Savita dies due to refusal to terminate an unviable foetus.*Mod warning Post #1*

Macha

Ellsbells wrote: »

More enlightened? India has gender abortions - is that enlightened? Btw you are still coming from the viewpoint of what other countries think of us - who cares

I do. I live abroad and an embarrassed when I have to explain how catholic teachings still have such a grip on Irish society. If I were Indian, I would be equally ashamed of the desire some couples feel to have boys instead of girls.

I am also embarrassed about the mess the HSE has made of the inquiry, in particular how badly Savita's husband has been treated.

Let's not be arrogant enough to think any country should be above international scrutiny.

Ellsbells

Macha wrote: »

I do. I live abroad and an embarrassed when I have to explain how catholic teachings still have such a grip on Irish society.

Let's not be arrogant enough to think any country should be above international scrutiny.

Why would you be embarrassed? It happens all over the world.

Macha

Ellsbells wrote: »

Why would you be embarrassed? It happens all over the world.

Because I'm Irish and I see it as a failing of Irish society. Nor do we have the excuse of bring an impoverished, developing country.

Ellsbells

Macha wrote: »

Because I'm Irish and I see it as a failing of Irish society. Nor do we have the excuse of bring an impoverished, developing country.

I think each country has its own issues so never would be embarrassed by ours

Memnoch

Ellsbells wrote: »

I think each country has its own issues so never would be embarrassed by ours

That makes no sense whatsoever. Regardless of what anyone else's issues are or aren't you have to measure yourself by what you believe is right. Something being wrong or embarassing should be on its own merits.

Sure why fix any problems in the country at all. There must be SOMEWHERE in the world doing it worse.

Let's rewind back all the laws why don't we? Let's ban divorce. Hell, why not say that it's not possible for a husband to rape his wife. Women should remain covered at all times.

Or maybe we can be honest enough to admit our failings and work to improve on them rather than trying to deflect criticism in such a weak and transparent fashion.

Jack B. Badd

goodie2shoes wrote: »

as you said this country is still one of the safest countries on earth to have a baby. we shouldn't lose sight of that.

As I've mentioned previously, this may not be the case. There is the potential issue that the Irish maternal mortality rate is under-reported & only takes into account a 42 day period following delivery, termination or miscarriage whereas other countries record this information up to a year afterwards. So the two figures can't be compared. See http://www.medicalindependent.ie/page.aspx?title=maternal_death_%E2%80%93_into_the_great_unknown & http://www.mdeireland.com/definitions/maternaldeath.html

Plus, since we export 1000s of abortions to the UK each year, they will skew the figures further.

poeticseraphim

I more concerned with the reality than the perception.


Of course we can look at other countries for information examples ideas etc.

The reality is the HSE has serious problems

Exactly! !! Why do irish people always feel the need to be liked & conform for other countries and peoples.

The reality is Irish people want a change and polls show the majority of Irish people want women to be able to choose.

It is the desire of the Irish people themselves ..for themselves...not for anyone else

This is the attitude of the Irish people.

I would be in favour of a referendum on abortion.

LittleBook

frfintanstack wrote: »

It'd be pretty near impossible to remove from the notes if it was there and I'd find it amazing if 3 discussions with the family asking for a termination weren't recorded.......especially if the doctor thought he was doing the correct thing legally...

doctors learn to record everything in the notes if they dont want to get sued. As the saying goes "if its not written down it didnt happen".

That's exactly what's being alleged. Furthermore, this morning on Newstalk, the former chief advisor on nursing and midwifery to the WHO, when asked what was the biggest problem facing inquiries like this one, replied that it was the terrible quality of note-taking by clinicians.

username123 wrote: »

I am not blaming anyone for anything, I am asking the question, where were all the pro life advocates during the Childrens Referendum?

Oh they were out in force, it's just that they were campaigning for a "no" vote.

Macha wrote: »

Because I'm Irish and I see it as a failing of Irish society. Nor do we have the excuse of bring an impoverished, developing country.

I've been thinking about this and I agree. And it's nothing to do with comparing Ireland to other countries, for better or for worse. I can still look at my country (as a whole) and see gob-smacking flaws.

sambuka41

LittleBook wrote: »

Oh they were out in force, it's just that they were campaigning for a "no" vote

AH yeah makes perfect sense, we must fight for their rights in the womb, give them a voice but once they are born they only have rights in the context of the family, no voice anymore :rolleyes:

I really hope there is a big turn out next week at Dail, they will be streaming the debates live, so the women will be out there listening to how poorly they care for us medically and how little respect they give our opinion

Oryx

People here are talking about how we are percieved by other countries, and why that should matter. Well the phrase 'people in glass houses shouldnt throw stones' comes to mind. How can we criticise India for gender abortions while we have this legislative mess on our own patch?

