Health committee hearings on legislating for abortion.

Morag

Is anyone else following this?

The Journal have been live blogging it, they did the medical hearings yesterday and today it is the legal stuff.

http://www.thejournal.ie/live-oireachtas-abortion-committee-day-2-746632-Jan2013

Macha

Yes, I'm following it as closely as I can while also trying to work.

I'm surprised at some of the individuals who have managed to get a slot, especially Patricia Casey. She's clearly not an independent medical professional on this issue and she demonstrated that yesterday when she invoked the "slippery slope" fallacy, claiming there'll be abortion on demand in no time. She was supposed to be there to give her medical opinion as a psychiatrist on the question of suicide and abortion.

She proved herself to be biased and went beyond her remit.

rainbow kirby

Macha wrote: »

I'm surprised at some of the individuals who have managed to get a slot, especially Patricia Casey. She's clearly not an independent medical professional on this issue and she demonstrated that yesterday when she invoked the "slippery slope" fallacy, claiming there'll be abortion on demand in no time. She was supposed to be there to give her medical opinion as a psychiatrist on the question of suicide and abortion.

I'm not surprised at all, bit of cherrypicking on FG's part. Also at the fact that the main religious groups were automatically selected but it took a bit of effort to get Atheist Ireland on the panel.

eviltwin

I'm not paying much attention to it as it happens but keeping up on the main points on the news. I find it all very difficult at the moment tbh, it seems to be the same anti choice voices again and again with a few token pro choice groups thrown in, not a single woman who has had an abortion, not one person from the TFMR group. What is the point when they won't even take the time to hear from one person with personal experience?

rainbow kirby

eviltwin wrote: »

What is the point when they won't even take the time to hear from one person with personal experience?

Patriarchy: That wonderful state where the opinion of a celibate man matters more than the life experiences of women on a matter concerning women's bodies. :mad:

Morag

This afternoon will be interesting, TCD Prof William Binchy who was the solictor for the pro life amendment in 1983 and who used the term abortion mills on the recent Vincent Browne dabate and former Supreme Court justice Catherine McGuinness who has been pro legislating for X for some time now.

seamus

I don't understand why they're bringing religious groups in. Why not bring in SIPTU or MANDATE seeing as we're going to ask for opinions from organisations with no qualifications or relevance to the discussion?

Morag

BPAS asked to speak as they have direct experience of Irish women who travel and were refused.

eviltwin

Morag wrote: »

BPAS asked to speak as they have direct experience of Irish women who travel and were refused.

Says it all really. :mad:

hattoncracker

This makes me very sad.. As a woman with experience of it.

I dont know too many women who would speak up though. My family dont even know I went to England. I'd be disowned.

eviltwin

hattoncracker wrote: »

This makes me very sad.. As a woman with experience of it.

I dont know too many women who would speak up though. My family dont even know I went to England. I'd be disowned.

I'm starting to be more open about mine, I told a few people last year and they were really good about it. Quite surprised as one - my brother - is a member of FG ( I can just about still accept him as my brother despite that ) and can be a bit of a fuddy duddy.

One friend I told no longer speaks to me over it but that's her loss. I don't really want to be friends with someone so judgemental anyway.

Its very hard though to listen to people talk about women like me with the idea that they have any authority to know anything about me or my mental capacity or my ability to make a personal decision.

I wrote to Enda Kenny before Christmas asking him if he would like to hear my story as a woman with direct experience of the impact the lack of abortion here has, no reply. Asked my brother to chase it up and was told I was wasting my time, they have no interest in hearing from anyone who has had an abortion, travelled with a woman who has had an abortion or helped them on their return.

This whole committee is just for show imo, they know already what they are going to do but are paying lip service to the pro choice groups by making this show of involving them.

Morag

The churches were invited as moral authorities, mind how how the RC Church can still be seen as that I don't know.

As for why they don't want to hear from women who have had abortions,
I guess we have no morals due to having had an abortion.

All of the people in my life who are close to me know and know I have been a pro choice activist for years and I have started being even more open about it. It's the only way to break the Taboo, if you can be open about it.

In 1971 when abortion was still illegal in Germany a magazine article ran with
374 women, including many celebrities, publicly declared "Wir haben abgetrieben!" (We have aborted!).



Maybe we need something like that here, gods know there have been enough Irish women who have traveled.


It seems that most of the speakers are making the point of including the case for Termination for Medical Reasons, which is a good thing.

eviltwin

I think that's a great idea Morag, I found when I told people they were shocked because I didn't fit the image of a woman who has an abortion - I was in my 30's, married, already had a child who was the result of a crisis pregnancy.

Its really important to show that abortion can touch anyone. Its hard though to be open about it, no one seems to want to talk to women.

I did take part in a thing last year where women were invited to tell their stories but it was all in secrecy under assumed names, I know for some women that is very important to them but nothing is going to change unless women are able to be public about it.

jaja321

I'm depressed by the whole thing to be honest; such a hoopla and we'll still be left with one of the most restrictive abortion legislation in the developed world.

I can't wait until the day this country (legislators/politicians) grow the hell up and face this situation head on. If England weren't on our doorstep, they would have to have done this years ago, but its a nice little Irish solution to an Irish problem. Really p*sses me off. :mad:

LittleBook

Macha wrote: »

I'm surprised at some of the individuals who have managed to get a slot, especially Patricia Casey.

eviltwin wrote: »

it seems to be the same anti choice voices again and again with a few token pro choice groups thrown in, not a single woman who has had an abortion, not one person from the TFMR group

seamus wrote: »

I don't understand why they're bringing religious groups in. Why not bring in SIPTU or MANDATE seeing as we're going to ask for opinions from organisations with no qualifications or relevance to the discussion?

Morag wrote: »

BPAS asked to speak as they have direct experience of Irish women who travel and were refused.

I haven't been following every single minute but I've found in the reporting of the hearings, the lack of reference to the fact that many women travel to the UK for abortions is astounding.

Whenever they're talking about facts and figures of what is the "current situation" in Ireland, no-one seems to mention the caveat that they cannot include the hundreds of women who travel in these figures ... so their "figures" are so skewed as to be completely invalid.

Really, what's the fúcking point when the one group who have experience of the reality of abortion for Irish women are not included.

Dr Anthony McCarthy of the College of Psychiatry in Ireland (who had the most realistic view of the current situation I've heard yet in the context of the hearings) was interviewed on Newstalk this morning. He made no bones about the fact anyone hoping for a more liberal abortion regime ("liberal" being in the case of rape/incest victims or where the foetus/baby will not survive) will be deeply disappointed at how narrow the legislation is.

My impression is the whole exercise is a whitewash.

As regards Patricia Casey ... in the words of Madeleine Albright ... there's a special place in hell for women who don't help other women.

rainbow kirby

William Binchy on this afternoon's session... there are videos on Youtube of him arguing with Mary Robinson about the 8th amendment in 1983, I cannot believe that 30 years on he's still at it.

Morag

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLWnoQjTNiw

He said that there would not be a challenge to the 8th amendment, and that is what the X Case was.

sambuka41

Why is McGuiness saying that she is not sure why she is chosen to talk, and that she doesn't represent the judiciary?

Up now is Hon Judge Catherine McGuinness. She remains seated because of a recent accident and explains she didn’t prepare an opening statement because of time constraints and ill health.
She says she is not sure why she was chosen, and explains she is not representing the judiciary.
She says she is here as a lawyer and her views are not relevant.

Morag

They have her there as a foil to Bunchy, which she did really with refuting some of the things he's said by saying 'I can't comment on that I am not a dr and I think only drs should comments and the committee heard about that yesterday".

She can't currently represent the Judiciary as she is no longer a member of the judiciary.

loveisdivine

To be honest I've not paid much attention to it so far. Im still sulking about the fact that even when this is all done and dusted, it will still only be a teeny tiny minority of people that can avail of abortion here in Ireland.

Oh and it wont be called abortion, it'll be 'pregnancy termination' ya know, so as not to tell the truth offend anyone.

B0jangles

Any else notice that when the last batch of questions were being put to the two experts, only Justice McGuinness was making notes of each one. Upwards of 15 specific questions were directed at each of them but Professor Binchy made no notes at all - does he have an infallible memory or does he have no intention of answering any of them?

I wonder.

sambuka41

I would say tomorrow's session will be more volatile than the last two days, considering who will be speaking

• Irish Catholic Bishops Conference
• Church of Ireland
• Presbyterian Church of Ireland
• Methodist Church of Ireland
• Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland
• Atheist Ireland

Day Three will also see witnesses from the Pro-Life Campaign, Youth Defence, Family & Life and the Iona Institute enter the chamber at 11.45am. Then at 2.45pm, Sinéad Ahern of Choice Ireland, Orla O’Connor from the National Women’s Council of Ireland and a representative from Action on X will give their testimonies.

panda100

Why on earth are all these religious groups allowed on this committe? If your catholic/methodist/islam/whatever and don't want an abortion, then don't have one. Last time I checked we lived in a democracy,not a religious dictatorship.

In all fairness the minute Prof Casey appeared on the medical comittee, the whole thing became farcical.

Morag

loveisdivine wrote: »

To be honest I've not paid much attention to it so far. Im still sulking about the fact that even when this is all done and dusted, it will still only be a teeny tiny minority of people that can avail of abortion here in Ireland.

Oh and it wont be called abortion, it'll be 'pregnancy termination' ya know, so as not to tell the truth offend anyone.

That has changed, infact it was in the papers this morning.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/up-to-30-abortions-a-year-to-save-the-lives-of-mothers-3347241.html

UP to 30 abortions are carried out in Ireland each year.

The master of Dublin’s Rotunda hospital, Dr Sam Coulter-Smith, told the first day of hearings of the Oireachtas Health Committee on the contentious issue that between 20 and 30 abortions a year are carried out to save the mother’s life.

Abortions.

Up to 30 Abortions a year.

Up to 30 abortions a year to save the lives of women, are carried out here in Ireland.

Abortions, not procedures, not terminations, Abortions, carried out in Ireland, by Doctors.

Never again can anyone say that there are are no abortions preformed in Ireland, that Ireland is abortion free.
Anyone trying to assert that fact is engaging in double speaks and frankly lying.

Have we finally matured this much as a nation?
I bloody well hope so.

lazygal

Morag wrote: »

That has changed, infact it was in the papers this morning.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/up-to-30-abortions-a-year-to-save-the-lives-of-mothers-3347241.html



Abortions.

Up to 30 Abortions a year.

Up to 30 abortions a year to save the lives of women, are carried out here in Ireland.

Abortions, not procedures, not terminations, Abortions, carried out in Ireland, by Doctors.

Never again can anyone say that there are are no abortions preformed in Ireland, that Ireland is abortion free.
Anyone trying to assert that fact is engaging in double speaks and frankly lying.

Have we finally matured this much as a nation?
I bloody well hope so.

I hope this medical information is repeated ad nauseum to the likes of Caroline Simons and the forced pregnancy brigade who claim there's never a reason for an abortion to save a woman's life.

loveisdivine

We already know the retort though.

"It's not an abortion if its to save the life of the mother"

They will claim the doctor is using the word abortion incorrectly.

Edit - I just checked the YD page and the exact words are "doctors sometimes act to terminate the pregnancy, not to terminate the life of the baby"

Death and Taxes

sambuka41 wrote: »

Why is McGuiness saying that she is not sure why she is chosen to talk, and that she doesn't represent the judiciary?

She is no longer a judge and as so doesn't represent the Judiciary, in any event under the seperation of powers the judiciary couldn't contribute to these hearings.

lazygal

loveisdivine wrote: »

We already know the retort though.

"It's not an abortion if its to save the life of the mother"

They will claim the doctor is using the word abortion incorrectly.

Edit - I just checked the YD page and the exact words are "doctors sometimes act to terminate the pregnancy, not to terminate the life of the baby"

WTF is the difference then if women want to terminate a pregnancy not a life?

loveisdivine

lazygal wrote: »

WTF is the difference then if women want to terminate a pregnancy not a life?

It comes down to what your intentions are. If your intention is to kill the baby, then you're evil. However if your intention is to save yourself, which just so happens to also involve killing the baby, then you're ok.

It's actually humorous how much they will distort the truth to suit themselves.

krudler

loveisdivine wrote: »

We already know the retort though.

"It's not an abortion if its to save the life of the mother"

They will claim the doctor is using the word abortion incorrectly.

Edit - I just checked the YD page and the exact words are "doctors sometimes act to terminate the pregnancy, not to terminate the life of the baby"

But yet according to YD abortion is murder, not "pregnancy termination", they truly are a repugnant organisation.

rainbow kirby

Churches in now. /popcorn

Liveblogging here

B0jangles

I'm watching right now and the thought that keeps popping into my head is how much today's group is men talking to men to decide about an issue which only directly affects women.

lazygal

I'm getting really insulted by the religious groups. They basically think my uterus should be subject to what their gods believe in, regardless of what's right for me or my family. They think my health should be forced to be compromised if I'm pregnant and I should have to give birth, regardless of any other health implications during or after pregnancy. And I find that horrifying. I also find it even more horrifying that the male dominated parliaments sees fit to invite men holding such views to have a public platform in a State building.

loveisdivine

lazygal wrote: »

I'm getting really insulted by the religious groups. They basically think my uterus should be subject to what their gods believe in, regardless of what's right for me or my family. They think my health should be forced to be compromised if I'm pregnant and I should have to give birth, regardless of any other health implications during or after pregnancy. And I find that horrifying. I also find it even more horrifying that the male dominated parliaments sees fit to invite men holding such views to have a public platform in a State building.

But you're creating magical baybeeees!!! The "miracle" that is human life!

lazygal

loveisdivine wrote: »

But you're creating magical baybeeees!!! The "miracle" that is human life!

I've had a baby. And there was nothing remotely magical about months of morning sickness, complications and a c section. Those men can fup off, the way they dismiss the reality of pregnancy like its nothing to worry about.

krudler

Why are so many religiously biased speakers even on this? As if the RCC are anyone to be talking about the welfare of children. and Youth Defence? ha, if you're a fetus you're more important than a living person, once you're born? don't want to know about you.

Morag

All the abrahmic faiths have reps, Sunni Islam, orthodox Jewish, catholic, Anglican, Presbyterian, roman catholic and Methodist and athiest Ireland are there.

No one from the Hindu communities of which Savita was a member or Buddhist or pagan.

rainbow kirby

krudler wrote: »

Why are so many religiously biased speakers even on this? As if the RCC are anyone to be talking about the welfare of children. and Youth Defence? ha, if you're a fetus you're more important than a living person, once you're born? don't want to know about you.

I think that could probably be blamed on FG choosing the speakers so that they can hear what they want to hear.

Absolute disgrace that YD are there, why should an organisation that's almost entirely US-funded get a say here?

seamus

krudler wrote: »

Why are so many religiously biased speakers even on this? As if the RCC are anyone to be talking about the welfare of children. and Youth Defence? ha, if you're a fetus you're more important than a living person, once you're born? don't want to know about you.

To be fair, they have divided the discussion into various "themes", day one being medical, day two being legal. Day 3 is supposed to be "moral", but it's such an emotive and subjective topic that I think it's a complete waste of time.

The committee has been convened in order to best determine how the legislation should be framed. The discussion about whether legislation is required, is over. Legislation is required and is going to be created.

So the time for hearing moral arguments is over, today is a complete waste of time. All you're hearing is opinion from people who have no medical or legal qualifications to assist in drafting this legislation.

There's also a problem that despite day one being the day for professional medical opinions, they allowed unqualified speakers such as Patricia Casey to speak. She should have been asked to speak today. Yesterday was supposed to be legal, but a committee member allowed himself to stray into moral territory when asking questions.

Morag

And the last statement was left to the RC bishop who said it's not an abortion if it's a procedure which saves a woman's life and there is no need to legislate for abortion/

/headdesk.

krudler

Morag wrote: »

And the last statement was left to the RC bishop who said it's not an abortion if it's a procedure which saves a woman's life and there is no need to legislate for abortion/

/headdesk.

Well that's cleared things up, thanks celibate virgin frock man! Silly women thinking they know what's best for themselves.

Morag

And now it's the pro life campaign, youth defense, life institute, mother and family and Iona institute. so many myths and lies and double speak.

krudler

Morag wrote: »

And now it's the pro life campaign, youth defense, life institute, mother and family and Iona institute. so many myths and lies and double speak.

all shady as hell too, US funded fundamentalist scumbags. Wouldnt surprise me if they just arrived on and shouted "baby!" while waving a stock image of a cute kid.

Hotblack Desiato

Didn't YD turn up at some Oireachtas committee meeting a few years ago, insult everyone and walk out?

Here's hoping they make fools of themselves again.

seamus

I wonder if Paddy Power are offering odds on one of these nutters pulling out a weapon and threatening everyone before being dragged outside.

kunst nugget

Morag wrote: »

And the last statement was left to the RC bishop who said it's not an abortion if it's a procedure which saves a woman's life and there is no need to legislate for abortion/

/headdesk.

A funny thing is that Catholic doctrine states that an unborn child cannot be directly aborted but the death of the baby must be an indirect result of an action to save a mother's life. So for instance, in the case of an ectopic pregnancy you can't use something like methotrexate or an incision in the fallopian tubes to remove the embryo as these are considered direct abortions. According to Catholic doctrine the only course of action morally permissible in this instance is to fully remove the fallopian tube as in this instance the death of the embryo is a foreseen but unintended consequence.

krudler

kunst nugget wrote: »

A funny thing is that Catholic doctrine states that an unborn child cannot be directly aborted but the death of the baby must be an indirect result of an action to save a mother's life. So for instance, in the case of an ectopic pregnancy you can't use something like methotrexate or an incision in the fallopian tubes to remove the embryo as these are considered direct abortions. According to Catholic doctrine the only course of action morally permissible in this instance is to fully remove the fallopian tube as in this instance the death of the embryo is a foreseen but unintended consequence.

Methotrexate is a abortifacient? Didn't know that, I take it for arthritis.

kunst nugget

krudler wrote: »

Methotrexate is a abortifacient? Didn't know that, I take it for arthritis.

Aye, it is indeed.

http://www.fwhc.org/abortion/mtxinfo.htm

hollypink

I see that at the hearing, the Bishop of Elphin called for another referendum on abortion to overturn the X case Supreme Court judgement. He is calling for it to give people a chance to reaffirm their views. Society has changed a lot since the last referendum so I wonder what the result of another referendum would be. My mum who is a devoted Catholic, marched with SPUC before the last referendum. But she said to me recently that maybe she has become too liberal because now she doesn't believe she has the right to dictate to anyone, her daughters included, about abortion.

meeeeh

Shouldn't separation of church and state mean that the churches can't influence legaslation?

Morag

It should do and it's been a slow process from the legalization of contraception in the mid 80s, the legislation of homosexuality and the right to divorce in the 90, it's slow hard work trying to undo the influence they have had.