Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

abortion talk in dcu

2»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,179 ✭✭✭✭Sangre


    Victor wrote:
    The reference to doctors committing infanticide would appear to be wrong, as I understand it, only a mother can commit infanticide.

    Only a mother can commit infantcide and it must be within 12 months of the birth.
    Its an outdated notion introdcued in Britain when all murder carried the death penalty. It was felt this was too harsh on a mother perhaps suffering from pre-natal depression so a life sentence was attached to the crime.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 483 ✭✭lazydaisy


    Abortion may be one of those necessary evils. Personally, I cant see how you can call it anything but terminating a human life, but at the same time I also can't see how you can criminalise it. Women have been having them and will continue to find ways to have them. Should they go to prison for it?

    I think the laws need to put more pressure on fathers to step up and take more responsibility both financially and in terms of caring for the child then women in crisis pregnancies wont feel so alone and scared. When I was in college there were two pregnancies a week according to our health services. There were no babies around. These were all middle class educated women with good families for whom it just wasnt a good time. I don't know a single woman who hasnt regretted having an abortion nor one who felt like they had a choice. They all felt like they would be shamed by their families and abandoned by the father of the child.

    It would be interesting to hear of any research on how abortion affects men/fathers.

    Seraphina- an abortion will have far more serious biological effects on you than late term pregnancy. You will hemorrage and be in pain for a while. Then you can expect clotting and a number of profound emotional consequences. After having 6 injections of novacaine in your vagina, [unless you elect general anesthesia-which has its own complications] and your womb invaded by one of several horrific procedures, believe me you wont be able to sit for your exam, which after terminating a pregnancy just wont seem that important.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭panda100


    As some of you know i have been very vocal on this issue over in the ucd boards-i really wanted to go to this talk and felt I have missed out by not doing so.
    However,i still am unsure on whether i am pro or against abortion.I think its one of those situations you just cant decide what you'd do unless you were in that situation. The majority of women feel a huge sense of relief when they have an abortion and the majority of women suffer absolutely no physical or mental damages after the operation.So i know we always talk about the mental physical distress abortion places on women but this really is only an argument in a tiny minority of cases.
    The big fact that worries me about abortion not being legal in Ireland is the dire consequence of backstreet abortion clinics.Everyday,we hear of a new case of a women going abroad in order to get cheap plastic surgery and then she either never returns home or the surgeon does a botched job. For a women to go over to England she would first have to pay for flights,then accomodation and then the actual abortive surgery itself.I think then if irish women had to travel to england then to get an abortion they would choose the cheapest option available and end up with dr.Nick from the simpsons.This is dangerous and is a huge factor i believe in making abortion legal over here.
    Then we come to the controversial dilemma of if a women is raped she should have the right to terminate her pregnancy.I do not believe abortion is the answer for a rape.After a rape it is a hugely traumatic time for the victim.Her body has been violated in a way we cant imagine.I think to violate her body again just by eradicating the product of her violent attack is an easy answer to this difficult situation.I think having two violent attacks on a womens body(the first being the assault and the second being abortive surgery) within such a short space of time will really cause a lot of physical and mental trauma for years to come.Our bodys can only take so much stress at one time,we are not machines and so i think to use the case of rape in the abortion debate is a weak argument.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,875 ✭✭✭Seraphina


    lazydaisy wrote:
    Seraphina- an abortion will have far more serious biological effects on you than late term pregnancy. You will hemorrage and be in pain for a while. Then you can expect clotting and a number of profound emotional consequences. After having 6 injections of novacaine in your vagina, [unless you elect general anesthesia-which has its own complications] and your womb invaded by one of several horrific procedures, believe me you wont be able to sit for your exam, which after terminating a pregnancy just wont seem that important.