I said before and I say again, I have no political agenda here. My views on abortion are conflicted, at best. I dont like the concept of it at all, it goes against my gut feelings on what life is. BUT situations arise wherethe rights and wrongs are not clear cut. And any moral stance gets diluted by simple empathy for another person facing a horrible set of circumstances. Foetal abnormalities, maternal depression, financial pressure, abandonment by a partner, these are some of the very real pressures that cause women to choose abortion. I am only lucky I have never had to face the choice head on as so many others have.

One of the main issues I have with the whole debate is how people claim we dont have abortion in Ireland and that should remain the case. WE DO have abortion in Ireland. I guarantee you know a woman who has had one (though you might not know that about her). To deny that simple fact is the worst kind of ignorance. We are just pushing our problems across the border, leaving women who travel for abortions anonymous, unsupported, and full of guilt.

I say again, personally, I dont think abortion is the right solution to crisis pregnancy, but until I have faced that situation, who am I to judge or choose for another person?

lazygal

Oryx wrote: »

I say again, personally, I dont think abortion is the right solution to crisis pregnancy, but until I have faced that situation, who am I to judge or choose for another person?

I don't meant to pick at your post, its just I hear this ALL the time about abortion not being the 'right' solution. What is the right solution? Adoption? Or keeping a baby you don't want?

I am totally against pushing the adoption agenda. Women aren't stupid, they KNOW adoption is an option. But sometimes a woman just doesn't want to be pregnant, end of. Two of my friends have known for a long time they don't want kids, one is married, one isn't. One has sought to have a tubal ligation and was told she needed to consult her husband and it wouldn't be carried out until she was post menopause.

I had to have a c-section to have my baby for medical reasons. I would not dream of forcing another woman to go through major abdominal surgery just because I thought a more minor procedure at an early stage of pregnancy wasn't the 'right' solution. Imagine having to have surgery under anasthetic, stay in hospital for five nights, have a catheter and have to have pain relief supposotories shoved up your arse. Is that the right solution for any woman who doesn't want to have a baby? Then you have your breasts fill with milk, which can cause mastitis, the risk of infection post pregnancy and the possibility of post natal depression.

Some women don't want to be pregnant, for whatever social, moral, practical, financial or other reasons. I don't force someone to give me a kidney to maintain my right to life. Why would I force a woman to give over her uterus and the rest of her body for the sake of feeling like there's no 'right' reason to have an abortion.

Oryx

lazygal wrote: »

I don't meant to pick at your post, its just I hear this ALL the time about abortion not being the 'right' solution. What is the right solution? Adoption? Or keeping a baby you don't want?

I dont mean to say it is the wrong solution either. No solution is ideal, any choice is going to be the toughest thing. And I will defend to the last any womans right to make whichever choice they feel is right. I think the current situation in Ireland is fake and wrong.

Personally I have a gut feeling about abortion, that is visceral and deep rooted, I have to move beyond that though, I cant let that instinct get in the way of someone elses needs. I have no idea how it feels to be in a situation where I need an abortion.

username123

lazygal wrote: »

What is the right solution? Adoption? Or keeping a baby you don't want?

Im interested in the answer to this as well. Womens bodies can be permanently changed as a result of pregnancy and childbirth too.

I have no interest in having children, but nor do I have any interest in being pregnant. I am married, so if I was to endure an enforced pregnancy due to this countries archaic laws, then I wouldnt be able to voluntarily hand the child up for adoption either. So what then? Raise an unwanted child? Be miserable, have a miserable child, resent the child, resent the situation, resent the changes pregnancy made to my body?

Is this actually what some people want for women?

Im uninterested in what other countries think of Ireland, but I am interested in the fact that Ireland seems to be stuck in the dark ages where womens health is concerned. It is simply not progressive not to offer clean, safe abortion.

eviltwin

I don't think anyone who is anti abortion really cares about what is right for the woman and her partner/family. They just want a living child.

