nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

PopePalpatine

I didn't know whether to post this here or in the Sanctimony of Pro-Lifers thread in t'udder forum - a BBC article on Paraguay's "epidemic" of child pregnancies. Paraguay only allows for abortion if the mother's life is at risk. On average, two girls aged 14 and under become pregnant in Paraguay every day.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Odhinn

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Further to this:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/sinn-f%C3%A9in-to-amend-its-stance-on-abortion-1.3287524

Is this de facto 'abortion on demand'?

Re GA's declaration of his 'pro-choice' hand, I'm wondering is he doing this at the behest of the emerging Dublin leadership. Might be an easier sell to 'traditional republicans' if it was perceived to be coming from the boss man himself rather than Mary Lou et al...

It's more reflective of changing attitudes in the party membership. Motions calling for "on demand" have previously been voted down at ardfheiseanna over the years.

Loafing Oaf

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

This is interesting, although it's not entirely clear that he favours full liberalisation of the law. If that's the case that's certainly a departure from his previous position, and the logical corollary is that he should be calling for the extension of British abortion law to NI. My impression had been that the younger republic-based SF favoured a more radical position on abortion but were being held back by Adams and the late Martin McGuinness but seemingly that's no longer the case...

Further to this:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/sinn-f%C3%A9in-to-amend-its-stance-on-abortion-1.3287524

Sinn Féin is to agree an amended position on abortion at its Ard Comhairle next Saturday, allowing for terminations when a mother’s health is at risk.

Is this de facto 'abortion on demand'?

Re GA's declaration of his 'pro-choice' hand, I'm wondering is he doing this at the behest of the emerging Dublin leadership. Might be an easier sell to 'traditional republicans' if it was perceived to be coming from the boss man himself rather than Mary Lou et al...

recedite

aloyisious wrote: »

BTW, Miss Ascough's surname is pronounced with the GH silent.

SBD. It's a Silent But Deadly Ascough..

aloyisious

MSN news online.....

Part of Katie Ascough's replies to interview by Marian Finucane earlier today..... When asked for her thoughts on abortion in cases of rape, she told RTE Radio 1: “(Rape) is one of the most abhorrent crimes towards women and I completely condemn it. In fact I think we need to look at having more serious sentences for rapists in Ireland. “But at the same time, I do not think that abortion is the answer to this. “The child should not have to bear the brunt of their father’s crime. The child should not be essentially sentenced to death for what their father has done.”

Ms Ascough, whose father is on the board at the Iona Institute, said Irish women need more support during a crisis pregnancy but argued that legalising abortion would be importing “England’s problem”.

She said her view on abortion is due to her mother having a misscarriage and she was able to hold her dead brother in her arms, looking at his physical appearance, it gave her the reason for her position on abortion.

.........................................................................................................................................................

One of the reasons given by her in respect of her decision to change the wording in the handbook, on legal asvice, was that it put her at risk of a conviction and a conviction meant she would not be able to travel abroud. It's probable that by that she meant travel to the US as her mother is US by birth and she has family in Texas.

Her statement about importing England's problem must be a reference to UK law and how she sees the law as a problem best left abroad, seeing as how abortion is not available here. The fact that such a position leaves irish women [twelve a day by her account in the interview] having to travel abroad for the abortions they want and actually need for medical reasons.

BYW, Miss Ascough's surname is pronounced with the GH silent.

gctest50

knipex wrote: »

I cannot quote your quote but I personally know many children and adults with spina bifida hydrocephalus living full and active lives. Some are wheelchair bound and may have issues with Bowel and Urinary control but other than that they live full lives same as you and me.

They go to school, university, work in the public and private sector, work as engineers, scientists, administrators, clerks and some are unemployed.

I am not aware that its now considered a FFA and would be extremely concerned if it was considered grounds for late term abortion..

Ah sorry, not late term, by "11½ hour" i meant they would drag it out until about 23 weeks

(Abortion being legal in England up to 24 weeks under the Abortion Act 1967 ).

recedite

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Kill them all, and let god sort them out?
I see they have their own website BTW

knipex wrote: »

To Clarify
I am questioning the story as reported..

Don't believe everything you read

The story may have been manipulated, to suit a particular agenda.

.......

This post has been deleted.

knipex

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I am sorry if I wasn't clear.

To Clarify

I am questioning the story as reported..

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I don't actually have a problem with that (in theory) but where do you draw the line ??

In my mind the debate is about the point when ti changes from begin a choice that impacts on the woman only to when it impacts on two lives.

What is concerning me is that much of the debate at the moment does not think there should be any upper limit.

Abortion on demand at any stage of the pregnancy for any reason..

That I could not support.

aloyisious

MrPudding wrote: »

I'm confused. I though he was anti-choice... Why is he making an argument for abortion?

MrP

I don't know but can't help wondering if he consulted his twin first.

.......

This post has been deleted.

knipex

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

As i said I was unable to quote the quote, it was not my intention to remove the context and I ensured the quote was indexed.

I am well aware of the differing severity of spina bifida and hydrocephalus (indeed I mentioned them in my post) but I am not aware of it ever being classified as a fatal fetal abnormality.

A Fetal Abnormality.. yes but not a fatal one..

I am not a doctor and I am open to clarification but to my knowledge spina bifida and hydrocephalus is classified as a fetal abnormality not a fatal abnormality

.......

This post has been deleted.

knipex

gctest50 wrote: »

I think there was a "thing" where a few hospitals wouldn't do tests until the 11½ hour - women then wouldn't have enough time to make arrangements

I cannot quote your quote but I personally know many children and adults with spina bifida hydrocephalus living full and active lives. Some are wheelchair bound and may have issues with Bowel and Urinary control but other than that they live full lives same as you and me.

They go to school, university, work in the public and private sector, work as engineers, scientists, administrators, clerks and some are unemployed.

I am not aware that its now considered a FFA and would be extremely concerned if it was considered grounds for late term abortion..

recedite

aloyisious wrote: »

Mattie allegedly said himself and and Independent pro-life senator Ronan Mullen were "the result of a pregnancy" before responding to laughter by shouting "this is why this committee is a charade".

Presumably in the back of his mind he meant to say "an unwanted pregnancy".
But being a politician, and not being able to refer to himself as "unwanted", the front part of his mind edited out that word before it reached his mouth.

MrPudding

aloyisious wrote: »

Mattie allegedly said himself and and Independent pro-life senator Ronan Mullen were "the result of a pregnancy"

I'm confused. I though he was anti-choice... Why is he making an argument for abortion?

MrP

aloyisious

The Irish Examiner reports that the Oireahtas 8th amendment committee heard today from a US-based Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) witness that Ireland is at risk of having to pay costly compensation to thousands of women forced to travel abroad to receive an abortion unless the law is immediately changed to make the procedure legal and easily accessible. The report said that two witnesses from the Pro-Life side cancelled their appearance before the committee on the grounds that it is biased against Pro-Life views.

It is reported that during private session before today's committee meeting, committee chair and Fine Gael senator Catherine Noone repeated her call for pro-life witnesses and said she would be open to holding a teleconference call or calls with pro-life experts in Australia and other countries who were previously rejected because of travel cost concerns. Later on in public session the committee members were accused by a member, Mattie McGrath, of bullying. Mattie allegedly said himself and and Independent pro-life senator Ronan Mullen were "the result of a pregnancy" before responding to laughter by shouting "this is why this committee is a charade".

If the last sentence is correct worded and it was, as reported, said in public session, it [imo] is a strange statement to make.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/ireland-at-risk-of-having-to-compensate-thousands-of-women-travelling-abroad-for-abortions-dail-committee-told-813333.html

gctest50

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I think there was a "thing" where a few hospitals wouldn't do tests until the 11½ hour - women then wouldn't have enough time to make arrangements

Aisling J encountered several obstacles in accessing diagnostic tests throughout the early part of her pregnancy, and therefore discovered relatively late that the fetus she was carrying had spina bifida[81] and hydrocephalus and could not survive.

She explained the problems she had met with:

I had the first scan after a long waiting time, so had the scan at about 16 weeks.... They said everything was fine. I saw the consultant at this visit.... He was a male doctor, extremely quick and dismissive. I was aware of the diagnostic tests I could request.... The doctor was extremely discouraging when I asked for information.

He was very defensive ... why these tests?
Did I know they could lead to an abortion?
Did I know they could be wrong and so I could abort a healthy child?”

Aisling paid for the tests herself and also requested a second scan, to be conducted at twenty weeks, “I called the Ultra Sound Department and was categorically told no.... I was not referred to anyone else either.”[84] She eventually made arrangements to have the scan done while on vacation in a European country, where she received the devastating news that the fetus would not survive. She elected to terminate the pregnancy.

https://www.hrw.org/report/2010/01/28/state-isolation/access-abortion-women-ireland

aloyisious

recedite wrote: »

So for the time being, the Minister is on the wrong side of the law?
But when he gets around to holding the referendum, and if he wins it, he'll be able to say he was ahead of his time.

Just Ireland on the wrong side on the UN Human Rights committee decision ruling and the minister is the current Minister with the portfolio and definitely not on the wrong side of our law/s.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0609/794304-abortion-law-un/

Excerpt from ruling.... Ireland's ban on abortion subjected a woman carrying a foetus with a fatal abnormality to discrimination and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, the United Nations has found.
It called for the strict prohibition to be reversed, including reforming the right to life of the unborn in the Constitution if necessary, to allow women to voluntarily terminate a pregnancy safely.
Independent experts, from the Geneva-based Human Rights Committee, said Amanda Mellet was forced to choose between carrying her baby to term, knowing it would not survive, or travelling abroad for a termination.

..............................................................................................................

If we hold a referendum and the result means Ireland passes changes to it's law/s to make Ireland compliant with the UN committee's ruling, the minister carries no responsibility and earns no praise for the change/s, just us and the Oireachtas. Just my hap'worth.

Loafing Oaf

recedite wrote: »

So for the time being, the Minister is on the wrong side of the law?
But when he gets around to holding the referendum, and if he wins it, he'll be able to say he was ahead of his time.

Simon Harris doesn't get to decide the timing of the referendum, I suspect we would already have had it if he was. And he has already made his position clear on abortion law in these sorts of cases.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/harris-speaks-of-frustration-at-abortion-laws-amid-twitter-campaign-1.2863304

“In relation to my own personal view on this situation I’ve described the constitutional situation as unacceptable, unsatisfactory. In relation to my own view as Minister for Health it greatly saddens and frustrates me that women in this country and their partners find themselves in this situation,”

recedite

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Because they have to hold a referendum first.

So for the time being, the Minister is on the wrong side of the law?
But when he gets around to holding the referendum, and if he wins it, he'll be able to say he was ahead of his time.

Loafing Oaf

recedite wrote: »

Because too busy doing other stuff?

Because they have to hold a referendum first.

recedite

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

but can't do anything about those laws for the time being...

Because too busy doing other stuff?

Loafing Oaf

recedite wrote: »

That's two separate women who have received €30,000 compo after traveling to England for FFA abortions. So the govt. must have decided that €30,000 is the going rate.
I find it hard to understand. If FFA abortion is currently illegal in this state, then why pay compo for not providing it?
Is this intended as compensation for the law being wrong?
If the govt agrees with the U.N. Human Rights Committee that Ireland's abortion laws are cruel and inhumane, then it should start changing the laws instead of paying compo.

Maybe these payments are intended to signal that the government (and in particular the Minister for Health) does indeed agree with the U.N. about our abortion laws but can't do anything about those laws for the time being...

recedite

Odhinn wrote: »

What drugs are you puttin in your tay at all? You have to fight change all the way.
eg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lydia_Foy

HSE paid for surgery in the UK. Not quite the same though. If gender reassignment surgery was illegal in Ireland, then it would be an analogy.

Actually there was a closer analogy during the "Miss Y" case when it emerged that in certain cases the HSE were funding people to go to England for abortions. It was all a bit hush hush though.
But its still not the same, because it could be argued that it was a "compassionate" payment, which is an optional "gift".
Whereas "compensation" is not an optional gift, it is something that is awarded to compensate somebody for when the law has been broken. Except that in this situation no laws were broken.
Ah well. Nobody is going to appeal it, just let sleeping dogs lie. It is bull$hit though.

knipex

recedite wrote: »

That's two separate women who have received €30,000 compo after traveling to England for FFA abortions. So the govt. must have decided that €30,000 is the going rate.
I find it hard to understand. If FFA abortion is currently illegal in this state, then why pay compo for not providing it?
Is this intended as compensation for the law being wrong?
If the govt agrees with the U.N. Human Rights Committee that Ireland's abortion laws are cruel and inhumane, then it should start changing the laws instead of paying compo.

The government cannot.

The constitution can only be changed by the people by referendum..

.......

This post has been deleted.

Odhinn

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

There's probably some sort of formula - money vs inertia. It would have to be a lot more than 30k per payout going on current evidence.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No notion. Can't remember seeing an estimate.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Odhinn

recedite wrote: »

That's two separate women who have received €30,000 compo after traveling to England for FFA abortions. So the govt. must have decided that €30,000 is the going rate.
I find it hard to understand. If FFA abortion is currently illegal in this state, then why pay compo for not providing it?
Is this intended as compensation for the law being wrong?
If the govt agrees with the U.N. Human Rights Committee that Ireland's abortion laws are cruel and inhumane, then it should start changing the laws instead of paying compo.

What drugs are you puttin in your tay at all? You have to fight change all the way.
eg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lydia_Foy

recedite

That's two separate women who have received €30,000 compo after traveling to England for FFA abortions. So the govt. must have decided that €30,000 is the going rate.
I find it hard to understand. If FFA abortion is currently illegal in this state, then why pay compo for not providing it?
Is this intended as compensation for the law being wrong?
If the govt agrees with the U.N. Human Rights Committee that Ireland's abortion laws are cruel and inhumane, then it should start changing the laws instead of paying compo.