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 Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

1…135136138140141…324

Comments

  • #4112
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    And it's people like me that need to be won over.

    Actually, the polling does not support that view.

    If everyone who is currently polling yes actually votes Yes, we don't need to convince anyone.


  • #4113
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,924 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    Indeed and for balance the opposite is true too. Say you are pro life and you'll be told you are a religious nut job and living a life pre enlightenment.

    Don't fully subscribe to the pro choice side or be like myself, neutral and question everything and you'll be labeled as the opposition.

    And it's people like me that need to be won over (that said, any campaigner of any flavor won't convince me).


    so you are saying that both campaigns need to win you over but you are unable to be convinced either way? do i have that right?


  • #4114
    Trasna1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 565 ✭✭✭Trasna1


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Actually, the polling does not support that view.

    If everyone who is currently polling yes actually votes Yes, we don't need to convince anyone.

    They won't all vote but I know I will, I always do.

    If you feel the argument is over, the campaigns should be transitioning to a get out the vote campaign. It hasn't because it's far from certain yes will carry the day. More likely, sure, but not certain.


  • #4115
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    bertieinexile wrote: »
    Good morning viewers

    I put up a video of a 23 week old premature baby.
    https://youtu.be/2RQ8ks-UH0E?t=22s
    I said he is now a healthy 3 year old. You can even look up the parents account on youtube and see video of him playing.

    A one in a million chance, how wonderful.

    Bertie: are you in favour of keeping a 23 week gestation baby alive on machines indefinitely; like, for years? Do you think that the parents of that child should have to live for their entire lives with a child on life support forever, who will never be able to breathe or eat without help? Should that child live as a brain-dead vegetable for ever and ever? Should hospitals be forced to dedicate resources for, say, 40 years to keep that individual alive even though there is zero hope of them ever being able to live without machines?


  • #4116
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    bertieinexile wrote: »
    Maybe, as some of these posters have said, this is mainstream thinking on the pro choice side.

    This is mainstream thinking, full stop. Ask anyone who works in a NICU. If you find this strange and extreme, you know nothing about the subject.


  • Advertisement
  • #4117
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    They won't all vote but I know I will, I always do.

    But a minute ago, you said no campaigner will convince you either way, so we'd be wasting our time trying.

    Presumably because you know better than all of us about everything anyhow. It is good of you to come down from your perfectly neutral meditation on the mountaintop to enlighten the rest of us.


  • #4118
    Trasna1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 565 ✭✭✭Trasna1


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    But a minute ago, you said no campaigner will convince you either way, so we'd be wasting our time trying.

    Presumably because you know better than all of us about everything anyhow. It is good of you to come down from your perfectly neutral meditation on the mountaintop to enlighten the rest of us.

    People like me who are neutral/undecided.

    But I suppose you're right it would be a waste of time trying to convince me personally. I'd like to see myself as immune to the biased claptrap and moralising from both campaigns.

    I prefer an Ivory tower to mountaintops, more comfortable.


  • #4119
    bertieinexile
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 299 ✭✭bertieinexile


    Yeah_Right wrote: »
    Sorry I'm late Bertie. Just catching up on the thread now.

    Yes I would have no issue with the life support being turned off on a 23 week old baby. Or a 6 month old baby. Or a 10 year old kid. Or a 25 year old adult. Or a 40 year old. Or a 70 year old. You get the picture? I doubt that deciding to turn off the life support of someone you love is an easy decision. They probably agonize, discuss and argue about it but it's not my business. It's between the family and the doctors.

    Comparing this to turning off the life support for an adult with no hope of recovery is completely missing the point.
    The child in the video not only had a chance of survival, he did survive and has grown in to a happy and healthy 3 year old.
    nozzferrahhtoo's point is that none of this matters. The fact that at 23 weeks there would not have been a regular pattern of fetal brain activity - nozzferrhatoos necessary condition for a right to life - means he is nonplussed about ending that life there in the incubator.
    That is what everyone else has agreed to as I understand it.

    Working on a response to JDD as we speak. Contain your excitement.


  • #4120
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    This is mainstream thinking, full stop. Ask anyone who works in a NICU. If you find this strange and extreme, you know nothing about the subject.

    Quick follow up after a half-assed google search (bertie can do his own homework if he wants to learn enough to talk sense on the topic):

    HSE Model of Care for Neonatal Services in Ireland

    Currently in the NICU setting, 62% of infant deaths are due to withdrawal of care, 20% are due to withholding treatment, and 18% die while still undergoing full neonatal intensive care.


  • #4121
    optogirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,040 ✭✭✭optogirl


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    People like me who are neutral/undecided.

    But I suppose you're right it would be a waste of time trying to convince me personally. I'd like to see myself as immune to the biased claptrap and moralising from both campaigns.

    I prefer an Ivory tower to mountaintops, more comfortable.

    So you are undecided but don't want to hear arguments from either side (which will necessarily be biased based on the fact that those presenting their opinion are already on one side or the other).
    I would urge you, if you are 'neutral' to vote yes meaning nobody's own personal position on the issue is impeded.


  • Advertisement
  • #4122
    Triceratops Ballet
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,894 ✭✭✭Triceratops Ballet


    bertieinexile wrote:
    Comparing this to turning off the life support for an adult with no hope of recovery is completely missing the point.


    Missing the point how?
    Life is life is life no? We're supposed to love both and treat them equally no?


  • #4123
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    People like me who are neutral/undecided

    Frankly, anyone who is neutral on this subject hasn't looked into it. All they need is a pointer to the Citizen's Assembly report.


  • #4124
    Trasna1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 565 ✭✭✭Trasna1


    optogirl wrote: »
    So you are undecided but don't want to hear arguments from either side (which will necessarily be biased based on the fact that those presenting their opinion are already on one side or the other).
    I would urge you, if you are 'neutral' to vote yes meaning nobody's own personal position on the issue is impeded.

    I'll read the ref com booklet when it arrives and decide after that. I can see the merit in the position you advocate: that my or another else's morals shouldn't impact anyone elses. Essentially I don't have to choose abortion myself but why should I stop anyone else? I wouldn't like a partner or family member (or indeed anyone) to go through some of the awful realities I have seen like being forced to carry a very wanted baby that won't make it.

    I wouldn't however like Ireland to become a society where the handicapped are routinely terminated either. Or late term abortions and repealing the 8th gives no protection to these cases. The legislation might, but we won't have to be directly consulted on that. But it's also true that that could be a fight for another day, to argue against that kind of legislation if it was ever introduced.


  • #4125
    optogirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,040 ✭✭✭optogirl


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    I'll read the ref com booklet when it arrives and decide after that. I can see the merit in the position you advocate: that my or another else's morals shouldn't impact anyone elses. Essentially I don't have to choose abortion myself but why should I stop anyone else? I wouldn't like a partner or family member (or indeed anyone) to go through some of the awful realities I have seen like being forced to carry a very wanted baby that won't make it.

    I wouldn't however like Ireland to become a society where the handicapped are routinely terminated either. Or late term abortions and repealing the 8th gives no protection to these cases. The legislation might, but we won't have to be directly consulted on that. But it's also true that that could be a fight for another day, to argue against that kind of legislation if it was ever introduced.

    late term abortions are incredibly rare in countries where abortion is available - for example in the UK 96% of all abortions are done 12 weeks or under. I don't know anyone who would opt for a late term abortion unless it was under advice from a doctor due to threat to life of either mother or child.


  • #4126
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • #4127
    Hannibal_Smith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,426 ✭✭✭Hannibal_Smith


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    optogirl wrote: »
    So you are undecided but don't want to hear arguments from either side (which will necessarily be biased based on the fact that those presenting their opinion are already on one side or the other).
    I would urge you, if you are 'neutral' to vote yes meaning nobody's own personal position on the issue is impeded.

    I'll read the ref com booklet when it arrives and decide after that. I can see the merit in the position you advocate: that my or another else's morals shouldn't impact anyone elses. Essentially I don't have to choose abortion myself but why should I stop anyone else? I wouldn't like a partner or family member (or indeed anyone) to go through some of the awful realities I have seen like being forced to carry a very wanted baby that won't make it.

    I wouldn't however like Ireland to become a society where the handicapped are routinely terminated either. Or late term abortions and repealing the 8th gives no protection to these cases. The legislation might, but we won't have to be directly consulted on that. But it's also true that that could be a fight for another day, to argue against that kind of legislation if it was ever introduced.


    What do you mean by 'the handicapped? If I remember from my own pregnancies they can only detect anomalies at the 20 week scan. 20 weeks is well after the 12 week abortion in demand being talked about. So unless there is a fatal foetal abnormality or threat to life of the mother I'm not sure how 'the handicapped' can be routinely terminated?

    Again, with late term abortions, I'm not sure who would or why this would be requested. If it's late term, there's every chance of survival outside the womb.


  • #4128
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    I wouldn't however like Ireland to become a society where the handicapped are routinely terminated either. Or late term abortions and repealing the 8th gives no protection to these cases. The legislation might, but we won't have to be directly consulted on that. But it's also true that that could be a fight for another day, to argue against that kind of legislation if it was ever introduced.

    Disability isn't one of the grounds recommended by the Committee on the 8th and isn't in the proposed legislation, so it won't be in whatever legislation is passed later this year (if the 8th is repealed). And you can be sure there will be significant coverage and scrutiny if anyone ever even suggests including it in the future.

    As for late term abortions, the proposed legislation restricts abortions after 12 weeks to when the woman's life or health is at risk, or there's an FFA. Of those three, FFA is the only case where abortion is allowed after the foetus has reached viability. So late term abortions will be rare in the first place, and only where the foetus is expected to die before or shortly after birth.

    The legislative approach is the best way to balance the rights of all concerned; the unborn AND the woman. The constitution is too blunt an instrument to properly capture all the nuances these situations have. We may not be directly consulted but that's no different to other complex ethical and medical issues (eg euthanasia, or decisions as to when to turn off life support), and it's not as if the people don't have means to overturn legislation they're not in favour of.


  • #4129
    Trasna1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 565 ✭✭✭Trasna1


    ....... wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    You are not going to like campaigning if you have to explain the same thing over and over. I never claimed to be an expert, not have I spread any mistruths. The majority of my posting in this thread has been in relation to questionable campaign activity by both sides and how this makes them both rotten.

    I'm not a new poster here btw, I've been around here for years


  • #4130
    Call me Al
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,039 ✭✭✭Call me Al


    Triceratops Ballet wrote: »
    Missing the point how?
    Life is life is life no? We're supposed to love both and treat them equally no?
    There was an excellent fly-on-the-wall documentary series recently enough on the Birmingham Children's hospital NICU.
    The focus was around paediatric life and death situations, the related ethical decisions and how they were arrived at, and the involvement of parents and medical staff in coming to these decisions.
    It was very realistic in paring back to the fundamentals of quality of life versus basic existence when coming to the harsh ethical decisions that these families make.
    And they make them everyday all over the world. I'm sure they'd do anything not to be in the position of having to do this. But they are.

    So no i dont judge any parent in that situation whatever the age of their child.


  • #4131
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,924 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    You are not going to like campaigning if you have to explain the same thing over and over. I never claimed to be an expert, not have I spread any mistruths. The majority of my posting in this thread has been in relation to questionable campaign activity by both sides and how this makes them both rotten.

    I'm not a new poster here btw, I've been around here for years


    I like the way you completely ignored all the points in the post you quoted.


  • Advertisement
  • #4132
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    I'm not a new poster here btw, I've been around here for years

    What happened to your previous account?


  • #4133
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    The majority of my posting in this thread has been in relation to questionable campaign activity by both sides and how this makes them both rotten.

    No, most of it has been bragging about how perfectly neutral you are, as if that was a virtue rather than a sign of utter ignorance of current affairs.

    You have yet to point out any questionable activity by the Yes campaign.


  • #4134
    amdublin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,653 ✭✭✭✭amdublin


    Call me Al wrote: »
    There was an excellent fly-on-the-wall documentary series recently enough on the Birmingham Children's hospital NICU.
    The focus was around paediatric life and death situations, the related ethical decisions and how they were arrived at, and the involvement of parents and medical staff in coming to these decisions.
    It was very realistic in paring back to the fundamentals of quality of life versus basic existence when coming to the harsh ethical decisions that these families make.
    And they make them everyday all over the world. I'm sure they'd do anything not to be in the position of having to do this. But they are.

    So no i dont judge any parent in that situation whatever the age of their child.

    I saw that program. It was heart wrenching.
    The poor parents in some of the cases covered they didn't want their child in pain but they just didn't want to give up either. The medical staff were incredible


  • #4135
    jugger0
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭jugger0


    I dont understand the push for abortion but yet people are very against the death penalty? Its ok to scramble babies in the womb but not ok to hang murderers and child molesters? I think if we have one we should have the other.


  • #4136
    amdublin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,653 ✭✭✭✭amdublin


    Over €410k raised by crowd funding.

    I swear it'll be half a million by the weekend!

    https://togetherforyes.causevox.com/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=cf1


  • #4137
    Triceratops Ballet
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,894 ✭✭✭Triceratops Ballet


    Call me Al wrote:
    There was an excellent fly-on-the-wall documentary series recently enough on the Birmingham Children's hospital NICU. The focus was around paediatric life and death situations, the related ethical decisions and how they were arrived at, and the involvement of parents and medical staff in coming to these decisions. It was very realistic in paring back to the fundamentals of quality of life versus basic existence when coming to the harsh ethical decisions that these families make. And they make them everyday all over the world. I'm sure they'd do anything not to be in the position of having to do this. But they are.

    Call me Al wrote:
    So no i dont judge any parent in that situation whatever the age of their child.

    Oh I agree, I was wondering how he thinks all of us who believe that it's a decision for the next of kin no matter what age the patient is have somehow missed the point. If you choose to "love both" should that not also mean that you support both through difficult situations and don't try dictate what is right or wrong to anyone in that awful position.
    That probably wasn't clear there is no sarcasm emoji!


  • #4138
    _Dara_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    You are not going to like campaigning if you have to explain the same thing over and over. I never claimed to be an expert, not have I spread any mistruths. The majority of my posting in this thread has been in relation to questionable campaign activity by both sides and how this makes them both rotten.

    I'm not a new poster here btw, I've been around here for years

    Well, duh.


  • #4139
    Sofiztikated
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Sofiztikated


    jugger0 wrote: »
    I dont understand the push for abortion but yet people are very against the death penalty? Its ok to scramble babies in the womb but not ok to hang murderers and child molesters? I think if we have one we should have the other.

    The death penalty is the state deeming that a person shouldn't be alive because of their crimes.
    Abortion is required for many reasons.

    There's a difference.


  • #4140
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    AtomicHorror wrote: »
    What happened to your previous account?

    Who got thread-banned 7 days ago?


  • Advertisement
  • #4141
    jugger0
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭jugger0


    Sofiztikated wrote: »
    The death penalty is the state deeming that a person shouldn't be alive because of their crimes.
    Abortion is required for many reasons.

    There's a difference.

    Yeah and the majority of the reasons are because they just dont want a baby.. not because they were raped or because of a dangerous medical condition, they just dont want one so they get to give it a little "death penalty". It makes more sense for criminals to be given the death penalty as they are a danger to society.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement