ah shure" attitude to it, its probably one of the hardest decisions a woman or couple will ever make.

I appreciate that - I just wasn't sure why such a comment was being directed at my quoted post, which was in response to the numbers likely to use the clinic and why...

There are always going to be people that abuse any system, I think when it comes to abortion they are likely to be very much in the minority and that is still no justification for a country to merrily export the issue.

Rodin

krudler wrote: »

Not yourself but its something that vehement pro-lifers trot out on a regular basis, as if women who have abortions have this "ah shure" attitude to it, its probably one of the hardest decisions a woman or couple will ever make.

Clearly not as difficult as deciding whether to use contraception properly or not

B0jangles

Rodin wrote: »

Clearly not as difficult as deciding whether to use contraception properly or not

Are you suggesting that contraception is infallible or that people consciously choose to use it incorrectly?

Either argument is asinine, I just want to be sure I'm laughing at you for the right reason.

Rodin

B0jangles wrote: »

Are you suggesting that contraception is infallible or that people consciously choose to use it incorrectly?

Either argument is asinine, I just want to be sure I'm laughing at you for the right reason.

They either don't use it or don't use it properly

Stheno

Rodin wrote: »

They either don't use it or don't use it properly

You do understand that no contraception is 100% effective?

Rodin

Stheno wrote: »

You do understand that no contraception is 100% effective?

Of course. And contraception does not have the failure rate represented by the number of women seeking abortion.

Stheno

Rodin wrote: »

Of course. And contraception does not have the failure rate represented by the number of women seeking abortion.

Have you any figures to back that up?

I.e. a breakdown even of the adult female population between 16 and 50, versus the amount of women seeking abortions?

jill_valentine

By the time somebody's seriously considering a thousand euro plus abortive procedure across a border, preaching about contraception's a bit redundant, no?

K-9

Rodin wrote: »

Of course. And contraception does not have the failure rate represented by the number of women seeking abortion.

How would anybody know such a thing? Total number of protected sexual intercourses in a year / by unplanned pregnancies!

Morag

Many women can't use the pill, or any type of hormonal contraception.

Lingua Franca

Where did Rodin's post about 200 million fertile pill-using women to explain 200k abortions go? I had the page open and when I refreshed it was gone.

28064212

Rodin wrote: »

There were 200,000 abortions in England and Wales last year.
Choosing a method of contraception like the pill, with a pearl index of 0.1, you would have to have approximately 200 million fertile per year using this method, with it failing to account for the figure of 200k for abortions.

I think it's fair to say that many of those abortions are from people who have used no contraception, have used a poor method of contraception or were just negligent.

From a personal perspective, and not at all from a religious one, I am not in favour of terminating viable pregnancies and I believe Marie Stopes will not be allowed to operate in the north.

The pill's perfect-use failure rate is 0.3. The pill is also very difficult to use "perfectly", which is why typical use is such an order of magnitude higher i.e. the pill's typical use rate is 26 times the perfect use rate. For comparison, the condom's typical use is only 7 times the perfect use.