Abortion in Ireland: 2 years on

Mr. CooL ICE

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

We already had it. Abortion was not illegal, it was restricted.

Care to elaborate? As far as I'm aware, we never had.

ohnonotgmail

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

"Perfect" isn't that high a bar or implies laboratory conditions. It's just a matter of following a few instructions to the letter. For example, for condoms they need to be

1. thrown out if not put on correctly the first time.

2. stored correctly (just in cool dry conditions - not hard)

3. not used if they are more than a month out of date.

All this coud be achieved quite easily by making them cheaper and more accessible, and by stigmatising drunken sex.

odd then that the major groups opposed to repeal are also opposed to contraception.

Ave Sodalis

WrenBoy wrote: »

But if someone was free of these underlying conditions or long lasting effects of pregnancy you would still say that not wanting to go through the pain/discomfort of child birth is a good enough reason to abort a healthy baby?
Not being forced to raise it as adoption is an option, but just the avoidance of pain/discomfort of childbirth is enough of a reason to abort? I don't think so but thats just my opinion.

Yes, because we have no idea of people's situations.

downinbigsmoke

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

OK, my 2m number is wrong,i was looking at the total for both sexes. the rest of your numbers are still. saying that an efficiency rate of 99.99% results in only 1 or 2 unwanted pregnancies a year is just stupid.

Correct sexual hygiene is for two methods of contraception to be used at all times. If a man wants to have sex without a condom he should have a vasectomy.

In this case, if one method fails the other one should work. For the most common combination - the pill + condoms - the chance of them both failing simultaneously is 1/500,000 AKA $0.0001\times 0.02.$, essentially 0. Other methods are even safer.

That's how I arrived at that figure.

SusieBlue

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

"Perfect" isn't that high a bar or implies laboratory conditions. It's just a matter of following a few instructions to the letter. For example, for condoms they need to be

1. thrown out if not put on correctly the first time.

2. stored correctly (just in cool dry conditions - not hard)

3. not used if they are more than a month out of date.

All this coud be achieved quite easily by making them cheaper and more accessible, and by stigmatising drunken sex.

I'm talking about the pill, which is the most common and popular type of contraceptive.
In order to qualify for typical use rather than perfect use, a woman need only:

1. Vomit or have diarrhea up to 6 hours after taking the tablet.
2. Take the tablet an hour or more later than she's supposed to.
3. Take prescription medication.
4. Have a fever/high temperature.
5. Have improper storage.
6. Forget to take 1 tablet altogether.
7. Drink certain types of herbal tea.


If a woman does any of the above things, on any day of the month, she will fall into the bracket of "typical use" and she has a 9/100 chance of getting pregnant that month.
I can see how any of those things could happen quite easily, we're humans not robots.

downinbigsmoke

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

odd then that the major groups opposed to repeal are also opposed to contraception.

Are they? I never had much involvement with the pro-life groups during the referendum, but my sister, who knocked on doors for LoveBoth, is very pro-contraception.

I feel like some people are equating pro-life with observant Catholic.

ohnonotgmail

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

Correct sexual hygiene is for two methods of contraception to be used at all times. If a man wants to have sex without a condom he should have a vasectomy.

In this case, if one method fails the other one should work. For the most common combination - the pill + condoms - the chance of them both failing simultaneously is 1/500,000 AKA $0.0001\times 0.02.$, essentially 0. Other methods are even safer.

That's how I arrived at that figure.

are you assuming that people only have sex once a year? because that failure rate is per use not per person per year.

ohnonotgmail

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

Are they? I never had much involvement with the pro-life groups during the referendum, but my sister, who knocked on doors for LoveBoth, is very pro-contraception.

I feel like some people are equating pro-life with observant Catholic.

yes they are.

ohnonotgmail

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

"Perfect" isn't that high a bar or implies laboratory conditions. It's just a matter of following a few instructions to the letter. For example, for condoms they need to be

1. thrown out if not put on correctly the first time.

2. stored correctly (just in cool dry conditions - not hard)

3. not used if they are more than a month out of date.

