The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Edward M

January wrote: »

What part is confusing I will try explain it better.

I thought going through the medical services was the best option.
I know the pill can be taken at home, but the way you said it it sounds like it should be nearly available at the chemist, no doc needed at all?

BabysCoffee

TerryDublin wrote: »

I feel the Government have not fully represented my view. I always planned to vote for repeal as I don't want any woman who needs an abortion unable to have one. But I am against abortion otherwise so what do I vote.

My sons fiance is pregnant and we all watched her first scan on DVD. So excited all of us. How could I vote for laws that would mean she could end their babys life. My grandchilds life. I know its so young so small but its still living you know. If she would want to do such a thing I would want her helped with why she would want to do this. If it was finance or fear of not coping. Help with these.

All around me my friends work people seem to be caught up in this but only from the view of the woman and her rights reproductive. The baby seems to be lost in all of this. Forgotten. Women have so much help with difficulties they face and I am happy for this but why is stopping the baby to live further seen so insignificant. I hope I am wrong and I can vote for repeal but not abortion as birth control only abnormalities rape etc.

Why would you think that your son's fiance would consider an abortion just because the 8th is repealed?

You do know that she could have an abortion right now? She could get on the plane to England or she could order pills online.

I presume she wouldn't do this because she is carrying a very wanted baby (as most are). The 8th being repealed will not change this.

captbarnacles

TerryDublin wrote: »

I feel the Government have not fully represented my view. I always planned to vote for repeal as I don't want any woman who needs an abortion unable to have one. But I am against abortion otherwise so what do I vote.

My sons fiance is pregnant and we all watched her first scan on DVD. So excited all of us. How could I vote for laws that would mean she could end their babys life. My grandchilds life. I know its so young so small but its still living you know. If she would want to do such a thing I would want her helped with why she would want to do this. If it was finance or fear of not coping. Help with these.

All around me my friends work people seem to be caught up in this but only from the view of the woman and her rights reproductive. The baby seems to be lost in all of this. Forgotten. Women have so much help with difficulties they face and I am happy for this but why is stopping the baby to live further seen so insignificant. I hope I am wrong and I can vote for repeal but not abortion as birth control only abnormalities rape etc.

Trust your daughter in law to make the right decision for herself and your son.

nice_guy80

it's spelled baulk

and I expect the Vote No 'bots' will be out in force from now on

January

Edward M wrote: »

I thought going through the medical services was the best option.
I know the pill can be taken at home, but the way you said it it sounds like it should be nearly available at the chemist, no doc needed at all?

Sorry you took me up wrong. Yes going through the medical services is the best option and an option that shouldn't be skipped. But people don't need two/three gp apps to complete the process. They don't need a waiting period between the GP appt and getting access to the pills. Even online you have to have a medical assessment and a doctor looks over it before you're approved.

pleas advice

January wrote: »

Even online you have to have a medical assessment and a doctor looks over it before you're approved.

What form does this assessment take? I actually am genuinely curious.

January

pleas advice wrote: »

What form does this assessment take? I actually am genuinely curious.

It asks estimated gestation, if you have an iud any known allergies if you've a heart condition if you've a doctor or hospital within a certain distance whether you're being forced into the abortion or not whether you are OK with having the abortion or if you're unsure etc. How many pregnancies you've had before if youve had an abortion before.if you've had an ultrasound or not (it is recommended but not mandatory just in case the pregnancy is ectopic)

Its not foolproof but if a doctor has any concerns they'll contact you for further information.

Its why I think having a consultation with a doctor is important.

Constabulary

What’s people’s here consensus, will the referendum pass or fail and by how much?

January

Constabulary wrote: »

What’s people’s here consensus, will the referendum pass or fail and by how much?

Pass. Hopefully by around 60/40 but I'll take anything once it passes.

amdublin

Constabulary wrote: »

What’s people’s here consensus, will the referendum pass or fail and by how much?

I think it will pass. I've really no idea how much by.

I want it to pass. I don't mind by how much or little

Oldtree

January wrote: »

Pass. Hopefully by around 60/40 but I'll take anything once it passes.

The same sex referendum had a relative drop in a red sea poll (from about this time) before the referendum to the result of 8.68%.

The current red Sea has yes at about 56% and if it was to follow a similar relative drop up to voting. then the yes would be around 51.14%. So I am going for 51% yes (possibly more) depending on how the undisideds vote, turnout, maby up as high as 56% yes is not inconceivable.

But there are far more undecided this time round at

For interest:

Latest red Sea 56% yes 26% no 16% undecided 2% refused



Poll 68% yes 22% no 10% undecided

Result 62.9% yes 37.9% no

The divorce referendum is from an.ireland long gone so I don't think its worth using the figures to do a similar comparison with.

Edward M

Well, its up and running, the save the eighth campaign is officially launched.
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/doctor-using-braindead-woman-as-incubator-was-noble-36758629.html

erica74

TerryDublin wrote: »

I feel the Government have not fully represented my view. I always planned to vote for repeal as I don't want any woman who needs an abortion unable to have one. But I am against abortion otherwise so what do I vote.

My sons fiance is pregnant and we all watched her first scan on DVD. So excited all of us. How could I vote for laws that would mean she could end their babys life. My grandchilds life. I know its so young so small but its still living you know. If she would want to do such a thing I would want her helped with why she would want to do this. If it was finance or fear of not coping. Help with these.

All around me my friends work people seem to be caught up in this but only from the view of the woman and her rights reproductive. The baby seems to be lost in all of this. Forgotten. Women have so much help with difficulties they face and I am happy for this but why is stopping the baby to live further seen so insignificant. I hope I am wrong and I can vote for repeal but not abortion as birth control only abnormalities rape etc.

But she doesn't want to have an abortion and nobody is going to force her to have one so...?

erica74

TerryDublin wrote: »

Yes this I feel is okay.



If no abnormality ffa risk to life like you said then waht are the reasons which justify ending babys life?

In your first post you said

I always planned to vote for repeal as I don't want any woman who needs an abortion unable to have one.

Why has your mind changed over the past 3 pages?

erica74

....... wrote: »

What if it was something that couldnt be helped?

I never want children. NEVER. Ive plenty of money and I would cope fine with stress/lack of sleep/lack of support/lifestyle changes etc...

But I dont want kids. Why on earth would it be a good thing to force a woman like me to be a mother? It happened my mother. She didnt want kids, but there were no other choices. She let us know it all our lives.

Mine too. Since I was old enough to understand she told my sister and I to "never have children".

volchitsa

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Because it is your biological duty, woman, and it is evil and unnatural not to have children. Wanting has nothing to do with it, you owe it to the rest of us!

(OWTTE)

Mongfinder General

Is anybody else concerned that the legalization of abortion could be used to target women in poorer demographics? Many of these women may be seen as a burden to the state, unemployed, living in state housing, not contributing from financially to the state? Could there be an ulterior motive behind this referendum?

SusieBlue

Mongfinder General wrote: »

Is anybody else concerned that the legalization of abortion could be used to target women in poorer demographics? Many of these women may be seen as a burden to the state, unemployed, living in state housing, not contributing from financially to the state? Could there be an ulterior motive behind this referendum?

Nobody is going to be forced to have an abortion. No one. It doesn't happen in countries where abortion is already legal and it won't happen here.

baylah17

Mongfinder General wrote: »

Is anybody else concerned that the legalization of abortion could be used to target women in poorer demographics? Many of these women may be seen as a burden to the state, unemployed, living in state housing, not contributing from financially to the state? Could there be an ulterior motive behind this referendum?

Trite rubbish of the type we can expect from now to referendum day,
Remember the divorce referendum in '95 ..."Hello Divorce, Goodbye Daddy"

Mongfinder General

SusieBlue wrote: »

Nobody is going to be forced to have an abortion. No one. It doesn't happen in countries where abortion is already legal and it won't happen here.

Correct but easier access and free access might encourage abortions

swampgas

Mongfinder General wrote: »

Correct but easier access and free access might encourage abortions

Women who want to be pregnant are not suddenly going to want abortions because they are legal, that's genuinely crazy - what would make you think they would change their mind like that?

It's women who genuinely want or need abortions who are currently being "encouraged" (coerced would be a better word) by the 8th to continue a pregnancy that they don't want, or which is damaging their health, or which is not viable. Changing that is a good thing.

Mongfinder General

swampgas wrote: »

Women who want to be pregnant are not suddenly going to want abortions because they are legal, that's genuinely crazy - what would make you think they would change their mind like that?

It's women who genuinely want or need abortions who are currently being "encouraged" (coerced would be a better word) by the 8th to continue a pregnancy that they don't want, or which is damaging their health, or which is not viable. Changing that is a good thing.

But some women may not want to be pregnant but may not want to take what they consider to be a life. Easier access up to 12 weeks puts pressure on make a decision. And when you’re a single mother with no money that’s an invidious position to find one’s self in.

SusieBlue

Mongfinder General wrote: »

But some women may not want to be pregnant but may not want to take what they consider to be a life. Easier access up to 12 weeks puts pressure on make a decision. And when you’re a single mother with no money that’s an invidious position to find one’s self in.

I trust women to make informed decisions, they do not need to be saved from themselves. They are more than capable of deciding.
Continuing to restrict/ban abortion just because we feel a small minority of women will struggle to make a decision is absolutely ridiculous.

swampgas

Mongfinder General wrote: »

But some women may not want to be pregnant but may not want to take what they consider to be a life. Easier access up to 12 weeks puts pressure on make a decision. And when you’re a single mother with no money that’s an invidious position to find one’s self in.

And surely the right thing to do is to give those women the ability to choose for themselves? It might be a tough decision, but it should be theirs to make, and not ours to judge.

amdublin

Mongfinder General wrote: »

Is anybody else concerned that the legalization of abortion could be used to target women in poorer demographics? Many of these women may be seen as a burden to the state, unemployed, living in state housing, not contributing from financially to the state? Could there be an ulterior motive behind this referendum?

No not one bit. There is no indication from any circles anywhere that abortion will become mandatory or forced.

It's about choice. Giving the choice to each woman to decide what is best for her, the pregnancy, her life, her health.
Similar to what is in place now but a woman will not need to go out of the country an abortion or medical care.

Do you have a link to where this is being mooted or is it something you are just imagining?

Martina1991

Mongfinder General wrote:

But some women may not want to be pregnant but may not want to take what they consider to be a life. Easier access up to 12 weeks puts pressure on make a decision. And when you’re a single mother with no money that’s an invidious position to find one’s self in.

At the minute those women who do not want to be pregnant and can't afford to travel are FORCED to continue with the pregnancy.

Making the option available here isn't going to push them into a clinic. 12 weeks is, I think, a reasonable amount of time for a women to make an informed decision.

Mongfinder General

swampgas wrote: »

And surely the right thing to do is to give those women the ability to choose for themselves? It might be a tough decision, but it should be theirs to make, and not ours to judge.

I take your point about choice but it is a measure of last resort right now. What if there were more choices like more state support for new borns and toddlers? Would such drastic action be necessary?

Mr. CooL ICE

Mongfinder General wrote: »

I take your point about choice but it is a measure of last resort right now. What if there were more choices like more state support for new borns and toddlers? Would such drastic action be necessary?

Doesn't do anything for the woman that doesn't want to be pregnant

Ave Sodalis

Mongfinder General wrote: »

I take your point about choice but it is a measure of last resort right now. What if there were more choices like more state support for new borns and toddlers? Would such drastic action be necessary?

I think better state support, better help for the homeless etc would reduce the number of abortions (which is why I don't really understand why pro-life never campaign for that, and I don't fully respect a pro-life view unless they do) but it wouldn't eliminate them. The 8th causes far more problems than that. Have a look at the In Her Shoes page on FB to see the wide variety of issues the 8th has caused.

swampgas

Mongfinder General wrote: »

I take your point about choice but it is a measure of last resort right now. What if there were more choices like more state support for new borns and toddlers? Would such drastic action be necessary?

The 8th affects much more than those cases though. It affects abortion for FFA, it affects how miscarriages are handled. The 8th must be repealed before we can address those issues.

Regardless of the reasons why a woman would choose an abortion, and the level of support provided by the state might not be a factor at all, a woman will evaluate for herself the impact a pregnancy will have, and should be able to terminate if that's what she really wants. Otherwise we're back to "encouraging" women to continue a pregnancy because it's what we want, not because it's what she wants.