Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

1…230231233235236…332

Comments

  • #6962
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »
    Jaysus, the outcry was bad enough when Deirdre Barlow was behind bars & she was a fictional character.

    Were a woman convicted of procuring an illegal abortion in this state:
    (1) The world's media would be encamped laughing at the little religious state which tries to pretend it's progressive. We'd become a laughing stock & be compared to Iran.
    (2) We would have created a martyr instantly & handed victory to the repeal side.
    (3) Tourism & our attractiveness for FDI would take a major whack.
    (4) World leaders would actively question our attitude to women's human rights.
    (5) The reputation damage would take decades to recover from.

    The DPP is in a difficult spot, if they bring a case forward they know the likelihood of prosecution, there is no political will for the backlash.

    Back of the radiator, the Irish solution to the Irish problem.

    Well it's happened twice in northern Ireland

    One woman had an abortion herself, the other ordered pills for her daughter.

    Although they didn't go to prison there was a conviction which they will have on their records.


  • #6963
    Wombatman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭Wombatman


    pilly wrote: »
    Coming from a very strong pro-choice view even I would have to agree that abortion figures probably will go up. It's not logical to me to presume otherwise.

    Given the very restrictive conditions the exist at present I think that is a safe assumption. A total of 25 legally-permitted abortions were carried out in Ireland in 2016. Of that total number, the procedures were carried out for a range of reasons:
    - 8 procedures were due to a risk of physical illness
    - 1 was due to a risk from suicide
    - 16 were carried out because of emergencies arising from physical illnesses.

    If the recommendations of the Citizen’s Assembly are adopted you could expect 10-20 abortions per 1,000 women between ages of 15-44 per annum. Obviously this will represent a big increase.

    The rate of unwanted pregnancies however will probably will remain about the same. If it is repealed, the choices available to these women, will increase.


  • #6964
    Hooks Golf Handicap
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 233 ✭✭Hooks Golf Handicap


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Well it's happened twice in northern Ireland

    One woman had an abortion herself, the other ordered pills for her daughter.

    Although they didn't go to prison there was a conviction which they will have on their records.

    Bit of detail here:
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/state-s-women-face-jail-for-taking-abortion-pill-1.2598217
    The woman at the centre of the Belfast case was 19 when she decided to purchase the abortion pills over the internet.
    She could not afford to travel to England, Scotland or Wales for an abortion, which she would have been legally entitled to there, and indeed would have been entitled to for free on the NHS if she had been a resident of the UK “mainland”.
    Her actions were uncovered when her flat mates found the bloodstained materials she had likely used to clean herself while she miscarried alone, and a 10-12- week-old foetus, in the bin. They reported their discovery to the police.

    Now she wasn't Mr. Wolf in the clean up department.
    Plus her housemates were a gang of squealers.
    The number of seizures of abortion pills arriving into this State in the post by the Health Regulatory Authority, working with customs officials, indicates that increasing numbers of women and girls are turning to the internet when facing a crisis pregnancy.
    While 635 tablets, in 28 packages, were seized in 2011, the numbers had almost doubled, to 1,017 tablets, in 60 importations, in 2014.
    The majority are coming through Netherlands-based sites and cost about €90. This compares with a cost of €600-€1,000 for an abortion, not including travel and accommodation costs.
    Should a concerned citizen in this State know of a woman or girl inducing her own abortion, they too might report her to An Garda Síochána, though how gardaí would respond to a woman in this situation remains to be seen.

    I know they reckon they catch about 10% of drugs coming in through the post although how they arrive at that figure I'm not sure.
    People are obviously buying in quantity based on the above figures.
    I wonder if they are making a few quid on the black market.
    If the figures doubled between 2011 & 2014 it would be difficult to guess where we stand now.
    I'd say more people are aware of this route nowadays.


  • #6965
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,862 ✭✭✭✭January


    Women buy in pills to keep them safe if they or a family member/friend needs to use them. Up to 5 women per day are now using abortion pills at home, according to Dr. Abigail Aikens who spoke to the JOC about the use of the pills.


  • #6966
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,363 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    pilly wrote: »
    Coming from a very strong pro-choice view even I would have to agree that abortion figures probably will go up. It's not logical to me to presume otherwise.

    You might want to go re-read this post here then, as it might explain some of the logic involved.
    pleas advice wrote: »
    this was said, with nothing to back it up.