    my point was an abortion NOW would be easier than being 6/7 months pregnant when i sit my exams.
    plus the added fact of supporting another human being for the next 18/20 years.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,875 ✭✭✭Seraphina


    panda100 wrote:
    I do not believe abortion is the answer for a rape.After a rape it is a hugely traumatic time for the victim.Her body has been violated in a way we cant imagine.I think to violate her body again just by eradicating the product of her violent attack is an easy answer to this difficult situation.I think having two violent attacks on a womens body(the first being the assault and the second being abortive surgery) within such a short space of time will really cause a lot of physical and mental trauma for years to come.Our bodys can only take so much stress at one time,we are not machines and so i think to use the case of rape in the abortion debate is a weak argument.

    i dunno, tbh for me, carrying the product of a violent sexual attack to term would be a constant and horrific reminder of what happened.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,022 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    Seraphina wrote:
    tbh i dont believe men should even be able to dictate womens options in their situations, they just cannot understand or empathise with the position women are put in.

    Okay. Fair enough. Perhaps we can have some special women-only referendum on the issue or something? <butts out>
    lazydaisy wrote:
    I think the laws need to put more pressure on fathers to step up and take more responsibility both financially and in terms of caring for the child then women in crisis pregnancies wont feel so alone and scared...
    It would be interesting to hear of any research on how abortion affects men/fathers.

    :v: :v: Seems to be a bit of a disagreement here.

    I can see a solution! The Japanese are probably working on it already!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭pretty*monster


    I wonder if anyone's aware that it doesn't matter whether abortions are legal or not. They happen. Women have power over their own bodies even if the law doesn't recognise it.

    When I was in school I saw evidence of three self-abortions performed in the bathroom. Pro-lifers can bury their heads in the sand all they like, it won't change reality.

    The question is, do they care enough about life to allow women and girls access to sterile facilities and trained professionals.



    That aside, the reason I was against the talk in ucd was because it was booked under false pretences (I mean, one has to ask, why they did that), their posters were highly offensive, and because Ultrasound has links with Youth Defence.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 223 ✭✭AndyWarhol


    fly_agaric wrote:
    Okay. Fair enough. Perhaps we can have some special women-only referendum on the issue or something? <butts out>

    What ever next: gay marriage referenda that only gays can vote in, motoring laws that only motorists can vote in, immigration law that only immigrants can vote in.

    A completely unworkable and unfair way to run a society.

    And why shouldn't men have a say in abortion? After all, it's their child as much as the mother's (even though many may not acknowlege this). Men were in the womb for 9 months just like every other woman on this planet and are entitled to as much a say with regards to protection of the sanctity of human life (male or female) as women.

    So get off it with your neo-feminist 'women only referenda'.

    fly_agaric wrote:
    :v: :v: Seems to be a bit of a disagreement here.

    I can see a solution! The Japanese are probably working on it already!

    Yeah, to the trivial matter that is dead babies.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,305 ✭✭✭ionapaul


    I wonder if anyone's aware that it doesn't matter whether abortions are legal or not. They happen. Women have power over their own bodies even if the law doesn't recognise it.

    Another poster mentioned the same above - an easy comparison could be to say that all forms of murder happen, despite being legal. They will never stop happening. Humans have the power to end other humans' lives, despite the prohibition in law against it. Should we then facilitate murder because it happens and always will happen?

    Of course not, if the action is morally wrong, we should prohibit it. The most important question that each of us need to examine and answer in this debate is whether or not the foetus is a living human. Is it is, how can killing it be right? In the case that the mother's life is in danger, than if the foetus is a living human, then it should be recognised that the question is more 'one life sacrificed to save another', rather than a simple medical procedure to ensure physical wellbeing.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,022 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    AndyWarhol wrote:
    So get off it with your neo-feminist 'women only referenda'.

    Where did I say that was what I wanted? It's the logical outcome of Seraphina's post: i.e.

    "pregnancy affects womens lives in ways men cant even begin to imagine, tbh i dont believe men should even be able to dictate womens options in their situations, they just cannot understand or empathise with the position women are put in."
    AndyWarhol wrote:
    Yeah, to the trivial matter that is dead babies.

