Healthy baby aborted at 15 weeks

nullzero

screamer wrote: »

Triple check, quadruple check. If it’s a much wanted baby wouldn’t you ???????

I think the parents may well have been led on this issue.
In this situation a doctor is supposed to be the person who offers the most reliable advise possible.
I take issue with the more "liberal" ideas surrounding abortion, but in a case of this type where the child will

amcalester

rovers_runner wrote: »

The presence of that condition hadn't been definitely confirmed when they made their decision along with obs.
There is no indication the mother was at risk medically nor was there a threat of a sudden miscarriage.
In that instance why the rush by obs to proceed with abortion?
Was it under the hospitals new direction of liberal Master or maternity?

Was there a rush? We’ll have to wait and see the outcome of the investigation.

Having been involved in discussions in Holles street after my partner suffered a miscarriage I can speak from experience that there was no pressure applied on which treatment avenue we chose.

Nothing but compassion and a clear explanation of the options available to us.

SusieBlue

nullzero wrote: »

I'm not putting words in your mouth at all, I'm responding to the words you wrote.
You're one of the main culprits of making this thread about repeal.
I'm struggling to remember the last post you made that actually references the case at hand.

If you have a problem with my posts, feel free to report them.
The last post I would have made would have been when I was discussing Edwards syndrome a few posts ago.
I think you’ll find that the main culprits for bringing up repeal are those who are blaming the outcome of the case on repeal, and I am quite entitled to reply to said posts.
I have tried to get the thread back in topic, most recently when someone brought up when life begins & the right to life just a few minutes ago.

nullzero

screamer wrote: »

Triple check, quadruple check. If it’s a much wanted baby wouldn’t you ???????

I think the parents may well have been led on this issue.
In this situation a doctor is supposed to be the person who offers the most reliable advise possible.
I take issue with some of the more "liberal" ideas surrounding abortion, but in a case of this type where the child will not survive I can empathise with the decision to seek a termination.
The fault isn't with the parents here, clearly there was scope for this situation to have been resolved properly further down the line. There was no reason to rush to a termination and that would appear to be the crux of the issue.

This is an issue of medical negligence, not a debate about the rights and wrongs of the repeal the eighth campaign.

Phil.x

Some figures Ireland can aspire to.
Repel the 8th. Sick.

Charles Ingles

First, do no harm. As an important step in becoming a doctor, medical students must take the Hippocratic Oath. And one of the promises within that oath is “first, do no harm” (or “primum non nocere,” the Latin translation from the original Greek.)

SusieBlue

Phil.x wrote: »

The test isn't fully conclusive......can you not grasp that??? or are you happy with sweeping you're little secret under the carpet.

Yes but the question here is whether the parents were aware of that or not.
From the reports I’ve read, it seems they were not aware that the test wasn’t fully conclusive.
Hence their shock to learn their child did not infact have Edwards syndrome postmortem.

The point being at the time of obtaining the abortion, they believed their child conclusively had the condition, and that wasn’t the case. Why can’t you grasp that? That’s what the topic at hand is.

troyzer

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Im the most staunch anti abortion person on boards, but I've always had respectful back and forth debate.
Because I genuinely believe that life is s gift from God and we all have a soul.
This is a serious wake up call for Ireland and the reality of the repealing of the eight amendment

You're making the mistake of assuming that the 8th amendment prevented abortion and would have stopped this from happening.

It wouldn't have. It would have happened in England instead.

This was a horrible, horrible mistake. One which the 8th would have done nothing to prevent other than let people like yourself ignore the problems of exporting our problems.

screamer

SusieBlue wrote: »

I find the notion that you just invented an entire narrative on my behalf to be even more BS.

To confirm I don’t not condone multiple abortions in lieu of birth control and I in no way indicated that I support it in my post. I don’t appreciate you implying that’s what I was insinuating.

I pointed out that if someone is very ‘flippant’ & they do not want to have a baby, they are probably not ideal candidates to have forced motherhood foisted on them.
I made a simple observation and you are adding arms and legs onto it to suit your own theories.

