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

Does anyone feel insulted by the abortion proposals?

lazygal

I don't know where to post. Its a bit of a ranting and raving post but I can't put it there. I feel so, so, so belittled as a woman by the suggestion that a woman seeking abortion on grounds of suicide would face some sort of tribunal of inquiry. The fact it was even bandied about as a proposal at all annoys me. I'm pregnant right now and I feel like my husband and daughter will be put in a position where they might have to face life without me, because even if my health is in serious danger right now, unless I might die I won't receive treatment.

I know this is a rambling, incoherent mess of a post but I'm just so angry and upset and insulted by the current bandying about of the difficulties the state wants women to face in the abortion debate.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

pinkypinky

Ilyana 2.0 wrote: »

That's true, although it's hard to know where you'll be living year on year too.

But the fact is that most young people are registered in their home towns and I'm sure the government is aware of that. Yet this fact didn't stop it holding the 2011 referendum on a Thursday, iirc.

Of course you can be registered in two places, provided you only vote once. I knew several students who were registered in the home town and in Dublin in case there was an election/referendum.

username123

lazygal wrote: »

It's still an elective procedure if the woman chooses it though. Not every woman facing pregnancy as a result of rape or health issues opts for abortion and its not an automatic procedure. Side issue I know but i'd imagine the vast, vast majority of abortions are carried out because the woman wants it.

Yes it is, Im just asking if its free in the UK without any kind of extenuating circumstances to muddy the water. Simply - I dont want to be pregnant - no reason given.

lazygal

username123 wrote: »

Is elective abortion free on the NHS in the UK? By elective I mean not due to rape or health reasons.

It's still an elective procedure if the woman chooses it though. Not every woman facing pregnancy as a result of rape or health issues opts for abortion and its not an automatic procedure. Side issue I know but i'd imagine the vast, vast majority of abortions are carried out because the woman wants it.

username123

Is elective abortion free on the NHS in the UK? By elective I mean not due to rape or health reasons.

eviltwin

I was a bit torn by the cost issue tbh, I suppose because the only available option to most women ie the UK costs money it doesn't seem unreasonable they should have to pay here but when I think about it - why should they?

All pregnancy care is free here if you go public so why not abortion?

I would assume that going public for an abortion if it ever became legal would be the same. I'm sure private clinics would open up and there would be a charge and that's fine but why should it be a case of only being able to access abortion if you can afford it? That's going to do nothing for the women whose reasons for taking matters into their own hands are down to money.

Certainly those who are having abortions as a result of rape and health reasons should not be expected to pay anything for that service.

lazygal

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Slightly OT and my apologies for this, but I have a question, I have heard some pro-choice women declaring that if abortion, under the X case guidelines or in general, was to be permitted in Ireland, that they expect it to be free. Now surely not everyone believes this? The pill before 9 weeks is £400 sterling in Belfast and procedures increase in cost from there. It would severely eat into any health budget if it were to be free. Surely women would have to pay for it here too?

I can't imagine forcing a suicidal woman to stump up the money or be billed for it afterwards if an abortion is approved to save her life would be appropriate.

wolfpawnat

Sulla Felix wrote: »

First, I'm an advocate of pretty a pretty liberal abortion regime. Set a guideline date (end of second trimester give or take I feel) and anyone should be able to walk into a clinic and have an abortion. No more questioning than you'd get if you went in for any other minor surgery.

But, just to add a little balance, I do understand why some of the anti-abortion crowd are so vehement. I don't agree with the perspective, but theirs is that the fetus is actually a baby. So it's no wonder they get upset. It's an emotive subject but I try to keep that in mind when talking to those people.

You will find many pro-lifers are reasonable (as with pro-choicers) and are capable of adult and rational conversation, then as I have seen personally with both sides, you have the extremists who believe that they are all knowing and anyone who disagrees with their exact line of thought are idiots and mentally challenged.

