nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

PopePalpatine

I didn't know whether to post this here or in the Sanctimony of Pro-Lifers thread in t'udder forum - a BBC article on Paraguay's "epidemic" of child pregnancies. Paraguay only allows for abortion if the mother's life is at risk. On average, two girls aged 14 and under become pregnant in Paraguay every day.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

robarmstrong

King Mob wrote: »

No, you ignore points because you cannot answer them honestly and you know that they show the flaws in your position.

You do not fool anyone by pretending it's about "behavior".
It's curious that you think you do.

Fairly certain it's me he has on ignore because I've chased him to provide evidence for his claims as seen in previous posts on this thread.

ohnonotgmail

robarmstrong wrote: »

Fairly certain it's me he has on ignore because I've chased him to provide evidence for his claims as seen in previous posts on this thread.

Me too.

martingriff

seamus wrote: »

It's not that simple in reality. A pregnant woman can't just rock up to any maternity hospital and demand to speak to a consultant.

When you're pregnant, you pick a maternity hospital, and from then on they deal with you, and your appointments are booked in weeks ahead of schedule.

Yes, you can change maternity hospitals, but that involves a transfer through official channels, including your history/file being sent across, and appointments having to be rebooked.

Realistically if this woman presented to (say) the Rotunda, she would have to be scheduled in for an appointment before she could even see a doctor. The machinations would take over from that point on, record transfer, etc. It's not a medical emergency so while she would be treated with priority, she would not be treated urgently.
At the first appointment, the doctor would decide that s/he needed another scan to see it for themselves. Depending on the location, that may requiring booking in for a separate appointment.

Once that was done, it would then be referred to a second doctor for their opinion. Who may ask for another scan.

And by the time those 3-4 weeks have passed, the Rotunda may still say, "We need to wait", or she may have miscarried.

Our maternity system works pretty well, but it doesn't work fast. Pregnancy being what it is, unless a woman presents with an imminent risk to her health, then you won't be rushed anywhere to get another test done that day. You'll get scheduled in for another appointment in a few days to look at it then.

Thanks for that. Ya was not thinking like that

tretorn

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/woman-in-four-week-wait-for-abortion-wscq3bpj2

ohnonotgmail

tretorn wrote: »

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/woman-in-four-week-wait-for-abortion-wscq3bpj2

which part of the article substantiates your claim that

The news states that two consultants wanted to wait for a few weeks to determine whether the defect was fatal or not.

Bear in mind the article is subscriber only so please quote the relevant section.

Timberrrrrrrr

robarmstrong wrote: »

Fairly certain it's me he has on ignore because I've chased him to provide evidence for his claims as seen in previous posts on this thread.

He doesn't put you on ignore, just claims to so he doesn't have to answer thebhard questions

robarmstrong

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

He doesn't put you on ignore, just claims to so he doesn't have to answer thebhard questions

That may cause an issue with the forum charter, especially the truth-claim aspect.

tretorn

Call me Al wrote: »

No this is totally incorrect.
The referendum was to remove the 8th amendment from the Constitution and to allow for independent legislation to be drawn up surrounding abortion services within the health system.
Nowhere in the constitution does it now say anything about protection of the foetus after 12 weeks.

The Constitution guarantees to protect all our rights to life, this was the case prior to the electorate voting to remove the right of life of foetuses up to twelve weeks old.

This right to life has now been withdrawn from foetuses up to twelve weeks old, they now have no right to life at all, they are on a par with the young of other species.

After twelve weeks the foetus has the same right to life as everyone posting here except in very limited cases which are provided for under the Law. A foetus life can only be terminated in Ireland if two Medical Professionals verify that a defect is fatal. This was the information given to the electorate before they voted to remove the only right the unborn have in our Laws.

This is the Law and the Law in the UK would have been very similar until pressure was put on legislators to widen access to abortion. We now know that abortion in the UK is unlimited up to twenty five weeks but at the moment a Consultant is acting illegally if he or she performs an abortion if a defect may not be fatal.

Lets wait to hear what the Master of the Coombe has to say about these events, it would be very foolish to take what was said in the Dail as the full facts surrounding this case.

The Times article reports what Coppinger said in the Dail, eg two consultants said the defect was fatal but the woman was then advised that she should continuethe pregnancy for three or four weeks to establish if the prognosis would change. This reporting makes no sense.

As I said we need a statement from the Master of the Coombe to establish the facts.

[Deleted User]

tretorn wrote: »

This was the information given to the electorate before they voted to remove the only right the unborn have in our Laws.

Again, you claim that, but you cannot and will not show that the electorate agrees with you.

Calina

tretorn wrote: »

Well, no, the electorate were told the foetus right to life was constitutionally protected after twelve weeks, the only constitutional amendment was to remove protection for life up to twelve weeks.

.

This is absolutely untrue. The referendum repealed the 8th amendment in its entirety and the electorate were told it would be a matter for the Dail. The 12 weeks is not mentioned in the constitution and the foetus' right to life is not constitutionally protected.

This was abundantly clear at the time of the referendum so I ask you why you are repeating something which is incorrect; if you did not know it was incorrect, why did you not know this? And why do you think you are qualified to comment given how absolutely wrong you are with regard to the update to the constitution under amendment 36.

ohnonotgmail

tretorn wrote: »

The Constitution guarantees to protect all our rights to life, this was the case prior to the electorate voting to remove the right of life of foetuses up to twelve weeks old.

This right to life has now been withdrawn from foetuses up to twelve weeks old, they now have no right to life at all, they are on a par with the young of other species.

After twelve weeks the foetus has the same right to life as everyone posting here except in very limited cases which are provided for under the Law. A foetus life can only be terminated in Ireland if two Medical Professionals verify that a defect is fatal. This was the information given to the electorate before they voted to remove the only right the unborn have in our Laws.

where does it say in the constitution that fetuses have protection past 12 weeks? you have simply made that up out of thin air

ohnonotgmail

Tretorn you have made the 2 claims below and have not backed them up as requested. I have asked a mod to intervene

tretorn wrote: »

The news states that two consultants wanted to wait for a few weeks to determine whether the defect was fatal or not.

tretorn wrote: »

Well, no, the electorate were told the foetus right to life was constitutionally protected after twelve weeks, the only constitutional amendment was to remove protection for life up to twelve weeks.

Call me Al

tretorn wrote: »

The Constitution guarantees to protect all our rights to life, this was the case prior to the electorate voting to remove the right of life of foetuses up to twelve weeks old.

This right to life has now been withdrawn from foetuses up to twelve weeks old, they now have no right to life at all, they are on a par with the young of other species.

....

Please substantiate this. And this:

Quote: tretorn
"Well, no, the electorate were told the foetus right to life was constitutionally protected after twelve weeks, the only constitutional amendment was to remove protection for life up to twelve weeks."

The article in Constitution would be perfect.

Hotblack Desiato

tretorn wrote: »

Irish people were told abortion would only be available after twelve weeks in certain specific circumstances, ie in cases where FFA is diagnosed and confirmed in the opinion of two medical professionals

The woman says she was diagnosed with FFA by two obstetricians

They are using the Dail to push their own liberal agendas on abortion

Mattie McGrath is using the Dail to push his illiberal agenda, but that's perfectly ok, if they should be silenced according to you then so should he.

the end games is an abortion regime like the UK, lets stop pretending now this wont happen quite soon.

It can only happen if a majority in the Dail would support it. Even that is no guarantee that it will happen.

tretorn wrote: »

Well, no, the electorate were told the foetus right to life was constitutionally protected after twelve weeks, the only constitutional amendment was to remove protection for life up to twelve weeks

Completely and utterly wrong

There is now no constitutional protection for "unborn life" at any stage. A Supreme Court decision before the repeal vote made this perfectly clear, they said that there were no constitutional rights for the foetus outside of the 8th amendment. So with the 8th amendment repealed, there is no constitutional protection whatsoever for the foetus and the Oireachtas is free to legislate on abortion in any way it sees fit (including to ban it entirely, subject to the constitutional right to life of the woman)

You are amazingly uninformed for someone who continually comments on an issue.

Oh and the very first line of that London Times article you linked makes your claims look extremely foolish:

A pregnant woman who had a fatal foetal abnormality diagnosed by two consultants

.......

Call me Al wrote: »

Please substantiate this. The article in Constitution would be perfect.

This poster has so far refused or is unable to substantiate any claim they have made.

splinter65

There was no further update in this story I take it. It’s disappeared off the news sites.

Odhinn

tretorn wrote: »

Well, the decision resting in the womans hands is not what the electorate voted so, this is very inconvenient for those people wanting a very liberal abortion regime but Irish people were told abortion would only be available after twelve weeks in certain specific circumstances, ie in cases where FFA is diagnosed and confirmed in the opinion of two medical professionals and on mental health grounds where continuing with a pregnancy could cause a woman to be suicidal.

I know two young adults who were diagnosed with having organs outside their bodies. Parents were advised to go to the Uk for abortions but refused. The young adults are graduating shortly from university and grew up perfectly normally after having surgery as infants. The mEdical professionals know how advanced surgery is now to help these babies so they know in their conscience that some of these cases are not fatal. In these circumstances the option is to go to the UK where you can have an abortion no questions asked at twenty four weeks. This is not what was put before the Irish electorate, ie women deciding themselves what was FFA or not and to be honest most Irish people dont vote for Ruth Coppinger or Brid Smyth on any matter and they most definitely wouldnt support these politicans views on abortion. Both of them are so unstatesman or woman like, please God the tiny vote will dwindle to nothing shortly so we can see the back of them. They are using the Dail to push their own liberal agendas on abortion and this is so wrong when Irish people were categorically assured that we would not end up with an abortion regime like they have in the UK. We are two weeks into abortion on demand up to twelve weeks and the pressure is already on, the end games is an abortion regime like the UK, lets stop pretending now this wont happen quite soon.

Dear o dear. Kinder, Kuch, kirche?

ohnonotgmail

Odhinn wrote: »

Dear o dear. Kinder, Kuch, kirche?

Took me a second to figure out why you mentioned cake.

[Deleted User]

Odhinn wrote: »

tretorn wrote: »

Well, the decision resting in the womans hands is not what the electorate voted so, this is very inconvenient for those people wanting a very liberal abortion regime but Irish people were told abortion would only be available after twelve weeks in certain specific circumstances, ie in cases where FFA is diagnosed and confirmed in the opinion of two medical professionals and on mental health grounds where continuing with a pregnancy could cause a woman to be suicidal.

I know two young adults who were diagnosed with having organs outside their bodies. Parents were advised to go to the Uk for abortions but refused. The young adults are graduating shortly from university and grew up perfectly normally after having surgery as infants. The mEdical professionals know how advanced surgery is now to help these babies so they know in their conscience that some of these cases are not fatal. In these circumstances the option is to go to the UK where you can have an abortion no questions asked at twenty four weeks. This is not what was put before the Irish electorate, ie women deciding themselves what was FFA or not and to be honest most Irish people dont vote for Ruth Coppinger or Brid Smyth on any matter and they most definitely wouldnt support these politicans views on abortion. Both of them are so unstatesman or woman like, please God the tiny vote will dwindle to nothing shortly so we can see the back of them. They are using the Dail to push their own liberal agendas on abortion and this is so wrong when Irish people were categorically assured that we would not end up with an abortion regime like they have in the UK. We are two weeks into abortion on demand up to twelve weeks and the pressure is already on, the end games is an abortion regime like the UK, lets stop pretending now this wont happen quite soon.

Problem with women much?

[Deleted User]

Duplicate post deleted

Hotblack Desiato

splinter65 wrote: »

There was no further update in this story I take it. It’s disappeared off the news sites.

wtf is that supposed to mean?

[Deleted User]

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

wtf is that supposed to mean?

I think it means that the print media and TV/Radio have copped on to Coppinger and Smith’s schenenigans.

splinter65

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

wtf is that supposed to mean?

It was ubiquitous across all the news sites for around 4 hours on Thursday then droppped like a hot brick. Actually the latest is that the Coombe say they will be ready to go with the abortions on Feb 4.

aloyisious

Today's I/Times reporting that the woman was told the abortion was refused because the "foetal anomaly" [report's words] was not fatal. So we will have to see who got what wrong in interpretation.

[Deleted User]

aloyisious wrote: »

Today's I/Times reporting that the woman was told the abortion was refused because the "foetal anomaly" [report's words] was not fatal. So we will have to see who got what wrong in interpretation.

A simple mistake to make when ones upset. Shame on Coppinger and Smith for taking such cruel advantage of a tragic situation of a very vulnerable woman.

splinter65

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A simple mistake to make when ones upset. Shame on Coppinger and Smith for taking such cruel advantage of a tragic situation of a very vulnerable woman.

My thoughts entirely. Coppinger in particular chomping at the bit to remove the 12 weeks that swung it for the repeal campaigners. I’m sure the couple misunderstood what was being explained to them in their distress and if the TDs has simply sought clarification this ****storm wouldn’t have happened. They’ve piled misery on misery.

aloyisious

splinter65 wrote: »

My thoughts entirely. Coppinger in particular chomping at the bit to remove the 12 weeks that swung it for the repeal campaigners. I’m sure the couple misunderstood what was being explained to them in their distress and if the TDs has simply sought clarification this ****storm wouldn’t have happened. They’ve piled misery on misery.

In fairness to the two TD's, the hospital could have only replied that it couldn't comment on individual cases, if it could comment at all on a patient's history, confidentiality and data protection law.. The only other source would be the woman who gave them what she had. I can't see any other clarification source for the TD's.

Hotblack Desiato

splinter65 wrote: »

It was ubiquitous across all the news sites for around 4 hours on Thursday then droppped like a hot brick. Actually the latest is that the Coombe say they will be ready to go with the abortions on Feb 4.

If willing to do it on Feb 4, why not now?

You were implying the whole story is fake, but now you admit it's not, otherwise there would be no abortion on Feb 4

Hotblack Desiato

splinter65 wrote: »

Coppinger in particular chomping at the bit to remove the 12 weeks that swung it for the repeal campaigners.

(a) this has got nothing whatsoever to do with 12 weeks

(b) you have no basis to say the 12 weeks swung the vote. The law is more restrictive than what the citizens' assembly wanted.

tretorn

The pregnant woman passed some comment about the bar being set too high for fatal foetal abnormalities, this set the alrms bells ringing for me.

The legislation clearly set out the circumstances where abortion could be carried out after twelve weeks and the decision regarding fatal is a decision for medical professionals only.

Even Kate O Connell, she of the " We won" jibe across the floor of the Dail has said Coppinger and Smyth should not have brought this sad case up in the Dail.