Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

Guy:Incognito · 03-12-2018 09:50AM

foreverandever wrote: »

Proper centres where they have access to ultrasounds, counsellors, contraception and follow up care. Like a well woman’s clinic. Similar to what’s in other countries. Not run by pro-life/people with alternative motives. They don’t need one in every town but easy access to them for women.

Somewhere handy for the protestors to focus on you mean?

To be fair, there probably aren't enough of them to spread around all the GPs surgerys in the country to set up their prayer stands in front of.

Was one of the points of the no side not that they reckoned the UK system would be a money making thing for "big abortion"?. The gp system seems like a good way to go. Unless it's just a tactic to delay as long as possible...........

seamus · 03-12-2018 10:06AM

foreverandever wrote: »

1. No huge proof that GP led abortion services are the best

No "huge proof" that they're not. Since abortion is a primary care service, it makes sense to have primary care providers do it.

If it turns out later on that it's better handled by specialised services, then we can change.

2. No access to ultrasound for dating scans

So? Other dating methods are good enough.

3. Why isn’t contraception free for every woman first

Why "first"? Why not "as well"? The lack of free contraception does not in any way hinder the introduction of abortion services.

4. Why are they being paid more to provide abortion services rather than maternity care to women

The services that GPs provide for maternity care are basically checking blood pressure and talking to the patient. Anything remotely complicated and the patient gets an ambulance to the nearest hospital. Abortion services require more work.

Any road, have you got a citation for this claim?

Loafing Oaf · 03-12-2018 11:17AM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Somewhere handy for the protestors to focus on you mean?

To be fair, there probably aren't enough of them to spread around all the GPs surgerys in the country to set up their prayer stands in front of.

Maybe getting too Machiavellian here, but I suspect wrongfooting protestors may have been the main reason for going with a GP-led service. And a year or two down the road we may see a switch to one based around family planning clinics, but by the stage the existence of an abortion service will be a fait accompli, and it will be very hard to build a head of steam around protests.

ohnonotgmail · 03-12-2018 11:20AM

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Maybe getting too Machiavellian here, but I suspect wrongfooting protestors may have been the main reason for going with a GP-led service. And a year or two down the road we may see a switch to one based around family planning clinics, but by the stage the existence of an abortion service will be a fait accompli, and it will be very hard to build a head of steam around protests.

As much as i would like to believe that is true i dont think it is. They still hold protests outside Planned Parenthood in the states. Sometimes violently. There were some of those american nutters over here during the referendum campaign. Expect them to return if we opened abortion clinics.

Guy:Incognito · 03-12-2018 11:22AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

As much as i would like to believe that is true i dont think it is. They still hold protests outside Planned Parenthood in the states. Sometimes violently. There were some of those american nutters over here during the referendum campaign. Expect them to return if we opened abortion clinics.

Nothing says "Pro life" more than bombing a clinic.

ohnonotgmail · 03-12-2018 11:23AM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Nothing says "Pro life" more than bombing a clinic.

you cant say they dont understand irony

Geuze · 03-12-2018 11:44AM

volchitsa wrote: »

GPs don't deliver babies any more, but going by costs in places that charge to the patient, like the US, I very much doubt an obstetrician gets less than 450€ for attending a birth. They get thousands in America.

GPs get paid to provide care to pregnant women during pregnancy.

Where I live, typically every second visit is to the GP, alternating with a hosp visit.

They will earn more for an abortion than for providing this maternity care.

SusieBlue · 03-12-2018 11:59AM

It just sounds like delaying tactics to me. The lack of free contraception can be linked to our poor standard of sex education and is an entirely separate issue to that of abortion.
A relevant issue, yes, and one that most certainly needs to be addressed. But not under the umbrella of legalising abortion services & not at the expense of delaying things even further.

ohnonotgmail · 03-12-2018 12:12PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

It just sounds like delaying tactics to me. The lack of free contraception can be linked to our poor standard of sex education and is an entirely separate issue to that of abortion.
A relevant issue, yes, and one that most certainly needs to be addressed. But not under the umbrella of legalising abortion services & not at the expense of delaying things even further.

Lets be honest, the type of people who are against abortion would object to free contraception as well. We are back to people presenting anti-abortion talking points but saying they are pro-choice.

03-12-2018 12:15PM

Geuze wrote: »

GPs get paid to provide care to pregnant women during pregnancy.

Where I live, typically every second visit is to the GP, alternating with a hosp visit.

They will earn more for an abortion than for providing this maternity care.

how did u vote asking for a friend

Berserker · 03-12-2018 12:25PM

Said many months back that this was going to be a balls up and it's well on a way to being that. All of this stuff should have been discussed and resolved before the referendum.

Geuze wrote: »

GPs get paid to provide care to pregnant women during pregnancy.