If you give them reasons you can't raise it they always mention adoption like its this cure all, they talk about the mental impact of abortion but forget the mental impact of putting a child up for adoption or raising a child you are not really prepared for.

goodie2shoes

Ellsbells wrote: »

More enlightened? India has gender abortions - is that enlightened? Btw you are still coming from the viewpoint of what other countries think of us - who cares

we ought to cognisant of how we are perceived but at the same time i think we're being overly-sensitive about international "opinion". ironically it reminds me of that narrow village mindset, where people are constantly preoccupied about "what will the neighbours think?"
screw the neighbours!
many of those countries who try to level criticism at us have appalling human rights issues of their own.

also it's a sad reality that the world moves on very quickly and in no time this tragic case will be wrapping people's fish 'n chips, or maybe their onion bhajees?

Macha

goodie2shoes wrote: »

we ought to cognisant of how we are perceived but at the same time i think we're being overly-sensitive about international "opinion". ironically it reminds me of that narrow village mindset, where people are constantly preoccupied about "what will the neighbours think?"
screw the neighbours!

No, for me it's just shame at our antiquated laws on abortion.

goodie2shoes wrote: »

many of those countries who try to level criticism at us have appalling human rights issues of their own.

As has already been pointed out, this is a pointless argument. All countries are flawed but no country is above international scrutiny.

goodie2shoes wrote: »

also it's a sad reality that the world moves on very quickly and in no time this tragic case will be wrapping people's fish 'n chips, or maybe their onion bhajees?

I think this has stirred up too much anger in too many people.

username123

Macha wrote: »

I think this has stirred up too much anger in too many people.

I really really hope so.

Too long this issue is skipped over, ignored, exported to the UK etc... This issue has remained unresolved prior to my fertility, and remains unresolved now as I come to the end of it.

I find it impossible to understand the pro-life position. I actually used to see it as a misogynistic view until I realised some women held it lol!!! The bit that gets me confused is the complete lack of empathy for a woman, coupled with the complete empathy for an unborn child - how can you be so concerned about one, and so unconcerned about the other? Id love to understand it.

goodie2shoes

username123 wrote: »

I really really hope so.

Too long this issue is skipped over, ignored, exported to the UK etc... This issue has remained unresolved prior to my fertility, and remains unresolved now as I come to the end of it.

I find it impossible to understand the pro-life position. I actually used to see it as a misogynistic view until I realised some women held it lol!!! The bit that gets me confused is the complete lack of empathy for a woman, coupled with the complete empathy for an unborn child - how can you be so concerned about one, and so unconcerned about the other? Id love to understand it.

i notice listening to today's news bulletins that increasingly there is an emphasis on economic, budgetry & euro issues, and the Savita story is being pushed further down.
Just wait until we get closer to Dec's budget.
It'll be Savita what?
People have far too much more important things going on in their lives.
Sad but true.

username123

goodie2shoes wrote: »

i notice listening to today's news bulletins that increasingly there is an emphasis on economic, budgetry & euro issues, and the Savita story is being pushed further down.
Just wait until we get closer to Dec's budget.
It'll be Savita what?
People have far too much more important things going on in their lives.
Sad but true.

Yeah I know. I hope it doesnt get forgotten or brushed aside. I continue to email my TDs.

goodie2shoes

username123 wrote: »

Yeah I know. I hope it doesnt get forgotten or brushed aside. I continue to email my TDs.

we've managed to brush it aside for the past 30 years.

to quote Johnny,
what's another year?

darn is that the time!
i'm off down the pub ...............

sambuka41

Yeah I hope people turn out next wednesday. I got this reply from Lucinda Creighton

Many thanks for taking the time to contact me recently. I take it that your email arises as a result of the recent media coverage of the tragic death of Savita Halappanavar. I am deeply disturbed by her death and the many questions that surround it. I am pleased that Minister James Reilly has ensured that an independent enquiry take place, and I will anxiously await its outcome. I hope that it can be completed in less that the three months which has been set out to complete the enquiry. The Government is also considering the report of the Expert Group on abortion, chaired by Mr. Justice Seán Ryan, which was received last week.

It is never acceptable that the life of a mother be considered in any way secondary to the life of her unborn child. While I am not in favour of abortion, it is clear that there are certain circumstances when a termination may be necessary to save the life of the mother. This scenario is supported by the guidelines set down by the medical council. I do not know what went wrong in the terrible case of Savita, and I will await the outcome of the independent enquiry before I cast judgement. If more certainty is required to guide the medical profession in cases such as hers, then I have no difficulty in ensuring that we, as a Government, will make that happen. No woman should have their life put at risk due to medical uncertainty.