    There, there. I wasn't laughing at dead babies (eh, why did the dead baby:D ...nah furgettabourit!).

    The "problem" I was speaking of was the contradiction between women wanting men to take a more active role in a crisis pregnancy/wanting men to butt out and let them make their decision. Depends on the woman and the situation I suppose.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 223 ✭✭AndyWarhol


    fly_agaric wrote:
    Where did I say that was what I wanted? It's the logical outcome of Seraphina's post: i.e.

    "pregnancy affects womens lives in ways men cant even begin to imagine, tbh i dont believe men should even be able to dictate womens options in their situations, they just cannot understand or empathise with the position women are put in."

    You did say as much: "Okay. Fair enough. Perhaps we can have some special women-only referendum on the issue or something?"
    fly_agaric wrote:
    There, there. I wasn't laughing at dead babies (eh, why did the dead baby:D ...nah furgettabourit!).

    The "problem" I was speaking of was the contradiction between women wanting men to take a more active role in a crisis pregnancy/wanting men to butt out and let them make their decision. Depends on the woman and the situation I suppose.

    We can talk about the responsibilities of both the mother and father towards the raising of their child all day (perhaps in another thread). That's not really the issue here: what we are talking about is the morality of killing babies inside the mother.

    There is no situation as far as I'm concerned where abortion is justified.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 915 ✭✭✭ArthurDent


    AndyWarhol wrote:
    There is no situation as far as I'm concerned where abortion is justified.

    Oh to live in a black and white world!
    What about a women pregnant and diagnosed with cancer requiring chemo/radiotherapy.

    How about a young woman pregnant by incest?

    what about a woman carrying a baby that will not survive birth due to congenital defect etc? I watched a good friend and a relation both carry babies that they knew would not survive outside the womb, they endured months of pregnancy knowing that their children would not survive.

    I don't see abortion as a choice I'd like to take, but maybe, just maybe there are times when its the lesser of two evils.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,117 ✭✭✭Gazza22


    ArthurDent wrote:
    Oh to live in a black and white world!
    What about a women pregnant and diagnosed with cancer requiring chemo/radiotherapy.

    How about a young woman pregnant by incest?

    what about a woman carrying a baby that will not survive birth due to congenital defect etc? I watched a good friend and a relation both carry babies that they knew would not survive outside the womb, they endured months of pregnancy knowing that their children would not survive.

    I don't see abortion as a choice I'd like to take, but maybe, just maybe there are times when its the lesser of two evils.

    Good post tbh
    It can be justified Andy, it's never as simple as the wrong or right...but many things can play a part in a woman deciding to have an abortion.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,022 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    AndyWarhol wrote:
    You did say as much: "Okay. Fair enough. Perhaps we can have some special women-only referendum on the issue or something?" There is no situation as far as I'm concerned where abortion is justified.
    hello, I WAS NOT BEING SERIOUS ABOUT THAT SUGGESTION!
    You've gone and rooned it now.:(

    Maybe it'll set your mind at ease a bit if I tell you I don't particularly like abortion. I think it is definitely necessary in some cases. However. I would hate to see us having the abortion-on-demand almost as late as you like situation that pertains in the UK for example.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Seraphina wrote:
    for example if i found out i was pregnant this week (god forbid!) i would at the height of pregnancy around my final exams in may. FINAL EXAMS.
    Then defer your exams. Lots of people do it without even being pregnant.

    As a reason for terminating a pregnancy, it’s probably the worst I’ve heard in a while.
    pregnancy affects womens lives in ways men cant even begin to imagine, tbh i dont believe men should even be able to dictate womens options in their situations, they just cannot understand or empathise with the position women are put in.
    That’s quite flawed on a few levels. For one it ignores the father’s wishes or rights and apparently relegates him to the role of sperm donor. You’re not even conceding a lesser say in how his offspring, or even his genetic material, is used, which is offensive to say the least.

    Secondly, if the foetus is indeed a human being, then its termination is affecting it in a way that women (or men) can’t even begin to imagine - thus leading to the same logical conclusion that you have applied to men.
    ArthurDent wrote:
    Oh to live in a black and white world!
    Morality tends to be pretty black and white, but only once properly examined. For the purposes of argument I will presuppose that the foetus is a human being - after all, if it were not, this entire discussion would be moot.
    What about a women pregnant and diagnosed with cancer requiring chemo/radiotherapy.
    I don’t think anyone has argued in the West that a mother should be denied treatment in such a case. Even the Roman Catholic Church would not condemn this, AFAIK.
    How about a young woman pregnant by incest?
    Well, if the foetus is indeed a human being, then you would in effect be punishing it for the crimes of the father, which last time I checked, was not a moral action.
    what about a woman carrying a baby that will not survive birth due to congenital defect etc? I watched a good friend and a relation both carry babies that they knew would not survive outside the womb, they endured months of pregnancy knowing that their children would not survive.
    That’s actually an interesting point and, again assuming the foetus is indeed a human being, essentially falls into the moral dilemma surrounding euthanasia. If euthanasia is moral, then so would this be. If not, neither is this.
    I don't see abortion as a choice I'd like to take, but maybe, just maybe there are times when its the lesser of two evils.
    Quite possibly, but it begs the question of how you define good and evil. If the foetus is indeed a human being, then you are killing it, not necessarily to save another’s life, but to improve their quality of life. The only way that this can be morally justified is if you consider the right to quality of life for one person to supersede the right to life of another.

    In that case you would be correct - it is the lesser of two evils (and if the foetus is not a human being, then it’s not evil in the slightest). But I would consider the moral precedent you’re setting, if were I you.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,875 ✭✭✭Seraphina


    Then defer your exams. Lots of people do it without even being pregnant.

    As a reason for terminating a pregnancy, it’s probably the worst I’ve heard in a while.

    That’s quite flawed on a few levels. For one it ignores the father’s wishes or rights and apparently relegates him to the role of sperm donor. You’re not even conceding a lesser say in how his offspring, or even his genetic material, is used, which is offensive to say the least.

    defer my exams? so i can have a baby i dont want? sounds like a great waste of time to me. its not a 'reason' for terminating a pregnancy, if i didn't have my final exams coming up, i would probably do it anyway.
    i dont care if i sound selfish, or if my reasons are 'flawed'. its not whether or not my reasoning and moral stance or whatever is flawed. its about what i want as a person and from my life. at the end of the day it is MY body. the ball of cells growing inside me is part of me and cannot survive outside of me (not until a certain stage anyway, and i would not dream of letting a pregnancy get that far) a feotus does not see, hear, or think. it is living, but it is not 'alive'. it is not conscious or aware. its not missing out, it doesn't even know what life is. i dont see how an something which doesn't exist yet should have 'rights' which extend as far as messing up my life.

    and the role of the father? well im pretty sure the current potential one doesn't want a kid either, but even if he did, well he's not the one who's going to be carrying it for 9 months is he? if he was he'd be welcome to have it himself. perhaps if he was willing to take sole responsibility i *might* consider it, but tbh it is unlikely.
    it does really depend on the circumstances. i'm not advocating abortion for all, but i feel i should have the right to choose about what goes on in my life, and not have to have a kid i dont want because of other people's jumped up ideas of life (no offence, i just dont agree at all) and it being 'precious'.
    how is a feotus any different to the spider you squished the other day? they both have about the same level of consciousness (maybe the spider has more, who knows?)
    neither do i agree with the argument that the feotus has the potential to become human and develop consciousness etc. each of those millions of sperm a guy loses every time he jerks off also has the potential to fuse with an egg and become human. where do you draw the line?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Seraphina wrote:
    defer my exams? so i can have a baby i dont want? sounds like a great waste of time to me. its not a 'reason' for terminating a pregnancy, if i didn't have my final exams coming up, i would probably do it anyway.

    i dont care if i sound selfish, or if my reasons are 'flawed'. its not whether or not my reasoning and moral stance or whatever is flawed.
    Then why are you posting in a humanities forum? Seriously, the reason this topic is debated is that it raises interesting questions about how we view right and wrong, and the consequences when we redefine those definitions.

    So if you really don’t feel it’s necessary to debate it, then don’t.
    its about what i want as a person and from my life. at the end of the day it is MY body.
    Absolutely, so if a man decides to rape and / or kill you, then that’s all right too. After all, it’s about what he wants as a person and from his life. For him, your opinion, given you’re not him, is irrelevant.
    the ball of cells growing inside me is part of me and cannot survive outside of me (not until a certain stage anyway, and i would not dream of letting a pregnancy get that far)
    a feotus does not see, hear, or think. it is living, but it is not 'alive'. it is not conscious or aware. its not missing out, it doesn't even know what life is. i dont see how an something which doesn't exist yet should have 'rights' which extend as far as messing up my life.
    Then the euthanasia of severely mentally and physically handicapped people is OK?
    and the role of the father? well im pretty sure the current potential one doesn't want a kid either
    That’s pretty irrelevant to what I said, however. I practically never vote, for example, but I still have the right to vote should I choose to exercise that right. If your boyfriend is not interested in exhibiting parental responsibilities does not mean that he should not have any parental rights.
    where do you draw the line?
    Hence such discussions. People express opinions, they are examined, the logic is tested and we arrive at a conclusion. Or not - you can’t have everything, after all.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,875 ✭✭✭Seraphina


    That’s pretty irrelevant to what I said, however. I practically never vote, for example, but I still have the right to vote should I choose to exercise that right. If your boyfriend is not interested in exhibiting parental responsibilities does not mean that he should not have any parental rights.

    i dont really want to get into a huge discussion on this but i just wanna point out that unless you're willing to take on the responsibilities, you cant really demand rights. they go together.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Seraphina wrote:
    i dont really want to get into a huge discussion on this but i just wanna point out that unless you're willing to take on the responsibilities, you cant really demand rights. they go together.
    That’s fair enough, but one is hardly going to suggest that men should not be afforded paternal rights, just because your boyfriend is a flake.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,875 ✭✭✭Seraphina


    That’s fair enough, but one is hardly going to suggest that men should not be afforded paternal rights, just because your boyfriend is a flake.

    slander!
    never said he was a flake, he just doesn't want kids (who in their right mind does at 21?)


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Seraphina wrote:
    slander!
    Very difficult to slander anyone without identifying them.
    never said he was a flake, he just doesn't want kids (who in their right mind does at 21?)
    Well, actually you have in fairness.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,875 ✭✭✭Seraphina


    ok enough thanks. this is getting a bit personal for my liking.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,894 ✭✭✭Chinafoot


    Pro-choice does not necessarily mean pro-abortion. I, personally, dont think I coould go through with it but I would like the option to be there once it was regulated properly.

    There should most definitely be circumstances where abortion is allowed, most of which have been mentioned in this thread already. Pregnancy through incest, pregnancy through rape, risk of the loss of the mother's life etc.

    Also, as for the rights of men, I agree that men should have a say...however, at the end of the day, its my body and therefore my choice.


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 7,486 ✭✭✭Red Alert


    yes but there should be absolutely no late term abortion available at all. if you'd had a case of incest/rape whatever, i would imagine they should do a pregnancy test and administer contraception and abort if necessary. i think it's morally wrong to abort at all, but on the other hand scientifically the foetus has no cognitive ability in the first six to eight weeks. set an upper limit on eight weeks and ban all other abortion would be my view.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement