Shurimgreat wrote: » Typically immature response. The referendum is over. Its now onto the question of discussing the legislation. So lets discuss it.
Shurimgreat wrote: » There is only proposed legislation at the moment. You knew that already. Try answer again rather than be dismissive. A hard case where a raped woman misses the 12 week limit. What happens? Is this not the main flaw in the proposed 12 week limit?
Pugzilla wrote: » Except as stated earlier, over 80% of abortion at 10-12 weeks are surgical.
2.25 The vast majority of abortions are performed under 13 weeks gestation (92% in 2016). There has been a continuing increase in the proportion of abortions that are performed under 10 weeks since 2006. In 2016, 81% of abortions were performed at under 10 weeks, a similar proportion to 2015 but increasing from 68% in 2006. In 2016, 11% were performed at 10-12 weeks. This proportion has not changed since 2015, but the proportion has halved from 22% since 2006. Abortions carried out at 13 weeks or later gestation represented 9% which is unchanged from 2015 and decreasing slightly from 11% in 2006. (Table 3a.iii and Figure 5).
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Well according some NO posters innhere there should beb"rape commitees' set up to interview the woman in question and make the decision. Me personally, I'd be happy to believe the woman and let her make the choice. If a woman presents herself at a doctor's over 12 weeks pregnant and says it's due to rape then let her have her termination.
Shurimgreat wrote: » Athiest here so nothing to do with catholic church. I despise much of the hypocisy of the average CC follower. Still not answered my original question in full nor even bothered to acknowledge the difficulty in framing legislation. I suppose you did concede that not all hard cases will be covered.
Elisabeth Wrong Stork wrote: » The pills are a less good option after ten weeks as far as I recall. The abortion pills would also be contraindicated for some medical conditions, surgery would be needed sometimes in ectopic cases (I'm not sure if they're included in Pete's figures). Selective abortions, where there's more than one foetus and you're only getting rid of one, obviously have to be performed surgically. Some women will also opt for a surgical abortion because they'd prefer it. It's quicker, they might not trust the pills to work, and I'm googling studies now and for women who've had a medical abortion previously, the bleeding and pain was too bad for them to want to do it again. The ratio of medical abortions to surgical abortions has been climbing continuously for years in the UK, and they're doing all they can to make sure that continues.
Wrongway1985 wrote: » Would you say it's highly realistic that a victim of rape in trauma would fear being pregnant by the perpetrator? Extremely unlikely she wouldn't seek to confirm pregnancy? Okay so if that's the case...then is it also extremely unlikely to go on and discover they didn't realize they were pregnant till after cut off point? Was it not the argument last week that you may be fully formed at 12 weeks seems people have moved on to that to pregnancies being discovered late, wow a fine jump and rape victim no less! You seem to permit the use of a raped woman as part of your unlikely imaginary scenario as someone who went out and bought the wrong handbag.
Elisabeth Wrong Stork wrote: » No it's not because the proposed regime isn't a batshít dystopian nightmare where "the experts" assess if a woman has been subject to a "genuine" rape or if she's some "clown" like you were spouting off about last week.If a woman is between 12 and 24 weeks pregnant as a result of rape, she can continue with that pregnancy, or, if it's endangering her physical or mental health then she will now have recourse to a termination.
Shurimgreat wrote: » Very difficult post to decipher I will be honest with you. I am trying to talk about dealing with hard cases here. Ok here goes. A woman presents at her GP at lets say 14 weeks. She says she was raped. It took her 3 months of trauma to come to terms with it. Rape is traumatic we all accept that. The doctor has no way to prove what she says is true or not. It may be true, it may not be. Now can people but aside their yes or no biases, cut out the personal attacks, not make claims like "yeh you are ok with raped women" etc and answer how such a scenario should be handled in the legislation?
Fred Swanson wrote: » This post has been deleted.
freshpopcorn wrote: » Another thing I hope is that we don't see articles popping up when abortion is available in Ireland saying that I had to travel because the stigma still exists here. The country voted in favor of it by a large majority and some still against it but this is the same in every country!
swampgas wrote: » And I know you think you have a gotcha here - you think women will roll up at 16 weeks or 20 weeks, claim they have been raped, and be provided with abortions no questions asked. As far as I can see the evidence doesn't suggest that this would be a significant issue.
Shurimgreat wrote: » Very difficult post to decipher I will be honest with you. I am trying to talk about dealing with hard cases here. Ok here goes. A woman presents at her GP at lets say 14 weeks. She says she was raped. It took her 3 months of trauma to come to terms with it. Rape is traumatic we all accept that. The doctor has no way to prove what she says is true or not. It may be true, it may not be.
end of the road wrote: » personally, i can't see how it could be handled after 12 weeks unless 1. it's done under the mental health grounds. my view is that would be the most likely way. the trama of such a horific crime would understandibly lead to mental health issues. 2. if there is a specific exemption for rape victims past 12 weeks, the doctor simply takes her word for it. unlikely that would be the method tbh. 3. we up the limit from 12 weeks. very possible but time would ultimately tell if such would actually happen.
Fighting Tao wrote: » I can see how it will be handled...under legislation that the TDs decide.
HEAD 4: RISK TO LIFE OR HEALTH 4. (1) It shall be lawful to carry out a termination of pregnancy in accordance with this Head where 2 medical practitioners certify that, in their reasonable opinion formed in good faith – (a) there is a risk to the life of, or of serious harm to the health of, the pregnant woman, (b) the foetus has not reached viability, and (c) it is appropriate to carry out the termination of pregnancy in order to avert that risk. (2) Of the 2 medical practitioners referred to in subhead (1) – (a) one shall be an obstetrician, and (b) the other shall be an appropriate medical practitioner. The law The second case where termination would be allowed is where there’s a threat to the life or health of the pregnant woman. Here, two doctors – one an obstetrician – must certify that there is a risk to the life of, or a risk of serious harm to the health of, the mother, and that termination is appropriate in order to avert that risk. Serious harm to health includes mental health. The procedure must be carried out by an obstetrician. Termination on this ground is available until the foetus is viable – that is, where it could survive outside the uterus. The proposal says that the viability of a foetus should be determined by the reasonable opinion of the doctors involved. David Kenny The politics After the 12-week period has elapsed, abortion will be legal only in specific circumstances, including those defined under this head: where there is a serious threat to the mental or physical health of the woman. Two doctors with relevant specialities must agree before the abortion can take place. Abortions under this head will not be permitted after the point at which the foetus can viably survive outside the mother’s womb – usually 24 weeks. No-side campaigners have warned of “vague” mental-health grounds, pointing out that in Britain most abortions are permitted on mental-health grounds. They also warn that foetal disability or the mother’s material circumstances could be judged to threaten her mental health. Yes campaigners say that law, culture and existing medical practice will prevent this. If the referendum is passed, this will become a key legislative battleground: how to craft the law to permit abortion in serious cases but not allow abortion on request up to 24 weeks. Pat Leahy
end of the road wrote: » and it's that legislation we are discussing in relation to how it may work.
end of the road wrote: » and we are discussing that legislation, and the possible ways in which it may work.
Cantona's Collars wrote: » The BBC were reporting live from Dublin while waiting for the official results of the count. It was telling that they could find nobody from the no side to interview and give their reaction to the exit polls.
Shurimgreat wrote: » The referendum is over. Its now onto the question of discussing the legislation. So lets discuss it.
Shurimgreat wrote: » The Yes side got the 8th repealed. Its now their responsibility to come up with legislation which covers all hard cases including raped women over the 12 weeks limit.
Loafing Oaf wrote: » I predicted a couple of months ago (with what I thought was humorous exaggeration) that the pro-life movement would evaporate the instant the result was announced, if it was a yes. Looks like it happened even quicker than that...
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f07ee44b0b39bbb635066da4046d9475.svg)