All this coud be achieved quite easily by making them cheaper and more accessible, and by stigmatising drunken sex.

"Perfect" isn't that high a bar

sweet suffering jasus.

WrenBoy

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Truthfully, I doubt fear of labour pain is a big factor in terminations. I think it’s what comes after mostly.

I agree, just replying and giving my 2 cents on it as a reason for abortion.

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Yes, because we have no idea of people's situations.

Obviously we don't know peoples situations, never said I did, I was talking about that one factor in isolation as a reason for termination which was posted by someone back in the thread.

Bannasidhe

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

This is complete nonsense . There are actually only about 1M women aged 20-45 in Ireland. I've just checked it on the CSO website: as of 2011

All marital status
Female
20 - 24 years 150,595
25 - 29 years 187,408
30 - 34 years 199,171
35 - 39 years 182,024
40 - 44 years 164,482

When we restrict it to unmarried

State
Single
Female
20 - 24 years 143,606
25 - 29 years 143,383
30 - 34 years 97,355
35 - 39 years 57,254
40 - 44 years 36,544


Adding an adjustment for married women who don't want children and unmarried who do, I think my back of the envelope calculation was pretty accurate. I'm normally quite good at these kinds of estimates, in physics at least.

Figures from 2011 are hardly accurate 9 years later - and that is just one issue with your figures.

Women only become capable of being pregnant aged 20 do they?
What was the X Case about so?
Fertility also doesn't automatically end aged 44.
Women in their late 40s - Janet Jackson was 50 - have become pregnant.

If you are going to be throwing numbers around claiming they are an accurate reflection then you need to give the number of post-puberty/pre menopausal not selecting some arbitrary starting point like age 20 and end age of 44 to make a point.


CSO figures for 2017 show 1.9% of all live births in Ireland were to women under the age of 20 (that is live births - not number who were pregnant).
6.9% of live births were to women over 40 - it does not state how many were over 44 but even a conservative 2% would put 3.9% of all live births in 2017 outside the age range you are using. And I emphasise again these are live births - not number who were pregnant.

As for marital status - if you are assuming married women do not get abortions you are assuming incorrectly.

downinbigsmoke

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

are you assuming that people only have sex once a year? because that failure rate is per use not per person per year.

As I have said twice already, the figures are for a couple who have regular sexual intercourse over the period of a year.

For a one-night-stand it's about 365 times lower.

ohnonotgmail

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

As I have said twice already, the figures are for a couple who have regular sexual intercourse over the period of a year.

For a one-night-stand it's about 365 times lower.

you need to ask for a refund for whatever statistics course you went on.

ELM327

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

Are they? I never had much involvement with the pro-life groups during the referendum, but my sister, who knocked on doors for LoveBoth, is very pro-contraception.

I feel like some people are equating pro-life with observant Catholic.

The love both group is a front of the iona institute.
A few years prior, that group were against contraception. As was the catholic church that the iona group espouses.

downinbigsmoke

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Figures from 2011 are hardly accurate 9 years later - and that is just one issue with your figures.

Women only become capable of being pregnant aged 20 do they?
What was the X Case about so?
Fertility also doesn't automatically end aged 44.
Women in their late 40s - Janet Jackson was 50 - have become pregnant.

If you are going to be throwing numbers around claiming they are an accurate reflection then you need to give the number of post-puberty/pre menopausal not selecting some arbitrary starting point like age 20 and end age of 44 to make a point.


CSO figures for 2017 show 1.9% of all live births in Ireland were to women under the age of 20 (that is live births - not number who were pregnant).
6.9% of live births were to women over 40 - it does not state how many were over 44 but even a conservative 2% would put 3.9% of all live births in 2017 outside the age range you are using. And I emphasise again these are live births - not number who were pregnant.

As for marital status - if you are assuming married women do not get abortions you are assuming incorrectly.

Did you read my initial post? I started with a figure 25% higher (way above population growth) than the 2011 CSO figures and made some adjustments for married women who do not want children. I also estimated menopause to be at 45 not 40.

The idea that properly used contraception is unsafe is a myth spread by Catholic sex-ed classes in the 60s.

voted to repeal

did so for reasons that make it an irrelevance to me what the figures are

nozzferrahhtoo

Mad_maxx wrote: »

if the baby - fetus does not feel pain , i dont have a problem with it

Perhaps I can help with that?

The near entirety of choice based abortion happen in or before week 12. There is at this stage no evidence whatsoever that A) it experiences any pain or there is any sentience/consciousness there TO experience any pain in the first place.

Worrying that it might feel pain therefore is like wondering if you can phone someone in the next room when A) There is no phone in your room No phone in their room and C) There is no one in the other room anyway even if the phones were there.

cournioni wrote: »

Whats your views on taking away a life outside of the womb with out the consent of the life being taken? Are people entitled to have those views?

My views, though I was not the person you asked, is that we should have regard for the well being and rights of sentient agents. A fetus at 12 weeks is not one of these. A new born baby, to my knowledge, is.

So apples and oranges really. Or to be more accurate, apples and rocks.

downinbigsmoke

SusieBlue wrote: »

I'm talking about the pill, which is the most common and popular type of contraceptive.
In order to qualify for typical use rather than perfect use, a woman need only:

1. Vomit or have diarrhea up to 6 hours after taking the tablet.
2. Take the tablet an hour or more later than she's supposed to.
3. Take prescription medication.
4. Have a fever/high temperature.
5. Have improper storage.
6. Forget to take 1 tablet altogether.
7. Drink certain types of herbal tea.


If a woman does any of the above things, on any day of the month, she will fall into the bracket of "typical use" and she has a 9/100 chance of getting pregnant that month.
I can see how any of those things could happen quite easily, we're humans not robots.

This "typical" use vs "perfect" use is a false dichotomy. There are many kinds of "typical" use with different risk factors associated. It is certainly not the case that if you drink herbal tea once a year your chance of getting pregnant jumps to 9%. I would need to find a research article on this to be sure, but would place money on the fact that the only two of those with significant risk attached (and unfortunately are probably are the most common) are:

1. Vomit or have diarrhea up to 6 hours after taking the tablet.
5. Have improper storage.
6. Forget to take 1 tablet altogether.

The "typical" use figure includes people who occasionally take the pill immediately before or after sex (I think it probably contains women who take it to regulate heavy periods, but I don't know that and shouldn't speculate), and thus are at an 85% risk of pregnancy. I would think that provided you avoid this "pitfall" the risk is minimal.

ohnonotgmail

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

This "typical" use vs "perfect" use is a false dichotomy. There are many kinds of "typical" use with different risk factors associated. It is certainly not the case that if you drink herbal tea once a year your chance of getting pregnant jumps to 9%. I would need to find a research article on this to be sure, but would place money on the fact that the only two of those with significant risk attached (and unfortunately are probably are the most common) are:

1. Vomit or have diarrhea up to 6 hours after taking the tablet.
5. Have improper storage.
6. Forget to take 1 tablet altogether.

The "typical" use figure includes people who occasionally take the pill immediately before or after sex, and thus are at an 85% risk of pregnancy. I would think that provided you avoid this "pitfall" the risk is minimal.

"typical use" is an average figure for failure rates over a population of users. some have more failures, some have less. the average is the "typical use" failure rate in real life. real life is not perfect.

nozzferrahhtoo

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

As I explained in response to an earlier question, the pill is 99.99% effective when correctly used. Condoms are 98% effective. In a typical year, therefore each year 1/500,000 people using contraception correctly are going to get pregnant.

Curious, how did you come to the 1/500,000 figure? Could you show your workings on that one?

The rates of the combined use of the two is 99% under perfect conditions and 92% in typical use (last number I heard, apologies if it has been revised since).

You appear to be combining them incorrectly. You are taking the first figure which you cited as 99.99% but I have always heard as 99%. Giving you 1/10000. And then you are taking the 98% of THAT I think. Which gives you 98% of 100/1000000 which is 2/1000000 or 1/500000.

