Mrsmum wrote: » Hmmm, it isn't Vicky Wall that these parents are accusing of being economical with the truth. Your other comment says more about you than anyone and in case there's a doubt that's not a compliment.
political analyst wrote: Doesn't what that doctor said to Vicky Wall indicate an indecently enthusiastic attitude to abortion in the medical profession, i.e. putting pressure of women with pregnancies that are believed to have FFA to have their pregnancies terminated?
Igotadose wrote: » No, they're (soon) to be litigating with their doctors. I stand by my statement, pro-life advocates are notoriously economical with the truth. And Vicky Wall's a heartless person for inflicting suffering on that baby. We've only got Vicky Wall's word on her discussion with her doctor - who knows what really went on? I'm never going to believe someone claiming to be pro-life at first blush, too much history of lying there.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » That's not pressure, that's informing a patient of an option. How the option was delivered ie tone, language is a separate issue. The expectant woman makes the final decision in abortion.
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » ....who was to blame.
ToBeFrank123 wrote: I agree with everything you say except for the last sentence. While expectant mothers should definitely have the final decision, it should be an informed decision, informed by every option and all possible information, including that there are more tests available which may be worth waiting for.
....... wrote: » Why do you need someone to "blame". A medical tragedy has happened. Instead of playing the blame game would it not be a better use of energy to put processes in place that minimise the chance of this happening again going forward?
political analyst wrote: » From May last year:https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/i-felt-abandoned-by-this-country-mother-who-had-termination-in-uk-36892200.html Doesn't what that doctor said to Vicky Wall indicate an indecently enthusiastic attitude to abortion in the medical profession, i.e. putting pressure of women with pregnancies that are believed to have FFA to have their pregnancies terminated?
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » I don't like hair splitting as much as the next person, but.. The 12 week limit was what was agreed by: 1. The Citizens Assembly which was a microcosm of Irish Society (not possible to put everyone in Ireland into the one room). 2. Received the backing of the majority in a referendum. People voted for or against based on this limit. If it was a 6 week limit, more may have voted for, if it was for example a 20 week limit, people might have voted differently. People voted based on a well advertised 12 week limit. 3. Politicians from across the board in the elected Dail and Seanad supported the 12 week limit in legislation. I don't think you can get more of a consensus or agreement than that. This wasn't one person or a dictator imposing a 12 week limit, it came initially from the Citizens Assembly, was part of a referendum campaign which gained a majority and was put into law by legislators representing constituents. By any standard that is the agreement of society and anything else is hair splitting.
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » And what if they told you after you had whipped off the breast they made a mistake and there was another even more accurate test they forgot to tell you about? Would you say "ah sure these things happen" or would you consider pursuing legal action?
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » We will have to wait for the enquiry.
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » Are you done with your tar brush?
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » If they decide to go ahead with the abortion before these other tests having been informed about them, then yes they have no-one to blame but themselves. However, I sincerely doubt a patient would ignore the advice of a doctor if that doctor was adamant enough or advised strongly the patient to await the outcome of other tests. The enquiry, if the report is made public, should tell us more and who was to blame.
Igotadose wrote: » If you're sheep enough to believe her. Pro-life are 'economical with the truth' to quote a poster here from last year. And how heartless of her to inflict that pain on the child. Awful person, typical pro-life activist though, all about the fetus and themselves.
SusieBlue wrote: » That would read to me Vicky was given an option and chose not to take it, and was at peace with her decision with no regrets. That's great for her. Many women who had to travel abroad were not so lucky & had to go through a traumatic life event in a foreign country without the support of their loved ones, at great financial cost, and had to have their baby's ashes shipped home via courier to boot. I feel sorry for those women but I don't feel sorry for Vicky. Ireland supported & looked after Vicky, it didn't look after Amy Callahan (the other woman in the article).
political analyst wrote: » Had to? Who said they had to have their pregnancies terminated? That was something they chose.
SusieBlue wrote: » But they didn’t choose to do it abroad.They had no choice. The Irish healthcare system wouldn’t look after them so they were forced to travel to a country with a bit more compassion. I note how you selectively quoted there and didn’t reply to the bit about parents having to have their children’s ashes shipped home by courier.
political analyst wrote: » They did have a choice - between having an abortion abroad and seeing their pregnancies through. If they'd done the latter then they wouldn't have had to have their deceased children's ashes "shipped" home - they wouldn't have had to have the remains cremated at all.
Jaster Rogue wrote: » The 8th amendment would have given a legal right to life to this poor defenceless innocent human life, and prevented his or her killing. Sad but true. All the right on lefty liberal 'woke' brigade : are you proud now?
Amirah Elegant Minus wrote: » That's proper authentic bottom of the barrel sludge right there. Using this tragedy to push your agenda, you should be ashamed of yourself. How dare you, really... I can only imagine what the parents are going through. There are risks involved for the more comprehensive test, contrary to popular belief. It's not an easy decision to make, I have been there myself. Do you proceed with the second test find out if your child may have a serious disability (It's also not 100% accurate), risking a miscarriage or do you take a risk and hope your child is born healthy? Not many here would be as brave to make that decision as they would like to think.
An added issue that has arisen after the legislation for terminations in the case of a fatal foetal anomaly diagnosis, is increased stigma. “The stigma now of travelling is much worse because if the baby’s diagnosis was bad enough you’d be looked after here. There are assumptions around that,” said Ms Cullen, who experienced her own loss after a fatal diagnosis.
political analyst wrote: » https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/specialreports/imperfect-system-and-cruel-barriers-still-stopping-women-access-abortion-928382.html What assumptions could they be?
orourkeda1977 wrote: » This is the case we've all been waiting for.
mvl wrote: » looking forward for more clarity on what process was followed here - after seeing this in media today "the medical practitioners who signed off on the abortion never examined or met the mother her in advance of the abortion."
judeboy101 wrote: » https://www.thejournal.ie/holles-st-review-termination-of-pregnancy-4639179-May2019/ interesting one. Docs obviously fecked up test but mother didn't want a dodgy baby
AulWan wrote: » What difference would that have made? What would an examination of the mother shown that was different to the tests results? A doctor can't diagnose a FFA by putting their hands on someone's bump. Doctors sign of on medical decisions all the time on the basis of test results without examining patients hands on. I don't see this as any different. They're grasping at straws trying to make a case, in my opinion.
mvl wrote: » Why would the process allow someone who's not even their doctor to signoff for a pregnancy termination ? It would matter in my view because I'd hope their own doctor would be more invested in getting things right on their behalf (or guide the patients for best possible outcome).
uptherebels wrote: » The issue is that the doctors have to "examine" the woman to sign off on FFA. The point now, is that is viewing tests results for a condition that can't be determined by a physical examination enough? Because this is what Tobin et al are going to argue. It's a failed arguement already imo, but they will try and try
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f07ee44b0b39bbb635066da4046d9475.svg)