If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind regards,


Lucinda Creighton TD
Minister of State for European Affairs

I found the bolded part patronising, esp as I have emailed in the past about her position on abortion. The usual non committal but at least she acknowledges that the life of the mother should not be secondary to the life of the foetus. Now they just need to act on that.

I wonder for the second bolded part; if the certainty requires legislation, will they do that?

Ellsbells

rainbow kirby wrote: »

The bolded words there are the reason why "pro choice" is a more accurate term. "Pro abortion" implies being in favour of abortion as the best choice in all circumstances.

not correct!!!


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proabortion

the dictionary defines it as 'favoring the legalization of abortion'

username123

Ellsbells wrote: »

not correct!!!


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proabortion

the dictionary defines it as 'favoring the legalization of abortion'

Sorry Ellsbells, I dont mean to be patronising here, but the denotation of a word has less importance in discussion than the connotation of a word. It is more or less universally recognised that the term pro-choice reflects the position that is being discussed here. I am in favour of legalising abortion yes, but that does not fully reflect my position, I am in favour of choice for a woman, one of which might be a legal abortion. That would be the generally accepted understanding of the term pro-choice. Pro-abortion does not quite cover it.

Ellsbells

username123 wrote: »

Sorry Ellsbells, I dont mean to be patronising here, but the denotation of a word has less importance in discussion than the connotation of a word. It is more or less universally recognised that the term pro-choice reflects the position that is being discussed here. I am in favour of legalising abortion yes, but that does not fully reflect my position, I am in favour of choice for a woman, one of which might be a legal abortion. That would be the generally accepted understanding of the term pro-choice. Pro-abortion does not quite cover it.

Potato -potato...

You can have your own definition but it doesnt mean someone who is in favour of abortion all the time.

username123

Ellsbells wrote: »

Potato -potato...

You can have your own definition but it doesnt mean someone who is in favour of abortion all the time.

I dont think you get what Im saying. Pro-abortion may literally mean, in one dictionary, 'in favour of legalising abortion', but people here are discussing 'stances' - pro-choice being one. There is no stance that is pro-abortion. As well as being in favour of legalising abortion, pro-choice means being in favour of other choices too.

Its not as basic as potato-potato. Pro-abortion is not a stance that I am aware of, although its basic meaning may be included in the stance of pro-choice with other choices.

Stheno

Ellsbells wrote: »

not correct!!!


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proabortion

the dictionary defines it as 'favoring the legalization of abortion'

And this dictionary and multiple others defines pro-choice as being "Favoring or supporting the legal right of women and girls to choose whether or not to continue a pregnancy to term."

Berlin at night

Pro, anti, who cares as long as we get a referendum going.

Stheno

Berlin at night wrote: »

Pro, anti, who cares as long as we get a referendum going.

we don't need a referendum for the x case legislation we've had it.

Ruairi Quinn today that legislation is required and is the most appropriate action to take

Meanwhile, Minister for Education Ruairi Quinn has indicated that legislation will be needed to deal with Ireland's position on abortion.

He said anyone looking at the 1861 laws on abortion would consider legislation the most appropriate way forward.

Speaking at Dublin Castle this morning, Mr Quinn said that he would be bringing his views to Cabinet next week.

We'd need a referendum for any broader laws allowing abortion outside the limits permitted by the x case ruling

Curly Judge

username123 wrote: »

Sorry Ellsbells, I dont mean to be patronising here, but the denotation of a word has less importance in discussion than the connotation of a word. It is more or less universally recognised that the term pro-choice reflects the position that is being discussed here. I am in favour of legalising abortion yes, but that does not fully reflect my position, I am in favour of choice for a woman, one of which might be a legal abortion. That would be the generally accepted understanding of the term pro-choice. Pro-abortion does not quite cover it.

If being pro-abortion means that its proponents think abortion is good in all circumstances does it then follow that being pro-chemotherapy mean its proponents think it's a good thing in all circumstances?

username123

Curly Judge wrote: »

If being pro-abortion means that its proponents think abortion is good in all circumstances does it then follow that being pro-chemotherapy mean its proponents think it's a good thing in all circumstances?

I dont know, Ive never heard the term pro-chemotherapy, maybe you could tell me what it means? Of course if you are just being disingenuous then Id rather not engage. Thanks!