However combined use does not work that way, so if that is how you are doing it you need to re-do your workings on it. It does NOT mean you take the first % and then take the second % as a factor of the results of the first.

SusieBlue

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

This "typical" use vs "perfect" use is a false dichotomy. There are many kinds of "typical" use with different risk factors associated. It is certainly not the case that if you drink herbal tea once a year your chance of getting pregnant jumps to 9%. I would need to find a research article on this to be sure, but would place money on the fact that the only two of those with significant risk attached (and unfortunately are probably are the most common) are:

1. Vomit or have diarrhea up to 6 hours after taking the tablet.
5. Have improper storage.
6. Forget to take 1 tablet altogether.

The "typical" use figure includes people who occasionally take the pill immediately before or after sex (I think it probably contains women who take it to regulate heavy periods, but I don't know that and shouldn't speculate), and thus are at an 85% risk of pregnancy. I would think that provided you avoid this "pitfall" the risk is minimal.

They aren’t. You are saying that only 1/2 women per year get pregnant on the pill. I am showing you evidence to prove this isn’t the case.
The majority of women don’t perfectly use the pill all of the time, because we are human and we aren’t perfect. So with typical use, statistics have found that the pill is 91% effective when taken this way.

Typical use stats are far more accurate and reflective of the general population than perfect use.

Honestly, you seem to have very little knowledge on how the pill works. Of course your chance of getting pregnant doesn’t jump to 9% for the whole year if you have one cup of herbal tea.
Some herbal teas can have a laxative effect, so if a woman drinks some soon before or after having her pill, she isn’t protected for the remainder of the month.

There was huge scandal a few years ago when this herbal ‘diet’ tea called BooTea resulted in hundreds of women falling pregnant and some of them successfully sued the manufacturers because of their unwanted pregnancies. It can and does happen.

Bannasidhe

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

Did you read my initial post? I started with a figure 25% higher (way above population growth) than the 2011 CSO figures and made some adjustments for married women who do not want children. I also estimated menopause to be at 45 not 40.

The idea that properly used contraception is unsafe is a myth spread by Catholic sex-ed classes in the 60s.

You are the one who gave a list of figures to prove a point - I believe you were 'proving' there are 1m women in Ireland who are fertile rather than the 2m another poster gave.
I am responding to those figures.

To prove this 1m you gave 9 year old figures.
Arbitrary start and end ages.
In 2011 (the year of the figures you gave) there was an 11 yr old pregnant in the UK - which demonstrates that females can be fertile 9 years before your start date.
The oldest women to give birth in Ireland to date was 54. 10 years more than your cut off point.
That is a span of 19 years you left out of the figures you provided to prove a point about how many fertile women there are in Ireland.

The oldest woman in the world to give birth by the way was days away from her 67th birthday.

Even dismissing the extremes at both ends a more accurate fertility figure would be the number of females between 13 and 50. That is a span of 15 years you left out. There were 371,588 13-18 year olds in 2016 - if half of those are female that is 185,794 for a start who you didn't include.

Your figures were also for 2011 - since then it is estimated that to mid 2020 the population has increased by 349,534. How many of those are fertile females I wonder?

My point is that if you are going to start giving a breakdown of figures to prove some point than at least use up to date and accurate ones.

downinbigsmoke

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

I also estimated menopause to be at 45 not 40.

I'm 51 and am not menopausal yet. Not even a sign of it. I also became pregnant at age 28, where two forms of contraception both failed.

Pill and condom. I was meticulous about taking the pill at the same time every day, and used a condom too, but I must have been the unlucky 1 out of 2 that year.

Loafing Oaf

downinbigsmoke wrote: »

Correct sexual hygiene is for two methods of contraception to be used at all times. If a man wants to have sex without a condom he should have a vasectomy.

Are many couples in long-term relationships actually doing this though?

ohnonotgmail

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You are the one who gave a list of figures to prove a point - I believe you were 'proving' there are 1m women in Ireland who are fertile rather than the 2m another poster gave.
I am responding to those figures.