They get paid to provide a basic level of care. Anything above that is referred.

Geuze wrote: »

They will earn more for an abortion than for providing this maternity care.

Not sure about that given the proposed number of abortions which will take place here. My OH's friends are working from 8am til 7pm flat out these days as GPs. Hard to see how they'd fit in more people. Finally, if money is the aim of the game you are onto a loser if you are a GP.

Loafing Oaf · 03-12-2018 12:30PM

Berserker wrote: »

Said many months back that this was going to be a balls up and it's well on a way to being that. All of this stuff should have been discussed and resolved before the referendum.

Well then the government would've been accused of being presumptuous and taking a yes vote for granted. Seems to me a lot of the trouble stems from the rush to get the service up and running on January 1. I understand why they're doing this but I'd say it would have been better to postpone it a couple of months to make sure all ducks were lined up.

seamus · 03-12-2018 12:31PM

Berserker wrote: »

Said many months back that this was going to be a balls up and it's well on a way to being that. All of this stuff should have been discussed and resolved before the referendum.

It was.

All of the alleged "issues" are coming from the same groups who kept bringing them up before the referendum and had them dismissed.

A tiny group of pro-life GPs and nurses are throwing a hissy fit about it and will continue to do so. This doesn't mean that it hasn't been "discussed and resolved".

In the wider context having a service which is 80% of what it should be, up and running by 1 January is better than delaying for another six months to get to 90%.

Every day that legal abortion services are not available in Ireland forces women to travel for abortion. This is what we have to remember and ignore the posturing and politicking.

Berserker · 03-12-2018 12:50PM

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Well then the government would've been accused of being presumptuous and taking a yes vote for granted. Seems to me a lot of the trouble stems from the rush to get the service up and running on January 1. I understand why they're doing this but I'd say it would have been better to postpone it a couple of months to make sure all ducks were lined up.

I agree that the rush in getting it up and running is part of the problem. However, if they were to have some sense and postpone it until everything is ready, they are going to get it from others. Disagree that consulting with GPs would have been presumptuous. It was/is a very important part of providing the service.

seamus wrote: »

A tiny group of pro-life GPs and nurses are throwing a hissy fit about it and will continue to do so. This doesn't mean that it hasn't been "discussed and resolved".

Not being petty but the issues haven't been resolved given the walkout that occurred. Also, pro-choice GPs are not happy about the manner in which it has been handled also. The GPs I know are happy to provide the service but they are not happy about the manner in which the government has managed the issue. The medical profession in general are very unhappy with the government. My OH and her colleagues are fuming over Leo's remarks about working during Christmas.

seamus · 03-12-2018 01:20PM

Berserker wrote: »

Not being petty but the issues haven't been resolved given the walkout that occurred.

The walkout was 50 pro-life GPs.

There is literally nothing the government can do to make these GPs happy except to ignore the referendum result.

"Resolved" can't mean, "Everyone is happy with the arrangement". But simply that the best compromise has been reached.

And it has. Conscientious objection is a thing. The fact that a tiny minority of GPs are still completely unsatisfied does not mean that we should delay.

Grayson · 03-12-2018 02:09PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

As much as i would like to believe that is true i dont think it is. They still hold protests outside Planned Parenthood in the states. Sometimes violently. There were some of those american nutters over here during the referendum campaign. Expect them to return if we opened abortion clinics.

I remember that being raised during the referendum and it was part of the reason for a GP led service.

If we had clinics you could expect the likes of Bernadette Smyth to set up shop outside them.

Loafing Oaf · 03-12-2018 02:46PM

Berserker wrote: »

I agree that the rush in getting it up and running is part of the problem. However, if they were to have some sense and postpone it until everything is ready, they are going to get it from others. Disagree that consulting with GPs would have been presumptuous. It was/is a very important part of providing the service.

I agree that Simon Harris should not have sprung the proposal on GPs the way he did. however, I think to have every aspect of the service sorted out in advance of the referendum would have seemed presumptuous and would very likely have antagonised undecided voters. As we saw from the Senate abolition referendum, voters don't like to be treated as sheep to be herded to the 'correct' outcome by their supposed betters.

ELM327 · 03-12-2018 02:53PM

The referendum is over. When will these small minded "people" realise that they don't get to impose their "conscience" on others??

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 03-12-2018 03:10PM

Berserker wrote: »

Said many months back that this was going to be a balls up and it's well on a way to being that. All of this stuff should have been discussed and resolved before the referendum.

They get paid to provide a basic level of care. Anything above that is referred.

Not sure about that given the proposed number of abortions which will take place here. My OH's friends are working from 8am til 7pm flat out these days as GPs. Hard to see how they'd fit in more people. Finally, if money is the aim of the game you are onto a loser if you are a GP.

The figure bandied about is 5000. Divide that by 26 would give 192 abortions per county per year (yes, I know the actual number per county would differ based on population). So that’s an abortion every two days roughly per county. Not per doctor, per county. Not much extra work, is it?

ELM327 · 03-12-2018 03:14PM

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The figure bandied about is 5000. Divide that by 26 would give 192 abortions per county per year (yes, I know the actual number per county would differ based on population). So that’s an abortion every two days roughly per county. Not per doctor, per county. Not much extra work, is it?

Even if it were 1920 per county per year it isn't going to be much work. All the doctor has to do is hand one pill (and possibly administer the other pill).

Let's not forget, if you don't allow abortion, these women will be coming for pre natal appointments anyway so there's no extra work at all!

Berserker · 03-12-2018 03:28PM

seamus wrote: »

The fact that a tiny minority of GPs are still completely unsatisfied does not mean that we should delay.

650 signed the petition, fyi. Four weeks away from it's in introduction, including the Christmas period when the public bodies involved will be out of action and nobody knows how it is going to be implemented but we are good to go, apparently. I'm talking about the reality of implementing this service.

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I agree that Simon Harris should not have sprung the proposal on GPs the way he did. however, I think to have every aspect of the service sorted out in advance of the referendum would have seemed presumptuous and would very likely have antagonised undecided voters. As we saw from the Senate abolition referendum, voters don't like to be treated as sheep to be herded to the 'correct' outcome by their supposed betters.

Talking to the people, the experts in the area, who are actually going to implement this would antagonise undecided voters. I've heard it all now.

Loafing Oaf · 03-12-2018 04:30PM

Berserker wrote: »

Talking to the people, the experts in the area, who are actually going to implement this would antagonise undecided voters. I've heard it all now.

I'm not talking about talking to doctors, of course they should have done that. I'm saying taking practical preparatory steps for introducing the service like training GPs, pre-ordering pills would have looked like taking the referendum result for granted.

spookwoman · 03-12-2018 07:18PM

Geuze wrote: »

They will get 450 for this service.

It seems they get less for maternity.

Sorry just saw the article for the 450

150 for first visit which includes scan.
"At the first visit the medical practitioner will confirm the pregnancy, offer advice and information and certify that the pregnancy has not exceeded twelve weeks gestation. "

I take it that it will probably involve a councellor as well as a practitioner

300 then for Following the three-day waiting period, a second visit will be required at which the medical practitioner will obtain consent, provide information on the procedure, possible complications and advice on contraception, administer the first medication and supply the second medication to the patient to be taken at home. a 3rd visit is optional for "the medical practitioner will confirm that the termination is complete and provide an aftercare consultation."

I don't have kids but how many times does someone go to a doctor during a pregnancy for routine checks I would think it adds up to more that say 9 visits at say 50 a go.

04-12-2018 12:12AM

Berserker wrote: »

650 signed the petition, fyi.

650 currently-working GP's?

id be checking that list twice.

....... · 04-12-2018 12:17PM

spookwoman wrote: »

I don't have kids but how many times does someone go to a doctor during a pregnancy for routine checks I would think it adds up to more that say 9 visits at say 50 a go.

Are your GP visits not free during pregnancy?

astrofool · 04-12-2018 12:22PM

....... wrote: »

Are your GP visits not free during pregnancy?

The doctor still gets paid....

Hotblack Desiato · 04-12-2018 01:21PM

They pulled a similar stunt a few years back at the obstetricians' and gynaecologists' conference, pack the hall with retirees then pass a BS motion stating that abortion is never needed to save a woman's life blah blah.

gandalf · 04-12-2018 08:55PM

Deleted User wrote: »

650 currently-working GP's?

id be checking that list twice.

As long as the list is published so no woman who wants a choice accidentally attends one of these "doctors".

It would be a useful tool for those of us who voted repeal to avoid giving them business in future as well.

spookwoman · 04-12-2018 08:59PM

WTF!

A number of anti-abortion TDs have proposed new changes to the abortion legislation which would require a doctor to report whether a woman had any previous abortions, what age and ethnicity she is and whether she is married.

If a medical practitioner does not do this, they could be fined or jailed for up to five years

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/abortion-law-change-to-make-doctors-report-woman-s-marital-status-sought-1.3719749?mode=amp&fbclid=IwAR1kJMCgZJAAc5hHQEilZ1fWf0eQE5zD3kFooGAdSwetLcLOYHa6X3MOUi4#.XAaVIw_Jqtc.facebook

gandalf · 04-12-2018 09:02PM

Ah it's the usual suspects wasting time as normal. Just when you think our TDs can't get any worse they lower the bar further.

Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

Comments