RobertKK wrote: » It is very dogmatic to think an opt in system wouldn't work. A list of doctors on the internet willing to carry out abortions makes sense. Simon would rather women go to their doctor and be charged €50+ for a consultation only to be told they will be referred to another doctor who will charge a consultation fee the first day and whatever the abortion procedure costs the next day. Opt in would be cheaper for the woman.
RobertKK wrote: » Opt in would be cheaper for the woman.
fxotoole wrote: » Look Robert, the people have spoken. Abortion is now legal in Ireland. GPs need to fall in line and start providing services to patients regardless of their own personal beliefs.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » And we all know how keen you are to see affordable abortion services for everyone.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » I think it is fair to say that this was their overriding concern throughout the entire referendum campaign.
RobertKK wrote: » So it will be fine to have women charged for a consultation with a doctor simply to get a referral, when she could have that money in her pocket and know beforehand if the doctor she was attending provided the service? It is like having an eye problem but not knowing you are attending a doctor who treats skin complaints, not eye complaints. People are being dogmatic about referral by not seeing opt in would work fine, plus save money.
RobertKK wrote: » If I was a doctor I would not want to be part of a referral service. But you could be sure I would be taking my normal fee if I had to. That said there is waiting times to see some GPs and I don't want my doctor's time wasted referring women when it can be totally unnecessary by using modern technology to get info.
Cupcake_Crisis wrote: » One would imagine that any GP who would turn a woman seeking abortion services away wouldn’t have the kahonas to charge her for the appointment.
RobertKK wrote: » Why not? They charge the same if you are there two minutes or 20 minutes or longer for a consultation, why do you think pregnant women who want an abortion will get special treatment?
Fighting Tao wrote: » Yes let’s make a list of doctors for the nut cases to target!
Calina wrote: » Why is the default assumption that doctors won't provide so we have to identify the doctors who will?
ELM327 wrote: » Because the doctor has refused to carry out the requested service? You get nothing for nothing in this world, and I'd never pay any GP who refused any medication or procedure request ..nor darken their door again
RobertKK wrote: » The doctor would be fine given there is not enough GPs in the country. Lets say she has to pay the doctor nothing, unless she is able to walk to the doctor there is a cost involved, and there is the cost in time wasted for everyone involved which wouldn't happen with opt in.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » I don't actually care if it is opt-in or opt-out. I think the reason Robert likes Opt-in is that he still hasn't got his head around the fact that there is a 2:1 majority in favour of abortion. He imagines opt-in will be a small list and hard to find one nearby and it will be a roadblock. But I think doctors, highly educated and upper middle class, are more pro-choice than the average voter, and we'll see 3:1 or more offering services once payments are sorted out. Opt in or out will make little difference.
RobertKK wrote: » Does a 2 to 1 majority mean everyone has to think the same? In your head maybe it does. I don't care how big or small the list of doctors is. I am for conscientious objectors to be fully excluded from the whole system, meaning no referral.
ELM327 wrote: » Ah would ya ever go away with yerself. It's done. As dead as renua/ the dodo/ the telex machine The people have voted, only 21% of the registered electorate were bothered enough to vote no. Doctors are generally more educated than the populous at large, so therefore are more likely to be pro choice* . I don't see there being an issue with (m)any doctors objecting. * If you take the Dublin area, in the constituencies with higher college graduates, the polls were and always have been more liberal on this issue. This includes but is not limited to DLR.
ELM327 wrote: » No referral will hopefully be illegal. PS: In referendum history, 2:1 is a very large margin, most referenda where there is any area of contention are much closer than that. If it was 51:49 like Divorce, there would be some argument for tapering it down a little. But with the overwhelming destruction of the No campaign by the 2:1 majority, it's full steam ahead. Abortion on demand mandatorily provided by all doctors. Once that sets in we can move forward to 24 weeks.
B0jangles wrote: » Word spreads very quickly - a doctor who refuses to provide either the service or even a referral will find themselves blacklisted by a lot of their potential patients. If it was me, I'd be asking the receptionist what the doctor's stance is on such issues - that way there's no chance of being charged for a wasted appointment, but I understand that not everyone would feel comfortable discussing something like that with someone other than their own doctor. (In my case it's a hypothetical; I checked and my own doctor signed up with Doctors for Choice )
SusieBlue wrote: » Telling them exactly where they can direct their moral outrage at. At the expense of the women, doctors and other patients trying to avail of medical services, but who cares about them. Voices need to be heard.