    Except it is backed up. The poster is just pointing out something that I cited sources for in this post here. Which is that making abortion illegal has little to no effect on the number of abortions happening.

    So his assertion is substantiated. Your counter assertion is not. And I do not think I have to insult your intelligence, or mine, by explaining the qualitative difference between a substantiated assertion, and an unsubstantiated one, do I?


  • Advertisement
  • #6967
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote:
    then, as it might explain some of the logic involved.


    Yeah I'll read it in a couple of years when we have actual figures. I'll be glad to point out to you then how wrong you were.

    Don't bother with another essay in reply. Not even pro-choice are interested in your patronising tone any longer.


  • #6968
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,014 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    Sooner its gone the better. The situation as it is is moronic. Women aren't just incubators. Its their body.


  • #6969
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,363 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    I will leave the personal insults out of the reply, as there is no need for them. Insults demean only the insulter, never the target.
    pilly wrote: »
    Yeah I'll read it in a couple of years when we have actual figures.

    The post I linked to refers to actual figures. So I am not clear what you mean here. Perhaps you mean actual figures from Ireland? Well clearly we do not have them yet, as it has not happened yet.

    But the figures from the citations I made are very real and show little effect of it being made legal. So it is not like we are completely devoid of figures here. The 2007 article for example was done in collaboration with WHO and Guttmacher together and were published in Lancet.

    “We now have a global picture of induced abortion in the world, covering both countries where it is legal and countries where laws are very restrictive,” Dr. Paul Van Look, director of the W.H.O. Department of Reproductive Health and Research, said in a telephone interview. “What we see is that the law does not influence a woman’s decision to have an abortion. If there’s an unplanned pregnancy, it does not matter if the law is restrictive or liberal.”

    But what making it legal DID do, they noted, was influence the dangers involved. Making it legal resulting in making it much safer.


  • #6970
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote:
    I will leave the personal insults out of the reply, as there is no need for them. Insults demean only the insulter, never the target.


    You're patronising tone insults every day but do carry on.


  • #6971
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,363 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    pilly wrote: »
    You're patronising tone insults every day but do carry on.

    The wonderful thing about the internet is it allows us to communicate with many more people. The downside of this however is that we can not always put the tone into our posts that we wish to convey. We lack the context of expression and vocal inflections and more. Over the years I have removed tone from a lot of what I write, and write it in an emotionless way.

    For many people this works. For a minority they insert the tone themselves where I have not. And then project that on to me like it is my fault. It is not.

    If you find you have to throw insults or make it personal, rather than reply to the content of a post I have made though, then the fault is with you not with me. But that is of course your choice.

    To return to the topic then. You claimed it is not logical for you to assume anything but an increase in the numbers should abortion be made legal. However this comment comes in the context of two things:

    1) We have actual data compiled on a global rather than local scale showing consistently that it actually does have little to no effect.

    And

    2) Some logical reasons have actually been presented to you to suggest why this might be so. Such as people against abortion being more willing to support initiatives to reduce abortion, when they have failed to keep abortion illegal.

    So you have numbers AND logical reasoning on offer here. So where you feel the lack of logic of plausibility now lies is unclear to me and I suspect, if you pause to consider it, to you too. And I invite you to consider that fact openly and dispassionately rather than getting personal for no good reason. Or you could simply not reply at all. To my knowledge no one is forcing you to.


  • Advertisement
  • #6972
    Captain Obvious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,165 ✭✭✭Captain Obvious


    ....... wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Well she did raise an important issue in regards to legal liability. What happens if a woman simply lies and a GP ends up prescribing the pills for a 14 week old fetus? Will the GP be criminally or civilly liable?


  • #6973
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,916 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Captain Obvious wrote: »
    Well she did raise an important issue in regards to legal liability. What happens if a woman simply lies and a GP ends up prescribing the pills for a 14 week old fetus? Will the GP be criminally or civilly liable?

    well we dont know what the criminal law will say on the matter so we can only speculate. As for civil liability who do you think they would be liable to?


  • #6974
    Captain Obvious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,165 ✭✭✭Captain Obvious


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    well we dont know what the criminal law will say on the matter so we can only speculate. As for civil liability who do you think they would be liable to?

    Primarily the woman if she had regret afterwards. Maybe the father also.


