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

Stheno

Rodin wrote: »

AGAIN, I have seen no reference that a consultant said anything about a catholic country. The word 'Consultant' isn't even mentioned in the irishtimes article

Fine. I was just pointing out that members of the medical team said it. Those could include consultants. It does appear to have been said according to the husbands testimony.

partyatmygaff

Ellis Dee wrote: »

I feel really angry that the life of a young Kannadiga woman has been sacrificed on the altar of religious zealotry here in Ireland. :mad:

Just imagine the indignation that would flood the Irish media if an Irishwoman visiting Karnataka died because she had been denied appropriate medical treatment on the ground of some local religious or superstitious belief.:rolleyes:

We should be deeply ashamed as a nation and I will certainly feel uncomfortable the next time I visit India, especially Bengaluru in Karnataka, a country where there has traditionally been a lot of goodwill towards Ireland. Hopefully our political leaders will now be prompted to get up off their fat posteriors and finally try to bring us into the modern world where women's rights are concerned.

Now a lot of the goodwill that Indians feel towards us may be eroded. The reader comments at the end of this article are very revealing, even comparing us to the Taleban. They are repeated right across the spectrum of Indian newspapers:


http://www.deccanherald.com/content/291923/karnataka-woman-dies-being-refused.html

Religion has nothing to do with this. Although I have very limited facts, with the timing of the events leading to her death it would seem the infection was set in before the idea of an abortion was even suggested by her. She became symptomatic on Tuesday evening. With an incubation period of 24 hours (Which is really the very bare minimum) the initial infection must have took hold on Monday and more than likely earlier on in the miscarriage. Being an ESBL strain, the antibiotics she was given more than likely weren't particularly effective which probably contributed a great deal to her death.

It would have been best practice to remove the source of infection but due to doctors wanting to avoid a legal grey area, they took the easier option

All in all, with all the exacerbating circumstances such as an ESBL strain, unfortunately, I don't think an abortion would have had any effect on the final outcome which is "death by septicaemia".

Rodin

Stheno wrote: »

Fine. I was just pointing out that members of the medical team said it. Those could include consultants. It does appear to have been said according to the husbands testimony.

But it is entirely unclear who said it.

Morag

So you are refuting the audio interview and the newspaper articles?

http://www.irishtimes.com/audio/2012/11/savita.mp3

Ellis Dee

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Religion has nothing to do with this.

Religion has everything to do with it. I'm just looking at a headline in a Finnish newspaper right now. It reads "Woman dies because 'Ireland is a Catholic country'."

Ireland's savage abortion laws are relics of a bygone age when human rights, including women's rights, were subordinated to whatever the male leaders of religions thought their imaginary creator and controller wanted. It is religion and the ignorance and prejudice that inevitably accompany it that have prevented our country from adopting more humane laws and medical practices that respect a woman's right to life and good health.

I am old enough to remember the days when virtually everyone in Ireland, especially rural areas, lived their lives under the complete control of the despicable Catholic Church, when our elected leaders in a supposedly secular state knelt before that twisted little bully Archbishop McQuaid, kissed his ring and did his bidding in virtually everything.

Those days are still not completely gone. Our cowardly politicians still fear the power of the lobbies, and organisations like Opus Dei still infect the body politic, the medical and legal professions and, in all probability, the civil service. That explains why not even rulings of the Supreme Court have led to legislation being amended.

In addition to which the Catholic Church still controls the majority of our schools, and its mores are inevitably passed on to children to some extent at least.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

It would have been best practice to remove the source of infection but due to doctors wanting to avoid a legal grey area, they took the easier option

First TV - the first medium they couldn't censor - being beamed in from Britain and then increasing modern travel loosened the grip of the religious bullies. Fortunately for Irish women, they long ago found "an Irish solution to the Irish problem" of abortion, and the name of that solution is "England". The zealots even tried to prevent women going there, but failed. The also failed to prevent women receiving information about abortion. When a 14-year-old pregnant rape victim was effectively interned, at least it opened the eyes of many people who had earlier been hoodwinked by the "pro-life" lobby, with its sophisticated propaganda techniques.

They have been thwarted and have had to yield ground, but like a defeated army that poisons wells as it retreats, they resort to every conceivable form of spite and mischief and try to make it as difficult as possible for women to exercise their rights. For twenty years they have prevented the Government from modernising our legislation, and the latest victim of that is a young woman.

If we as a nation can't shake those bullies off our necks, we should at least try to be honest when we invite people from all over the world to visit us for the Gathering next year and give them this warning: If you are pregnant or suspect you might be, bear in mind that if any complications arise you will be subject to Ireland's draconian legislation, which severely limits the options available to the medical personnel who treat you.



.

clappyhappy

It is very tragic story, my heart goes out to her husband and her family.
I feel very embarrassed and ashamed to be Irish in the 21st century when something like this happens.
If this happened in a third world country we would be the first to give out about their beliefs, but this didn't happen in Africa or India, it happened in Ireland.
Another great image for us world wide.
Rest in peace savita, and sincerest sympathy and apologies to her family.

Lingua Franca

Rodin wrote: »

But it is entirely unclear who said it.

He said she continued to experience pain and asked a consultant if she could be induced.

"They said unfortunately she can't because it's a Catholic country," Mr Halappanavar said.

"Savita said to her she is not Catholic, she is Hindu, and why impose the law on her.

"But she said 'I'm sorry, unfortunately it's a Catholic country' and it's the law that they can't abort when the foetus is live."


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-20321741


The audio is right there. Have you really not read, seen or heard anything other than the Irish Times article?

Wibbs

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Religion has everything to do with it. I'm just looking at a headline in a Finnish newspaper right now. It reads "Woman dies because 'Ireland is a Catholic country'."

Certainly, but that also makes for easy headlines.

I would say religion had everything to do with it and other daftness in our legal system and country at large. What is left is the echo of that in some pockets of the older generation and most of all the inaction of elected representatives to actually get off their collective well padded arses and change the legislation and it's a looooong time since the X case so they've had enough time to do it. After all they have changed laws regarding other areas which would have had McQuaid and his ilk foaming with rage(divorce, gay rights etc). Abortion is the hot spud they really don't want to touch.

Why? The holdover of the catholic stuff and the fact older types who are more likely to agree with much of it are more likely to vote. Hell look at something that was obviously lacking in our constitution, legal protection for kids and look at how few turned out to vote and more, look at how close run a thing it was. Even today I'd put good money down that abortion would be another close run thing. It'd likely pass, maybe 60/40 for, but your cute hoor Healy-Rae types think more about the 40% because they're their consistent voters. Add in the other lobbies you mention and well...

First TV - the first medium they couldn't censor - being beamed in from Britain and then increasing modern travel loosened the grip of the religious bullies.

Very much so. I'd say TV way more than travel as the Irish have been traveling back and forth in search of work for many generations. I noticed that in the 70's and 80's. Dublin and other major cities had "pipe" TV so we got the UK stations, rural areas didn't and you could see and feel the diff. The demographic shift that made us the youngest nation in Europe in the mid 80's was a major scene changer too. Over a million of us went to see pope John Paul George Ringo when he came in the late 70's. If he had come in the late 80's that figure would have been significantly reduced. As you said though we're not out of the woods yet.

If you are pregnant or suspect you might be, bear in mind that if any complications arise you will be subject to Ireland's draconian legislation, which severely limits the options available to the medical personnel who treat you.

True and in this case tragically true(though Partyatmygaff makes valid points re the infection). However on the other side of the argument, the Irish medical service, while having serious issues on many levels also has the best record in Europe(and AFAIR the world) regarding pregnancy and birthing mortality and complications. If you are giving birth Ireland is about the best place to do so.

Davidth88

Great post Wibbs.... totally agree with you .

username123

Im really angry and upset about this case.

Its frightening to think that if you are suffering a miscarriage it might make more sense to go to an airport rather than a hospital.

Oryx

It is frightening. I am only glad my children were born without incident, and that I wasnt aware of all this while pregnant, as I would have been petrified. I would have presumed that if my life were in danger I would be treated appropriately, but that seems not to be the case.

I dont blame the doctors. As it stands, they are damned if they do, and damned if they dont. I blame the law, and the gutless politicians who have been afraid to deal with this for fear of a backlash from voters.

Honey-ec

Rodin wrote: »

AGAIN, I have seen no reference that a consultant said anything about a catholic country. The word 'Consultant' isn't even mentioned in the irishtimes article

Stheno wrote: »

Fine. I was just pointing out that members of the medical team said it. Those could include consultants. It does appear to have been said according to the husbands testimony.

Rodin wrote: »

But it is entirely unclear who said it.

What difference does it make exactly which member of the medical team said it?

Sponge Bob

Honey-ec wrote: »

What difference does it make exactly which member of the medical team said it?

The consultant directs the entire team...is why. The team may be repeating what a consultant directed they do in a case meeting for example. However there is no doubt once the consultant tells the patient or the patient and their family straight out.

I have seen 8 people standing in a room in UCHG including an arrest team ...all waiting for the consultant to make the call and with the consultant and midwife engaged in a highly animated discussion to say the least.

There are around 7 or 8 consultants working in that Maternity Unit. Most recent patients are public patients (not least because private consultants have 9 month waiting lists in Galway). Once a patient is assigned a particular consultant that assignment is not changed. Not all consultants would necessarily take the exact same approach with the exact same priorities, they operate pretty autonomously in our system.

UCHG would also be about the 4th largest Maternity Unit in Ireland or the 5th and one of 4 teaching units. ( from memory those numbers) . This is not a small hospital ....it is about the 5th or 6th largest in the state overall in terms of size and mix of specialties.

UCHG was also where a number of terminations were wrongly carried out absent full checks in recent times and because of this and similar cases in Our Lady of Lourdes hospital a change was made to the conditions under which a termination on the grounds of miscarriage may be carried out in any maternity hospital. See and also . That is merely context.

Lingua Franca

Honey-ec wrote: »

What difference does it make exactly which member of the medical team said it?

Because nit picking distracts from the real issue.

Esterhase

I was at the Dail protest last night and plan to go again on Saturday.
I'm absolutely heartbroken for the poor man who needlessly lost both his wife and baby in the space of a few days. I hope he sees coverage of the protests/vigils and can take some kind of comfort from the fact that so many people are outraged about this.
RIP.

Honey-ec

Sponge Bob wrote: »

The consultant directs the entire team...is why.

Sorry, I meant that once it was said, by *anyone*, then there's a valid religious issue at hand. Rodin seemed very hung up on who said it, rather than whether it was said at all.

Morag

Did you know that White is the Hindu colour for mourning?
It is being asked that if you can, please wear white, to any of the vigils/marches/protests you are attending this weekend.

Sorcha16

Honey-ec wrote: »

I meant that once it was said, by *anyone*, then there's a valid religious issue at hand. Rodin seemed very hung up on who said it, rather than whether it was said at all.

Rodin is correct to be concerned with who said it. It only becomes a valid religious issue if it's said by someone in a position of authority. It would significantly less relevant if a member of nursing staff said it, as generally, nurses don't make executive decisions that impact on people's lives.

Consultants however, do -hence their words carry more gravitas

starlit

Its not just a religious or not so religious issue but its the issue of the law on medical grounds what was feasible. Doctors were confused they knew they be doing something illegal and get prosecuted if they didn't make the right call in the eyes of the law, but suppose the catholic ethos was still there no matter how you look at it. It does boil down to the catholic ethos of course that affected the law which is not clearly legislated which should be.

She had miscarried, the baby wasn't likely to survive so why couldn't they not have given her a termination the baby wasn't likely to survive but they could have tried to save the mother all they could whether there was a risk or not. Isn't the after care just important as the care during pregnancy/miscarriage.

It should have been dealt in a more humane way. The fact she had the infection at all meant she should have come first and her decision to want to terminate and her health should have been number one.

It should never happen again. I just hope the government will see sense to try to do something about bringing a law to be more clear to where doctors stand as every case is different but even under similar situations the best interest of the patient is more important than just the baby. She could have lived and had more children.

My heart goes out to her and her family. Its an ordeal no-one should have to face. Whose going to bear that cross?

Sponge Bob

doovdela wrote: »

She had miscarried, the baby wasn't likely to survive so why couldn't they not have given her a termination the baby wasn't likely to survive but they could have tried to save the mother all they could whether there was a risk or not.

You are confusing the issue. I understand the foetus could not have survived at all given the cervical dilation. In a case of Anencephaly where survivability is impossible, termination is not allowed either.

Stercus Accidit

Saturday is the next protest? That's what I came to find out, thanks.

ABajaninCork

I got a response back from one of my local TD's.

***TEXT***

Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

As you will be aware, the Government established an Expert Group (as promised in the Programme for Government) to study the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the ABC v. Ireland case. In that judgement, the European Court held that the Irish State had failed to legislate to implement existing rights to lawful abortion when a mother’s life is at risk pursuant to Article 40.3.3° of the Irish Constitution.

The Expert Group is chaired by Mr. Justice Sean Ryan and comprised of experts in the fields of law and medicine. It was asked to make recommendations on a series of options on how to implement the judgment taking into account the constitutional, legal, medical, and ethical considerations involved in the formulation of public policy in this area and the over-riding need for expeditious action in light of the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights.

On 13th November, the Expert Group delivered its Report to the Minister for Health. The Minister for Health, Dr. James Reilly TD, will now examine the Report and bring it to Government for discussion.

The Government will be engaging again with the Council of Europe in respect of the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights before 30 November next.

Please be assured that the importance of this issue is fully recognised by Fine Gael.

***END OF TEXT***

Sounds like a stock answer, especially as he voted against the motion, but we'll see...

allym

ABajaninCork wrote: »

I got a response back from one of my local TD's.

***TEXT***

Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

As you will be aware, the Government established an Expert Group (as promised in the Programme for Government) to study the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the ABC v. Ireland case. In that judgement, the European Court held that the Irish State had failed to legislate to implement existing rights to lawful abortion when a mother’s life is at risk pursuant to Article 40.3.3° of the Irish Constitution.

The Expert Group is chaired by Mr. Justice Sean Ryan and comprised of experts in the fields of law and medicine. It was asked to make recommendations on a series of options on how to implement the judgment taking into account the constitutional, legal, medical, and ethical considerations involved in the formulation of public policy in this area and the over-riding need for expeditious action in light of the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights.

On 13th November, the Expert Group delivered its Report to the Minister for Health. The Minister for Health, Dr. James Reilly TD, will now examine the Report and bring it to Government for discussion.

The Government will be engaging again with the Council of Europe in respect of the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights before 30 November next.

Please be assured that the importance of this issue is fully recognised by Fine Gael.

***END OF TEXT***

Sounds like a stock answer, especially as he voted against the motion, but we'll see...

I got the same. Anthony Lawler? Or is it actually the stock Fine Gael answer?

Lingua Franca

ABajaninCork wrote: »

I got a response back from one of my local TD's.

***TEXT***

Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

As you will be aware, the Government established an Expert Group (as promised in the Programme for Government) to study the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the ABC v. Ireland case. In that judgement, the European Court held that the Irish State had failed to legislate to implement existing rights to lawful abortion when a mother’s life is at risk pursuant to Article 40.3.3° of the Irish Constitution.

The Expert Group is chaired by Mr. Justice Sean Ryan and comprised of experts in the fields of law and medicine. It was asked to make recommendations on a series of options on how to implement the judgment taking into account the constitutional, legal, medical, and ethical considerations involved in the formulation of public policy in this area and the over-riding need for expeditious action in light of the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights.

On 13th November, the Expert Group delivered its Report to the Minister for Health. The Minister for Health, Dr. James Reilly TD, will now examine the Report and bring it to Government for discussion.

The Government will be engaging again with the Council of Europe in respect of the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights before 30 November next.

Please be assured that the importance of this issue is fully recognised by Fine Gael.

***END OF TEXT***

Sounds like a stock answer, especially as he voted against the motion, but we'll see...

Up to another fricking year?! What a joke!

Twee.

Such a sad situation. If the foetus was known to be not viable it should not have been considered as a barrier to treatment. I'm looking at it as she had already lost the baby, there was no chance, but she was left in agonising pain for days. If she had some other condition (nothing to do with pregnancy), would doctors have let her lie there in such pain?

I'm sure there will be a lot of interest when the reports come out to determine what exactly happened over her time in hospital.

ABajaninCork

allym wrote: »

I got the same. Anthony Lawler? Or is it actually the stock Fine Gael answer?

Of course it's a stock answer (probably prepared by the spin doctors). Our politicians aren't bright enough to given an honest one!!

And no. It wasn't Mr Lawler...

Morag

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Saturday is the next protest? That's what I came to find out, thanks.

Info on all the protests is here
http://www.irishchoicenetwork.com/1/post/2012/11/please-wear-white-protest-and-march-update.html

partyatmygaff

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Religion has everything to do with it. I'm just looking at a headline in a Finnish newspaper right now. It reads "Woman dies because 'Ireland is a Catholic country'."

I don't really care what a newspaper types up in big bold attention-grabbing print in the hope of garnering sales. What I care about is this case.

Let's forget all this stuff about the law, the Catholic church and whatever else the international media and the general public seem to be so focused on. Look at this from a medical perspective. So far, we know the following.

• She died of a septicaemic ESBL-producing E.Coli infection.
• She was admitted to hospital on a Sunday complaining of back pains and was told she was suffering a miscarriage. At this point, it doesn't appear she was in abnormally huge pain.
• On Monday, she asks for an induction to resolve the miscarriage and her request is refused due to the presence of a foetal heartbeat. At this point, i'd imagine the pain very slowly started to increase. At an estimation based on when she became symptomatic, i'd she was at least suffering from systemic inflammatory response syndrome + the early stages of sepsis.
• On Tuesday morning, she asked for another induction and was refused again. Symptoms of advanced septicaemia started to show that evening and the medical team responded by starting her on antibiotics.
• Wednesday lunchtime, the foetus died and the womb contents were removed. By evening, she is critical with weak vital signs and a high fever.
• By Saturday, her infection progressed to multiple organ failure and by the end of the day she had died.

Let's consider the scenario where they agreed to her request and aborted on Monday evening. She would have still been in a bit of pain which would have written off as normal and she would have been discharged with a prescription for painkillers. The abortion would have removed the source of the infection and some portion of the bacteria but if (as I suspect) the infection had already reached the bloodstream all it really would have done is prolong the incubation time. Instead of becoming symptomatic on Tuesday evening, she would have become symptomatic later on in the week. She'd return to the hospital again, they'd treat her with a standard antibiotic (Empirical prescribing is standard practice until they identify the species responsible for the infection) which probably wouldn't have any effect on the strain she was infected with and she'd die in the exact same way.

What medically sound reason is there to suggest that an abortion would definitely have stopped her death by septicaemia? (Providing it was already underway before she suggested an abortion as appears to be the case)

ABajaninCork

The Government will be engaging again with the Council of Europe in respect of the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights before 30 November next.

I took this to mean before the end of this month TBH. I sincerely hope it isn't 2013!!!

Eve_Dublin

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/eils-mulroy-prochoice-side-must-not-hijack-this-terrible-event-3294723.html


What do people think of this article? How can she make claims like that in a paper so widely read?