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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Abortion debate thread

24567…59

Comments

  • #32
    Lingua Franca
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,800 ✭✭✭Lingua Franca


    ehcocmeo wrote: »
    I heard something the other day.. Why do you care what pro-choice does.. Sure one less child from "those" people just helps them self destruct. Obviously I don't agree. But I understand the logic.

    Oh, you couldn't fault that logic for sure. This pro choice person has 3 children and is considering another. How many have you got?

    I'll take your silence on my previous post as embarrassment.


  • #33
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    ehcocmeo wrote: »
    This thread is to share our Pro-life experiences and to stand up for Ireland being rail roaded into legislation we don't need.

    Just to stir the pot.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/1114/1224326575203.html#.UKL8MDEf720.facebook


  • #34
    VinLieger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,184 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Really looking forward to the youth defence cronies explaining the recent ad campiagn now and how there is "always a better answer" and how "abortion never saves the mothers life" ahem http://www.youthdefence.ie/am_cms_media/medical-treatments-for-pregnant-women.pdf

    Pretty sure Savita Halappanavars husband might be able to argue a different view and i doubt anybody of a rational mind could disagree with it


  • #35
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    The death of this woman, and the death of a baby she wanted to have, is a tragedy. It would appear from reports that this is a result of medical error.

    No doubt unscrupulous and dishonest people will try to exploit her death to argue for abortion on demand. :(


  • #36
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    PDN wrote: »
    The death of this woman, and the death of a baby she wanted to have, is a tragedy. It would appear from reports that this is a result of medical error.

    No doubt unscrupulous and dishonest people will try to exploit her death to argue for abortion on demand. :(
    What was the medical error?

    MrP


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    super_furry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,365 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    She died because "this is a Catholic Country."

    Not for much longer thankfully and the people should finally be able to force a government into providing legislation that's 20 years overdue.


  • #38
    Gumbi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,682 ✭✭✭Gumbi


    super_furry wrote: »
    She died because "this is a Catholic Country."

    Not for much longer thankfully and the people should finally be able to force a government into providing legislation that's 20 years overdue.
    I'm not 100% sure of that yet. Isn't there legislation already in place for mothers whose lives are in danger?


  • #39
    KazDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 334 ✭✭KazDub


    MrPudding wrote: »
    What was the medical error?

    MrP

    ..that she wasn't given a life saving abortion when she should have had one! :rolleyes:


  • #40
    doctoremma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    KazDub wrote: »
    ..that she wasn't given a life saving abortion when she should have had one! :rolleyes:
    I agree with this (although it's opinion, not grounded in legal fact).

    I would assume that when a woman begins to miscarry, things are allowed to progress naturally for a short time. At a point where it becomes dangerous for the woman (retention of dead or dying fetal material), there would be surgical intervention to remove any remaining fetal material.

    This woman was forced to miscarry for three days, during which she became ill. After three days, she again requested surgical intervention but was denied, when it must have been perfectly clear to the medical team that the fetus was not viable and was presenting a serious risk to her life.

    That's a grave medical error in my book.


  • #41
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 9,833 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    Even if the abortion had been performed at that time, what is the clear medical evidence that the woman's life would have been saved. Ireland has a Catholic life affirming heritage and this shows by the world class nature of maternity care in this country, from WHO statistics.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    super_furry wrote: »
    She died because "this is a Catholic Country."

    Who are you quoting exactly? I notice that the Guardian ran the exact same quote. It too did not list any source.


  • #43
    doctoremma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    Manach wrote: »
    Even if the abortion had been performed at that time, what is the clear medical evidence that the woman's life would have been saved
    Of course, we will never know.

    If a fetal heartbeat had not been detectable, a D and C (or similar) would have been performed as standard. Removal of dead or dying tissue is recommended to prevent infections and so forth. With a fetal heartbeat, the doctor refused to treat the patient. This is even as it was perfectly clear to the medical team that she was miscarrying (her cervix was dilated, her amniotic sac was torn) and that waiting for the fetus to die "naturally" could only place her at increased risk of complications.


  • #44
    doctoremma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    Who are you quoting exactly? I notice that the Guardian ran the exact same quote. It too did not list any source.
    It's the husband's account:

    "Again on Tuesday morning, the ward rounds and the same discussion. The consultant said it was the law, that this is a Catholic country. Savita [who was Indian and a Hindu] said: 'I am neither Irish nor Catholic,' but they said there was nothing they could do."


  • #45
    KazDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 334 ✭✭KazDub


    Manach wrote: »
    Even if the abortion had been performed at that time, what is the clear medical evidence that the woman's life would have been saved. Ireland has a Catholic life affirming heritage and this shows by the world class nature of maternity care in this country, from WHO statistics.

    Unfortunately miscarriage at 17 weeks isn't uncommon, a pregnancy can spontaneously end at any point, right up until birth. What's uncommon is that this foetus, though dying, still had a heartbeat. Had she gone in to the hospital with a foetus that had no heartbeat none of this would have happened.
    Heartbeat or no heartbeat, this pregnancy was always going to end the same, sad way. The injustice and true tragedy lies in the fact that the doctors were unwilling or unable to act because there was still a heartbeat; albeit a feint and unavoidably decreasing one.
    One miscarriage badly handled has now resulted in the unnecessary death of the mother too.

    Oh, and why must our level of health care be dependent upon a religious ethos. Can't we just have a 'world class nature of maternity care in this country' that's unhindered by the religious beliefs of some?


  • #46
    Lingua Franca
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,800 ✭✭✭Lingua Franca


    Manach wrote: »
    Even if the abortion had been performed at that time, what is the clear medical evidence that the woman's life would have been saved. Ireland has a Catholic life affirming heritage and this shows by the world class nature of maternity care in this country, from WHO statistics.


    At least 3 mothers dead in a month, I think the WHO statistics are going to be pretty damning next time round, and then what will you cling to?
    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    Who are you quoting exactly? I notice that the Guardian ran the exact same quote. It too did not list any source.

    From Savita's husband interview in the Times.
    “Savita was really in agony. She was very upset, but she accepted she was losing the baby. When the consultant came on the ward rounds on Monday morning Savita asked if they could not save the baby could they induce to end the pregnancy. The consultant said, ‘As long as there is a foetal heartbeat we can’t do anything’.

    “Again on Tuesday morning, the ward rounds and the same discussion. The consultant said it was the law, that this is a Catholic country. Savita [a Hindu] said: ‘I am neither Irish nor Catholic’ but they said there was nothing they could do.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/1114/1224326575203.html


  • #47
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    doctoremma wrote: »
    Of course, we will never know.

    If a fetal heartbeat had not been detectable, a D and C (or similar) would have been performed as standard. Removal of dead or dying tissue is needed to prevent infections and so forth. With a fetal heartbeat, the doctor refused to treat the patient. This is even as it was perfectly clear tot he medical team that she was miscarrying (her cervix was dilated, her amniotic sac was torn) and that waiting for the fetus to die "naturally" could only place her at increased risk of complications.

    My understanding is that as a result of a fetal heartbeat being present, any intervention would be considered an abortion and as legislation has never been enacted to give effect to the Supreme Court decision in the X case the doctor would have been breaking the law (albeit a law that is now unconstitutional). I'm no expert though.

    All said and done, it's a tragedy, one which might have been avoided (we'll never know if she would have died anyway), and it's past time for politicians to take responsibility and legislate for cases such as these.


  • #48
    doctoremma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    Benny_Cake wrote: »
    My understanding is that as a result of a fetal heartbeat being present, and intervention would be considered an abortion and as legislation has never been enacted to give effect to the Supreme Court decision in the X case the doctor would have been breaking the law (albeit a law that is now unconstitutional). I'm no expert though.
    But it would (should?) have been apparent that this woman was becoming seriously ill as a result of her incomplete miscarriage. As I understand, abortion is legal if Mum is at risk? Surely this is practised, no? Apologies if I've made a massive (and incorrect) assumption about Irish abortion law.


  • #49
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Benny_Cake wrote: »
    My understanding is that as a result of a fetal heartbeat being present, any intervention would be considered an abortion and as legislation has never been enacted to give effect to the Supreme Court decision in the X case the doctor would have been breaking the law (albeit a law that is now unconstitutional). I'm no expert though.

    All said and done, it's a tragedy, one which might have been avoided (we'll never know if she would have died anyway), and it's past time for politicians to take responsibility and legislate for cases such as these.

    No, I don't think that is correct. Both the Constitution and the medical guidelines allow for the removal of a foetus where there is a physical (ie not a mental risk of suicide) threat to the mother's life. The presence of a heartbeat does not change that.

    According to one of the links on the Irish Times article in Morbert's pot stirring post, the heartbeat was relevant to this case because it affected the diagnosis.
    Septicaemia was an unpredictable event which could happen acutely and prove devastating for the affected person, he said. The existence of a foetal heartbeat could lead to a situation where it might not be considered that septicaemia was a possible complication.

    The X case was to do with the risk of suicide. Unless Mrs Halappanavar committed suicide or threatened suicide, then the X case is irrelevant to this case.


  • #50
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    doctoremma wrote: »
    But it would (should?) have been apparent that this woman was becoming seriously ill as a result of her incomplete miscarriage. As I understand, abortion is legal if Mum is at risk? Surely this is practised, no? Apologies if I've made a massive (and incorrect) assumption about Irish abortion law.

    No, you are entirely correct.


  • #51
    28064212
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,080 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    PDN wrote: »
    No, I don't think that is correct. Both the Constitution and the medical guidelines allow....
    But the law does not. Abortion is illegal under the Offences Against the Persons Act 1861. The law is unconstitutional under the Supreme Court ruling, but as it has never been challenged in court, it has never been struck down
    PDN wrote: »
    The X case was to do with the risk of suicide. Unless Mrs Halappanavar committed suicide or threatened suicide, then the X case is irrelevant to this case.
    The X Case ruling stated it was permissible if there was a real and substantial risk to her life, including (but not exclusive to) the risk of suicide. It is very relevant

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Advertisement
  • #52
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    MrPudding wrote: »
    What was the medical error?

    MrP
    '
    The medical error was failure to protect the mother's life by removing a foetus that was already miscarrying. Current medical guidelines, and the law, support such an action.


  • #53
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    28064212 wrote: »
    But the law does not. Abortion is illegal under the Offences Against the Persons Act 1861. The law is unconstitutional under the Supreme Court ruling, but as it has never been challenged in court, it has never been struck down

    The X Case ruling stated it was permissible if there was a real and substantial risk to her life, including (but not exclusive to) the risk of suicide. It is very relevant

    Again - from the Irish Times article linked to in Morbert's pot-stirring post:
    Under the Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in 1992, it is lawful to terminate a pregnancy if it is established “as a matter of probability” that there is a real and substantial risk to the life, as opposed to the health, of the mother.


  • #54
    Obliq
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,371 ✭✭✭Obliq


    Thank you Benny for the chance to repost this message. Apologies for the cursing earlier, I was extremely angry (and remain so), but I should not have used a bad word on this forum.

    Stirring the pot? Well I'm more inclined to beat the contents of said pot with a stick today.
    I am ashamed to be Irish. I am ashamed of the so called "pro-life" Irish in particular. Pro-life? Are they?

    RIP Savita Halappanavar.

    46071_4819248324438_1545631149_n.jpg


  • #55
    28064212
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,080 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    PDN wrote: »
    Again - from the pot-stirring Irish Times article -
    The important part being "Under the Constitution". Because the Government never legislated for the ruling, it is still illegal. It would be struck down by the High Court, but it has to be challenged in court for that to happen

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • #56
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Obliq wrote: »
    Thank you Benny for the chance to repost this message. Apologies for the cursing earlier, I was extremely angry (and remain so), but I should not have used a bad word on this forum.

    Stirring the pot? Well I'm more inclined to beat the contents of said pot with a stick today.
    I am ashamed to be Irish. I am ashamed of the so called "pro-life" Irish in particular. Pro-life? Are they?

    RIP Savita Halappanavar.

    46071_4819248324438_1545631149_n.jpg

    I am pro-life. I oppose any attempt to introduce abortion on demand. And I also believe the doctors should have saved Mrs Halappanavar's life by whatever means neccesary as provided by Irish law - which would include removing the foetus.

    If I was a dishonest troll I would now post photographs of women who have died through complications resulting from abortions and use them to imply falsehoods against pro-abortion posters.


  • #57
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    28064212 wrote: »
    The important part being "Under the Constitution". Because the Government never legislated for the ruling, it is still illegal. It would be struck down by the High Court, but it has to be challenged in court for that to happen

    Supreme Court trumps High Court - no?


  • #58
    28064212
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,080 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    PDN wrote: »
    Supreme Court trumps High Court - no?
    The High Court is the minimum level that can strike down a law. So a case would have to go through the criminal courts first, then be appealed to the High Court.

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • #59
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    I would think that everyone but the most rabid pro-life extremist would support intervention or termination in cases such as this. Even Sen Ronan Mullen, a man not known for his liberal views, was on the radio a short while ago arguing the same point. This shouldn't be about abortion on demand, it should be about getting to the bottom of what happened, and ensuring that the risk of something such as this happening again is at an absolute minimum. It may be that new legislation is needed (I suspect it it), or it may be misconduct / incompetence on the part of the hospital. Let's wait and see, but I would hope they move quickly on an inquiry.


  • #60
    doctoremma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    So, just so I am clear. The Irish Constitution says abortion is legal if the life of the mother is at risk. Irish law has not assimilated this and, as it stands, abortion is illegal under any circumstance?

    So, no woman in Ireland ever gets an abortion if she is highly like to die during pregnancy (excluding the ectopic cases mentioned earlier)?

    Are you saying that a doctor, when confronted with making the decision, could "choose" to follow constitutional law and have that action upheld on appeal against any criminal charges brought against him/her?


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Lingua Franca
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,800 ✭✭✭Lingua Franca


    Yes, unsure, yes.

    Despite what the anti choice camp are insisting even in this very thread, the consititution has not been legislated for and so the current (1861) law stands, that it is a felony offence to ever perform an abortion.

    Hence the whole "legislate for X now!" campaign and the ECHR ruling. And this woman's death.


Advertisement