8th amendment referendum part 3 - Mod note and FAQ in post #1

ohnonotgmail · 16-05-2018 02:48PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Someone trolling.

I've seen enough posts in a similar style on FB to not assume this is anything other than genuine.

eviltwin · 16-05-2018 02:49PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

That's my point really. There will be women who will choose to end their baby's life because it is inconvenient to have a baby. That certainly doesn't sit easy with me. Lots of things irrevocably change a person's life, and I don't think that is a reason to end another human's life. And yes, I know a lot of posters will come on here and say 'it's not a baby/human' etc. But to me it is, so there is no way I would ever see an abortion so that a girl could continue her studies, does not want to be a mother as okay.

I don't think anybody should be forced to bring up a child, and I do think it's a shame that so few babies are available for adoption any more. On that subject, a few people have posted that the realities of adoption are not fully understood. I'm genuinely interested in clarification on that. Obviously there will be stories of some adoptions which haven't worked out, just as there will be non adopted adults who will have stories of difficult childhoods. But I would have grown up at a time when many of the girls I went to school with, kids on the road etc would have been adopted and they all seemed to have happy childhoods and grow up to be normal adults.

I do agree that situations where vulnerable children are passed from foster home to foster home because a parent refuses to consent to adoption are wrong. That is definitely an area that needs reform.

But it doesn't impact you either way, you don't have to pick up the pieces. I had an abortion for mostly financial reasons and it was the right thing for my family. How can you say i was wrong to do that when every day I feel very grateful that I could?

I appreciate you don't like it but it's one thing not to agree with it, it's another to try and prevent those women accessing the service.

joe40 · 16-05-2018 02:49PM

On the subject of imported abortion pills, there are two major points of concern.
If the tablets are bought online how can you be sure of the quality. Is the formulation correct, is the purity correct. They need to be medical grade produced in a proper facility with good quality control
Secondly this medication needs to be taken under medical supervision.
We are seriously heading for another Ann Lovett type scenario where a teenager bleeds out and dies as a result of pregnancy.
Of course there would be the same national guilt and soul searching as happened in the 80's but it is too late then.
Lack of prosecution. or minimal fine is tacit approval, some young women may not realise the risks.

wexie · 16-05-2018 02:49PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

. But I would have grown up at a time when many of the girls I went to school with, kids on the road etc would have been adopted and they all seemed to have happy childhoods and grow up to be normal adults.

Seemed to...You know emotional trauma and mental health issues don't show on the outside no?

How many of those people do you actually know well enough to judge that they are 'okay'. And I mean well enough to have spoken in depth about their innermost feelings and emotions?

Just because someone 'seems' okay when you see them does not mean they 'are' okay.

And with regards to not forcing someone to 'raise' a child that is exactly what you are doing when you force them to have it. What other options are there really?

Sofiztikated · 16-05-2018 02:51PM

trixi001 wrote: »

Not sure if this has been posted before, but there is an article in the Irish times by a doctor supporting keeping the 8th amendment
irishtimes.com/opinion/medical-myths-about-eighth-amendment-must-be-challenged-1.3451748
I believe for the issues surrounding maternal car, a lot of these issues are not about the constitution, they are about the law.
Savita Halappanavar didn't die due to the 8th amendment, she died due to uncertainty around the 8th amendment in the medical profession.
Abortion is and always has been allowed if the life of the mother is at risk.
The government were able to amend the abortion law and brought in Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, which has made it much clearer for the medical profession what they can and cannot do. The law can be further amended without the need to remove the 8th amendment.
I firmly believe the unborn have a right to life, and firmly disagree with abortion on demand.
If the referendum was to repel the 8th amendment and replace it with a different amendment for exceptional cases such as FFA etc, then I may not vote no, but it is being replaced with wording that means any government can fully change the rules on abortion - and the current government want to introduce abortion on demand for any reason up to 12 weeks - my conscience could not allow me to support this.

That'd be Eamonn McGuinness that actively campaigned to remove the right to access, for rape, FFA.

And yes, the government can "change" the law. They could make it more restrictive. And if/when medical advances happen, the law can change to reflect that.

greenpilot · 16-05-2018 02:53PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Someone trolling.

Nope. No troll. Just a guy with a choice of voting. Or should I say, voting for choice.

circadian · 16-05-2018 02:54PM

Just listened to the Maria Steen interview with Pat Kenny.

She is little more than a bully, Pat handled it well and stood his ground. On one hand she tells him not to put words in her mouth and immediately puts words in Pat's mouth and accuses his of saying various things.

I'll say that she is effective and I can see how she can galvanise an already fervent base but I struggle to see how these tactics can sway more than a few of the undecideds.

Also, an interesting point made by Pat; after he interviewed Dr Boylan apparently the show got an influx of messages by text/mail all using the same term "The government is giving Dr Boylan free reign" which sounds like a directed attack on the show. Steen of course denied knowing anything about that but it'd be nice to know who would be coordinating something like that.

SusieBlue · 16-05-2018 02:57PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

That's my point really. There will be women who will choose to end their baby's life because it is inconvenient to have a baby. That certainly doesn't sit easy with me. Lots of things irrevocably change a person's life, and I don't think that is a reason to end another human's life. And yes, I know a lot of posters will come on here and say 'it's not a baby/human' etc. But to me it is, so there is no way I would ever see an abortion so that a girl could continue her studies, does not want to be a mother as okay.

But you don't have to see it as ok, she shouldn't need your approval to have an abortion to continue her studies.
If she is okay with it, if she has made the decision in good conscience, it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks.
I don't deny that it is human, that's undisputible, but I don't agree that it should be afforded an equal right to life as that of the woman in which it resides.
I genuinely don't see how its in the best interests of a baby to force him/her into the care of an unwilling mother who doesn't want him/her. A woman who would definitely had a termination if things were different.
It just doesn't seem very pro-life to me, to be encouraging that type of situation.

I don't think anybody should be forced to bring up a child, and I do think it's a shame that so few babies are available for adoption any more. On that subject, a few people have posted that the realities of adoption are not fully understood. I'm genuinely interested in clarification on that. Obviously there will be stories of some adoptions which haven't worked out, just as there will be non adopted adults who will have stories of difficult childhoods. But I would have grown up at a time when many of the girls I went to school with, kids on the road etc would have been adopted and they all seemed to have happy childhoods and grow up to be normal adults.

I do agree that situations where vulnerable children are passed from foster home to foster home because a parent refuses to consent to adoption are wrong. That is definitely an area that needs reform.

On your first point, I think its a mixed bag. A lot of people have excellent experiences growing up with adoption, and a lot of people don't have good experiences at all.
Adoption is a solution for someone who doesn't want to be a parent, but not for someone who can't or won't gestate a pregnancy.

The unfortunate reality we are faced with is that we have over 6k children currently in foster care, while in 2016 we only had 5 infant adoptions occur in this country.
If you want to stop 4k abortions, you need to find 4k willing parents to take on those kids.
And seeing as the system is already buckling and so restricted its unable to cope, what you'd really end up with is having 10k kids in state care.
And that certainly isn't in the best interests of any child.

seamus · 16-05-2018 02:57PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

That's my point really. There will be women who will choose to end their baby's life because it is inconvenient to have a baby.

Let's assume that there is a tiny cohort of women who will act in such a way, and end a pregnancy because it, for example, gets in the way of some holiday plans.

Do you think they'd make good parents? Or even "adequate" parents?

Igotadose · 16-05-2018 02:58PM

circadian wrote: »

Also, an interesting point made by Pat; after he interviewed Dr Boylan apparently the show got an influx of messages by text/mail all using the same term "The government is giving Dr Boylan free reign" which sounds like a directed attack on the show. Steen of course denied knowing anything about that but it'd be nice to know who would be coordinating something like that.

Feels like they're trying to harmonize with the anti-HSE wave that's come up due to the Cervicalcheck issue. See: HSE bad, HSE wants abortions, bad HSE! Bad!

nozzferrahhtoo · 16-05-2018 02:58PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

That's my point really. There will be women who will choose to end their baby's life because it is inconvenient to have a baby.

That has concerned me every time I have heard the word "inconvenient" is how many things people lump under that one term in an attempt to make them equivalent.

We hear lines like "The pregnancy clashes with their skiing holiday" thrown about as an example of "inconvenient". But then we here this somehow equated with a women who already has 4 kids and is already unsure she can afford to give them the education and future they deserve but another baby would pretty much ensure it never happens. As if this is somehow just another petty "inconvenience".

I am also not sure why the motivation to seek an abortion is relevant at all to be honest. Either a person believes a fetus has rights.... in which case they are against abortion WHATEVER the narrative of choice the particular woman has to seek it............... or the believe the fetus has no rights at all.......... in which case why the hell should we care what the reasons a woman has for seeking it?

Either way, for either side, therefore I really am not seeing the relevance of the individual narratives for seeking it.

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

But to me it is, so there is no way I would ever see an abortion so that a girl could continue her studies, does not want to be a mother as okay.

But you do not have to see it as okay really. You have to ask yourself if you not seeing it as ok is justifiable reason enough to ensure she can not make HER choice based on how SHE sees it. How you see it is not really relevant.

It is also worth asking yourself can you go deeper than merely writing "To me it is"? Can you actually put together a coherent string of sentences explaining exactly why you think/feel that. Or do you just think it because you think it?

If the latter, would this not concern you at all when using your vote to make choices (or in this case prevent choices) on behalf of other people who are not you?

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

I'm genuinely interested in clarification on that. Obviously there will be stories of some adoptions which haven't worked out, just as there will be non adopted adults who will have stories of difficult childhoods. But I would have grown up at a time when many of the girls I went to school with, kids on the road etc would have been adopted and they all seemed to have happy childhoods and grow up to be normal adults.

When was that? Not sure what age group you are in but I have managed to get through almost all of my life without knowingly having met anyone adopted. So that you knew a significant number of such people suggests there is some interesting temporal or geographic divide in play here.

However the effects and potential effects of adoption on the children are explored. SOME of those effects are compounded by adoption being common or being rare. In that the more people around you that are also adopted, the less SOME of those issues are a problem. Whereas if you are isolated and rare, SOME of them are compounded.

But other issues are independent of that too. Adoption can be great and successful, but there are known issues and concerns that stop it from being the utopia perfect solution many consider it to be.

erica74 · 16-05-2018 03:00PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

That's my point really. There will be women who will choose to end their baby's life because it is inconvenient to have a baby. That certainly doesn't sit easy with me. Lots of things irrevocably change a person's life, and I don't think that is a reason to end another human's life. And yes, I know a lot of posters will come on here and say 'it's not a baby/human' etc. But to me it is, so there is no way I would ever see an abortion so that a girl could continue her studies, does not want to be a mother as okay.

I don't think anybody should be forced to bring up a child, and I do think it's a shame that so few babies are available for adoption any more. On that subject, a few people have posted that the realities of adoption are not fully understood. I'm genuinely interested in clarification on that. Obviously there will be stories of some adoptions which haven't worked out, just as there will be non adopted adults who will have stories of difficult childhoods. But I would have grown up at a time when many of the girls I went to school with, kids on the road etc would have been adopted and they all seemed to have happy childhoods and grow up to be normal adults.

I do agree that situations where vulnerable children are passed from foster home to foster home because a parent refuses to consent to adoption are wrong. That is definitely an area that needs reform.

So no education for that woman, what about job prospects in order to support her and her baby? When/how is she then supposed to get an education? Wait 5 years until her child is in school?

Why have you formed the opinion that so few babies are up for adoption? The rules around adoption in Ireland are so severely strict that children remain in long term foster care as an alternative.

You know "many girls and kids" who were adopted? I literally know one person who was adopted. Isn't it interesting how you just happen to know so many and they all conveniently fit into your story about seeming normal?

As for the last part, that is why there are so few adoptions in Ireland. Are you looking into campaigning to change the rules around adoption in Ireland?
Actually, I wonder if anyone on the No side is interested in that? Actually backing up all their shouting with some action to change things. They're probably too busy standing outside of our maternity hospitals and targeting girls wearing repeal jumpers and other such productive uses of their time.

joe40 · 16-05-2018 03:02PM

trixi001 wrote: »

Not sure if this has been posted before, but there is an article in the Irish times by a doctor supporting keeping the 8th amendment
irishtimes.com/opinion/medical-myths-about-eighth-amendment-must-be-challenged-1.3451748
I believe for the issues surrounding maternal car, a lot of these issues are not about the constitution, they are about the law.
Savita Halappanavar didn't die due to the 8th amendment, she died due to uncertainty around the 8th amendment in the medical profession.
Abortion is and always has been allowed if the life of the mother is at risk.
The government were able to amend the abortion law and brought in Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, which has made it much clearer for the medical profession what they can and cannot do. The law can be further amended without the need to remove the 8th amendment.
I firmly believe the unborn have a right to life, and firmly disagree with abortion on demand.
If the referendum was to repel the 8th amendment and replace it with a different amendment for exceptional cases such as FFA etc, then I may not vote no, but it is being replaced with wording that means any government can fully change the rules on abortion - and the current government want to introduce abortion on demand for any reason up to 12 weeks - my conscience could not allow me to support this.

If there was a debate surrounding the medical dangers of circumcision. Would you put the same value on the opinion of a doctor with strong Jewish faith.

I don't know the doctors that are campaigning for a no vote but if they are devout catholics then surely that would influence their opinion to some extent.

I'm not saying their opinion is invalid I would just be curious to see how of the doctors that oppose repeal of the 8th are devout Catholics. They have an absolute right to practise their faith but I think in this issue they should be upfront about it.

I could be wrong maybe many oppose the 8th but have no strong religious conviction, I'm just curious

16-05-2018 03:04PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

That's my point really. There will be women who will choose to end their baby's life because it is inconvenient to have a baby. That certainly doesn't sit easy with me.

so there is no way I would ever see an abortion so that a girl could continue her studies, does not want to be a mother as okay.

Im sorry, does this mean that you think a pregnancy which will stop a woman from studying? from a career? from all the plans she has for her life, is inconvenient?
It's way more than inconvenient!

wexie · 16-05-2018 03:09PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

But you don't have to see it as ok, she shouldn't need your approval to have an abortion to continue her studies.
If she is okay with it, if she has made the decision in good conscience, it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks.

Lets stick with the example of a girl in college cause it's a good illustration of what might happen.

GirlieA is 19 years old....studying in UCD (lets say)....get's pregnant, can't access an abortion, more likely than not won't finish her degree. Now we have a young, possibly single mother without a degree which will effect her employment options till the end of days. With it her child care options and, importantly, her childs options...

GirlieB is 19 years old...studying in UCD...gets pregnant, has an abortion, finishes her degree. Is now a lot more employable, chances are will STILL end up having one or multiple children. But girlieB has had the chance to finish her education, find a partner (presumably) and a job and is in an infinitely better place to raise her children, mind her children and give them better options.

I can't possibly imagine how anybody couldn't see that girlieB is definitely getting the better deal here.

And yes of course these are hypothetical scenario's. I'm sure you could find someone who got pregnant in college and still finished her degree and turned out okay. But the reality is that that is not the norm.

spookwoman · 16-05-2018 03:09PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

That's my point really. There will be women who will choose to end their baby's life because it is inconvenient to have a baby. That certainly doesn't sit easy with me. Lots of things irrevocably change a person's life, and I don't think that is a reason to end another human's life. And yes, I know a lot of posters will come on here and say 'it's not a baby/human' etc. But to me it is, so there is no way I would ever see an abortion so that a girl could continue her studies, does not want to be a mother as okay.

I don't think anybody should be forced to bring up a child, and I do think it's a shame that so few babies are available for adoption any more. On that subject, a few people have posted that the realities of adoption are not fully understood. I'm genuinely interested in clarification on that. Obviously there will be stories of some adoptions which haven't worked out, just as there will be non adopted adults who will have stories of difficult childhoods. But I would have grown up at a time when many of the girls I went to school with, kids on the road etc would have been adopted and they all seemed to have happy childhoods and grow up to be normal adults.

I do agree that situations where vulnerable children are passed from foster home to foster home because a parent refuses to consent to adoption are wrong. That is definitely an area that needs reform.

Women are more than breeding mares. Just because we have a uterus does not mean we have to go through with pregnancies against our will. We have a right to how we live our lives just like everyone else.

Dressing gown · 16-05-2018 03:13PM

Any person that equates rearing a child to an ‘inconvenience’ is either not a parent or is a terrible one.

Having a child is like a bomb going off in your life. Show me a parent that disagrees and I’ll tell you they are either not the number one carer or they are a liar.

SusieBlue · 16-05-2018 03:18PM

wexie wrote: »

Lets stick with the example of a girl in college cause it's a good illustration of what might happen.

GirlieA is 19 years old....studying in UCD (lets say)....get's pregnant, can't access an abortion, more likely than not won't finish her degree. Now we have a young, possibly single mother without a degree which will effect her employment options till the end of days. With it her child care options and, importantly, her childs options...

GirlieB is 19 years old...studying in UCD...gets pregnant, has an abortion, finishes her degree. Is now a lot more employable, chances are will STILL end up having one or multiple children. But girlieB has had the chance to finish her education, find a partner (presumably) and a job and is in an infinitely better place to raise her children, mind her children and give them better options.

I can't possibly imagine how anybody couldn't see that girlieB is definitely getting the better deal here.

And yes of course these are hypothetical scenario's. I'm sure you could find someone who got pregnant in college and still finished her degree and turned out okay. But the reality is that that is not the norm.

I think its very important to talk about scenarios like this. The No side are constantly trying to insist the whole Yes side is based purely on hard cases, but it isn't - many girls seeking abortions are in similar circumstances to your scenario.

I just don't think its very pro-life for the No side to be insisting these women keep their babies when
1) They neither want to be pregnant nor do they want a baby
2) They have limited support and finances.
3) The interruption in their education will ensure a lower standard of living for mam and baby, which they might never get back out of.

I don't think a woman/girl in that scenario is doing it out of "inconvenience".

I would argue that its a HUGE ask to insist someone gestate a pregnancy and have a child they do not want, give up/limit their education, give up their future career plans and take on a massive financial burden as well as the responsibility for another human being, just to placate someone else's morals.
Especially when the woman directly affected might not even share those morals.
Its a huge ask. Calling it an "inconvenience" is extremely dismissive of the issue.

We are constantly being accused of focusing on the hard cases. Well I for one fully support women in the above scenario in having an abortion if she wants one.

McTigs · 16-05-2018 03:18PM

Dressing gown wrote: »

Any person that equates rearing a child to an ‘inconvenience’ is either not a parent or is a terrible one.

Having a child is like a bomb going off in your life. Show me a parent that disagrees and I’ll tell you they are either not the number one carer or they are a liar.

I am a parent of three and I have never understood the bomb analogy... it's certainly a massive change in life, priority, perspective.... not to mention financial situation. But it's not a bomb that blows everything before it to smithereens.

....... · 16-05-2018 03:20PM

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail · 16-05-2018 03:21PM

McTigs wrote: »

I am a parent of three and I have never understood the bomb analogy... it's certainly a massive change in life, priority, perspective.... not to mention financial situation. But it's not a bomb that blows everything before it to smithereens.

would you describe it as an "inconvenience"?

January · 16-05-2018 03:23PM

McTigs wrote: »

I am a parent of three and I have never understood the bomb analogy... it's certainly a massive change in life, priority, perspective.... not to mention financial situation. But it's not a bomb that blows everything before it to smithereens.

It could be though if it didn't figure in your life plans at the time it happens.

SusieBlue · 16-05-2018 03:24PM

Missing the bus is an inconvenience. Running out of milk for your cereal is an inconvenience. Forgetting your keys is an inconvenience.

Being forced to gestate an unwanted pregnancy and then take on complete responsibility for another human for 18+ years, sacrificing your finances, career and travel plans, your health and even life path is quite a lot more than an inconvenience.

Its a big ask to expect of people who might not share your morals.

January · 16-05-2018 03:24PM

I wouldn't describe it as a bomb either... now the crisis pregnancy, that was a bomb.

retro:electro · 16-05-2018 03:27PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

Missing the bus is an inconvenience. Running out of milk for your cereal is an inconvenience. Forgetting your keys is an inconvenience.

Being forced to gestate an unwanted pregnancy and then take on complete responsibility for another human for 18+ years, sacrificing your finances, career and travel plans and even life path is quite a lot more than an inconvenience.

Its a big ask to expect of people who might not share your morals.

And an even greater burden to suggest if you were raped that you should be made keep your rapists baby and learn to love it, as midwife Paula Barry helpfully suggested yesterday.

wexie · 16-05-2018 03:28PM

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Me! Me! Me!

I'm a male parent of three.

And I wouldn't really go with the bomb comparison either.

More like a hurricane, the kind that brought Dorothy to Ozz. Except Ozz is filled with odd little people that don't really understand reasoning, fight with each other over who gets to look out of which side of the car, have no concept of time or 'hurrying', are consistently hungry but never for what's on offer, can manage to eat their weight in fruit yet eating a single pea is the most horrendous torture and somehow at the end of all that make it all worthwhile and stop you from taping them to the wall just in time, every time.

McTigs · 16-05-2018 03:29PM

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yes

would you describe it as an "inconvenience"?

No, its certainly of greater magnitude than that

It could be though if it didn't figure in your life plans at the time it happens.

It didn't.... but I was 35.

I should mention for transparancy that I am 100% Yes

Walter Bishop · 16-05-2018 03:33PM

You also had the 'a woman who's raped should keep the baby, sure there's counselling for that' interviewee in the Irish Times yesterday..

Hotblack Desiato · 16-05-2018 03:38PM

RobertKK wrote: »

People put values on their own lives with life insurance. Courts with compensation involving death.

Not comparable at all.

I'm the sole earner in my family. I have life insurance so that if anything happens to me, my family retain a roof over their head and my wife is not forced to immediately seek work and struggle with the logistics and cost of childcare just to feed and clothe them.
Her life is insured to the same sum, so if the worst should happen I could afford to take a career break unpaid for a few years and put the care of my children first at the time they need it most.
Neither insurance policy can replace a parent, and neither is intended to.

Same with court awards. Usually loss of future earnings makes up the lion's share. Some amount can be awarded for pain and suffering, but usually not much. In cases like e.g. a parent not dependent on their adult child, the negligent or unlawful death of that child leads only to a quite small pain and suffering award.

NONE of the above is intended to put a value on a person's life, or even trying to.

Now if we keep abortion illegal, but make the fine €1 or €100 or even €1000, what we are saying as a society is that we want to discourage abortion in our laws, BUT we clearly do not equate the death of a foetus or embryo as in any way comparable to the death of any born person.

Amazing really that you would advocate a position which destroys the core of your own argument, but here we are.

Vicxas · 16-05-2018 03:40PM

Woah this thread is very much TL;DR, so im gonna throw my 2 cents in.

Im gonna vote yes, but not because of any sort of REPEAL movement.

Personally i find the REPEAL camp inherently unlikeable. While they dont spew the hilariously OTT sh!te that the NO side does, they attract the worst kind of people to their cause.

The reason i'm voting yes is because i'd hate to see happen again what happened Savita, i'd hate for a husband/boyfriend/life partner to be told that the little bundle of joy that she has been carrying around is killing her and there's nothing you can do about is as its a "Catholic" country.

It made me sick back then and still grinds my gears now.

8th amendment referendum part 3 - Mod note and FAQ in post #1

Comments