Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

Delirium wrote: »

Currently abortion isn't an option for fatal foetal abnormality cases in Ireland.

Edit's after reading Tracy's letter again. Yes, her preferred option is the legal way things are done here presently.

I was thinking about women coming back from abortions abroad not having counselling or support services available to them to assist them in getting over grief and loss feelings, also having to wait for the return by post or courier of the feotus remains.

Separately I wonder how she reacted to the HSE report on the 12 abortions performed here in 2014 under medical certification.

aloyisious wrote: »

Yes. I was thinking about women coming back from abortions abroad not having counselling or support services available to them to assist them in getting over grief and loss feelings, also having to wait for the return by post or courier of the feotus remains.

Yeah and then they claim that 'abortion is more traumatic' after they've done all they can to make it so.

The Family & life group have this written on their facebook page in reference to Tracy Harkin's article...... [This is not very prominent on the Irish Times website. I wonder why. But it's worth searching for (and sharing).]

I guess they don't know that the news of Tracy's article has spread, or they haven't got much feedback, or even being economic with the reality.

MrPudding

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Yeah and then they claim that 'abortion is more traumatic' after they've done all they can to make it so.

Similar, I think, to the laundries. The church says "ah, but it was the families that sent them". They set up the condition then try to abdicate responsibility for the consequences.

MrP

Ray D'arcy has just had the mother of Grace, a 10 month old baby girl {who was diagnosed as being incompatible with life outside the womb} on his show. He's just said there will be a podcast of the interview. It relates the life story (to date) of Grace and her mother around the months leading up to Grace being born to the present. Due to the shortness of time for the interview, there is not really a great detail described after Grace was born.

I regret to say that I was so concentrated on the interview that I missed the woman's name, However, having heard the name Grace being the name of the girl, I reckon it's the woman and child mentioned in a recent Irish newspaper article. Grace was diagnosed as having Downs-syndrome along with other ailments which was interpreted to mean Grace would not survive for long, and that it was amazing that there had not been a miscarriage. Her mother said several times she had not been told of hospice care and said that FFA was a term not used by doctors.

Despite being asked several (3) times by Ray of her opinion on women who had had abortions, she said she would not condemn them for their choice. I got the impression that Ray, despite his stated position, wanted her to make a statement that she was opposed to abortion, period.

Listening to the woman speaking gave a whole different read on the paper article, hearing her speak with tone and time to explain live what she felt made for a completely different understanding of the article and her reasoning behind going for a birth rather than an abortion. I recommend that people go listen to the podcast when it becomes available. Re women being given the choice to decide for themselves, I still support it 100 percent.

So what's the point? Even with the availability (in other countries at present, perhaps here in future) of abortion for FFA or disabilities it's still a choice, a choice which some will take and others will not. Anecdotes about women who did or did not abort are just that, anecdotes. I don't see the point of radio show X having a woman in one week who aborted and radio show Y having a woman in the next who didn't. Personal stories and anecdotes are safer ground for the broadcasters than actual debate. They can pretend they're 'airing the issue' or whatever when it's really just the radio equivalent of the weekly Late Late Show 'isn't that awful' illness slot.

Edit: that said, the topic of abortion and the stories of the women who have had abortions has been suppressed and shamed for so long that it does need to be aired, but it seems now the broadcasters have to 'balance' everything, so it's anecdote one week and counter-anecdote the other. This doesn't serve the broadcasters or audience well IMHO and the BAI and their frequently idiotic rulings have to take the blame here. The current forced 'balance' ignores the last 30 or 40 years of anti-abortion coverage on all broadcast media which went largely unchallenged, can we have 30 or 40 years of pro-choice coverage for balance? Can we feck.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

So what's the point? Even with the availability (in other countries at present, perhaps here in future) of abortion for FFA or disabilities it's still a choice, a choice which some will take and others will not. Anecdotes about women who did or did not abort are just that, anecdotes. I don't see the point of radio show X having a woman in one week who aborted and radio show Y having a woman in the next who didn't. Personal stories and anecdotes are safer ground for the broadcasters than actual debate. They can pretend they're 'airing the issue' or whatever when it's really just the radio equivalent of the weekly Late Late Show 'isn't that awful' illness slot.

Edit: that said, the topic of abortion and the stories of the women who have had abortions has been suppressed and shamed for so long that it does need to be aired, but it seems now the broadcasters have to 'balance' everything, so it's anecdote one week and counter-anecdote the other. This doesn't serve the broadcasters or audience well IMHO and the BAI and their frequently idiotic rulings have to take the blame here. The current forced 'balance' ignores the last 30 or 40 years of anti-abortion coverage on all broadcast media which went largely unchallenged, can we have 30 or 40 years of pro-choice coverage for balance? Can we feck.

Though that kind of reads as you don't think we need to have people on radio/tv talking about why they did or didn't have abortions, but there is a need to have people on radio/tv talking about why they did have abortions. With that kind of logic being presented, you might understand why others with views a little different from yours might want what you're proposing balanced with people on radio/tv talking about why they didn't have abortions; so we don't end up with those people being suppressed and shamed as you say. Because no one actually wants to repeat the last 30 or 40 years in a mirror image, I think most of us would rather move forward.

[Deleted User]

Or they're simply making the point that the plural of anecdote is not data.

Data unfortunately doesn't make for interesting stories... Anecdotes do. Guess which an entertainment medium iselling advertising s going to prefer.

[Deleted User]

Absolam wrote: »

Data unfortunately doesn't make for interesting stories... Anecdotes do. Guess which an entertainment medium iselling advertising s going to prefer.

Yes. We know. Hotblack Desiato said as much.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

.......Personal stories and anecdotes are safer ground for the broadcasters than actual debate. They can pretend they're 'airing the issue' or whatever when it's really just the radio equivalent of the weekly Late Late Show 'isn't that awful' illness slot........

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes. We know. Hotblack Desiato said as much.

There you go... agreement! They'd don't even need to pretend anything, it just needs to be what people want to listen to.

lazygal

http://www.independent.ie/life/health-wellbeing/health-features/all-i-wanted-to-do-was-give-her-a-chance-even-if-that-was-oneinamillion-irish-woman-whose-miracle-baby-survived-the-odds-34904084.html

This is the woman who was on Ray D'arcy.

http://www.catholicireland.net/baby-fatal-foetal-abnormality-pro-life-rally/

See also here.

No surprises there.

lazygal

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

No surprises there.

Indeed. The secular pro lifers we hear so much about are strangely silent.

lazygal wrote: »

Indeed. The secular pro lifers we hear so much about are strangely silent.

About what?

lazygal wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/life/health-wellbeing/health-features/all-i-wanted-to-do-was-give-her-a-chance-even-if-that-was-oneinamillion-irish-woman-whose-miracle-baby-survived-the-odds-34904084.html

This is the woman who was on Ray D'arcy.

Although Down Syndrome is compatible with life, doctors believed the other medical hurdles facing Sinead’s child meant that the chances of it surviving were minuscule and they suggested she should consider a termination.

Here's a woman who chose not to abort, and there's a photo of the child sitting on her knee. What's your point? That the child is unhealthy? That she should have aborted? That she shouldn't have?
That she had a choice in the matter? That the child had no choice?

The point is that she made a certain choice, and is campaigning for all other women in a similar situation to be forced to make the same 'choice' as she did, unless they are willing and able to go to another country.

Choice in danger quotes because a choice between forced birth, 14 years in prison or going abroad isn't really a choice.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

The point is that she made a certain choice, and is campaigning for all other women in a similar situation to be forced to make the same 'choice' as she did..

Is she campaigning?

aloyisious wrote: »

Ray D'arcy has just had the mother of Grace, a 10 month old baby girl {who was diagnosed as being incompatible with life outside the womb} on his show. He's just said there will be a podcast of the interview. It relates the life story (to date) of Grace and her mother around the months leading up to Grace being born to the present. Due to the shortness of time for the interview, there is not really a great detail described after Grace was born.
Despite being asked several (3) times by Ray of her opinion on women who had had abortions, she said she would not condemn them for their choice. I got the impression that Ray, despite his stated position, wanted her to make a statement that she was opposed to abortion, period.

I haven't listened to the podcast myself, but I have no reason to disbelieve the above. She seems like someone telling her own story. People like talking about their own kids. Sometimes they won't shut up about them :pac:

State could cover foetal return costs. No link is being provided by me as I read the article in the paper (S/Indo) about the state possibly providing financial help to citizens seeking to repatriate the remains of their feotus following on from abortions abroad. The report said there is a chance that Simon Harris, Minister for Health, may approve the measure being considered by his Dept to provide funding for it. The Dept has made clear that things being left for the abortion convention to consider will NOT be considered for funding.

I assume people here interested in the issue will be able to get and read the newspaper article themselves. It contains the POV's of both the Life Institute and a new group, The Terminations for Medical Reasons (TFMR) group. TFMR is seeking assistance for provision of post-natal help for the women concerned, including the above funding. The Life institute opposes abortion and matters attached to it.

I imagine that it may well be similar-to the supply of state funds by consular officials to citizens stuck abroad due to financial problems, on a loan basis repayable at the soonest opportunity possible when home.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

The point is that she made a certain choice, and is campaigning for all other women in a similar situation to be forced to make the same 'choice' as she did, unless they are willing and able to go to another country.
Choice in danger quotes because a choice between forced birth, 14 years in prison or going abroad isn't really a choice.

I think campaigning is more than an overstatement, before you even get to the fact that she simply isn't advocating forcing people to make any choice; that's just the way you colour it because you think she's opposing your point of view. The fact is, she's getting airtime and being asked to speak for a much simpler reason; she's offering hope. For all the people being told their situation is hopeless, that there is no chance their child will survive and they should give up, she's saying maybe they have a chance, maybe they shouldn't give up, because she didn't give up, and she has a child despite what she was told. That's a message that people in that situation really really want to hear, even if in fact most of them will not be as fortunate as she was. You can be cynical about it and say, well, if she's not trying to force people like I said she was, she's giving people false hope and she shouldn't be doing that either. But leave your agenda out of it and you'll see it's not about who does and doesn't want abortion, it's about people who do want their children, and are almost certainly going to lose them.

recedite wrote: »

Is she campaigning?

See post 3133.

I haven't listened to the podcast myself, but I have no reason to disbelieve the above. She seems like someone telling her own story. People like talking about their own kids. Sometimes they won't shut up about them :pac:

"pro-life" rallies are not about 'supporting women more' as she is quoted in the news pieces, they are about maintaining the denial of choice to women.

Aloysius, TFMR have been around for a couple of years at least, so not new.

One of my nephews discussing Enda and this .... http://www.newstalk.com/Citizens-Assembly-on-Irelands-abortion-laws-to-be-set-up-from-next-week..... on F/B

Seeing as how it was on F/B, I reckon anyone replying would be on his friends list in order for him to see the nephews post. One reply to his as follows....... The problem I see, is the inevitable opening of the floodgates bit by bit and without having even seen the movement we will have wholesale abortion foisted upon us. It's only inevitable and for me deeply disturbing.

Nephews reply....... Education. Education. Education. No one wants abortion as contraception.

God, I like my nephew......

It's a Monday morning..... the article is a bit dated (reference to UN Mellett report as being issued last week) & as the Oireachtas is in recess, it's going to a committee (nice to know they're still there in Leinster House

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

"pro-life" rallies are not about 'supporting women more' as she is quoted in the news pieces, they are about maintaining the denial of choice to women.

Nope, they're about maintaining the limitation on killing unborn children...

aloyisious wrote: »

The Terminations for Medical Reasons (TFMR) group.

It seems an odd name. Isn't every UK abortion supposed to be justified by a threat to the health of the mother?

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Abortion/Pages/Why-is-it-necessary.aspx

recedite wrote: »

It seems an odd name. Isn't every UK abortion supposed to be justified by a threat to the health of the mother?

Possibly not the best link for info on your question re the UK, if you are a No Abortion person, but it does seem to have the info and does mention the life of the woman and FFA........

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwithdn5kI_OAhWJKMAKHcxBAZsQFggoMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mariestopes.org.uk%2Fwomen%2Fabortion%2Fabortion-facts%2Fwhat-uk-law-abortion&usg=AFQjCNG1qH9FbCwYgnsj6CVVyxl7m-DEbw

If your question is pertinent to Irish women, I'd suggest you check the POLDPA act re health versus life.....

rainbow kirby

recedite wrote: »

It seems an odd name. Isn't every UK abortion supposed to be justified by a threat to the health of the mother?

eviltwin

recedite wrote: »

It seems an odd name. Isn't every UK abortion supposed to be justified by a threat to the health of the mother?

The term refers to the health of the foetus not the mother. The group represents women who had a diagnosis of an FFA which would likely have happened well into the second trimester requiring a particular traumatic journey to a specialist hospital - not an abortion clinic - at the cost of thousands of euros. They then have the added indignity of having their babies remains sent home by courier or smuggled home. And finally they have no specific counselling services available to them.

So they are anti-abortion except in their own specific cases, in which they are pro-abortion. But then they are unhappy with the lack of respect shown to the aborted foetuses by the surgeons/hospitals that perform the abortions.

eviltwin

recedite wrote: »

So they are anti-abortion except in their own specific cases, in which they are pro-abortion. But then they are unhappy with the lack of respect shown to the aborted foetuses by the surgeons/hospitals that perform the abortions.

Not sure where you are getting this idea from. I know a few of the ladies involved, they are not anti abortion at all. They are talking about an issue they have personal experience of, not campaigning to make one form of abortion legal and one illegal.

Who said they are unhappy with the hospital, where is this lack of respect

It's not the fault of the UK that our laws are the way they are. My understanding is the hospitals go out of their way to take care of the women from Ireland.