To prove this 1m you gave 9 year old figures.
Arbitrary start and end ages.
In 2011 (the year of the figures you gave) there was an 11 yr old pregnant in the UK - which demonstrates that females can be fertile 9 years before your start date.
The oldest women to give birth in Ireland to date was 54. 10 years more than your cut off point.
That is a span of 19 years you left out of the figures you provided to prove a point about how many fertile women there are in Ireland.

The oldest woman in the world to give birth by the way was days away from her 67th birthday.

Even dismissing the extremes at both ends a more accurate fertility figure would be the number of females between 13 and 50. That is a span of 15 years you left out. There were 371,588 13-18 year olds in 2016 - if half of those are female that is 185,794 for a start who you didn't include.

Your figures were also for 2011 - since then it is estimated that to mid 2020 the population has increased by 349,534. How many of those are fertile females I wonder?

My point is that if you are going to start giving a breakdown of figures to prove some point than at least use up to date and accurate ones.

i admitted that my figure of 2M was wrong, it is closer to 1M. Despite that i cannot understand how somebody can come up with a figure of 1-2 people per year accidentally falling pregnant while using contraception and not step back and think that their calculation is wrong. On the face of it the figure of 1-2 per year is just nonsense.

Bannasidhe

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm 51 and am not menopausal yet. Not even a sign of it. I also became pregnant at age 28, where two forms of contraception both failed.

Pill and condom. I was meticulous about taking the pill at the same time every day, and used a condom too, but I must have been the unlucky 1 out of 2 that year.

I began menopause aged 48, periods didn't stop completely for another 3 years - but I got my first period aged 9. That would put my personal fertility range as being between 9 and 51 - 18 years more than allowed by the figures given. My grand-daughter got her first period aged 11.

Isn't it amazing how women's bodies refuse to just conform to a set of arbitrary dates and laboratory test conditions?

ohnonotgmail

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I began menopause aged 48, periods didn't stop completely for another 3 years - but I got my first period aged 9. That would put my personal fertility range as being between 9 and 51 - 18 years more than allowed by the figures given. My grand-daughter got her first period aged 11.

Isn't it amazing how women's bodies refuse to just conform to a set of arbitrary dates and laboratory test conditions?

yeah, whats up with that?

Bannasidhe

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i admitted that my figure of 2M was wrong, it is closer to 1M. Despite that i cannot understand how somebody can come up with a figure of 1-2 people per year accidentally falling pregnant while using contraception and not step back and think that their calculation is wrong. On the face of it the figure of 1-2 per year is just nonsense.

It is closer to 1m then 2m yes, but my point is that if someone is going to be all smart arsey and provide figures than at least make them accurate figures. Not BS about 20 -44 as the age range females are fertile and 11 year old stats.

Bannasidhe

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

yeah, whats up with that?

Women's stuff... or something.

secondrowgal

Laura Old-fashioned Mace wrote: »

While 6666 (18.2 per day) is a fairly significant figure (imagine that as COVID Ire deaths), likely is small compared to other countries, in both the modern developed or developing world.

According to WHO, every year in the world there are an estimated 40-50 million abortions.
This corresponds to approximately 125,000 abortions per day.

In the USA, where nearly 50% pregnancies are unintended and 4/10 of these are terminated by abortion. This results in over 3,000 abortions per day. 22% of all pregnancies in the USA (excluding miscarriages) end in abortion. You can see why it's very emotive over there in the world's leading superpower.

Is basic family planning so hard to do?

If it really is, should females (esp in developing world) be microchipped with timed/remote control contraceptives i.e. auto dispension of hormones on small daily doses. Patents exist for this already, and are good for 16yrs once installed in the body which would prevent births before e.g. the age of 30.

Are. You. ****ing. Joking. Me? :mad:

Have read of this and re-educate yourself.

https://twitter.com/designmom/status/1040363431893725184

TLDR: Men are 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies.