Does anyone feel insulted by the abortion proposals?

From speaking to my female friends (mid twenties to early thirties), they are all in favour of legislating for cases of rape and foetal abnormality, and the vast majority are in favour of abortion by request within a reasonable time frame. I was particularly surprised by one who is very conservative and quite religious, but absolutely pro-choice.

I think it's easy for people in Ireland to 'default' to a so called pro-life position, which will only be questioned if they choose to educate themselves (based on hard facts), or if they or a loved one find themselves in the situation of needing an abortion.

I found this opinion piece by a Catholic priest quite interesting. It's a shame so few of them share his position.
http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/column-tony-flannery-catholic-church-abortion-897260-May2013/

inocybe

Insulted, and frustrated. First off I think that fatal abnormalities should have been first on the list for the government to sort out, i don't understand how anyone could be so cruel as to oppose those women being provided with an abortion in their own healthcare system.
The whole issue of suicide, rape etc is a waste of time. If someone is desperate enough to fake being suicidal, they're desperate enough to need an abortion. I look forward to the day when we can debate the only important issue to me, which is time limit.

wolfpawnat

shoos wrote: »

They basically haven't been following any of the news on abortion in Ireland, ever. Barely know Savita's name or story let alone what's been happening since. Yet they say they're pro-life and would vote against abortion. When I asked why they told me "because if I was pregnant, I'd keep it". Spent so long trying to explain to them that they already have that choice, but this is about other women and them being able to also make their own choice. Their faces were just blank, like they've literally never taken part in a discussion on it before, never given it any thought more than "well, I'd keep it sooo... no to abortion!".

And these are the voters that really worry me. Like they're just so ignorant on the issue, they have never, ever given thought to situations like - fetal abornormalties, miscarriages, incest, rape etc.

What rock have they been under? It is impossible not to hear about about abortion and the Savita case. I can't turn on the news anymore because I am so burned of the whole thing!

A lot of people I find, don't think of the extreme situations which is odd to me, because I thought of the things that could go wrong as opposed to the things that go right at first.

Flying Fox wrote: »

From speaking to my female friends (mid twenties to early thirties), they are all in favour of legislating for cases of rape and foetal abnormality, and the vast majority are in favour of abortion by request within a reasonable time frame.

I found this opinion piece by a Catholic priest quite interesting. It's a shame so few of them share his position.
http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/column-tony-flannery-catholic-church-abortion-897260-May2013/

There are some Catholic priests in the 21st Century, sadly they are the tiny minority.

I don't think I have met a person that would be deemed mentally sane that would not want it available in those cases.

And I find the Belfast model of the first 9 weeks is more popular than anything up to 24, though most people seem to accept the 20-24 week frame is when the fatal foetal abnormalities are recognised and diagnosed in many cases. I think people agree that though it is alive, but it is not developed enough for them to associate as human at that stage.

Sala

I have noticed a lot of the debate around this issue has been insulting to a whole range of people:

1) Women: for a wide range of reasons, but in particular listening to some people you would think that legislating for abortion will have women everywhere flocking for abortions as an alternative to contraception. As if we are idiots and think abortion is the "easy" option.

2) Doctors: We trust Doctors to make life and death decisions every day I don't see why this is any different. The initial suggestions that 6 Doctors would be required was also ridiculous - if your life is in danger and you require a termination it is most likely a fairly urgent situation and you'd be dead before they got 6 Doctors in a public hospital to see you.

3) People with mental illnesses: There are ads on the radio and TV encouraging people to be aware of mental illness, to be open to talk about it and recognise it as no different to physical illnesses.. until the abortion issue comes into it and many people will accept abortion only where a woman's life is in danger from a physical illness and not mentally ill and suicidal

Morag

And the mental health issues which comes from being told you are expected to carry a fetus with fatal abnormalities to term, and those which arise from being left to slowly miscarry until there is no fetal heartbeat.

Sala

Morag wrote: »

And the mental health issues which comes from being told you are expected to carry a fetus with fatal abnormalities to term, and those which arise from being left to slowly miscarry until there is no fetal heartbeat.

Yes, because forcing women to suffer horribly to carry a fetus that will never survive is apparently showing respect for life!

username123

Morag wrote: »

And the mental health issues which comes from being told you are expected to carry a fetus with fatal abnormalities to term, and those which arise from being left to slowly miscarry until there is no fetal heartbeat.

Yes, presumably some women suffer from PTSD from such traumatic events?

And Berry Kielys perinatal hospices idea - I would be a complete basket case if I was subjected to that.

Neyite

username123 wrote: »

Yes, presumably some women suffer from PTSD from such traumatic events?

And Berry Kielys perinatal hospices idea - I would be a complete basket case if I was subjected to that.

Didnt the Magdalene laundries start out as a sort of perinatal hospice of sorts - well maybe not a hospice, but same idea. And shure, doing a bit of washing was only to help the poor wimmin take their mind off their plight I'm sure :rolleyes:

Clearly Kiely has given no thought to what women are supposed to do about their jobs, or their other children or any other commitments while they spend months in these hospices separated from their partners, their families their support systems, their home, surrounded by other women in the same situation.

Its a barbaric idea.

Sala

I was shocked by her suggestion. After everything that happened to women in this country she is willing to go on TV and suggest that instead of humanely ending the pregnancy of a woman carrying a fetus with a fatal abnormality we could send them off to some sort of institution to wait it out. Shows a complete lack of empathy and respect for the women and a delusional belief in the sanctity of life where that life is simply not possible.

Sala

lazygal wrote: »

I had a discussion on abortion with a group of women on Friday night. We're all mothers and there were no pro life/pro choice divides. We all said that being pregnant and giving birth has made us a lot more choice leaning and most of us felt Ireland's 'safest place in the world to have a baby' myth was just that, a total myth.

That's an interesting comment. A friend of mine recently gave birth in an Irish hospital. She is not Irish and was not long here when before she was due, so the issues we are discussing were not on her radar. However she commented afterwards that she felt the hospital staff in Ireland only care about the baby - she was in a lot of pain and suffering badly and every time she complained someone rushed over to check the baby and once satisfied the baby was ok they didn't bother with her

Sala

Sala wrote: »

I was shocked by her suggestion. After everything that happened to women in this country she is willing to go on TV and suggest that instead of humanely ending the pregnancy of a woman carrying a fetus with a fatal abnormality we could send them off to some sort of institution to wait it out. Shows a complete lack of empathy and respect for the women and a delusional belief in the sanctity of life where that life is simply not possible.

I also found it sickening that she spoke about the joyful few moments that a mother could have with her child. What on earth is beautiful about going through the agony of childbirth only to watch your child die? Presumably the child would be in terrible pain too, not only at birth but possibly in the latter stages of the pregnancy too. How is that in any way humane?

She then stated that other countries in Europe (other than ourselves and Malta) don't have a culture of respect for life. Unbelievable stuff.

These people don't care about pregnant women or their babies, all they care about is control.

eviltwin

Just out of interest does anyone know if perinatal hospices exist anywhere in the world? It just seems like such a crazy idea to put women away out of sight until their babies are born. Are they basing it on any actual experience or is this some kind of crazy they dreamt up all on their own?

Sala

I agree Flying Fox, she tried to paint it as if carrying the fetus full term had some sort of silver lining. I also hate the respect for life arguments that suggest a respect for life is merely prolonging and extending life at all costs.

Another thought struck me when reading that debate also. I am not a medical professional and have no knowledge in this regard, but I wonder if in certain cases of fatal abnormalities if carrying the fetus to full term and making it stronger would mean it would survive longer and therefore suffer more?

Sala

eviltwin wrote: »

Just out of interest does anyone know if perinatal hospices exist anywhere in the world? It just seems like such a crazy idea to put women away out of sight until their babies are born. Are they basing it on any actual experience or is this some kind of crazy they dreamt up all on their own?

Crazy idea to "put women away out of sight until their babies are born"?? We have a sad history of that!

eviltwin

She didn't seem to understand that for many women who have a termination for an abnormality they get the same time with their baby they would have if they went to term. They get to hold the baby, sleep with it in the room, take pictures, have footprints and handprints etc. Its actually encouraged that family get to come in and see the baby. But that is in the UK where they are far better at these kinds of things, here they probably would be put on a general ward with limited visit and no option to do anything they could in the UK.

stinkle

Flying Fox wrote: »

I also found it sickening that she spoke about the joyful few moments that a mother could have with her child. What on earth is beautiful about going through the agony of childbirth only to watch your child die? Presumably the child would be in terrible pain too, not only at birth but possibly in the latter stages of the pregnancy too. How is that in any way humane?

She then stated that other countries in Europe (other than ourselves and Malta) don't have a culture of respect for life. Unbelievable stuff.

These people don't care about pregnant women or their babies, all they care about is control.

I agree - I was baffled by her quote about getting "great comfort" from spending time with a dying baby. Maybe that was her friend's experience, but I couldn't imagine going through that - now maybe if you expected the child to be stillborn and they weren't it might be considered a "blessing", but that not universal. If anything it could be more traumatic if you braced yourself for the former situation. Not to mention the stress of wondering how much pain they might be suffering.

It's also incredibly simplistic of her to make out that it's a peaceful, comforting time. It may not be - anyone I know who's gone through it experienced a medical emergency situation and didn't spend much time with the baby as the medics were doing their best to help them to survive. There was no peaceful bonding until after no more could be done

stinkle

eviltwin wrote: »

She didn't seem to understand that for many women who have a termination for an abnormality they get the same time with their baby they would have if they went to term. They get to hold the baby, sleep with it in the room, take pictures, have footprints and handprints etc. Its actually encouraged that family get to come in and see the baby. But that is in the UK where they are far better at these kinds of things, here they probably would be put on a general ward with limited visit and no option to do anything they could in the UK.

so glad you posted this! the people I mentioned in my post above actually did get to do this thankfully (in Ireland) but they had the added stress of a dramatic birth and the baby being taken away (rightly so) so the medics could try their best. In the two cases I'm familar with, both babies were very much wanted and the complications were unforseen (not fatal foetal abnormalities). However, in such situations, why is it ok for the woman to go through this added stress when it could be handled more humanely, without subjecting her to a dramatic natural labour and most likely barely being able to see/touch the baby if it survives at all.

meeeeh

Somebody said that becoming a mother made them more pro choice. It was the opposite for me. I'm still pro choice but now I can emphasise with people that having an abortion might be emotionally draining for some. I still don't consider first trimester abortion/miscarriage overly taxing unless sociatal pressures trie to make it a big deal. I remember nurses tiptoeing around me and giving me brochures about counselling available to me after my first miscarriage in Ireland. I almost felt obliged to look more affected than I actually was when all I realy felt was relief that I'm still alive.

However once you get past feeling your baby move for me abortion becomes a lot harder. And what I find absolutely horrific is the thought of carrying a baby that you know won't survive. As someone said the plight of those people is for me the hardest. I'm not a fan of late therm abortions because in most cases you have plenty if time to make up your mind before but how can you be forced to carry a baby which you know won't survive. When every kick that would normally make you happy just forces you to deal with what is waiting for you at the end of your pregnancy. It's just torture and it's all for nothing.

eviltwin

stinkle wrote: »

so glad you posted this! the people I mentioned in my post above actually did get to do this thankfully (in Ireland) but they had the added stress of a dramatic birth and the baby being taken away (rightly so) so the medics could try their best. In the two cases I'm familar with, both babies were very much wanted and the complications were unforseen (not fatal foetal abnormalities). However, in such situations, why is it ok for the woman to go through this added stress when it could be handled more humanely, without subjecting her to a dramatic natural labour and most likely barely being able to see/touch the baby if it survives at all.

Listening to her talking about it she really seems to think a TFMR is just like a traditional abortion, its totally different. It makes me wonder if she has even bothered to talk to women who have been through it to listen to their experiences

meeeeh

I actually don't know if I'd want to see the baby after it. I'm one of those people who stick the head in the sand and pretend it's not happening. But that's just me.

The lack of emphaty in those matters just shows the close midedness of some people. It's like there is only one acceptable way of dealing with things and if you are outside of the norm you are some sort of a heartless freak.

Neyite

Its the sheer daily grind if you have to carry a pregnancy to term of people -everyone - from colleagues to shop assistants to complete strangers talking to you about your pregnancy because you are sporting a bump.

"how far along are ya?"
"is this your first?"
"d'ya know what yir havin"
"when are ya due?"
"are ya shure its not twins?"

But those kind of things were said to me almost daily. From all areas of my life. Strangers tried to pat my bump. And I was happy about my pregnancy. It was planned and very much wanted. I was proud about my bump but even then, babies, pregnancy and childbirth was ALL anyone ever seemed to want to talk to me about when I was pregnant. The last one was said to me several times, and trying to keep smiling when someone said it, when, unbeknownst to them, the pregnancy had started off as a twin one, and I miscarried one early was tough to hear.

So I can only imagine the sadness and misery that a woman who is pregnant with a non-viable foetus would have to endure with people constantly harping on about the pregnancy.

Frito

Unusually for me I composed a long post in response to meeeh's point about lack of empathy. Then I bledy timed out. I'll try again.

I recall facing a potential crisis pregnancy soon after becoming sexually active. It was due to failed contraception. I never had to stare in disbelief at a positive pregnancy test because I took the MAP, but how I agonised over taking those two pills! I had been staunchly pro-life up to that point, believed emergency contraception akin to abortion and I considered myself an empathic person. It took that experience to over-ride my 'thought experiment' on what I would do if it happened to me. Had emergency contraception failed, I would have had an abortion. And I probably would've agonised over that decision too. Nowadays, it's a no-brainer. If I wanted an abortion I would have one.

That 'agonising' was quite a profound and scary experience. It was basically my first step to becoming atheist. It wasn't just a question of 'is abortion right or wrong' but 'if abortion is right then everything I have believed up until now is potentially redundant'. So for me, to be pro-life was a validation of ALL my beliefs, not just the abortion issue. I think this might be a case for lots of people, not just those who reject abortion on religious grounds. And they may be highly empathic people, just the scale of the issue is enormous so it's easier to avoid it.

It's agonising now to think that should I face an unwanted pregnancy I will either have to travel, or lie to a bunch of medics about being suicidal - with whatever risk that may incur.

wolfpawnat

Flying Fox wrote: »

I also found it sickening that she spoke about the joyful few moments that a mother could have with her child. What on earth is beautiful about going through the agony of childbirth only to watch your child die? Presumably the child would be in terrible pain too, not only at birth but possibly in the latter stages of the pregnancy too. How is that in any way humane?

I am sure there are some women in a non-viable foetus situation that want to carry it to term, and that is fine for them. But as Eviltwin said, many women who decide to terminate get to spend time with their baby and form a bond, just rather than waiting months they get to decide themselves when it happens. But a hospice, that is just another insane comment regarding this whole matter.

ezra_pound

mel1 wrote: »

Sorry i completely disagree with you.
It is unaceptable IMO for someone to terminate a healthy baby just because they decide they didnt like the person that they accidently slept with without protection.

This has nothing, NOTHING to do with the new legislation.

lazygal

On phone so can't link. But nice to see FG want to make sure there won't be too many abortions to save lives and that the legislation can be changed if too many women need their lives saved.

Call me Al

lazygal wrote: »

On phone so can't link. But nice to see FG want to make sure there won't be too many abortions to save lives and that the legislation can be changed if too many women need their lives saved.

Trying to keep everyone happy, and in the process keeping nobody happy.

I wonder what they would do if the 4,000 women who travel suddenly turned up in a&e looking for assistance.

Obliq

Frito wrote: »

Unusually for me I composed a long post in response to meeeh's point about lack of empathy. Then I bledy timed out. I'll try again.

I recall facing a potential crisis pregnancy soon after becoming sexually active. It was due to failed contraception. I never had to stare in disbelief at a positive pregnancy test because I took the MAP, but how I agonised over taking those two pills! I had been staunchly pro-life up to that point, believed emergency contraception akin to abortion and I considered myself an empathic person. It took that experience to over-ride my 'thought experiment' on what I would do if it happened to me. Had emergency contraception failed, I would have had an abortion. And I probably would've agonised over that decision too. Nowadays, it's a no-brainer. If I wanted an abortion I would have one.

That 'agonising' was quite a profound and scary experience. It was basically my first step to becoming atheist. It wasn't just a question of 'is abortion right or wrong' but 'if abortion is right then everything I have believed up until now is potentially redundant'. So for me, to be pro-life was a validation of ALL my beliefs, not just the abortion issue. I think this might be a case for lots of people, not just those who reject abortion on religious grounds. And they may be highly empathic people, just the scale of the issue is enormous so it's easier to avoid it.

It's agonising now to think that should I face an unwanted pregnancy I will either have to travel, or lie to a bunch of medics about being suicidal - with whatever risk that may incur.

What a well thought out and insightful post Frito. I think this is exactly what is missing from the debate - the many, many people who are afraid to address the issue of "killing da baybees" for fear that compassion for others (thereby forming their own morals) might ultimately lead to having to question their entire belief system and where their own morals differ to those of their church.

ezra_pound

Call me Al wrote: »

Trying to keep everyone happy, and in the process keeping nobody happy.

I wonder what they would do if the 4,000 women who travel suddenly turned up in a&e looking for assistance.

The lives of those four thousand women is not in danger. Therefore if you want them to be allowed a legal abortion a referendum would be needed. FG cannot legislate unconstitutionally.

What do you want from the legislation?

tatabubbly

My sixteen year old cousin had a baby 2 weeks ago. She's not going back to school now, and even though the baby is gorgeous and wonderful, this event probably has ruined her life.

Due to her circumstances, I'm totally pro choice... its true what a previous poster said, in the hospital they don't care about you. She had to have 2 epidurals along with the damage she suffered down there, she hasn't been able to walk properly the last 2 weeks.. They gave her an antibiotic after and didnt give her any pain relief... So in this country were life is so sacred, my little cousin will probably have to fight for everything from here on in and it shouldnt have happened. She should of had a choice. As a country we need to teach young women how to care for their bodies and also that they have choices..

lazygal

ezra_pound wrote: »

The lives of those four thousand women is not in danger. Therefore if you want them to be allowed a legal abortion a referendum would be needed. FG cannot legislate unconstitutionally.

What do you want from the legislation?

How do you know not one of the women who travel for terminations faces a life threatening situation? I remind you the reason we are being forced to finally legislate at all is because a woman who's life was in danger, the C in the European case, wasn't able to get a straight answer on whether her life was in danger by being forced to remain pregnant - she wasn't able to get a termination here and travelled.

I think there are women, couples and families traveling every day of the week for life saving terminations - its just not talked about. I don't want life saving abortions to be capped at a certain number and then those after the cut off point have to fend for themselves. We don't cap medical interventions that save lives at a certain point, so why on earth would there be a review in the event 'too many' life saving terminations are too high in number?

Once again, the implication is that women in Ireland can't be trusted, especially if they are pregnant and in any kind of complex situation. And as a pregnant woman, I couldn't feel more patronised and belittled by nonsensical proposals. Do we limit the number of medically necessary c sections because there's too many and the women should just get on with it? Or the number of epidurals because the women should just get on with it?