Does the abortion debate reveal what some people really think about women?

lazygal

From listening to the Oireachtas hearings and media commentators, politicians and clergy and reading the online debates, the 'floodgates' argument crops up, as does the iffyness about including suicide as a threat to life. Leaving aside the fact that suicide is the central element to the X case, therefore leaving it out would not mean legislating for it, the discourse around pregnancy and women, and how they might behave, has been quite revealing. Men and women seem to have no problem arguing that if suicide is grounds for legal abortion, women will fake or exaggerate suicidal thoughts to get what they want. There's a inherent distrust of women, particularly pregnant women, that seems to be innate in some circles.

I saw a bit of this when I was going through antenatal care. I was lucky to be able to select the consultant I wanted and express my preferences about my pregnancy and birth, and aftercare. However, during some antenatal classes I heard and saw some midwives being downright dismissive of some women, particularly younger mums to be. I'm in a mum's group and some of the women have horror stories about being told they were being hysterical by doctors, only to have an emergency c section because of complications, their husbands told to 'make sure and mind her, she's a bit emotional' when given bad news in scans, concerns over birth plans totally ignored or being told in patronising tones that they won't be worrying about that during labour.

I'm not sure if this is relevant to the abortion discussion but having been pregnant and given birth in Ireland, and now listening to the discourse around abortion, I'm left with the unshakeable feeling that a lot of people feel that I was not to be trusted with my feelings and shouldn't be given any grounds for leeway about my own body, because I'm likely to lie and lie some more to get what I want, be it an abortion, an elective c section, or a particular form of aftercare.

MOD WARNING HERE

Deleted User wrote: »

Mod

If you are incapable of debating this topic without resorting to personal snipes, do not post. Any further personal digs will result in mod action.

This is the only warning that will be given on this matter.

Lingua Franca

Floodgates, self harm, liars, mentally ill, hysterical, shouldn't-be-having-sex-if-they-don't-want-babies, abortion as contraception... And the incredibly odd belief that if abortion was allowed in Ireland that more women would suddenly start queueing round corners to have abortions.

Yes it reveals what some people truly think about women, and it is despicable. I am honestly appalled by some of the things that people, mostly male, think it's ok to say about women. There's a definite attitude that women cannot be trusted, and an expectation that women should breed.

I have also experienced dismissive midwives who knew better than I what was best for me, despite them going against my wishes and leaving me in considerable distress and causing me to require an unwanted epidural and forceps delivery and then messing up my medical notes.

When we protest and speak up for ourselves we're dismissed as agenda wielding babykilling looney lefty feminazis. Of course we can't be trusted with ourselves.

I got my daughter the hell out of Ireland, I want better for her.

Peregrinus

lazygal wrote: »

. . . There's a inherent distrust of women, particularly pregnant women, that seems to be innate in some circles.

It’s a fair point. But (nitpick coming up) the distrust is not just of women (and perhaps not even primarily of women) but also of the medical profession.

And (more substantial point coming up) I don’t think it’s “innate”. It’s influenced by what’s happened in the UK, where legislation allows abortion up to 24 weeks where two doctors certify that continuing the pregnancy is more dangerous to the life or health the woman than terminating it, and this translates in practice into abortion for anyone who wants it within that time limit. The UK has a staggeringly high abortion rate, and if those abortions were really motivated by concerns for women’s health, that would point to the UK - the home of the NHS - having standards of maternal health that would disgrace a third-world country. It would be a major scandal, and a national disgrace.

But nobody’s bothered because they all know that, despite what the legislation suggests, abortion is available on demand, and relatively few abortions are in fact motivated by concerns about maternal health. What looks from the legislation like a medical-needs-based abortion regime is in fact an abortion-on-demand regime, and everyone knows this.

I’m not suggesting that the same would happen under the proposed Irish legislation. But when people see the experience in the UK, the “slippery slope” argument suddenly looks very plausible to them, and we don’t have to appeal to an “innate distrust of women” to explain their fear that something similar would happen in Ireland.

People are cynical by nature, "Oh he's on the sick" etc., or the assumption that having a bad back just means being lazy or workshy. A reason is often seen as little more than an excuse. When it comes down to something as important as having or not having a kid then people will of course be extremely cynical about others' motivations and honesty.

philologos

Many women are pro-life, and many of those who are aborted are female (sometimes merely because they are female).

It says no less about the value of women than a pro-choice position does.

lazygal

philologos wrote: »

Many women are pro-life, and many of those who are aborted are female (sometimes merely because they are female)

And your point is..........?

philologos

lazygal wrote: »

And your point is..........?

My point is that a pro-life position isn't anti-woman and that pro-choicers who claim such are lying.

She asked a question, related some experiences, and you swan in calling her a liar?
Certainly seems to answer the question anyway

lazygal

philologos wrote: »

My point is that a pro-life position isn't anti-woman and that pro-choicers who claim such are lying.

I never said anything of the sort, in fact, unlike you, I have experience of being pregnant and giving birth in Ireland, and the most dismissive and unhelpful medical personnel I came across were women, particularly midwives.

rainbow kirby

I think it partly demonstrates how much of a patriarchal system the healthcare system is in this country. There tends to be a pretty overwhelming attitude of "Shut up little woman, who do you think you are to disagree with this man who of course knows what's best for you?" throughout the system, and a lot of people outside of it have assimilated that. Way too many people have died or suffered permanent injury because of this "doctors are gods" complex (Michael Neary caesarean hysterectomies, symphysiotomy etc) and though things have changed a bit, there's a lot further to go there.

CaraMay

Op am not speaking about individual cases and I had no problems with the midwives I encountered. A friend of mine, who is a midwife, did say that a lot of women, especially first time mothers, come in with totally impractical birthing plans which just could not be implemented for a variety of reasons. I think you have to trust the team to know what's best for you and your baby. People can quote all the bad experiences they want but 99.9999999% of times, it's all for the good of the mother and child.

I have heard from friends who went public that you are really just a number. I went private as I wanted more control over the experience, which I got.

Wibbs

rainbow kirby wrote: »

I think it partly demonstrates how much of a patriarchal system the healthcare system is in this country. There tends to be a pretty overwhelming attitude of "Shut up little woman, who do you think you are to disagree with this man who of course knows what's best for you?" throughout the system, and a lot of people outside of it have assimilated that. Way too many people have died or suffered permanent injury because of this "doctors are gods" complex (Michael Neary caesarean hysterectomies, symphysiotomy etc) and though things have changed a bit, there's a lot further to go there.

Oh very much so, on the other hand it's one of the safest countries in the world to give birth in(IIRC Dublin is the safest city in the world to give birth in). Hopefully it was partially a backlash to the sometimes pure criminal way women were treated here by some in the medical profession in the past. More women becoming doctors certainly helped. Some of the dinosaurs are still out there, but luckily they're going extinct.

Morag

All the floodgates and slippery slope shíte annoys me, we already have the same abortion rate per capita as other eu countries, 12 women a day travel to the UK for abortion.

The X case legislation which should have been put in place 20 years ago won't cover most of those women, most of them will still have to travel. The legislation will not be liberal or progressive and won't provide the right to an abortion which most irish people agree with, that is for the life and health of the woman and in cases of rape, incest and fatal fetal abnormalities.

All of the horrible rhetoric we are hearing as a goal of stigmatising abortion, women who have had them, those who want more rights then the x case legislation will allow.

They don't want us to be accepting of women who have had an abortion or who may want one or want that option or choice to be available for them and others for any reason.

We know that at least 150,000 Irish women have traveled to the UK to have an abortion, that is enough to fill the Aviva Stadium 3 times. If women start coming forward and breaking the taboo then things have to change and they can't talk about us in the same way and their lies will be shown up to be what they are.

Lingua Franca

Morag wrote: »

We know that at least 150,000 Irish women have traveled to the UK to have an abortion, that is enough to fill the Aviva Stadium 3 times.

Or enough to fill up Merrion Square South 5 times.

Balmed Out

rainbow kirby wrote: »

There tends to be a pretty overwhelming attitude of "Shut up little woman, who do you think you are to disagree with this man who of course knows what's best for you?" throughout the system, and a lot of people outside of it have assimilated that.

As a man who has had reason to spend time in the system Id have to say that most younger doctors seem to be women and men can be practically treated like babies being called pet, hun, you poor thing repeatedly. I think yere reading too much into this. Id nearly say consultants are the only ones without the bull but mainly because their so eager to say next.

Wibbs

Morag wrote: »

We know that at least 150,000 Irish women have traveled to the UK to have an abortion, that is enough to fill the Aviva Stadium 3 times.

Slight aside M, how did they come up with that figure? If it was a survey, then I'd defo say that figure is higher. I personally know of two women who went to the UK and I really doubt they ticked a box on a survey. One has effectively erased the whole experience from her life narrative(considering the circumstances around it I can well understand why too).

Morag

150,000 that is the number of women who have had abortions in UK clinics/hospitals and who have given an Irish address on the forms they have to fill out, it is collated and reported by BPAS, it's the only hard number we currently have.

That does not include Irish women who gave a friends UK address, or those who went to Holland, Prague, Sweden, or those who have imported and taken the abortion pill.

So yes it could be a quarter of a million Irish women have had abortions over the last 30 years but we only have the hard number of 150,000.

http://www.ifpa.ie/Hot-Topics/Abortion/Statistics

http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsStatistics/DH_099285

Wibbs

I forgot about the pill, so I can add another two to my personal list and one of the previously mentioned put a UK address down on the forms so... yea well over that official figure I'd say.

seenitall

Wibbs wrote: »

One has effectively erased the whole experience from her life narrative(considering the circumstances around it I can well understand why too).

Hm. Based on an abortion experience thread in here from last year, I wouldn't be surprised if many, many Irish women have 'erased the experience of abortion from their life narrative'. Some of the most pertinent 'circumstances around it' being the incredible level of stigma and judgment in this society toward these women, either explicitly or implicitly expressed.

Which is all part of a big vicious circle of secrecy and society's mores-induced guilt, which sadly then serve to perpetuate those prescribed 'morals' even further, and we're back to square one of the pain and secrecy of a woman's situation.

The young women of Ireland, in the years and decades to come, will be the ones driving the change of public opinion of women as god-given incubators for men's babies, 'little women', and the correspondent, general, deeply ingrained condescension toward women that is obvious in most institutional structures in Ireland, such as HSE, and as enshrined by the Catholic Church.

They will have to be the ones; they will have to fight for the reproductive rights that women all over Europe are lucky enough to be taking for granted, because no one is going to hand them to them in this country.

I am hopeful that they will succeed , even though I'd say that's still a couple of decades in the future.

PS. My Irish hospital experience: at times I was treated as no more than a petulant 5-year old, and I am not exaggerating here. From being literally shushed at by a nurse when I had the temerity to shout out in pain ("Ssshhh, no screeching!"), to being outright lied to about the next step of a procedure, just in order to placate me and shut me up. Somehow I have a difficulty in imagining a man being treated the same; but maybe I'm wrong? It would be interesting to know.

lazygal

seenitall wrote: »

PS. My Irish hospital experience: at times I was treated as no more than a petulant 5-year old, and I am not exaggerating here. From being literally shushed at by a nurse when I had the temerity to shout out in pain ("Ssshhh, no screeching!"), to being outright lied to about the next step of a procedure, just in order to placate me and shut me up. Somehow I have a difficulty in imagining a man being treated the same; but maybe I'm wrong? It would be interesting to know.

I definitely felt like I was being treated like a child at times. I am always organised and had my hospital bags packed to perfection, baby's clothes all ready to go in little bags with a full change and nappies in each one. Midwives constantly referred to the fact I wouldn't be long being all over the place, that I'd be in a heap when I got home. Never happened. I also had a really bossy midwife tell me to put a hat on my baby, she HATED hats, still does, so I said this and she rolled her eyes and told me I had a lot to learn. I also got the 'don't you worry about this, we know what we're doing' line when I queried something, and I was in the right.

Morag

seenitall wrote: »

Hm. Based on an abortion experience thread in here from last year, I wouldn't be surprised if many, many Irish women have 'erased the experience of abortion from their life narrative'. Some of the most pertinent 'circumstances around it' being the incredible level of stigma and judgment in this society toward these women, either explicitly or implicitly expressed.

Which is all part of a big vicious circle of secrecy and society's mores-induced guilt, which sadly then serve to perpetuate those prescribed 'morals' even further, and we're back to square one of the pain and secrecy of a woman's situation.

The young women of Ireland, in the years and decades to come, will be the ones driving the change of public opinion of women as god-given incubators for men's babies, 'little women', and the correspondent, general, deeply ingrained condescension toward women that is obvious in most institutional structures in Ireland, such as HSE, and as enshrined by the Catholic Church.

They will have to be the ones; they will have to fight for the reproductive rights that women all over Europe are lucky enough to be taking for granted, because no one is going to hand them to them in this country.

I am hopeful that they will succeed , even though I'd say that's still a couple of decades in the future.

I don't think it will be decades, having been at a number of large meetings over the last 6 months there are women in their 40s, 50s and 60s who are involved and who are getting involved. Women speaking at meetings and saying I want better for my daughter or my grand daughter.

I myself am in my late 30s and I by no means part of the older demographic.

Many of these women are coming around to being able to say "I had an abortion".

seenitall

Morag wrote: »

I don't think it will be decades, having been at a number of large meetings over the last 6 months there are women in their 40s, 50s and 60s who are involved and who are getting involved. Women speaking at meetings and saying I want better for my daughter or my grand daughter.

I myself am in my late 30s and I by no means part of the older demographic.

Many of these women are coming around to being able to say "I had an abortion".

Good to know, Morag. I really hope you're right!

lazygal

Morag wrote: »

I don't think it will be decades, having been at a number of large meetings over the last 6 months there are women in their 40s, 50s and 60s who are involved and who are getting involved. Women speaking at meetings and saying I want better for my daughter or my grand daughter.

I myself am in my late 30s and I by no means part of the older demographic.

Many of these women are coming around to being able to say "I had an abortion".

I was on a march in the wake of the death of Savita and my husband and friends were really surprised to see the older women and men who turned out. Gave us a lot of hope the winds of change are truly blowing.

CaraMay

A midwife or a nurse on the maternity ward?

I found they gave me conflicting advice in hospital depending on who you were talking to but I would never have allowed them patronize me like that?

With regard the view that the whole world judges women who have abortions, I always note from these threads that the 'pro-choice' movement have a George Bush attitude of 'you're either with us, or against us'. Firstly not everyone cares that women get abortions, some care a lot and think its murder and some understand but would do not it themselves. Im sure all views are covered by the many non 'pro-choice' people on the planet.

I think the 'pro-choice' movement is the most judgmental of all and especially on boards as anyone who dares not agree with abortion is generally lambasted by those who do.

lazygal

CaraMay wrote: »

A midwife or a nurse on the maternity ward?

I found they gave me conflicting advice in hospital depending on who you were talking to but I would never have allowed them patronize me like that?

A midwife who was dealing with me, a nurse on the maternity ward and a couple of doctors all had a superior attitude. I found the same when I had to have a colposcopy a few months after giving birth. Any questions or concerns I had were totally deflected by the young male doctor who had no interest in engaging with me and made it clear he just wanted to get on and do the procedure, sighing when I said it was too painful and not really giving me any information on aftercare. The nurse who happened to be there too was very helpful.

CaraMay

That's terrible lazygal. Maybe a small element if it can be put down to time constraints due to cutbacks but basic manners and respect should not go out the window.

CaraMay

CaraMay wrote: »

I think the 'pro-choice' movement is the most judgmental of all and especially on boards as anyone who dares not agree with abortion is generally lambasted by those who do.

The first poster on this thread to do any lambasting was a prolifer who came in and called her a liar, so no, I quite disagree

CaraMay

bluewolf wrote: »

The first poster on this thread to do any lambasting was a prolifer who came in and called her a liar, so no, I quite disagree

Sorry should have been clearer - Not this thread - previous abortion related threads.

Morag

Worst encounter I had was my first booking in appointment.
I was just under 25 ( looked younger) unmarried and as part giving my comlpete history told the midwife doing my paper work I had a surgical abortion.

She froze and the other midwife in the room was a nun, which I didn't know at the time and I got lectured about how I was at risk and this child I now carried was at risk due to me having had an abortion. I told her to stop talking at me and asked her to leave the room if she could not be professional and that she should pray for compassion.

When I went to the pre natal class, I was sent to a special one for you guessed it young unmarried mothers and the whole tone was, well you were stupid enough to get pregnant let's hope you stay healthy and can manage to keep the baby alive.

Half way through the nun walked in to take over, I left.
That was 15 years ago, I'd like to think things have moved on from then.


Second booking in appointment there were two midwives in training who were doing it supervised by a matron, you have to give your history again, despite the hospital already having a file. Again I disclosed my full history and as soon as I said the word abortion the matron interrupted and said she could complete my history and the two midwives of placement could go, I asked that they didn't as they would see women like me and would have to be professional and a full medical history is important, so they stayed and both of them had no problem making eye contact with me and said thank you to me afterwards.

CaraMay

Morag, pardon my question but what is a booking in appointment? Sorry if its a dumb question

pwurple

Well, in fairness, sometimes people giving birth for the first time can have some unrealistic expectations. My birth plan was fairly simple, 'no gas please it makes me puke, but I'll take other pain relief'. This was read and adhered to. i was spoken to with respect and told what was going on at all points. I am delighted with both the safe birth and our healthy child. I did encounter a snotty midwife on the wards, but the rest were fantastic professional people.

My friends thought my birth plan was silly, and didn't have enough choices made on what I did and didn't want in various scenarios, but honestly, I had never done it before and I wanted to take full advantage of the vastly experienced people available to help me, rather than limiting what they could do.

I have seen some completely impractical birth plans that included what music be played as the child exited the birth canal, and what sort of yoga-like position they wanted to be in for it, so I understand how anyone can get a bit flippant about that sort of thing. Being shhsed is way out of line though, very unprofessional, no matter what the circumstances.

CaraMay is on the button there about there being many shades of pro-choice, and pro-life. There is judgementalism on both sides.

seenitall

CaraMay wrote: »

A midwife or a nurse on the maternity ward?

I found they gave me conflicting advice in hospital depending on who you were talking to but I would never have allowed them patronize me like that?

LOL. Yes, I'm sure you would have been well able to stand up for yourself while on your back crying out in pain during an invasive procedure, and whilst dependent for your care on a person who is dismissing you like a child. Or you would have known right away when a medical professional is patronising you by lying to your face just in order to get rid of your concerns, you would have seen through them double-quick and 'never allowed it'. :rolleyes:

Morag

CaraMay wrote: »

Morag, pardon my question but what is a booking in appointment? Sorry if its a dumb question

The first appointment you have when you go to the maternity hospital, when you are pregnant, they start your file then, take a history all your details and the first rounds of blood works and book you in as being a patient of that hospital.

CaraMay

seenitall wrote: »

LOL. Yes, I'm sure you would have been well able to stand up for yourself while on your back crying out in pain during an invasive procedure, and whilst dependent for your care on a person who is dismissing you like a child. Or you would have known right away when a medical professional is patronising you by lying to your face just in order to get rid of your concerns, you would have seen through them double-quick and 'never allowed it'. :rolleyes:

There is no need to be so aggressive and sarky. I am entitled to a viewpoint too and have regularly called people on patronizing comments and bad manners as I am doing to you now.

Malari

seenitall wrote: »

LOL. Yes, I'm sure you would have been well able to stand up for yourself while on your back crying out in pain during an invasive procedure, and whilst dependent for your care on a person who is dismissing you like a child. Or you would have known right away when a medical professional is patronising you by lying to your face just in order to get rid of your concerns, you would have seen through them double-quick and 'never allowed it'. :rolleyes:

You are being patronising to another poster here, while also complaining about being treated condesendingly!

seenitall

CaraMay wrote: »

There is no need to be so aggressive and sarky. I am entitled to a viewpoint too and have regularly called people on patronizing comments and bad manners as I am doing to you now.

And I've regularly called people on their BS; and as that's what I've done in that post, it's no surprise you didn't take it so well.

philologos

bluewolf wrote: »

The first poster on this thread to do any lambasting was a prolifer who came in and called her a liar, so no, I quite disagree

I didn't actually.

I said anyone who argues that being pro-life is anti-woman is lying. The OP has said this wasn't her intention.

jaffacakesyum

philologos wrote: »

I didn't actually.

I said anyone who argues that being pro-life is anti-woman is lying. The OP has said this wasn't her intention.

It is anti-woman in my opinion regardless of the gender of the pro-lifer.

Pro-life basically believe a woman shouldn't have the right to control her own body. That sounds pretty anti-woman to me. Same if men weren't allowed rights to their own body, that would be anti-male.

Lingua Franca

pwurple wrote: »

Well, in fairness, sometimes people giving birth for the first time can have some unrealistic expectations. My birth plan was fairly simple, 'no gas please it makes me puke, but I'll take other pain relief'. This was read and adhered to...
I have seen some completely impractical birth plans that included what music be played as the child exited the birth canal, and what sort of yoga-like position they wanted to be in for it, so I understand how anyone can get a bit flippant about that sort of thing. Being shhsed is way out of line though, very unprofessional, no matter what the circumstances.

I don't think anyone is griping because they were playing Maire Brennan instead of Enya when the baby was born or that they weren't allowed to give birth in a pool in the lotus position.

In my case the midwife broke my waters before my husband arrived despite me begging her to wait, ordered an epidural for me because I went into such pain that I couldn't speak or let her touch me and let me get an epidural without first examining me to see how far I was dilated. As it turned out I was fully dilated and baby was on his way out. I'd had the epidural so late that it stopped my labour, so she took that cue to go for lunch and when she came back an hour later she had to bring in a doctor to give me an episiotomy and pull my son out with forceps, leaving him with an elongated head topped with a spectacular blood bruise for several weeks. That's not to mention the dismissive and patronising way in she spoke to me "I don't know what you're complaining for, women do this everyday without crying" being one example. I was also shhhed, and tutted at, and had eye rolls. My notes, when I saw them, were not of my experience. Things absent, things added. I did complain but I'd been one of her last patients as she worked two more days there and then left for a job in England, which may explain why she absolute didn't care.

I've seen a lot of ladies here and elsewhere giving off about the inaccuracy of their medical notes. I believe there was a thread here very recently asking about how women's medical notes related to their experience.

I've also had the pleasure of being cared for by really wonderful, caring, professional women and I believe that most of them are. But there historically there has been a strong element of "little ladies don't know what's best for them" running through the medical profession. Hopefully that is coming to an end.

seenitall

Malari wrote: »

You are being patronising to another poster here, while also complaining about being treated condesendingly!

Oh you're right, maybe I should apologise; only I've no intention of doing so as I've had it up to here of being patronised, whether directly by a nurse or indirectly by a "eh if it were me, I wouldn't have stood for it, pffft".

paperclip2

Just on the ante-natal care, a friend of mine had her son at 18 and during one of her final check-up appointments asked that it be noted she wanted an epidural during delivery.
The midwife responded with
'What! You can't be saying that now. That's like booking a panadol for a headache you might have!'

Morag

seenitall wrote: »

LOL. Yes, I'm sure you would have been well able to stand up for yourself while on your back crying out in pain during an invasive procedure, and whilst dependent for your care on a person who is dismissing you like a child. Or you would have known right away when a medical professional is patronising you by lying to your face just in order to get rid of your concerns, you would have seen through them double-quick and 'never allowed it'. :rolleyes:

Most of the books and papers which the foundation of modern obstetrics has been based on were done during a time when 'twilight births' were all the fashion. That women would not remember a thing during the birth as they were doped out of it they started in germany and then spread to the usa.

http://www.ourbodiesourselves.org/book/companion.asp?id=21&compID=75

A series of events between 1910 and 1920 set the stage for doctors to usurp the traditional role of the midwife and laid the foundation for a pathology-oriented medical model of childbirth in this country. Two reports on medical education, published in 1910 and 1912, concluded that America’s obstetricians were poorly trained. To improve obstetrics training, one report recommended hospitalization for all deliveries and the gradual abolition of midwifery. Rather than consult with midwives, the report argued, poor women should attend charity hospitals, which would serve as sites for training doctors.

Just two years later, in 1914, “twilight sleep” was introduced. Twilight sleep was induced through a combination of morphine, for relief of pain, and scopolamine, an amnesiac that caused women to have no memories of giving birth. Upper-class women initially welcomed it as a symbol of medical progress, although its negative effects were later publicized.

In 1915, Dr. Joseph DeLee, author of the most important obstetric textbook of that period, described childbirth as a pathologic process that damages both mothers and babies “often and much.” He said that if birth were properly viewed as a destructive pathology rather than as a normal function, “the midwife would be impossible even of mention.” In the first issue of the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, DeLee proposed a sequence of interventions designed to save women from the “evils natural to labor.” The interventions included routine use of sedatives, ether, episiotomies, and forceps.

It was the 1970s before there was a shift away from those policies in the USA and the UK and due to the influence of the RC church on the maternity hospitals here it is only recently we are seeing changes in policies here with the domino scheme but so much of what is in modern birthing plans are just not possible in our hospitals due to restrictive polices and lack of resources for example it is not possible to have a waterbirth in any hospital in the country.

And this is the country that left Micheal Neary go unchecked for so long
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Neary_%28surgeon%29


and the women who were given Symphysiotomies are still waiting for justice.
http://www.thejournal.ie/symphysiotomy-survivors-gather-to-recount-stories-of-torture-673113-Nov2012/

Marie O’Connor, chairperson of SOS, describes symphysiotomy as “arguably the biggest human rights scandal in Ireland since the foundation of the State”.

“Survivors have been seeking truth and justice for over a decade. Successive governments have stonewalled, forcing our members to resort to the courts.

“These were covert, if not clandestine, operations – performed without consent – but taking a [legal] case over surgery done 50 years ago is fraught with difficulty. Setting aside the statute bar would enable all survivors to get their cases off the starting blocks, without being stymied by long running procedural battles.

“The Chairperson of SOS emphasised that the law needed to change to allow all survivors ready access to the courts. ‘The government must now lift the statute bar. While many cases are being taken against private hospitals, all of these operations were done on the State’s watch.

“The courts must be allowed to determine the truth in a timely manner. Protecting the reputation of deceased doctors should not be allowed to take precedence over the rights of living survivors. Most are in their 70s and 80s: time is not on their side.”

I know that most of the staff in our maternity hospitals today are there to look after women and to be professional but it can take a long time to undo the attitude and polices of intuitions but seeing that we now have Masters like Dr Rhona Mahony give me hope.

Whispered

pwurple wrote: »

CaraMay is on the button there about there being many shades of pro-choice, and pro-life. There is judgementalism on both sides.

I think this is true. I don't know if I would be considered pro-life or pro-choice. I would be pro-choice in certain circumstances only and have been told, quite curtly, that that means I'm not really pro-choice and how dare I call myself pro-choice when I'm not etc.

I think that pro-life people are often dismissed as being anti-women. Another thing I notice a lot is that people assume that being pro-life is based on religious reasons. For a lot of people this is not the case at all.

lazygal

philologos wrote: »

I didn't actually.

I said anyone who argues that being pro-life is anti-woman is lying. The OP has said this wasn't her intention.

Don't dare put words in my mouth. You have made your anti women stance clear on numerous occasions. You stick to your scripture and let the rest of us have a real discussion.

philologos

lazygal wrote: »

Don't dare put words in my mouth. You have made your anti women stance clear on numerous occasions. You stick to your scripture and let the rest of us have a real discussion.

I'm not anti-woman, that's the point. Neither are many many others who oppose abortion-by-choice.

If anything that's putting words into my mouth. Give me examples if you're going to make an absurd claim like that

pwurple

Lingua Franca wrote: »

I don't think anyone is griping because they were playing Maire Brennan instead of Enya when the baby was born or that they weren't allowed to give birth in a pool in the lotus position.

In my case the midwife broke my waters before my husband arrived despite me begging her to wait, ordered an epidural for me because I went into such pain that I couldn't speak or let her touch me and let me get an epidural without first examining me to see how far I was dilated. As it turned out I was fully dilated and baby was on his way out. I'd had the epidural so late that it stopped my labour, so she took that cue to go for lunch and when she came back an hour later she had to bring in a doctor to give me an episiotomy and pull my son out with forceps, leaving him with an elongated head topped with a spectacular blood bruise for several weeks. That's not to mention the dismissive and patronising way in she spoke to me "I don't know what you're complaining for, women do this everyday without crying" being one example. I was also shhhed, and tutted at, and had eye rolls. My notes, when I saw them, were not of my experience. Things absent, things added. I did complain but I'd been one of her last patients as she worked two more days there and then left for a job in England, which may explain why she absolute didn't care.

I've seen a lot of ladies here and elsewhere giving off about the inaccuracy of their medical notes. I believe there was a thread here very recently asking about how women's medical notes related to their experience.

I've also had the pleasure of being cared for by really wonderful, caring, professional women and I believe that most of them are. But there historically there has been a strong element of "little ladies don't know what's best for them" running through the medical profession. Hopefully that is coming to an end.

What an awful experience. So sorry this person had anything to do with being a midwife. I have never experienced that kind of thing myself. I did have an epidural top-up when I was fully dilated too though, and it made no difference to my pushing, baby was out 20 minutes later, no forceps. Everyone is different. Diving in and breaking the waters without permission though, that's not right.

I have seen what you mean with my grandfather too. He is ill. The 'carer' didn't realise I had let myself into the house and was shouting at my grandad to get up and stop messing. He spoke to him like he was a naughty child. I was horrified and told him to show some respect.

I experienced something similar during a miscarriage, when the doctor and midwife were discussing scan measurements and terms I wasn't familiar with. I asked what they were talking about and what the terms meant, and they said, 'the baby' and turned back to talk to eachother.

My point is, it's not necessarily being female, but being The Patient that has us sometimes experiencing condescension through some parts of the medical profession. I suppose with abortions, the patient is always female.

lazygal

philologos wrote: »

I'm not anti-woman, that's the point. Neither are many many others who oppose abortion-by-choice.

You are anti women. Nothing about your concern for a foetus over adult women, based on a 2,000 year old book and your constant evangelism on behalf of a male deity, suggests otherwise. How many born women have you helped with a crisis pregnancy?

philologos

lazygal wrote: »

You are anti women. Nothing about your concern for a foetus over adult women, based on a 2,000 year old book and your constant evangelism on behalf of a male deity, suggests otherwise. How many born women have you helped with a crisis pregnancy?

Which is laughable for afforementioned reasons. Many women are pro-life. Many of those who are aborted are female and some specifically because they are female. Abortion by choice facilitates gendercide which has even taken place in Britain.

If you want to meet people who are genuinely anti-women try asking the people who have aborted a child just because it was female.

Lingua Franca

pwurple wrote: »

I experienced something similar during a miscarriage, when the doctor and midwife were discussing scan measurements and terms I wasn't familiar with. I asked what they were talking about and what the terms meant, and they said, 'the baby' and turned back to talk to eachother.

Ack! As if it was none of your business what was going on! I'm sorry for your loss, by the way.

My point is, it's not necessarily being female, but being The Patient that has us sometimes experiencing condescension through some parts of the medical profession. I suppose with abortions, the patient is always female.

I guess so, I had Neary and his ilk in mind during my rant as well as my own first midwife and was thinking more in general terms of gynaecology and obstetrics rather than just abortion and I wasn't thinking of other groups of people who have been patronised or bullied or dismissed by medical staff. I know there's a lot of problems with carers for the elderly treating them like naughty toddlers and talking to them like they are babies, for example.

lazygal

philologos wrote: »

Which is laughable for afforementioned reasons. Many women are pro-life. Many of those who are aborted are female and some specifically because they are female. Abortion by choice facilitates gendercide which has even taken place in Britain.

If you want to meet people who are genuinely anti-women try asking the people who have aborted a child just because it was female.

More guff. Your scripture provides you with some pretty laughable opinions. How many women with crisis pregnancies have you helped? Are women who abort foetuses incompatible with life wrong to do so? When you get pregnant, I'll be sure to tell you what to do with your body.n

matrim

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

It is anti-woman in my opinion regardless of the gender of the pro-lifer.

Pro-life basically believe a woman shouldn't have the right to control her own body. That sounds pretty anti-woman to me. Same if men weren't allowed rights to their own body, that would be anti-male.

I hate this argument.

The core of all abortions arguments is when do you think human life begins. After that point it's not just the life of the mother to consider. Yes, if medically necessary for the health of the mother there should be a choice, and personally I'd be in favour of any abortion up to about 12 - 16 weeks. But after whatever point people decide life begins there are 2 people to consider

Should a 7 months pregnant woman be allowed to say "I'm sick of being pregnant, cut the baby out of me" even thought there is no medical reason to do it? At 7 months the baby will likely live but being born so early will likely damage it's health.

The law is full of cases where one persons right to do something is withdrawn because doing that thing will damage other peoples health / well-being. This is just another an extention of that. The fact that it only effects women doesn't make it anti-woman it just means that physically women are the only one's that can give birth