I have no theories and I don’t talk in loops....
Anyways.... back on topic.

amcalester

Charles Ingles wrote: »

First, do no harm. As an important step in becoming a doctor, medical students must take the Hippocratic Oath. And one of the promises within that oath is “first, do no harm” (or “primum non nocere,” the Latin translation from the original Greek.)

Not in Ireland.

Plumbthedepths

Charles Ingles wrote:

First, do no harm. As an important step in becoming a doctor, medical students must take the Hippocratic Oath. And one of the promises within that oath is “first, do no harm†(or “primum non nocere,†the Latin translation from the original Greek.)

Medical students do not take take the Hippocratic oath in Ireland.

nullzero

SusieBlue wrote: »

If you have a problem with my posts, feel free to report them.
The last post I would have made would have been when I was discussing Edwards syndrome a few posts ago.
I think you’ll find that the main culprits for bringing up repeal are those who are blaming the outcome of the case on repeal, and I am quite entitled to reply to said posts.
I have tried to get the thread back in topic, most recently when someone brought up when life begins & the right to life just a few minutes ago.

You're just getting snotty now.
I'm not suggesting your posts need to be reported, I'm just trying to understand what it is you're saying.

The majority of this thread has been sniping about repeal when it's of little relevance to what's being discussed. If you feel a sense of entitlement to waffle on go right ahead I don't mind you doing that but the fact remains that repeal isn't the issue in this case. You could take your arguments to PM (the irony of me saying that in these circumstances isn't lost on me) if you really wanted to go deep into it.

Mod-Banned

Phil.x

SusieBlue wrote: »

Yes but the question here is whether the parents were aware of that or not.
From the reports I’ve read, it seems they were not aware that the test wasn’t fully conclusive.
Hence their shock to learn their child did not infact have Edwards syndrome postmortem.

The point being at the time of obtaining the abortion, they believed their child conclusively had the condition, and that wasn’t the case. Why can’t you grasp that? That’s what the topic at hand is.

Well when you want to be one of the "first" to try out a new product, service or what's the latest fashion you should do a little research first or you could be unhappy with the results.

Spanish Eyes

Sooner the better a court case happens. Then it will be sub judice.

We should wait and see. But no, that will not satisfy some.

No one knows what happened here at all. Just speculation at the moment.

nullzero

Phil.x wrote: »

Well when you want to be one of the "first" to try out a new product, service or what's the latest fashion you should do a little research first or you could be unhappy with the results.

I don't believe that these people were motivated by that at all.

Phil.x

troyzer wrote: »

You're making the mistake of assuming that the 8th amendment prevented abortion and would have stopped this from happening.

It wouldn't have. It would have happened in England instead.

This was a horrible, horrible mistake. One which the 8th would have done nothing to prevent other than let people like yourself ignore the problems of exporting our problems.

How the f do you know that!

screamer

nullzero wrote: »

I think the parents may well have been led on this issue.
In this situation a doctor is supposed to be the person who offers the most reliable advise possible.
I take issue with some of the more "liberal" ideas surrounding abortion, but in a case of this type where the child will not survive I can empathise with the decision to seek a termination.
The fault isn't with the parents here, clearly there was scope for this situation to have been resolved properly further down the line. There was no reason to rush to a termination and that would appear to be the crux of the issue.

This is an issue of medical negligence, not a debate about the rights and wrongs of the repeal the eighth campaign.

We live in a world of information, at your fingertips. Does anyone just accept bad news from a doctor without thinking, I’ll look into it, I’ll check, try to educate myself? Get a second opinion elsewhere? That’s why they’re called second opinions. I’m not blaming the parents, but I’m baffled if they just took the doctors word for it.

Topgear on Dave

Phil.x wrote: »

How the f do you know that!

Women have been going to England for years.

Ireland never admitted that to itself though.

Charles Ingles

Charles Ingles wrote: »

First, do no harm. As an important step in becoming a doctor, medical students must take the Hippocratic Oath. And one of the promises within that oath is “first, do no harm” (or “primum non nocere,” the Latin translation from the original Greek.)

Irish doctors don't take the Hippocratic Oath Charlie.

SusieBlue

nullzero wrote: »

You're just getting snotty now.
I'm not suggesting your posts need to be reported, I'm just trying to understand what it is you're saying.

The majority of this thread has been sniping about repeal when it's of little relevance to what's being discussed. If you feel a sense of entitlement to waffle on go right ahead I don't mind you doing that but the fact remains that repeal isn't the issue in this case. You could take your arguments to PM (the irony of me saying that in these circumstances isn't lost on me) if you really wanted to go deep into it.

People are blaming the outcome of this case on repeal, that’s why it’s being discussed. I know better than anyone that Repeal isn’t the issue in this case, but I’m not the one who keeps bringing it up.

Plumbthedepths

Phil.x wrote:

How the f do you know that!

You engaged in mindless assumption earlier, yet you get upset when someone else does it.

Phil.x

Phil.x wrote: »

How the f do you know that!

How do you know half the assumptions you're posting on here, you don't.

troyzer

Phil.x wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

You're making the mistake of assuming that the 8th amendment prevented abortion and would have stopped this from happening.

It wouldn't have. It would have happened in England instead.

This was a horrible, horrible mistake. One which the 8th would have done nothing to prevent other than let people like yourself ignore the problems of exporting our problems.

How the f do you know that!

Because that's been the overwhelming experience of couples given an FFA diagnosis. Many of us have been unable to avoid the family distress of a loved one coming back on the plane from England when they should never have had to.

Allowing couples to decide to terminate a pregnancy with little chance of life is the compassionate thing to do.

This really is a horrible situation. But nobody here is proposing anything that would have stopped it. These couples up until recently can and did go to England, most of them did not bring the foetus to term. Understandably so.

Maybe you'd prefer if we banned all abortion and fitted every pregnant woman with a GPS tracker and put her under house arrest?

Phil.x

nullzero wrote: »

I don't believe that these people were motivated by that at all.

Fully Agree, but you can bet your last penny they were given this option and with ireland now being all modern liberal and equal the3 found no wrong in that option.

SusieBlue

Phil.x wrote: »

Well when you want to be one of the "first" to try out a new product, service or what's the latest fashion you should do a little research first or you could be unhappy with the results.

I find it hard to believe that any parent would terminate a much wanted pregnancy at that gestation unless they categorically believed their child had a condition such as Edwards syndrome.
My own theory is that the conclusiveness of the test wasn’t properly explained to them, but only time will tell.

Abortion isn’t the ‘latest fashion’ & even suggesting that in regards to this case is in very poor taste.

jam_mac_jam

How disgusting to blame the parents. Jesus christ.

nullzero

SusieBlue wrote: »

People are blaming the outcome of this case on repeal, that’s why it’s being discussed. I know better than anyone that Repeal isn’t the issue in this case, but I’m not the one who keeps bringing it up.

But you're perpetuating it. This has gone into a twenty page plus thread, most of which has been off topic. You're responsible for what you post, nobody is changing their mind due to what anybody else here is saying.

screamer

SusieBlue wrote: »

People are blaming the outcome of this case on repeal, that’s why it’s being discussed. I know better than anyone that Repeal isn’t the issue in this case, but I’m not the one who keeps bringing it up.

Or maybe just maybe, we’ve had a period of rushed legislation and start to termination services following the repeal vote, and mistakes are being made???? Who knows if the couple had to travel to the UK would they have made the same decision? Would the more experienced services there have given them better advise?
To just say that this is nothing to do with repeal, is closing down opportunities for learning valuable lessons about what might have gone wrong since the repeal was enacted.

SusieBlue

nullzero wrote: »

But you're perpetuating it. This has gone into a twenty page plus thread, most of which has been off topic. You're responsible for what you post, nobody is changing their mind due to what anybody else here is saying.

Absolutely bizarre that you are attacking me for my responses to certain posts but have no issue with those who made the posts I’m replying to

nullzero

Phil.x wrote: »

Fully Agree, but you can bet your last penny they were given this option and with ireland now being all modern liberal and equal the3 found no wrong in that option.

I don't know if they should find wrong in that option when they are under the impression that their child wouldn't survive.

Like I said I take issue with the more "liberal" aspects of the abortion debate, but I can't honestly find fault with the parents in this case, or any others like it.