Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

Because it puts it out of reach for a lot middle/working class women. The women who were most negatively affected by the cost of having to go to England.

It will surely be covered by the medical card. I'm having trouble believing that middle class women would struggle to scrape together €300.

Mavis Warm Stranger wrote: »

If it's covered by the medical card is the problem solved?

Not everyone has a medical card (although they are given out willy nilly).

The socioeconomic section affected by this most are those above the medical card threshold anyway.

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

And for those who don’t have a medical card?

I would imagine if you don't qualify for a medical card you should be able to gather €300 together in a week or two?

Captain Obvious wrote: »

That is such a nonsense argument. We impose collective beliefs on people all the time. They are called laws.

No they are not beliefs like pro/anti choice. They are shared beliefs for the common good. Offences against the person, offences against the state etc. Revenue generation. Not religious beliefs.

Perhaps you should revisit your handle.

Captain Obvious wrote: »

That is such a nonsense argument. We impose collective beliefs on people all the time. They are called laws.

Good luck friend, I don't think you're going to achieve anything if you go down the road of arguing with her

kunst nugget wrote: »

It will surely be covered by the medical card. I'm having trouble believing that middle class women would struggle to scrape together €300.

Mavis Warm Stranger wrote: »

I would imagine if you don't qualify for a medical card you should be able to gather €300 together in a week or two?

€300 is too expensive and is quite frankly ridiculous.

I have a good job as does my partner, we earn over €100k combined and have just bought our first house. But we'd have to budget for a €300 expense that was unexpected

Mavis Warm Stranger wrote: »

Good luck friend, I don't think you're going to achieve anything if you go down the road of arguing with her

I assume this passive aggressive BS is directed at me?
Despite the fact I have clearly stated on many occasions on this and other threads I am male.

fxotoole

ELM327 wrote: »

Not everyone has a medical card (although they are given out willy nilly).

The socioeconomic section affected by this most are those above the medical card threshold anyway.

Speaking as someone who tried to get one, no they most certainly are not.

Mavis Warm Stranger wrote: »

I would imagine if you don't qualify for a medical card you should be able to gather €300 together in a week or two?

Maybe they will, but there’s working class women that don’t qualify for medical cards. €300 is a stretch for some people.

[Deleted User]

Mavis Warm Stranger wrote: »

I think the no side were very upfront about their intentions throughout the campaign.

If you mean that they set out their stall with everyone should be forced to carry to term regardless of any factors, otherwise their a murderer, and their (and I'm being generous) inaccurate media campain, yes they did.

It was comical that in the week of the vote, seeing that their campaign hadn't worked that they said once the vote went their way they would propose ammendements to allow for the cases of FFA and rape/incest. But the majority of the electorate knew this was bull, hence the result of the vote.

fxotoole wrote: »

Speaking as someone who tried to get one, no they most certainly are not.

They are.
The problem is they are given willy nilly to those who don't need them and scam the system. Like the travel pass, 25% of the country has one..

The genuine cases often struggle.

fxotoole

Mavis Warm Stranger wrote: »

I would imagine if you don't qualify for a medical card you should be able to gather €300 together in a week or two?

Then you've obviously never been in the position of being just above the income limits for a medical card, and having an unexpected €300 expense come up suddenly.

Neyite

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

" Ruth Coppinger says she will try to get rid of the 72-hour waiting period for women seeking an abortion when the bill comes to the Dáil. "

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/ruth-coppinger-to-seek-to-remove-insulting-72-hour-wait-for-abortion-845721.html

Well it didn,t take long for Ruth Coppinger to look to make changes to the planned legislation post referendum win, she could of being more upfront pre referendum that she would seek changes to get rid of the 72 hour pause period but didn,t , it shall be interesting to see what other changes others will try to make .

If the 72hr cooling off period means paying for two GP visits then many women might leave terminating later when they have gathered the money together. I can see why she would want it removed.

At the moment you can order the pills online for €70-90. If you have to pay for two GP visits at €60 a pop 72hrs apart, plus the cost of the pills* at €70-90, that's €190+. Many women who are low income and who don't qualify for a medical card would struggle to come up with that money in less than a month or two.Surely if abortion is going to happen, you'd agree that the earlier a woman accesses the medication the better?

So at least if we must have a 72hr cooling off period because some people still don't fully trust lady-brains to make an educated, informed choice on her pregnancy, make the second follow-up visit free. At least.

What I would get behind from the pro-life side is if they campaigned for comprehensive sex education for children and teens, accessible and affordable contraception for all citizens, affordable and accessible sterilisation for those who wish it, particularly those who are outside the threshold of a medical card yet are still low paid. Pro-lifers need to stop flogging a dead horse with the 8th and refocus - turn their energies into strategies to reducing the number abortions in Ireland through methods that work, not scaremongering, shaming, or coming up with crackpot non-solutions like outersex and abstinence.

*lets take the online price for arguments sake but other figures being bandied about is that the pills may cost up to €300.

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

Maybe they will, but there’s working class women that don’t qualify for medical cards. €300 is a stretch for some people.

A stretch perhaps, but surely not impossible?

How much is a fair price?

Do we have numbers available as to the actual cost of performing the procedure? Or the pills?

ELM327 wrote: »

I have a good job as does my partner, we earn over €100k combined and have just bought our first house. But we'd have to budget for a €300 expense that was unexpected

So? You'd still be able to pay it. Why should the state have to pay for it if you can afford it yourself?

It will most likely be covered by your health insurance in any case, I reckon.

gormdubhgorm

DubInMeath wrote: »

Please continue to post their a reminder of why the no side lost in case anyone forgets.

This thread has been styled as a post referendum discussion forum.
But in reality it seems like a "Yes Voters love in lets slap each other on the back forum."

The second poster got 93 likes for saying "I voted yes it was the easiest vote ever."

Ok I will sumarise what I learned from this thread:

The use of terminology is odd much like "collateral damage" (which I used deliberately in another post for this reason) It is used military campaigns to distance themselves what is actually happening a de-humanisation. If people are dehumanized cleansing of a "problem" is far easier.
For example the phrase "right to choose" is wonderfully vague sounding and harmless. It creates a distance between the act itself and the planning of it.
A neat mental compartmentalisation

====
Many yes voters can seem to conveniently ignore that there is human life form inside them. (heartbeat, fingers toes irrelevant - I want it out of my body)

====
It has nothing to do with human life it does not exist (like the yes posters prove)

====
If you do not share this viewpoint you are controlling women, apparently -
Even though the woman has control already in various other aspects and other alternatives.

====
There is no mention of any say a male partner may have in the issue, he has no right whether to decide to have a child or not. 100% of the say rests with the woman and the woman only. joint decisions of loving couples do not seem to exist in the narrative.

====
If you are a man who voted no in this referendum you are anti-woman. -That is seen as a logical conclusion by many.

====
If you are a woman who voted no in this referendum you are only slightly better then the man who voted no (this was said by a moderator). - This is a very telling comment to the mindset of some yes voters.

====
Some yes voters vehemently claim there is no regret after abortions - so I suppose there is no need for conselling then in that case? - sure it will be grand

====
Some women do not like abortions and see it as a last resort, having gone through traumatic pregnancies in the past.

====
Others see it a lifestyle choice in furtherance of the women's liberation movement - the me generation - the kind who view no voters as "slut shaming" to use thier terminology. (It is for those I referred to them as treating pregnancy like a pimple on the @rse - there is no talking to that cohort of yes voters)

====
If a person voted no they are backward / out of touch

====
If a person voted yes they are modern and forward thinking

====
Any thoughts about where this will lead in 10 / 20 /30 years time is scaremongering - downs sydrome, designer abortions etc

====
About 30% of the country voted incorrectly - they should be quiet and let the yes side continue with the back slapping.

====
Changing adoption laws and fostering is not seen as an alternative - women do not see it as good thing to go full term - then hand a child to someone who wants it. - The reply is always a cliched vessel comment.

====
Any no voter who posts on this referendum thread is a sore loser. - As if it was a game to be won and lost.

Loafing Oaf

fxotoole wrote: »

Shall also be interesting to see what changes the No side try to make to the proposed legislation. They should have been more upfront about this before the referendum :rolleyes:

It's a democracy for chrissake. We all knew the legislation was not set in stone and that it was subject to discussion/ammendment when we voted on it.

Neither Coppinger nor the dwindling 'no' side will get anywhere in their attempts to seriously amend the legislation. Bar a bit of tinkering round the edges it will be passed as set out by Minister Harris before the referendum...

ArmaniJeanss

How is the €300 figure calculated?
As I see it it's 2 x €60 for GP visits + an amount for the tablets which has been variously mentioned in all the threads as being between €30 and €90.
So it looks somewhere round €150-€200 to me unless people are throwing in transport costs and cost of time off work, which you wouldn't normally do in such a calculation.

Mavis Warm Stranger wrote: »

A stretch perhaps, but surely not impossible?

How much is a fair price?

Do we have numbers available as to the actual cost of performing the procedure? Or the pills?

The cost of ONE GP visit and the cost of the pills, basically.

https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/revealed-most-abortions-carried-out-here-expected-to-cost-in-region-of-300-36956248.html

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

How is the €300 figure calculated?
As I see it it's 2 x €60 for GP visits + an amount for the tablets which has been variously mentioned in all the threads as being between €30 and €90.
So it looks somewhere round €150-€200 to me unless people are throwing in transport costs and cost of time off work, which you wouldn't normally do in such a calculation.

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

This thread has been styled as a post referendum discussion forum.
But in reality it seems like a "Yes Voters love in lets slap each other on the back forum."
The second poster got 93 likes for saying I voted yes it was the easiest vote ever.

Ok I will sumarise what I learned from this thread.

A lot of your list I would agree with.

How do you feel about abortion in the case where a woman is pregnant by rape?

ELM327 wrote: »

No they are not beliefs like pro/anti choice. They are shared beliefs for the common good. Offences against the person, offences against the state etc. Revenue generation. Not religious beliefs.

Perhaps you should revisit your handle.

There are laws based on our collective beliefs from being a broadly Catholic society that we impose on everyone like the fact we have no polygamy or until recently that gay people couldn't marry and that abortion was illegal. We as a society believe drugs are bad so we criminalise them. Captain Obvious was being obvious.

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

The cost of ONE GP visit and the cost of the pills, basically.

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/revealed-most-abortions-carried-out-here-expected-to-cost-in-region-of-300-36956248.html

It is expected the abortion pills which will be used in the vast majority of terminations will come under the drugs payment scheme, which sets a limit of €134 for any approved prescribed drugs or medicines.

...

GP Dr Mary Favier said it is likely such consultations will be more extensive, complex and lengthy, and therefore doctors will be likely to charge more. This could be in the region of €100 for the first and €80 for a second appointment.

..

GPs will have to give a thorough assessment of the patient; checking for pre-existing illnesses to ensure the pill is suitable. A physical exam to accurately determine the gestation of the pregnancy will also be required.

It's likely medical card holders will be able to access the pill for free.

It doesn't seem too unreasonable, although perhaps the 2nd consultation should be free, assuming all the assessments are done in one appointment.

€134 is the price of the pills because of the Drug payment scheme. With around a €100 fee for the first appointment you're already at €234.

Neyite wrote: »

If the 72hr cooling off period means paying for two GP visits then many women might leave terminating later when they have gathered the money together. I can see why she would want it removed.

At the moment you can order the pills online for €70-90. If you have to pay for two GP visits at €60 a pop 72hrs apart, plus the cost of the pills* at €70-90, that's €190+. Many women who are low income and who don't qualify for a medical card would struggle to come up with that money in less than a month or two.Surely if abortion is going to happen, you'd agree that the earlier a woman accesses the medication the better?

So at least if we must have a 72hr cooling off period because some people still don't fully trust lady-brains to make an educated, informed choice on her pregnancy, make the second follow-up visit free. At least.

What I would get behind from the pro-life side is if they campaigned for comprehensive sex education for children and teens, accessible and affordable contraception for all citizens, affordable and accessible sterilisation for those who wish it, particularly those who are outside the threshold of a medical card yet are still low paid. Pro-lifers need to stop flogging a dead horse with the 8th and refocus - turn their energies into strategies to reducing the number abortions in Ireland through methods that work, not scaremongering, shaming, or coming up with crackpot non-solutions like outersex and abstinence.

*lets take the online price for arguments sake but other figures being bandied about is that the pills may cost up to €300.

Simply put in a system like when you have to go to A&E or stay in hospital. Issue the bill after the fact and people can choose to pay off in instalments if they want - something I had to do when I had to stay in hospital unexpectedly and was caught short.

kunst nugget wrote: »

There are laws based on our collective beliefs from being a broadly Catholic society that we impose on everyone like the fact we have no polygamy or until recently that gay people couldn't marry and that abortion was illegal. We as a society believe drugs are bad so we criminalise them. Captain Obvious was being obvious.

Broadly catholic society?
It's not 1983 anymore buddy those days are past.

kunst nugget wrote: »

So? You'd still be able to pay it. Why should the state have to pay for it if you can afford it yourself?

It will most likely be covered by your health insurance in any case, I reckon.

I never asked that the state should pay it?
Merely that the mooted cost was too high.

ELM327 wrote: »

Broadly catholic society?
It's not 1983 anymore buddy those days are past.

We are a broadly Catholic country still according to the census - many people still identify as Catholic even if its just in a cultural sense. We are changing our laws as time goes on but many still reflect Judeo-Christian values as would most systems of law in Europe and the West.

Mavis Warm Stranger wrote: »

It doesn't seem too unreasonable, although perhaps the 2nd consultation should be free, assuming all the assessments are done in one appointment.

€134 is the price of the pills because of the Drug payment scheme. With around a €100 fee for the first appointment you're already at €234.

Barring an ultrasound scan, the first consultation wouldnt be so complex that it’d warrant an extra €40 on top of the actual fee. All a few of €300 will achieve is forcing women to still buy the pills online, and then what was the point?

Neyite

Mavis Warm Stranger wrote: »

If it's covered by the medical card is the problem solved?

If you work at all, you are unlikely to qualify for a medical card.

I worked minimum wage and low paid jobs for a long time and I would never have qualified.

kunst nugget wrote: »

It will surely be covered by the medical card. I'm having trouble believing that middle class women would struggle to scrape together €300.

You mean middle class women and the men that impregnated them, don't you?

The cost of this will affect men as well. Men who's partner is not on a medical card, men who work in McDonalds while their girlfriend is a student.

It's gonna affect male and female pockets so lets make sure it's a fair and affordable price for all.

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

Barring an ultrasound scan, the first consultation wouldnt be so complex that it’d warrant an extra €40 on top of the actual fee. All a few of €300 will achieve is forcing women to still buy the pills online, and then what was the point?

Well, aftercare for a start. Possibility of termination in complicated circumstances, like Savita's case for example.

and, as quoted:

GPs will have to give a thorough assessment of the patient; checking for pre-existing illnesses to ensure the pill is suitable. A physical exam to accurately determine the gestation of the pregnancy will also be required.

It's a fair bit more work than a standard appointment, where the GP might have a 5 minute chat a quick check with a stethoscope and you're on your way.