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

Healthy baby aborted at 15 weeks

Options
1…1718202223…55

Comments

  • Options
    #572
    petalgumdrops
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭petalgumdrops


    mvl wrote: »
    I find this very odd, non-professional.
    - In my case it was my OB who encouraged me to have other tests, wait for another scan before the actual abortion ... but different country, different methodologies.
    Maybe this process is too new for some of these doctors too.

    It puts people in a very vunerable position. Maybe the HSE and minister hasn't given clear guidelines or policies on how to approach this. Why would they though when we were assured tests were "gold standard"


  • Options
    #573
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,019 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    mvl wrote: »
    I find this very odd, non-professional.
    - In my case it was my OB who encouraged me to have other tests, wait for another scan before the actual abortion ... but different country, different methodologies.
    Maybe this process is too new for some of these doctors too.

    That occurred to me too. My experience was like yours, but like you that wasn't in Ireland either.


  • Options
    #574
    petalgumdrops
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭petalgumdrops


    AulWan wrote: »
    Thanks for the reply. Were they able to arrange these tests quickly?

    I didn't have the amnio in NMH but any other procedure I needed was organised and done in days. My fetal medicine clinics were quickly organised and dates were within a few days.
    My friend had an amnio there and it was booked within a few days but bear in mind you do need to be a certain gestation for this. After the CVS result I had to wait for amino to reach the correct gestation. This period between tests is excruciating as doctors has wrongly given me the "no hope routine" and so I was stressed beyond words. It's an awful traumatic experience and so hospitals do not wait longer than they need to, to perform these tests.


  • Options
    #575
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,019 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    petalgumdrops wrote: »
    It puts people in a very vunerable position. Maybe the HSE and minister hasn't given clear guidelines or policies on how to approach this. Why would they though when we were assured tests were "gold standard"

    Even gold standard tests need the full results to be valid though. That's what didn't happen, the termination was carried out before the results came through.


  • Options
    #576
    petalgumdrops
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭petalgumdrops


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Even gold standard tests need the full results to be valid though. That's what didn't happen, the termination was carried out before the results came through.

    I remember many exchanges with you during the campaign about my story and all i'm going to say is that the concerns of I and many others who suffered a misdiagnosis were not listened to. Our stories showed that these results can be flawed as testified by so many women but these would have compromised repeal and so it really is no wonder when all parties are not afforded a voice to express concerns that issues would arisearise.
    My story was pulled apart by many people currently on this thread- those same people thankfully have the sense not to engage with me now. Perhaps they know I had a point, a valid contribution they should have listened to. In incidents such as these its not nice to be right!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #577
    Hannibal_Smith
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hannibal_Smith


    petalgumdrops wrote: »
    I remember many exchanges with you during the campaign about my story and all i'm going to say is that the concerns of I and many others who suffered a misdiagnosis were not listened to. Our stories showed that these results can be flawed as testified by so many women but these would have compromised repeal and so it really is no wonder when all parties are not afforded a voice to express concerns that issues would arisearise.
    My story was pulled apart by many people currently on this thread- those same people thankfully have the sense not to engage with me now. Perhaps they know I had a point, a valid contribution they should have listened to. In incidents such as these its not nice to be right!

    What makes you think that, if the 8th hadn't been repealed the couple wouldn't have travelled? You are making this story personal to you but at the end of the day you haven't a clue what the couple discussed between each other and how it would be effected with or without the 8th.

    I voted to repeal. I would vote again and every day of the week to repeal.

    This case is tragic in its circumstances and my thoughts go to the couple involved, but it doesn't change the importance of repealing the 8th for me.


  • Options
    #578
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,586 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    Nobelium wrote: »
    what society are you claiming to represent ?

    The one we live in, what other is there?


  • Options
    #579
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,586 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    petalgumdrops wrote: »
    I remember many exchanges with you during the campaign about my story and all i'm going to say is that the concerns of I and many others who suffered a misdiagnosis were not listened to. Our stories showed that these results can be flawed as testified by so many women but these would have compromised repeal and so it really is no wonder when all parties are not afforded a voice to express concerns that issues would arisearise.
    My story was pulled apart by many people currently on this thread- those same people thankfully have the sense not to engage with me now. Perhaps they know I had a point, a valid contribution they should have listened to. In incidents such as these its not nice to be right!

    Nothing to do with compromising repeal. Misdiagnosis happen unfortunately, but do you base your laws on the possibility of a 0.15% chance of a false positive! Or the 99% of being correct?


  • Options
    #580
    Nobelium
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,093 ✭✭✭Nobelium


    uptherebels wrote: »
    The one we live in, what other is there?

    Then why do you claim to be the spokesperson for our society ?


  • Options
    #581
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,586 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    BoJack Horseman wrote: »
    We voted for babies to be aborted a 25 weeks..... Or max-term if mother says she's mentally ill.

    15 is hardly controversial.

    I take it you haven't actually read the legislation?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #582
    petalgumdrops
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭petalgumdrops


    Hannibal_Smith wrote: »
    What makes you think that, if the 8th hadn't been repealed the couple wouldn't have travelled? You are making this story personal to you but at the end of the day you haven't a clue what the couple discussed between each other and how it would be effected with or without the 8th.

    I voted to repeal. I would vote again and every day of the week to repeal.

    This case is tragic in its circumstances and my thoughts go to the couple involved, but it doesn't change the importance of repealing the 8th for me.

    We know a "much wanted" baby was terminated on what appears to be an absolutely shambolic roll out of termination services. It is not the repeal/ provision of termination that I found issue with but the removal of the right to life of all babies wanted and unwanted. I said that a healthy wanted baby may mistakenly be terminated and this has now happened. I wonder now that the right to life is gone what can these poor parents do about it! Repeal, like many stated, was not going to affect those who were going to terminate anyway (choice, choice, choice) but now they could do it at home.-This situation, this horrific error, this loss of a "baby" and it was a baby to these parents will probably never hace any redress for whatever horrific chain.of events ensued.
    what recourse do they have? The unborn they don't have rights their mother's their biggest protectors to their right to life as stated by Mary Lou in response to the repeal of the right to life! This mother trusted a broken, inadequate system to inform her decisions. Sure weren't we told termination would be rare and restrictive after 12 weeks. 3 doctors, counselling etc etc!
    The 8th (that constitutional protection) made doctors accountable to two patients not just one. The hospital is liable only to the woman now and the baby it seems may just be collateral damage to the repeal cause!

    If only we had some legal protection for the unborn child? Oh yes we did have that but we fully repealed it rather than inserting a constitutional limit (similar to divorce) in our constitution!


  • Options
    #583
    Hannibal_Smith
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hannibal_Smith


    petalgumdrops wrote: »
    We know a "much wanted" baby was terminated on what appears to be an absolutely shambolic roll out of termination services. It is not the repeal/ provision of termination that I found issue with but the removal of the right to life of all babies wanted and unwanted. I said that a healthy wanted baby may mistakenly be terminated and this has now happened. I wonder now that the right to life is gone what can these poor parents do about it! Repeal, like many stated, was not going to affect those who were going to terminate anyway (choice, choice, choice) but now they could do it at home.-This situation, this horrific error, this loss of a "baby" and it was a baby to these parents will probably never hace any redress for whatever horrific chain.of events ensued.
    what recourse do they have? The unborn they don't have rights their mother's their biggest protectors to their right to life as stated by Mary Lou in response to the repeal of the right to life! This mother trusted a broken, inadequate system to inform her decisions. Sure weren't we told termination would be rare and restrictive after 12 weeks. 3 doctors, counselling etc etc!
    The 8th (that constitutional protection) made doctors accountable to two patients not just one. The hospital is liable only to the woman now and the baby it seems may just be collateral damage to the repeal cause!

    If only we had some legal protection for the unborn child? Oh yes we did have that but we fully repealed it rather than inserting a constitutional limit (similar to divorce) in our constitution!

    I hope we never go back to the horror of legal protection for the unborn.

    The termination services are not the issue. It's the advice the couple got that there was no hope that's the issue. That's what was reported the other day anyhow.. They were told there was no hope so they requested a termination.


  • Options
    #584
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,586 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    petalgumdrops wrote: »

    If only we had some legal protection for the unborn child? Oh yes we did have that but we fully repealed it rather than inserting a constitutional limit (similar to divorce) in our constitution!

    That was the legal protection that was superceded by a woman's right to travel?
    Medical issues have no place in the constitution.


  • Options
    #585
    petalgumdrops
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭petalgumdrops


    Hannibal_Smith wrote: »
    I hope we never go back to the horror of legal protection for the unborn.

    The termination services are not the issue. It's the advice the couple got that there was no hope that's the issue. That's what was reported the other day anyhow.. They were told there was no hope so they requested a termination.

    As someone that is 16 weeks pregnant with a baby not a fetus! I worry that some feck up will be made before my baby has "fully emerged from the womb" and is granted their right to life. (This is when the legislation bestows the right to life to my baby! That magical trip through the birth canal that makes them suddenly human) Who do I turn to if my baby is affected? Test case will have to confirm if medical misadventure in relation to the unborn will be constitutional but it is not a nice time to be pregnant in Ireland. With simon Harris deflecting all of the money he promised would go into improved materity service now being used on free abortions my pregnancy can not pass soon enough.
    Two women and a newborn dead since January as well as this misdiagnosis and Harris is still sailing on the crest of the repeal wave. 2/3 nurses for a ward of 30+ patients where a woman and her son died and people think he gives a crap about women!
    We've just made it easier in Ireland to make medical mistakes and, feck ups in maternity care but that threat of litigation so many obs talked about is now gone!!


  • Options
    #586
    Hannibal_Smith
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hannibal_Smith


    petalgumdrops wrote: »
    As someone that is 16 weeks pregnant with a baby not a fetus! I worry that some feck up will be made before my baby has "fully emerged from the womb" and is granted their right to life. (This is when the legislation bestows the right to life to my baby! That magical trip through the birth canal that makes them suddenly human) Who do I turn to if my baby is affected? Test case will have to confirm if medical misadventure in relation to the unborn will be constitutional but it is not a nice time to be pregnant in Ireland. With simon Harris deflecting all of the money he promised would go into improved materity service now being used on free abortions my pregnancy can not pass soon enough.
    Two women and a newborn dead since January as well as this misdiagnosis and Harris is still sailing on the crest of the repeal wave. 2/3 nurses for a ward of 30+ patients where a woman and her son died and people think he gives a crap about women!
    We've just made it easier in Ireland to make medical mistakes and, feck ups in maternity care but that threat of litigation so many obs talked about is now gone!!

    Not a nice time to be pregnant in Ireland?? Are you going to be strapped to a bed and forced to have an abortion? Choice is the key. Your body your choice.

    You continue to make this tragic loss of this couple about you. They made the decision with the best of intentions and with the information available to them at the time. I don't know why that would affect your pregnancy.


  • Options
    #587
    Edgware
    Registered Users Posts: 5,875 ✭✭✭Edgware


    It's obvious that the medical profession can't be trusted. How many innocent little babies have been sacrificed to their incompetence?


  • Options
    #588
    petalgumdrops
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭petalgumdrops


    uptherebels wrote: »
    That was the legal protection that was superceded by a woman's right to travel?
    Medical issues have no place in the constitution.

    Again you need to focus on the babies like the baby in this case that was wanted. Unwanted babies that will be terminated anyway don't require constitutional protection I.e up to 12 weeks gestation. Those over should be afforded protection with allowance for FFA.
    Repeal has affected wanted and unwanted babies by indiscriminately removing the right to life of all babies. Those that are wanted and those that are not.
    Lets see how far this family get with a legal case? I've read they are speaking with solicitors!


  • Options
    #589
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    petalgumdrops wrote: »
    As someone that is 16 weeks pregnant with a baby not a fetus! I worry that some feck up will be made before my baby has "fully emerged from the womb" and is granted their right to life. (This is when the legislation bestows the right to life to my baby! That magical trip through the birth canal that makes them suddenly human) Who do I turn to if my baby is affected? Test case will have to confirm if medical misadventure in relation to the unborn will be constitutional but it is not a nice time to be pregnant in Ireland. With simon Harris deflecting all of the money he promised would go into improved materity service now being used on free abortions my pregnancy can not pass soon enough.
    Two women and a newborn dead since January as well as this misdiagnosis and Harris is still sailing on the crest of the repeal wave. 2/3 nurses for a ward of 30+ patients where a woman and her son died and people think he gives a crap about women!
    We've just made it easier in Ireland to make medical mistakes and, feck ups in maternity care but that threat of litigation so many obs talked about is now gone!!

    Before the 8th was put in the constitution there was no constitutionally protected right to life for unborn babies either.
    Everyone managed fine. It’s not like your child would be denied medical treatment or intervention because the right to life is no longer constitutionally protected.


  • Options
    #590
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,370 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Hannibal_Smith wrote: »
    Not a nice time to be pregnant in Ireland?? Are you going to be strapped to a bed and forced to have an abortion? Choice is the key. Your body your choice.

    You continue to make this tragic loss of this couple about you. They made the decision with the best of intentions and with the information available to them at the time. I don't know why that would affect your pregnancy.

    You're speaking to someone who has had a personal experience of this type of situation and speaking to them as if they have committed some sort of offence by offering their experience as a reference.

    People can have differing opinions on things and still respect the other person's right to their opinion, something which you seem to be unwilling to extend to this poster, why that is, I can only speculate but perhaps a little compassion and respect might be more appropriate than the pointing of an accusatory finger from whatever type of perch of self righteous moral indignation you're sitting atop of.

    Abortion is an issue which is extremely divisive and people bring all sorts of baggage to the debate surrounding it. A reasonable place to begin would be for people to learn to respect each others rights to their opinions.

    Just to clarify, I'm in no way attempting to suggest that you should not be allowed to make your point here, I'm merely trying to help suggest another way of looking at things.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #591
    petalgumdrops
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭petalgumdrops


    Hannibal_Smith wrote: »
    Not a nice time to be pregnant in Ireland?? Are you going to be strapped to a bed and forced to have an abortion? Choice is the key. Your body your choice.

    You continue to make this tragic loss of this couple about you. They made the decision with the best of intentions and with the information available to them at the time. I don't know why that would affect your pregnancy.

    I'm not really going to explain myself further. Mistakes of medical professions of which they are plenty and especially in maternity care are now safe from litigation if an unborn child is affected. A healthy child was aborted, will the hospital be made accountable for this? I'm guessing not as the child had no right to life anyway. Can't sue for "a clump of cells" with no rights!

    you can keep pushing the "you're making this about you" comment or you could actually reflect on the situation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #592
    Hannibal_Smith
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hannibal_Smith


    nullzero wrote: »
    You're speaking to someone who has had a personal experience of this type of situation and speaking to them as if they have committed some sort of offence by offering their experience as a reference.

    People can have differing opinions on things and still respect the other person's right to their opinion, something which you seem to be unwilling to extend to this poster, why that is, I can only speculate but perhaps a little compassion and respect might be more appropriate than the pointing of an accusatory finger from whatever type of perch of self righteous moral indignation you're sitting atop of.

    Abortion is an issue which is extremely divisive and people bring all sorts of baggage to the debate surrounding it. A reasonable place to begin would be for people to learn to respect each others rights to their opinions.

    Just to clarify, I'm in no way attempting to suggest that you should not be allowed to make your point here, I'm merely trying to help suggest another way of looking at things.

    Are you replying to the correct post? I have no sense of self righteous indignation and I know the poster from the previous thread.

    I never denied the other poster their opinion... I am expressing my disagreement with it.

    If you have a problem with my post.. Report it.


  • Options
    #593
    Hannibal_Smith
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hannibal_Smith


    petalgumdrops wrote: »
    I'm not really going to explain myself further. Mistakes of medical professions of which they are plenty and especially in maternity care are now safe from litigation if an unborn child is affected. A healthy child was aborted, will the hospital be made accountable for this? I'm guessing not as the child had no right to life anyway. Can't sue for "a clump of cells" with no rights!

    you can keep pushing the "you're making this about you" comment or you could actually reflect on the situation.

    What makes you think I haven't reflected on the situation. My sympathies continue to lie with the couple in this case who made the decision they thought was right at the time.


  • Options
    #594
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Just found this online, in case it’s of interest to anyone.
    If a child is born with injuries caused by a doctor’s medical negligence during pregnancy or birth, the parents can claim compensation on his or her behalf. This is confirmed by s. 58 of the Civil Liability Act 1961.

    The 8th Amendment does not have any effect on this area of law, and so repeal would not change it.


  • Options
    #595
    petalgumdrops
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭petalgumdrops


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Before the 8th was put in the constitution there was no constitutionally protected right to life for unborn babies either.
    Everyone managed fine. It’s not like your child would be denied medical treatment or intervention because the right to life is no longer constitutionally protected.

    I imagine we did not have such a litigious society prior to the 8th being inserted into the constitution. I presume our technology was not as advanced. Mistakes were not as easily identified by patients. Codes, policies and guidelines to keep detailed notes and records. Patients didn't have as much access to information, to know what was good acceptable practice, financial support to sue. It's not something I know much about but I will definitely look into this.

    Bottom line is we live in a litigious society now. Not something that I grew up in!


  • Options
    #596
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,370 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Hannibal_Smith wrote: »
    Are you replying to the correct post? I have no sense of self righteous indignation and I know the poster from the previous thread.

    I never denied the other poster their opinion... I am expressing my disagreement with it.

    If you have a problem with my post.. Report it.

    I'm wondering why you have made things so personal with that user. They have offered a valuable layer to the debate and perhaps deserve a little more in the way of respect than what you have afforded them.

    I'm not suggesting your post is worthy of being reported, I don't see how you have broken any forum rules, and I already clarified this point in my previous post.

    A big issue around this debate seems to stem from a complete lack of empathy towards anyone with a differing opinion (on both sides), I'm merely suggesting you re evaluate things somewhat here. I don't think you're being completely fair, regardless of some argument you had a year ago in another thread.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #597
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    petalgumdrops wrote: »
    I imagine we did not have such a litigious society prior to the 8th being inserted into the constitution. I presume our technology was not as advanced. Mistakes were not as easily identified by patients. Codes, policies and guidelines to keep detailed notes and records. Patients didn't have as much access to information, to know what was good acceptable practice, financial support to sue. It's not something I know much about but I will definitely look into this.

    Bottom line is we live in a litigious society now. Not something that I grew up in!

    I don’t see what relevance litigation has, you said you were concerned that you and your baby would receive substandard care due to them no longer having a constitutionally protected right to life but that isn’t the case.
    Doctors still have a duty of care to provide treatment to your baby and they would still be responsible for any injury to you or your child, even without the 8th.
    I’m really confused as to what the problem is being honest.


  • Options
    #598
    petalgumdrops
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭petalgumdrops


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Just found this online, in case it’s of interest to anyone.

    This came up during the referendum and until a test case is brought to the supreme court I believe we will not have a full understanding of the impact that the removal of constitutional protection has on the 8th.

    We have many rights that are guaranteed in the constitution, free speech, right to own property etc etc we have repealed the only right the unborn had and so until this is tested the outcome is not fully known.


  • Options
    #599
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    petalgumdrops wrote: »
    I'm not really going to explain myself further. Mistakes of medical professions of which they are plenty and especially in maternity care are now safe from litigation if an unborn child is affected. A healthy child was aborted, will the hospital be made accountable for this? I'm guessing not as the child had no right to life anyway. Can't sue for "a clump of cells" with no rights!

    you can keep pushing the "you're making this about you" comment or you could actually reflect on the situation.

    You and a number of pro life posters were saying before the referendum that maternity care in Ireland was of a higher standard than the UK because of the 8th, now suddenly it isn't because of the repeal of the 8th.

    As a question do you feel that your doctors are not looking after you given the slightly increased risks a person over 40 may face in their pregnancy?


  • Options
    #600
    Hannibal_Smith
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hannibal_Smith


    nullzero wrote: »
    I'm wondering why you have made things so personal with that user. They have offered a valuable layer to the debate and perhaps deserve a little more in the way of respect than what you have afforded them.

    I'm not suggesting your post is worthy of being reported, I don't see how you have broken any forum rules, and I already clarified this point in my previous post.

    A big issue around this debate seems to stem from a complete lack of empathy towards anyone with a differing opinion (on both sides), I'm merely suggesting you re evaluate things somewhat here. I don't think you're being completely fair, regardless of some argument you had a year ago in another thread.

    Im replying to the poster on a point they made about whether the 8th still being in place would have had an effect here. People respond to posters on points that pique their interest all the time. All I remarked on was that they are making this case about them.

    I don't recall ever having an argument with the poster a year ago?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #601
    petalgumdrops
    Registered Users Posts: 190 ✭✭petalgumdrops


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    I don’t see what relevance litigation has, you said you were concerned that you and your baby would receive substandard care due to them no longer having a constitutionally protected right to life but that isn’t the case.
    Doctors still have a duty of care to provide treatment to your baby and they would still be responsible for any injury to you or your child, even without the 8th.
    I’m really confused as to what the problem is being honest.


    Every professional has a duty of care as do doctors. When mistakes are made by doctors there are greater repercussions as it can literally be life/death. Doctors don't go around trying to give substandard care, don't confuse my point. The system in which they are working is so overstrected that mistakes have and will be made. I may be lucky and it won't affect me but you can guarantee that we will hear more of these stories and I would put my house on that. I am protected from malpractice as I have constitutional protection that guarantees my rights. The unborn..... not so clear!


Advertisement