Girl sectioned after psychiatrist ruled out abortion

One eyed Jack · 13-06-2017 09:02PM

cnocbui wrote: »

https://www.childlawproject.ie/publications/order-detaining-pregnant-girl-seeking-abortion-discharged/

You then just use a bit of logic to work out that given their latter agitation, the mother and daughter are unlikely to have traveled to Dublin knowing the daughter would be sectioned, so it seems reasonable to conclude they were deliberately mislead.

It would be equally logical and reasonable to conclude that the mother and daughter would have made this assumption of their own volition given that there's no mention in the report of anyone having told them any such thing.

cnocbui · 13-06-2017 09:08PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It would be equally logical and reasonable to conclude that the mother and daughter would have made this assumption of their own volition given that there's no mention in the report of anyone having told them any such thing.

No it wouldn't.

In the course of my life, I have traveled to and attended innumerable appointments. Not once ever, have I been under any misapprehension as to where I was going or why.

The report is very deliberately lacking in significant details, such as this one, most likely in an attempt to preserve professional reputations.

Captain Obvious · 13-06-2017 09:13PM

cnocbui wrote: »

https://www.childlawproject.ie/publications/order-detaining-pregnant-girl-seeking-abortion-discharged/

You then just use a bit of logic to work out that given their latter agitation, the mother and daughter are unlikely to have traveled to Dublin knowing the daughter would be sectioned, so it seems reasonable to conclude they were deliberately mislead.

Doesn't say anything about her being misled or trapped into going to Dublin. It's a massive assumption to make.

cnocbui · 13-06-2017 09:22PM

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Doesn't say anything about her being misled or trapped into going to Dublin. It's a massive assumption to make.

Your massive is my reasonable, so let's just agree to disagree as clarification would require the girl or her mother to provide further detail, which is unlikely to happen unless they make this the third case to complain of human rights being violated by Ireland's abortion legislation.

One eyed Jack · 13-06-2017 09:25PM

cnocbui wrote: »

No it wouldn't.

In the course of my life, I have traveled to and attended innumerable appointments. Not once ever, have I been under any misapprehension as to where I was going or why.

Right, so each of us can only base our logical and reasonable conclusions on our own experiences, so you can understand then why we might come to different conclusions - our experiences clearly differ.

The report is very deliberately lacking in significant details, such as this one, most likely in an attempt to preserve professional reputations.

Another logical and reasonable conclusion? I don't have to assume that the report is deliberately lacking specific details in order to protect the anonymity of the child and the family involved in the case -

It will pursue its aims and objectives by attending the courts where child care cases are heard in order to report on those proceedings while protecting the anonymity of the children and their families, in accordance with a Protocol drawn up by its Director. This will be based on a previous Protocol for reporting family law proceedings by the Courts Service. Dr Coulter directed the Courts Service Family Law Reporting Project, which published a series of reports on family law cases in the courts and a Final Report in 2007.

https://www.childlawproject.ie/about/

One eyed Jack · 13-06-2017 09:29PM

cnocbui wrote: »

Your massive is my reasonable, so let's just agree to disagree as clarification would require the girl or her mother to provide further detail, which is unlikely to happen unless they make this the third case to complain of human rights being violated by Ireland's abortion legislation.

The case had nothing to do with Irelands abortion legislation, the case was only concerned with the detention of the girl, not her pregnancy.

The Irish Times chose to pick up on the abortion angle and run with it even though the case before the Courts wasn't about abortion.

cnocbui · 13-06-2017 09:36PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Right, so each of us can only base our logical and reasonable conclusions on our own experiences, so you can understand then why we might come to different conclusions - our experiences clearly differ.

Well, I am not in the least bit surprised that you have experience of going places, not knowing the nature of your destination or why you were going.

cnocbui · 13-06-2017 09:42PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The case had nothing to do with Irelands abortion legislation, the case was only concerned with the detention of the girl, not her pregnancy.

The Irish Times chose to pick up on the abortion angle and run with it even though the case before the Courts wasn't about abortion.

I just saw a pig fly past the window! Fancy that; whatever next?

Captain Obvious · 13-06-2017 09:48PM

cnocbui wrote: »

In the course of my life, I have traveled to and attended innumerable appointments. Not once ever, have I been under any misapprehension as to where I was going or why.

How many times have you been misled as to where you were going?

cnocbui wrote: »

Your massive is my reasonable, so let's just agree to disagree as clarification would require the girl or her mother to provide further detail, which is unlikely to happen unless they make this the third case to complain of human rights being violated by Ireland's abortion legislation.

No, your assumptiom assigns malice and deception to doctors that may just have easily being doing their job to the letter.

cnocbui · 13-06-2017 09:59PM

Captain Obvious wrote: »

How many times have you been misled as to where you were going?

No, your assumptiom assigns malice and deception to doctors that may just have easily being doing their job to the letter.

We don't agree, I'm leaving it there.

One eyed Jack · 13-06-2017 10:02PM

cnocbui wrote: »

Well, I am not in the least bit surprised that you have experience of going places, not knowing the nature of your destination or why you were going.

cnocbui wrote: »

I just saw a pig fly past the window! Fancy that; whatever next?

Well I wasn't expecting an acknowledgement that your experience while it may lead to what you assume is a reasonable and logical conclusion to you, isn't universal, so that's something I suppose.

volchitsa · 13-06-2017 10:12PM

cnocbui wrote: »

https://www.childlawproject.ie/publications/order-detaining-pregnant-girl-seeking-abortion-discharged/

The consultant adolescent psychiatrist said that there was an initial concern of self-harm and that she was very distressed to find out about the pregnancy.

The consultant adolescent psychiatrist said that the young girl's mental health was difficult to ascertain on admission because both the young girl and her mother thought that they were being transferred to Dublin for a termination and she was very agitated when she found that she was being admitted to a mental health unit.

You then just use a bit of logic to work out that given their latter agitation, the mother and daughter are unlikely to have traveled to Dublin knowing the daughter would be sectioned, so it seems reasonable to conclude they were deliberately mislead.

Can someone help me with that quote please, because it seems to me exactly as though the girl asked for an abortion on mental health grounds, this was refused but she was then sectioned on grounds of suicidal ideation - is that what happened? Or have I missed something?

Because I definitely remember during the POLDPA debate a psychiatrist dismissing the very idea that that might happen. Now apparently it has. Who was that psychiatrist and has he expressed an opinion on this latest shining example of Ireland's abuse of women and girls?

The last bit is also puzzling : they went ahead with the forced admission because she was distressed at learning that she was being sectioned. That sounds like fūcking Soviet Russia.

Captain Obvious · 13-06-2017 10:34PM

volchitsa wrote: »

Can someone help me with that quote please, because it seems to me exactly as though the girl asked for an abortion on mental health grounds, this was refused but she was then sectioned on grounds of suicidal ideation - is that what happened? Or have I missed something?

Because I definitely remember during the POLDPA debate a psychiatrist dismissing the very idea that that might happen. Now apparently it has. Who was that psychiatrist and has he expressed an opinion on this latest shining example of Ireland's abuse of women and girls?

The last bit is also puzzling : they went ahead with the forced admission because she was distressed at learning that she was being sectioned. That sounds like fūcking Soviet Russia.

They couldn't know for sure the definite reason for her distress or mental state at that time of her assessment so erred on the side of caution and admitted her for further assessment. It's the same for non-pregnant people who claim to be suicidal and show definite signs.

13-06-2017 10:45PM

Captain Obvious wrote: »

They couldn't know for sure the definite reason for her distress or mental state at that time of her assessment so erred on the side of caution and admitted her for further assessment. It's the same for non-pregnant people who claim to be suicidal and show definite signs.

Except it isn't, as has been discussed a lot in this thread.

Anita Blow · 13-06-2017 10:48PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Except it isn't, as has been discussed a lot in this thread.

In what way is it different?

13-06-2017 11:00PM

Anita Blow wrote: »

In what way is it different?

Suicidal people are rarely sectioned, even suicidal children.

gctest50 · 13-06-2017 11:01PM

http://bit.ly/2rbYAF5

..... both the young girl and her mother thought that they were being transferred to Dublin for a termination

Why did both of them think this ?

Surely there must be a record of this ?

and she was very agitated when she found that she was being admitted to a mental health unit.

I'd imagine you'd bit agitated if you were told you were going on the train to the zoo and ended up in the saltmines

.

volchitsa · 13-06-2017 11:10PM

Captain Obvious wrote: »

They couldn't know for sure the definite reason for her distress or mental state at that time of her assessment so erred on the side of caution and admitted her for further assessment. It's the same for non-pregnant people who claim to be suicidal and show definite signs.

But they said she was very definite about her reasons for wanting an abortion - so she appears to have been clear about the reasons for her distress, and coherent as well.

On that : she was able to travel with her mother to Dublin. Whereas someone who's so mentally ill they're going to be involuntarily committed isn't normally safe to be sitting in a car without at least another person to supervise and more usually would require special transport (and yes I do know this, someone in my family is manic-depressive) so she was calm enough until she (and her mother?) learned that she was in fact being sectioned.

Outlaw Pete · 13-06-2017 11:19PM

As said before..... maybe the psychiatrist felt she was suicidal for a different reason... one which abortion wouldn't remedy. They could have felt the girl was being coached, or that she had been raped and the abortion was maybe being sought as an attempt to cover that up...... there is a whole host of reasons why they may have made the choice which they did..... bit early in the day to be saying we're like Soviet Russia.

13-06-2017 11:20PM

volchitsa wrote: »

But they said she was very definite about her reasons for wanting an abortion - so she appears to have been clear about the reasons for her distress, and coherent as well.

On that : she was able to travel with her mother to Dublin. Whereas someone who's so mentally ill they're going to be involuntarily committed isn't normally safe to be sitting in a car without at least another person to supervise and more usually would require special transport (and yes I do know this, someone in my family is manic-depressive) so she was calm enough until she (and her mother?) learned that she was in fact being sectioned.

I can also back this up, a Garda car or ambulance would be common practice in transporting a person from the location where they are when they are assessed to be in need of sectioning, to the facility where they are to be treated.

13-06-2017 11:21PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

As said before..... maybe the psychiatrist felt she was suicidal for a different reason... one which abortion wouldn't remedy. They could have felt the girl was being coached or that she had been raped and the abortion was being had to cover this up...... there is a whole host of reasons why they may have made the choice which they did..... bit early in the day to be saying we're like the Soviet Russia.

While I don't agree with you, this is a point very well made and well explained. Finally! Good man Pete

koumi · 13-06-2017 11:29PM

Whatever about soviet Russia there is no doubt that Ireland is nowhere near capable of providing a standard of care that is required, and it's pretty f?cking dismal having to contend with it every time these kind of situations arise. It is practically medieval.

volchitsa · 13-06-2017 11:33PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

As said before..... maybe the psychiatrist felt she was suicidal for a different reason... one which abortion wouldn't remedy. They could have felt the girl was being coached, or that she had been raped and the abortion was maybe being sought as an attempt to cover that up...... there is a whole host of reasons why they may have made the choice which they did..... bit early in the day to be saying we're like Soviet Russia.

That's even worse - you're suggesting they might have sectioned her for trying to pull a fast one on them about the abortion?

That's exactly like Soviet Russia - punishing people by sending them to mental hospitals!

hatrickpatrick · 13-06-2017 11:43PM

Have none of ye heard of Occam's Razor? It takes a fair stretch of the imagination to read "the girl and her mother believed that she was being transferred to dublin for an abortion" and conclude anything other than that some scumbag lied to her so that she would "go quietly" and not resist being sectioned.

gctest50 · 13-06-2017 11:49PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Have none of ye heard of Occam's Razor? It takes a fair stretch of the imagination to read "the girl and her mother believed that she was being transferred to dublin for an abortion" and conclude anything other than that some scumbag lied to her so that she would "go quietly" and not resist being sectioned.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Have none of ye heard of Occam's Razor?

Doesn't work here, you need Paddys' Razor - brown envelope or some other sh!te at work

then it all gets buried in reports and something something holy bishops Eircom shares House prices

Outlaw Pete · 13-06-2017 11:55PM

volchitsa wrote: »

That's even worse - you're suggesting they might have sectioned her for trying to pull a fast one on them about the abortion?

That's exactly like Soviet Russia - punishing people by sending them to mental hospitals!

Nope, what I said was there are number of variables one of which could be that she may have been pregnant as a result of rape (by a family member perhaps) and her suicidal ideation may have been very very real.... just not solely because of she did not want to have the baby she was carrying. I note for example that it was said:

".....termination of pregnancy was not the solution for all the child’s problems at this stage"

...and that to me is a very interesting choice of words.

Again, it's just one of many possibilities and I think it's a little early to be using her as some kind of prime example of why the 8th needs to be repealed as is currently happening all across social media today. It might turn out that her situation does indeed prove to be something which results in the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act / the 8th being looked at, repealed or amended.... but right now to say all that is somewhat premature would be a massive understatement.

gctest50 · 14-06-2017 12:01AM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

As said before..... maybe the psychiatrist felt she was suicidal for a different reason... one which abortion wouldn't remedy. They could have felt the girl was being coached, or that she had been raped and the abortion was maybe being sought as an attempt to cover that up...... there is a whole host of reasons why they may have made the choice which they did.................

Well if a psychiatrist can be trusted with all that, they can be trusted working in a setup with no law restricting abortion at all

Anita Blow wrote: »

.....Ideally the 8th would be gone and we wouldn't have it complicating such personal & private medical conditions but unfortunately this is the current legal situation in which professionals must act.

14-06-2017 12:06AM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Nope, what I said was there are number of variables one of which could be that she may have been pregnant as a result of rape (by a family member perhaps) and her suicidal ideation may have been very very real.... just not solely because of she did not want to have the baby she was carrying.

She was 14, even if she consented, by Irish law she cannot consent so it is, by law, still rape. She wanted an abortion. The psychiatrist thought that a termination would not solve all of her problems so did not allow her a termination. Surely it would solve the biggest problem facing her at that moment? She was 14 years old. Unwanted pregnancy at that age is a very big problem to begin with. I'd rather they deal with that first and look into her psychological issues after!

gctest50 · 14-06-2017 12:23AM

Deleted User wrote: »

,,,,. Surely it would solve the biggest problem facing her at that moment? She was 14 years old..........

She can't be a good little incubator if she isn't locked up, might run away or something

the old get-as-many-babies-as-possible-to-sell thing must be part of the DNA of some of them

One eyed Jack · 14-06-2017 12:39AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

She was 14, even if she consented, by Irish law she cannot consent so it is, by law, still rape. She wanted an abortion. The psychiatrist thought that a termination would not solve all of her problems so did not allow her a termination. Surely it would solve the biggest problem facing her at that moment? She was 14 years old. Unwanted pregnancy at that age is a very big problem to begin with. I'd rather they deal with that first and look into her psychological issues after!

budgese you're not the first one to mention it, but where are people getting the idea that the child in this case was 14? I've seen it mentioned a couple of times now but there was no mention of her age in the report?

It's quite possible though that it was determined that her pregnancy wasn't the biggest problem facing her at that moment, and that there could indeed have been other factors which we are not privy to which led to her guardian ad litem and the consultant psychologists arguing that it was no longer necessary for her to be detained, and the Judge agreed with their determination.

To have looked into her psychological issues first would appear to have been the more prudent and immediate course of action in those circumstances than arguing that she should be permitted to travel for an abortion, and her guardian ad litem in the case also argued that it was on the grounds that the child did not have a mental health disorder that she be discharged -

The GAL pointed out that there was no conflict regarding the evidence from the two consultant psychiatrists and therefore the Order should be discharged immediately. The GAL outlined that although an application was made in respect of the child’s right to travel, it was not necessary that the court consider the application under that ground, but rather solely on the basis that the child did not have a mental health disorder and therefore could not be detained under the Mental Health Act 2001.

Girl sectioned after psychiatrist ruled out abortion

Comments