8th amendment referendum part 3 - Mod note and FAQ in post #1

Nettle Soup

Friday cannot come quick enough.

Igotadose

Read this, then say you're still going to vote for no. Wow. A woman pregnant with twins stuck in hospital for weeks waiting for them to die.

https://www.facebook.com/RepealTheEighth/posts/171786876829071:0

gmisk

bubblypop wrote: »

I am watching a young guy standing on the wall of the Phoenix park, tying a no payer to a light inside the wall.
Surely the park rangers will take that down?

What is the law with posters on light poles along the street?

I would say so I don't think any posters are allowed inside park? I was there at weekend I didn't see any, maybe report it?

Igotadose

Seems like the No side is taking messages from the alt-right. Not surprising. Also, lots of discussion on social media, laws and the referendum here: https://www.politico.eu/article/foreign-groups-invade-ireland-online-abortion-referendum-debate-facebook-social-media/

Leroy42

Igotadose wrote: »

Read this, then say you're still going to vote for no. Wow. A woman pregnant with twins stuck in hospital for weeks waiting for them to die.

https://www.facebook.com/RepealTheEighth/posts/171786876829071:0

Bad cases make bad law, isn't that the line? I haven't read it, but I understand the gist of what it will be about. I guess the counter to it would be what is the price we are willing to pay to save that poor woman? Is the potential abortion of X number of healthy, but unwanted babies, worth the saving of this woman's pain and grief (I am not saying it is or it isn't, merely asking the question).

Mr.H

Right this second in Ireland a woman can have an abortion if her health is at risk. That is fact. In fact the was fact in the case of Savita also. The issue was the doctors did not examine her properly. When she asked for a termination it was not because she thought she was dying. It was because she didn't want to continue the pregnancy. After everything happened later, doctors said she would have been given the termination if they caught the infection earlier. They also said they should have suspected the infection because of how far alone she was and her symptoms.

While yes there is a good chance she would be alive today if the 8th was repealed. The fact is there was 13 occasions where her life could have been saved. Also she could have had a termination if the doctors did their jobs and actually checked for the very common infection.

Savitas case is absolutely nothing to do with the 8th. She should have lived regardless.

ohnonotgmail

Mr.H wrote: »

Right this second in Ireland a woman can have an abortion if her health is at risk. That is fact. In fact the was fact in the case of Savita also. The issue was the doctors did not examine her properly. When she asked for a termination it was not because she thought she was dying. It was because she didn't want to continue the pregnancy. After everything happened later, doctors said she would have been given the termination if they caught the infection earlier. They also said they should have suspected the infection because of how far alone she was and her symptoms.

While yes there is a good chance she would be alive today if the 8th was repealed. The fact is there was 13 occasions where her life could have been saved. Also she could have had a termination if the doctors did their jobs and actually checked for the very common infection.

Savitas case is absolutely nothing to do with the 8th. She should have lived regardless.

That is not fact. she can have an abortion if her LIFE is at risk. And immediate risk at that.

Ave Sodalis

Mr.H wrote: »

Right this second in Ireland a woman can have an abortion if her health is at risk. That is fact. In fact the was fact in the case of Savita also. The issue was the doctors did not examine her properly. When she asked for a termination it was not because she thought she was dying. It was because she didn't want to continue the pregnancy. After everything happened later, doctors said she would have been given the termination if they caught the infection earlier. They also said they should have suspected the infection because of how far alone she was and her symptoms.

While yes there is a good chance she would be alive today if the 8th was repealed. The fact is there was 13 occasions where her life could have been saved. Also she could have had a termination if the doctors did their jobs and actually checked for the very common infection.

Savitas case is absolutely nothing to do with the 8th. She should have lived regardless.

No. A woman can have an abortion if her life is at risk. It doesn't matter if she will end up in horrid pain for the rest of her life. It doesn't matter if she will die shortly after the pregnancy without treatment that's being denied. If she doesn't die before she gives birth, that is the only measure of success.

Also, Savita's case has been debunked several times. There is a report on the HSE website. I'd recommend reading it.

realitykeeper

bubblypop wrote: »

Yes, a democracy.
Not a country ran by religion.
We live by the laws of the country, not a religion.

... and in a democracy we are all governed by how others vote. You may not like a particular political party, e.g. Labour or FG or particular organizations e.g. the various trade unions but unfortunately we must live under the boot of such entities because of other people in our democracy. That is democracy. The trade union movement and the liberal press are far more influential in today`s society than the holy Catholic Church and I see an extremely bleak future for this country as a consequence.

People were outraged by Rasputin, 100 years ago and Russia`s churches were torn down. What followed was 70 years of misery for the Russian people. So blaming God for the actions of the clergy was a mistake. Russia has since learned from its mistake and returned to God just as Our Lady of Fatima foretold.

gmisk

Mr.H wrote: »

Right this second in Ireland a woman can have an abortion if her health is at risk. That is fact.

If the woman is literally at deaths door....pretty low bar.
Also didn't Maria steen and the rest of the Íona institute and other No supporters even oppose this change?

Answer=they did

Love both?
Nope

ELM327

Mr.H wrote: »

Right this second in Ireland a woman can have an abortion if her health is at risk. That is fact. In fact the was fact in the case of Savita also. The issue was the doctors did not examine her properly. When she asked for a termination it was not because she thought she was dying. It was because she didn't want to continue the pregnancy. After everything happened later, doctors said she would have been given the termination if they caught the infection earlier. They also said they should have suspected the infection because of how far alone she was and her symptoms.

While yes there is a good chance she would be alive today if the 8th was repealed. The fact is there was 13 occasions where her life could have been saved. Also she could have had a termination if the doctors did their jobs and actually checked for the very common infection.

Savitas case is absolutely nothing to do with the 8th. She should have lived regardless.

Health at risk is not sufficient.
It must be life at risk.


See previous. This has already been debunked.

ELM327 wrote: »

It did.
To use a car crash into a pedestrian. It doesn't allow you to warn the pedestrian before the crash, merely to lift the car off the pedestrian once it starts to crush them (but not before).


We are again hamstrung by the 8th. In cases of doubt, the constitution has higher standing than acts of the oireachtas. And this creates doubt. In medical terms, the doctor is limited by the concerns posed by the 8th. Actual concerns about actual or perceived limitations.

Mr.H

ohnonotgmail wrote:

That is not fact. she can have an abortion if her LIFE is at risk. And immediate risk at that.

Yes and if hey caught the infection they would have seen that her life was at risk. In fact cases like this have happened and the termination has been given.

Ave Sodalis wrote:

No. A woman can have an abortion if her life is at risk. It doesn't matter if she will end up in horrid pain for the rest of her life. It doesn't matter if she will die shortly after the pregnancy without treatment that's being denied. If she doesn't die before she gives birth, that is the only measure of success.

Not true. A woman can be given a termination if her doctor suspects that her life is at risk. Regardless of when that is. The issue was incompetence.

Ave Sodalis wrote:

Also, Savita's case has been debunked several times. There is a report on the HSE website. I'd recommend reading it.

I have read it. The hiqua report is where I got my information.

ELM327

Mr.H wrote: »

Yes and if hey caught the infection they would have seen that her life was at risk. In fact cases like this have happened and the termination has been given.



Not true. A woman can be given a termination if her doctor suspects that her life is at risk. Regardless of when that is. The issue was incompetence.



I have read it. The hiqua report is where I got my information.

This has been debunked already.
Hiqua do not have jurisdiction to comment on the 8th.


A woman cannot be given a termination on those circumstances. Given that there were only 37 on Irish soil since the introduction of PLDP act, it can't be that far reaching.

Any comment on the below as linked by January's post?
I think anyone voting no after reading it needs a humanity check

You never know who may need your Yes 💔

I don't even really know where to start but I can't just sit back and say nothing anymore. I want to share my story in the hope that even if just one person is sitting on the fence as to how to vote in the referendum on Friday, my story will help them decide to vote yes and show compassion for me and others in my situation. I never once thought that the 8th amendment would affect me and my family.

On March 17th, we found out we were expecting at nearly 6 weeks. Extremely surprised and in shock but happy!! We have a 3 year old, we live at home with my parents for just over a year now, after a year spent at his parents home. We are in the middle of saving hard for our house, a wedding and a honeymoon. Baby number 2 was to be planned for after all the stress, not to arrive during it, little did I know what lay ahead for us.

The last 8 weeks have been the longest of my life. Firstly we thought I was having an ectopic pregnancy due to the symptoms i was experiencing but then a scan proved everything was ok! Then at just nearly 10 weeks, I started to feel really unwell. Thinking it was a combination of morning sickness and low blood pressure, I went to The Coombe after experiencing pain in my head all day in work. I went completely blind, dizzy and extremely faint for about 10/15 minutes in the bathroom in work and when i did feel ok to move again, my sight didn't come back fully in my left eye. My co-ordination was not ok, I couldn't even type an email. The Coombe advised me to go to a general hospital after scanning the Baby and confirming baby was doing ok.