  • #6975
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    is there any word of dates for the referendum yet?
    i am overseas and will be coming home to vote hopefully


  • #6976
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,916 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Captain Obvious wrote: »
    Primarily the woman if she had regret afterwards. Maybe the father also.

    liable to the woman because they believed a lie she told him?


  • #6977
    Captain Obvious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,165 ✭✭✭Captain Obvious


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    liable to the woman because they believed a lie she told him?

    Yes.


  • #6978
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,916 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Captain Obvious wrote: »
    Yes.

    Not sure how you think that would work.


  • #6979
    Captain Obvious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,165 ✭✭✭Captain Obvious


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Not sure how you think that would work.

    Medical negligence. Prescribed a medication they shouldn't have. Much like if they prescribed pain medication based on a lie.


  • #6980
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,916 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Captain Obvious wrote: »
    Medical negligence. Prescribed a medication they shouldn't have. Much like if they prescribed pain medication based on a lie.

    do you have any examples of doctors sued for negligence by a patient due the patient lying to them? I'm struggling to think of one.


  • #6981
    Captain Obvious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,165 ✭✭✭Captain Obvious


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    do you have any examples of doctors sued for negligence by a patient due the patient lying to them? I'm struggling to think of one.

    Not off hand no.


  • Advertisement
  • #6982
    thee glitz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,294 ✭✭✭thee glitz


    bubblypop wrote: »
    is there any word of dates for the referendum yet?
    i am overseas and will be coming home to vote hopefully

    I don't think so. Just make sure you were ordinarily resident in the State on 1st September last year.


  • #6983
    nice_guy80
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,722 ✭✭✭nice_guy80


    pilly wrote: »
    Coming from a very strong pro-choice view even I would have to agree that abortion figures probably will go up. It's not logical to me to presume otherwise.
    or official recording of abortions


  • #6984
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,862 ✭✭✭✭January


    25th of May seems to be the date being cited. Polling officers have been asked to keep that date free.


  • #6985
    Loafing Oaf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,817 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    it actually does have little to no effect.

    I suppose the pro-lifers would say that even if only 5 or 10 women would have abortions in a given year who would not have them if the 8th was still in place, then it is worth keeping...


  • #6986
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    And the pope visiting before the referendum?

    Happy accident? Hardly.


  • #6987
    applehunter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭applehunter


    Notable increase in the use of cute/humerous baby memes from the pro life side.

    Clever move.


  • #6988
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    thee glitz wrote: »
    I don't think so. Just make sure you were ordinarily resident in the State on 1st September last year.

    Yep, I'm quite entitled to vote thanks


  • #6989
    erica74
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,618 ✭✭✭erica74


    Edward M wrote: »
    She raises some valid questions though, especially the one re the affirming that the fetus is no more than 12 weeks.
    I can see GPs referring a lot of cases on to gynecology to deal with the issue if its passed.
    Perhaps that would be best all round as she pointed out that a GP surgery is an unsafe place for emergency treatment if necessary.
    I think the implementation of an abortion policy has to be done right, the basic premise of how it will be handled has to be included in any pre vote material on the issue.
    Some, and maybe even a large percentage of GPs don't want to take the responsibility of the repercussions of bad side affects possible from an abortion?
    There is a difference in being in favour of abortion and having to administer it!

    I don't see why there would be any problem with GPs carrying out abortions and I think, if the 8th is repealed, it's in everybody's interest to keep this service out of our already massively overstretched hospitals. Now, obviously there may be some more complex individual cases but, for the most part, this procedure is something that can be looked after by a GP.

    What "bad side effects" are you talking about?


  • #6990
    nice_guy80
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,722 ✭✭✭nice_guy80


    david75 wrote: »
    And the pope visiting before the referendum?

    Happy accident? Hardly.
    thought it was August?


  • Advertisement
  • #6991
    Edward M
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭Edward M


    erica74 wrote: »
    I don't see why there would be any problem with GPs carrying out abortions and I think, if the 8th is repealed, it's in everybody's interest to keep this service out of our already massively overstretched hospitals. Now, obviously there may be some more complex individual cases but, for the most part, this procedure is something that can be looked after by a GP.

    What "bad side effects" are you talking about?

    I know they are rare, I suppose all medications carry risks and possible side affects.
    My point really was just that many doctors might not want to deal with it because of concerns they aren't expert enough if complications do arise and would have to refer the patient on anyway.
    But some possible complications are listed here.
    https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion/the-abortion-pill/how-safe-is-the-abortion-pill


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement