Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Consultant 'refused abortion plea'

Options
1…91011121315»

Comments

  • Options
    #422
    otto_26
    Registered Users Posts: 518 ✭✭✭otto_26


    Seachmall wrote: »
    I'm not privy to the details of those cases. Are you?


    And the idea that nobody has been convicted under that law in the past which means nobody will in the future is silly.


    Laws should always be specific and comprehensive. This one isn't.

    Your right and in Ireland if the mother's life is at physical risk then termination is needed to be done. This is a case of the doctor not doing their job properly.


  • Options
    #423
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    otto_26 wrote: »
    So the doctor was at fault.

    It'd be a bit moronic to say the doctor was at fault for erring on the cautious side of the law.

    They shouldn't have to err on either side of the law. They law should have clear boundaries.

    You shouldn't need a law degree to be confident you're practicing medicine correctly.

    otto_26 wrote: »
    Your right and in Ireland if the mother's life is at physical risk then termination is needed to be done. This is a case of the doctor not doing their job properly.
    But who decides that? The doctor? But what about if there's an inquiry afterwards and a different doctor disagrees?

    There should be a method in place to ensure doctors are making the medically and legally sound decision, and that needs to be legislated.


  • Options
    #424
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    otto_26 wrote: »
    Thousands of successful terminations in Ireland when a mother's life was at risk without any problems? How does this show hospitals are not equipped?

    It's a case of doctor not doing their job properly.


    As I said - Unless you can cite specific instances and numbers thereof, its pointless throwing that in.

    The coroner has asked for the legal situation to be clarified.
    The first of the recommendations is that the Medical Council should lay out
    exactly when doctors can intervene to save the life of a mother.

    Coroner Dr Ciaran MacLoughlin had said this would provide clarity for
    patients and doctors.
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0419/382357-savita-halappanavar-inquest/


    The coming report from the HSE follows similar lines.


  • Options
    #425
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    otto_26 wrote: »
    This is a case of the doctor not doing their job properly.

    No, it's not.

    On the evidence the doctor was working on, there was not sufficient risk to the life of the mother to warrant a termination.
    This happened because the doctors received blood results too late, if they'd received the test that showed the infection sooner they could have treated the infection and saved the life of the mother.
    The fault here is in 2 places.

    1) The systems in place in the ward failed, bloods that were meant to be tested on the ward were sent to another lab and took too long to be seen by the doctor in charge, which lead to the infection spreading untreated.

    2) The law on the matter is too vague and dangerous. Dangerous in that it means doctors have to worry every time hey perform a termination that they might have to prove that the mothers life was in danger, if there is any doubt that the mothers life is in danger, a doctor in this country will be very slow to perform a termination, and I can't blame them for that.

    The reality is that from the law and the information she was working on, the consultant in charge felt there was nothing she could do. By the time she received the information needed to justify the termination, it was too late. It's a systematic failure, not a failure of the doctor.

    Blaming any one person it idiocy.


  • Options
    #426
    Flier
    Closed Accounts Posts: 345 ✭✭Flier


    otto_26 wrote: »
    It's legally allowed at all times when the mother's life is at physical risk i.e. (thousands of abortions when the mother's life was at risk been done in Ireland)

    This is a case of the doctor not doing their job properly, not laws.
    otto_26 wrote: »
    But the law states that if the mother's life is at risk then termination has to be done. It's the doctors job to understand when the mother's life is at risk. That's why I stated it's a case of the doctor not doing their job properly, not laws...

    How is it that thousands of terminations have been done in Ireland when the mother's life has been at risk without any problems? Why didn't the law affect them?
    otto_26 wrote: »
    That's the doctor's job to state?


    Otto, you're wrong. Look at the wording of the amendment. Read the supreme court judgement on the X case. Unfortunately, for all of us, it's just not a black and white issue.

    Technically, a mother's life is always at risk during pregnancy - it's a relatively dangerous time. Identifying the exact point where this risk becomes 'real and substantial' is difficult to impossible - it's a very non specific term. And therein lies the problem.


    Ash.J.Williams wrote: »
    Because doctors usually put common sense and professionalism before vague unrealistic laws

    A sensible and professional doctor will rightly, and is obliged to, practice medicine within the confines of the law, even when that law is vague, and even when common sense will suggest otherwise. It is a very easy and somewhat lazy solution to scapegoat the doctor in this case. There are a myriad of issues that have come to light that need to be dealt with and Dr Astbury's professionalism is not one of them.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #427
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    otto_26 wrote: »
    How is it that thousands of terminations have been done in Ireland when the mother's life has been at risk without any problems? Why didn't the law affect them?

    Thousands ????

    What is your source for that figure ?


  • Options
    #428
    gcgirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,044 ✭✭✭gcgirl


    It's around the 30 termination Mark a year but the woman's life has to bring in the Balance over 51% if your at 49% you won't get one so it's very unreliable because you simply can't really tell
    Peter Boylan was spot on this week just as Rhona o Mahoney back at the hearings


  • Options
    #429
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,136 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    otto_26 wrote: »
    That's the doctor's job to state?

    Well, you said
    otto_26 wrote: »
    It's legally allowed at all times when the mother's life is at physical risk i.e. (thousands of abortions when the mother's life was at risk been done in Ireland)

    This is a case of the doctor not doing their job properly, not laws.

    So which part of the law applies in this case. You did say they were legally allowed to. that means it has to be expressed in the law.


  • Options
    #430
    Loafing Oaf
    Registered Users Posts: 16,065 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    otto_26 wrote: »
    But the law states that if the mother's life is at risk then termination has to be done. It's the doctors job to understand when the mother's life is at risk. That's why I stated it's a case of the doctor not doing their job properly, not laws...

    How is it that thousands of terminations have been done in Ireland when the mother's life has been at risk without any problems? Why didn't the law affect them?

    As I have said before on here, there is a wall of silence round the details of practice in this area at Irish maternity hospitals, for entirely understandable reasons. It may be that other obstetricians adopt a definition of 'real and substantial risk' that stretches the meaning of that phrase to breaking point. But surely you can appreciate that is not a satisfactory situation either, forcing highly qualified professionals to commit 'mental reservations' just so they can do their job to the standard of their peers in other countries...And what happens if the patient encounters the one consultant who takes the unorthodox approach of adhering to the letter of the law?


  • Options
    #431
    Boombastic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,496 ✭✭✭Boombastic


    So many threads on abortion in AH, I'll just put this in this one


    Scotland
    Catholic midwives told they won't have to supervise staff taking part in abortions after winning court battle


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #432
    GCU Flexible Demeanour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,257 ✭✭✭GCU Flexible Demeanour


    Boombastic wrote: »
    So many threads on abortion in AH, I'll just put this in this one


    Scotland
    Catholic midwives told they won't have to supervise staff taking part in abortions after winning court battle
    Interesting case. I think the problem is how to accommodate a situation where large numbers of staff have an ethical objection. Pragmatically, if there's only a handful, you can envisage organising things so that everyone gets what they want.

    But I'd say there's no easy answers. And, at some level, I'd find it hard not to appreciate the position of someone who argued that their motivation for working in healthcare was to preserve life, and felt that was inconsistent with abortion.


  • Options
    #433
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    Boombastic wrote: »
    Scotland
    Catholic midwives told they won't have to supervise staff taking part in abortions after winning court battle

    "Christian soldiers told they won't have to soldier as they believe being forced to take a life is a violation of their human rights."

    "Jewish butchers told they won't have to butcher as they believe being forced to carve pork is a violation of their human rights."

    "Islamic underwear models told they won't have to model as they believe being forced to remove their burqas is a violation of their human rights."


    If your religion prevents you from doing your job then you should probably find a different job.


  • Options
    #434
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    Seachmall wrote: »
    If your religion prevents you from doing your job then you should probably find a different job.

    .....or a new religion......:pac:


Advertisement