I was put under the care of the Neurology team. I thought they would tell me I had a bad migraine and send me on my way. Turned out I had a STROKE. A blood clot had travelled and landed in the back of my left eye. I'm 29! The consultant teams that looked after me during my stay were amazing, as were all the nurses that looked after me!! They really done all they could legally do. I'm on a dose of aspirin whilst waiting for blood results to come back, which will decide the next course of action. My headaches come and go. Some days I feel great and some days, like today, I can't get out of bed with the pain in my head.

My neurology team want to do an MRI on my brain to ensure I have no further clots, they are not allowed to. My life is not severely threatened enough for them to legally be able to do so. A consultant was brought in from Holiers street to be an advocate for my Baby during the consultations, she assured everyone that an MRI is not harmful past the first trimester and deemed one necessary in my case. In spite of this, Radiology will not go ahead and scan me because I am pregnant. I could be walking around waiting on another stroke to happen due to a clot in my head and only then, if that happens, would my life be threatened enough to warrant the MRI. Every nurse, doctor and consultant I've spoken to in the last 4 weeks wants to book me in for an MRI, each time they come back to me and my partner with the same answer. They are not allowed to go ahead with it.

My baby needs me to be healthy, I do not want to harm my baby in anyway but especially not by having a more severe stroke. I also want to be at ease for the next 26 weeks that each headache I get is not the start of another stroke.

Voting yes is not just about the choice of whether to make abortion legal in this country. It's about recognising that I am not just a vessel growing another life, which is amazing in its own right and should be given every support and the best care!! I am a woman who needs the appropriate medical treatment in my hour of need! Given the choice, I would not have went ahead with the MRI at the time. I would have waited until after 12 weeks and into my 2nd trimester, I want my baby to be safe. But that is not my choice to make due to the laws of this country. It's not even the choice for my Neurology team to make. My baby needs me to be healthy. My 3 year old little boy does too!!

You really never know what happens behind closed doors, all the more reason to trust women and give them their right to choice. This was just an insight into my life for the last few weeks. I need your yes vote. It will be too late for this pregnancy but not for future women in similar situations. I don't think I could ever go through this again but especially not if the no vote wins. I will always be a high risk for strokes now in any future pregnancies and knowing the limited care this country can provide me under current legislation is not very comforting.

I can't believe this is actually my story. It's been really hard to write, it seems so real and final and totally out of my control. Please consider voting YES for me.

#Repealthe8th #togetherforyes #prochoice

DrumSteve

I don't know about anyone else but I'm going to give that prime time debate a miss tomorrow night.

I just can't be arsed listening to the NO side lying for a solid hour again.

I've read enough at this stage to know that voting Yes is the right thing to do.

Remember to vote on Friday lads, Vote Early and Vote Often :-)

Mr.H

God and religion have no place in this referendum. I hope logic prevails and we vote yes. Not because I wasn't an open door policy. Bot because I want bus to trust our women (I don't trust our men FFS why would I trust our women). But I want to repeal because it is the logical thing to do. We do have laws in this country that allow for termination but repealing the 8th allows for expansion on that.

gmisk

DrumSteve wrote: »

I don't know about anyone else but I'm going to give that prime time debate a miss tomorrow night.

I just can't be arsed listening to the NO side lying for a solid hour again.

I've read enough at this stage to know that voting Yes is the right thing to do.

Remember to vote on Friday lads, Vote Early and Vote Often :-)

I am likely going to do the same.
If it is going to be as poorly chaired as the Claire Byrne debacle was I will just find it upsetting.

I am up early to vote heading to biggest weekend in Belfast but changed my train to a later one, it so important to vote in this one!

Zubeneschamali

spookwoman wrote: »

He then went on to say mental health doesn't exist

I think Senator Mullen does not exist, what we see is 1000 toads in a human skin.

ELM327

No interest in watching a debate at this stage, there's no excuse for a NO vote, and if it is no we have a lot of questions to answer as a nation, not least considering the ECHR have told us the 8th is infringing on human rights.

ELM327

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I think Senator Mullen does not exist, what we see is 1000 toads in a human skin.

The world would be a better place if this was true.

Mr.H

It wasn't debunked. It was dismissed by a pro lifer. The hiqua report is nothing to do with the 8th. It purely states that she would have lived and there were 13 occasions were life saving intervention could have taken place. It also mentioned she should and would have been given a termination. If the infection was found. Regardless of if her life was in immediate danger.

You do not have to be anywhere near deaths door.

Leroy42

realitykeeper wrote: »

The trade union movement and the liberal press are far more influential in today`s society than the holy Catholic Church and I see an extremely bleak future for this country as a consequence.

I think there are hundreds of women that were forced through Magdalene laundries, thousands of children that were abused, many people that were shunned by their families and communities on the word of a priest that would seriously disagree with your statement.

Mr.H

gmisk wrote:

I am up early to vote heading to biggest weekend in Belfast but changed my train to a later one, it so important to vote in this one!

It's important to vote in every one!

ohnonotgmail

Mr.H wrote: »

It wasn't debunked. It was dismissed by a pro lifer. The hiqua report is nothing to do with the 8th. It purely states that she would have lived and there were 13 occasions were life saving intervention could have taken place. It also mentioned she should and would have been given a termination. If the infection was found. Regardless of if her life was in immediate danger.

You do not have to be anywhere near deaths door.

We have been through this several times already. You are just wrong. The leading experts in OBGYN have confirmed this.

gmisk

Mr.H wrote: »

It's important to vote in every one!

I agree.
I have voted since moving here, but I meant this is more important for me than voting in general election

Leroy42

Wasn't part of the Savita issue that the doctors were totally unsure what they could and couldn't do? Certainly I have heard other cases where doctors feel an abortion is the way to go but based on the 8th err on the side of doing nothing for fear of getting in trouble. So in effect the needs of the woman are being put behind the foetus and the doctor.

ELM327

Mr.H wrote: »

It wasn't debunked. It was dismissed by a pro lifer. The hiqua report is nothing to do with the 8th. It purely states that she would have lived and there were 13 occasions were life saving intervention could have taken place. It also mentioned she should and would have been given a termination. If the infection was found. Regardless of if her life was in immediate danger.

You do not have to be anywhere near deaths door.

Your posts are confusing.
But regarding the last sentence you are very much mistaken.
You can believe what you like - including that today is Thursday for instance, but it's not changing the actuality, the 8th blocks healthcare until the mother is half dead, and today is Monday.

ELM327

Leroy42 wrote: »

Wasn't part of the Savita issue that the doctors were totally unsure what they could and couldn't do? Certainly I have heard other cases where doctors feel an abortion is the way to go but based on the 8th err on the side of doing nothing for fear of getting in trouble. So in effect the needs of the woman are being put behind the foetus and the doctor.

This is the problem.
Because the 8th is so restrictive and far reaching and the penalties are so punitive, the doctors are afraid to do anything.


If you do nothing, you can't be penalised, whereas if you terminate the pregnancy and save the mother, you can receive jail. Ridiculous. I understand the doctors position.

kylith

Logo wrote: »

kylith wrote: »

Do you think that a woman’s health or life is worth less that a foetus?

I thought we were voting on a referendum. I honestly can't believe that men don't matter

How is a man’s health and healthcare impacted by pregnancy?

seamus

Mr.H wrote: »

Right this second in Ireland a woman can have an abortion if her health is at risk. That is fact.

I'm the tenth person to say it to you, but let's just clarify again

A woman today in Ireland cannot get an abortion if her health is at risk. Full stop. No grey areas.

If carrying a pregnancy carries a risk of blindness, diabetes, permanent disability, or any one of a million non-life-threatening illnesses, there is nothing she can do about it in Ireland.

A termination may only be provided in Ireland is there if a real and substantial risk to her life.

Real means, "actually happening right now" rather than "could happen"

and

Substantial means, "unacceptably likely to kill her". This is a fluffy one because it doesn't mean the risk to her life has to be 50%+, but if it's 5 or 10% then a doctor may not be permitted to terminate.

retro:electro

Mr.H wrote: »

Right this second in Ireland a woman can have an abortion if her health is at risk. That is fact. In fact the was fact in the case of Savita also. The issue was the doctors did not examine her properly. When she asked for a termination it was not because she thought she was dying. It was because she didn't want to continue the pregnancy. After everything happened later, doctors said she would have been given the termination if they caught the infection earlier. They also said they should have suspected the infection because of how far alone she was and her symptoms.

While yes there is a good chance she would be alive today if the 8th was repealed. The fact is there was 13 occasions where her life could have been saved. Also she could have had a termination if the doctors did their jobs and actually checked for the very common infection.

Savitas case is absolutely nothing to do with the 8th. She should have lived regardless.

This is all that matters.

What would you prefer, to wait until you’re drowning to be saved?
Or to have prevented measures put in place to safeguard and ensure you never get to the stage where you are at deaths door and medical limbo before a professional can intervene?
The doctor responsible for the independent report of Savita’s death has said that while malpractice was also to blame, the 8th contributed to her death and she would never have developed sepsis if the doctors had terminated the pregnancy when it became clear that she was miscarrying.

I find the repeated dismissal of the circumstances that caused her death and the “sure aren’t ye grand, can’t ye wait til ye are nearly dying” absolutely appalling to read.
I don’t know how some of you aren’t ashamed.