8th Amendment

Zubeneschamali

From the time of her admission, up to the morning of the 24th of October - the clinical management plan for the patient centred on the approach to “await events” and to monitor the fetal heart in case an accelerated delivery mig
ht be possible once the fetal heart stopped. Awaiting events is clinically appropriate provided it is not a risk to the mother or the fetus.

Appropriate monitoring and evaluation of the changing clinical presentation with appropriate clinical investigations would likely have lead to reconsideration of the need to expedite delivery. Monitoring and adherence to guidelines for the prompt and effective management of sepsis would likely have helped to prevent rapid deterioration of the patient.

Delaying adequate treatment including expediting delivery in a clinical situation where there is prolonged rupture of the membranes and increasing risk to the mother can, on occasion, be fatal.

Black Menorca

Huntergonzo wrote: »

What's truly low is that you would clearly rather see more deaths like that of Savita than rights to protect these women so you should admit as much. What's your main issue with abortion anyway, do you not believe women should have control over their own bodies?

If Savita has proper due care and attention, shoe would never have died.

I have an aversion to killing unborn babies and do not want Ireland to turn into another abortion ridden country like our neighbours.

Black Menorca

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

There is no other way to summarise yesterday’s main testimony to the Savita Halappanavar inquest other than that, in the view of an expert witness, restrictive Irish abortion laws cost Ms Halappanavar her life.
Dr Peter Boylan’s statement that Ms Halappanavar would most likely be with us today if she’d been given a termination earlier may be just an opinion, but it is the opinion of one of the most eminent obstetricians in the State.
As the former master and current clinical director of the National Maternity Hospital, with extensive professional experience in the UK and US as well as Ireland, Dr Boylan clearly has vast experience.

Ahhh, now you're quoting Boylan. So you now accept that nowhere in the three reports was an abortion cited as a justified action in the circumstances?

Icepick

am946745 wrote: »

So basically some child should not have rights.. We should change our constition so that there wont be equality for all children? Gay rights fine...baby no.

Embryos, especially if they are not viable, are not children. And women don't want to kill children. Abortion is a very personal and unfortunate decision for those involved, not to mention a serious health concern that affects you mentally and physically.
And show me how forcing women to go abroad is morally superior to providing health care here.

Black Menorca

Icepick wrote: »

Embryos, especially if they are not viable, are not children. And women don't want to kill children. Abortion is a very personal and unfortunate decision for those involved, not to mention a serious health concern that affects you mentally and physically.
And show me how forcing women to go abroad is morally superior to providing health care here.

No one is forced to have an abortion.

However Ireland has decided not to accommodate the killing of unborn babies. If then, the choice is made to go abroad, tragically there is nothing we can do.

But selling out to the abortion industry is not an option and hopefully never will be.

Madd Finn

Gael23 wrote: »

Will we ever see a referendum to repeal this?

Oh hell yeah. Several in fact.

Gael23 wrote: »

Will we ever see a successful referendum to repeal this?

Much more difficult question. Unlike the last no-brainer pair of referenda, anything on this topic is genuinely controversial. Because there good strong arguments on both sides.

[Retreats to safe distance and dons tin hat]

Zubeneschamali

Black Menorca wrote: »

Ahhh, now you're quoting Boylan. So you now accept that nowhere in the three reports was an abortion cited as a justified action in the circumstances?

I'm not sure what report you are reading, I quoted the HSE report, executive summary, below. In case you still don't see it, "expedited delivery" is code for abortion.

Zubeneschamali

Black Menorca wrote: »

If then, the choice is made to go abroad, tragically there is nothing we can do.

If parents were taking 2 year old children to be euthanized abroad, there is a whole tonne of stuff the state could do. In fact, the Attorney General did use the 8th as a basis to stop an abortion abroad one time, you may have heard about it.

But we had a referendum to stop him doing it again, because no-one thinks abortion is murder, and no-one thinks an "unborn" is legally the same as a child.

Black Menorca

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If parents were taking 2 year old children to be euthanized abroad, there is a whole tonne of stuff the state could do. In fact, the Attorney General did use the 8th as a basis to stop an abortion abroad one time, you may have heard about it.

But we had a referendum to stop him doing it again, because no-one thinks abortion is murder, and no-one thinks an "unborn" is legally the same as a child.

Murder is your word.

ec18

nothing that is based on a religious belief should be enshrined in the constitution, Repealing the 8th makes for more scope in legislating for abortion at a legislative level. At the end of the day if some stranger that you don't know wants/needs/chooses to abort who is anyone to question their decision with blind rhetoric

Black Menorca

ec18 wrote: »

nothing that is based on a religious belief should be enshrined in the constitution, Repealing the 8th makes for more scope in legislating for abortion at a legislative level. At the end of the day if some stranger that you don't know wants/needs/chooses to abort who is anyone to question their decision with blind rhetoric

I oppose the deliberate killing of unborn babies and the Irish Statute Book and Constitution agree with me.

Zubeneschamali

Black Menorca wrote: »

Murder is your word.

IF an "unborn" actually has an equal right to life with the mother, the way the mad 8th amendment says, then we would be justified in handcuffing pregnant women to a prison bunk to stop them aborting. One of the Supreme Court justices said as much in his X case judgement, that even if we left the mother a physical and mental wreck, they would both be alive:

It has not been argued that the words "having regard to the equal right of life of the mother" should be construed more widely than preserving the life of the mother and should be construed to be wide enough to include a situation where the best expert opinion is to the effect that the continuance of the pregnancy would be to make the mother a physical wreck. I do not think the word "life" in this context is to be construed any differently from the word "life" in the earlier part of the same Article though the State would be obliged to do all it reasonably possibly can to take steps to prevent anybody becoming a physical or a mental wreck, short of taking innocent life to achieve it. Fortunately the Court does not have to decide this matter now but has to decide the matter in the context of a threat of suicide. Suicide threats can be contained. The duration of the pregnancy is a matter of months and it should not be impossible to guard the girl against self-destruction and preserve the life of the unborn child at the same time. The choice is between the certain death of the unborn life and a feared substantial danger of death but no degree of certainty of the mother by way of self-destruction

But actually, voters don't believe the 8th, were horrified by this interpretation, and voted to allow women to travel, and even to have access to baby-murdering information here in Ireland.

This is completely different to how actual baby-murder is treated.

Icepick

No Voter And Proud wrote: »

So therefore I am ignorant of the word ignorant, in addition to you being ignorant of the point I was making?

As a pro-life christian, anything that prevents even one harmless child from being killed is a positive in my eyes.

As opposed to a harmful child?

keane2097

Black Menorca wrote: »

I oppose the deliberate killing of unborn babies and the Irish Statute Book and Constitution agree with me.

Are you willing to say what you think the punishment should be for it so we can dispense with this slithering around with words that appears to be going on?

Black Menorca

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

IF an "unborn" actually has an equal right to life with the mother, the way the mad 8th amendment says, then we would be justified in handcuffing pregnant women to a prison bunk to stop them aborting. One of the Supreme Court justices said as much in his X case judgement, that even if we left the mother a physical and mental wreck, they would both be alive:

It has not been argued that the words "having regard to the equal right of life of the mother" should be construed more widely than preserving the life of the mother and should be construed to be wide enough to include a situation where the best expert opinion is to the effect that the continuance of the pregnancy would be to make the mother a physical wreck. I do not think the word "life" in this context is to be construed any differently from the word "life" in the earlier part of the same Article though the State would be obliged to do all it reasonably possibly can to take steps to prevent anybody becoming a physical or a mental wreck, short of taking innocent life to achieve it. Fortunately the Court does not have to decide this matter now but has to decide the matter in the context of a threat of suicide. Suicide threats can be contained. The duration of the pregnancy is a matter of months and it should not be impossible to guard the girl against self-destruction and preserve the life of the unborn child at the same time. The choice is between the certain death of the unborn life and a feared substantial danger of death but no degree of certainty of the mother by way of self-destruction

But actually, voters don't believe the 8th, were horrified by this interpretation, and voted to allow women to travel, and even to have access to baby-murdering information here in Ireland.

This is completely different to how actual baby-murder is treated.

The intentional taking of unborn life is a crime in this country. You be in denial of this fact if you wish.

But tell us. If its not a crime, how many babies were intentionally killed in the womb since X was legislated for?

Zubeneschamali

Black Menorca wrote: »

I oppose the deliberate killing of unborn babies and the Irish Statute Book and Constitution agree with me.

Why does the constitution explicitly allow that the right to life of the unborn does not affect a woman's right to travel or obtain abortion information?

In case you are not old enough to remember, we voted that into the constitution to stop the State defending the right to life of the unborn, as long as the abortions happen somewhere else.

keane2097

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Why does the constitution explicitly allow that the right to life of the unborn does not affect a woman's right to travel or obtain abortion information?

In case you are not old enough to remember, we voted that into the constitution to stop the State defending the right to life of the unborn, as long as the abortions happen somewhere else.

It's just a word game, you know the craic.

Zubeneschamali

Black Menorca wrote: »

But tell us. If its not a crime, how many babies were intentionally killed in the womb since X was legislated for?

You keep asking this, even though you have already been told that nobody knows. They really don't have to put a notice in the paper.

Black Menorca

keane2097 wrote: »

Are you willing to say what you think the punishment should be for it so we can dispense with this slithering around with words that appears to be going on?

I refer you to the X Legislation, it makes it very clear what the punishment can be maximised to.

Icepick

Glenman wrote: »

Life is precious from conception until natural death.

I hope you don't use antibiotics then.

Black Menorca

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Why does the constitution explicitly allow that the right to life of the unborn does not affect a woman's right to travel or obtain abortion information?

Because the Irish People amended the Constitution, enabling the right to travel. The People are Sovereign.

keane2097

Black Menorca wrote: »

I refer you to the X Legislation, it makes it very clear what the punishment can be maximised to.

Do you think people who take their kids abroad and kill them should be open to punishment when they come away home?

ec18

Black Menorca wrote: »

I oppose the deliberate killing of unborn babies and the Irish Statute Book and Constitution agree with me.

based on your belief, that i'm assuming life begins at conception? (Apologies if i'm wrong)

But based on your posts here, it's a very strong belief (incorrect for it to be enshrined in a Constitution). It's a terrible reflection of the power that the catholic church had in Ireland that such a amendment was ever proposed let alone passed.

I'm off to argue with a wall I have an inkling that the wall will be more willingly to listen to reason than you

Lux23

Black Menorca wrote: »

I oppose the deliberate killing of unborn babies and the Irish Statute Book and Constitution agree with me.

That is firmly held view and I respect that, but I would like the chance to vote on repealing the 8th amendment. It was put in a year after I was born and I don't think it has any relevance, 32 years later. Thousands of Irish women are travelling abroad to have abortions and with access to abortion pill on the internet, I don't see that it is fair to those women to keep the 8th in place.

I think it is funny that gay marriage and abortion are though of as similar issues. One is about two people falling in love and committing and the other is about ending a life/potential. Hugely different topics.

Black Menorca

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

You keep asking this, even though you have already been told that nobody knows. They really don't have to put a notice in the paper.

So as far as you know, not one unborn baby has been intentionally killed.

We'll go with that, given there's no evidence to the contrary.

Black Menorca

keane2097 wrote: »

Do you think people who take their kids abroad and kill them should be open to punishment when they come away home?

Yes, of course.

c_man

So is there any chance of something happening on this before the next general election?

Zubeneschamali

Black Menorca wrote: »

I refer you to the X Legislation, it makes it very clear what the punishment can be maximised to.

14 years. So that's 158,000 women since 1983 who should have been jailed for 14 years each for abortion. Say they serve 7 years with good behaviour, maybe 30,000 would be behind bars right now.

6 times our actual prison population - that's a pretty draconian place you live in, inside your head.

Black Menorca

ec18 wrote: »

based on your belief, that i'm assuming life begins at conception? (Apologies if i'm wrong)

But based on your posts here, it's a very strong belief (incorrect for it to be enshrined in a Constitution). It's a terrible reflection of the power that the catholic church had in Ireland that such a amendment was ever proposed let alone passed.

I'm off to argue with a wall I have an inkling that the wall will be more willingly to listen to reason than you

Give me the 8th and X legislation over an day, over abortion on request regimes in our near neighbours.

Huntergonzo

Black Menorca wrote: »

If Savita has proper due care and attention, shoe would never have died.

I have an aversion to killing unborn babies and do not want Ireland to turn into another abortion ridden country like our neighbours.

Correct, if she got due care = the abortion she needed then she probably would be alive today.

Listen abortions aren't ideal but fact of the matter is Irish women are going to have them whether you or anybody else has an aversion to them or not, but exporting then problem is not the way to deal with it.

Ps, why do you have an aversion to abortion?