The end of the second trimester is argued to be between 26-28 weeks. Some countries say 26, some 28, but the reason it is allowed in most civilized countries until 24 weeks, is the foetus is a viable life out side of the mother, with medical intervention at that time. It's lungs, though they will more than suffer problems, are capable of working with assistance, ergo, many argue, even in the pro-choice group, it is a human life after that time. My best friend was born at 27 weeks developed.

At 24 weeks it is not minor surgery, it is very invasive, and expensive surgery, as much as £2400 sterling I believe due to the procedure involved. Though I have to say, unless there is something that turns up in the 20-22 week scan that would severely alter your reason for having a child, I would wonder what would make a woman wait so long to terminate the pregnancy and at such a cost.

Slightly OT and my apologies for this, but I have a question, I have heard some pro-choice women declaring that if abortion, under the X case guidelines or in general, was to be permitted in Ireland, that they expect it to be free. Now surely not everyone believes this? The pill before 9 weeks is £400 sterling in Belfast and procedures increase in cost from there. It would severely eat into any health budget if it were to be free. Surely women would have to pay for it here too?

Call me Al

lazygal wrote: »

I think it might be. I posted on another thread about a mums group I'm in. There's mums going to CUMH for antenatal care and they aren't getting ANY scans, no dating or anomaly scans are offered. One put her foot down and was very begrudgingly given one. They've been told they'll be scanned at 34 weeks to check fluid levels and for general checks. Some reported some comments from midwives about women who wanted to 'do something about' an abnormality and looking for their notes.

I also know women who were totally dismissed when asking about nuchal fold and other standard tests. One has a child with Downs syndrome and wanted the tests done. Her midwife asked her why she'd get it done, would she want to go ahead with the pregnancy and other intrusive questions that clearly made value judgments of the women.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Ireland's maternity services are not world class, they are as hit and miss as many other parts of the health service and its often the luck of the draw if you're going public as to what options are presented to you.

I had these comments made to me. I requested a nuchal fold scan and was paying for this privately. I felt like I had to pass a test with the sonographer to get access to one, despite having discussed this test at length with my husband and her boss the consultant. I was very shocked. In hindsight I should have made my thoughts on her line of questioning known at the time, but I was so taken aback.

lazygal

eviltwin wrote: »

Some are only getting scans now at the 12 week stage, the anomoly scan that was the norm when I had my eldest seems to be happening less and less.

I wonder sometimes if that is a deliberate ploy to cut down on the cases where a woman might want to have an abortion if something presents itself - or am I just being paranoid?

I think it might be. I posted on another thread about a mums group I'm in. There's mums going to CUMH for antenatal care and they aren't getting ANY scans, no dating or anomaly scans are offered. One put her foot down and was very begrudgingly given one. They've been told they'll be scanned at 34 weeks to check fluid levels and for general checks. Some reported some comments from midwives about women who wanted to 'do something about' an abnormality and looking for their notes.

I also know women who were totally dismissed when asking about nuchal fold and other standard tests. One has a child with Downs syndrome and wanted the tests done. Her midwife asked her why she'd get it done, would she want to go ahead with the pregnancy and other intrusive questions that clearly made value judgments of the women.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Ireland's maternity services are not world class, they are as hit and miss as many other parts of the health service and its often the luck of the draw if you're going public as to what options are presented to you.

gcgirl

Call me Al wrote: »

well considering many women don't have access to scans until well past the 25 week mark it makes it kind of difficult to assess for fetal abnormalities of any severity until well past what could be a cut off mark.

Exactly unless your fortunate enough to go private
This country is unreal when it comes to dating scans, on my first kid 12 Years ago I got it done at 16 weeks, 3 kid was done at 24 weeks

eviltwin

Call me Al wrote: »

well considering many women don't have access to scans until well past the 25 week mark it makes it kind of difficult to assess for fetal abnormalities of any severity until well past what could be a cut off mark.

Some are only getting scans now at the 12 week stage, the anomoly scan that was the norm when I had my eldest seems to be happening less and less.

I wonder sometimes if that is a deliberate ploy to cut down on the cases where a woman might want to have an abortion if something presents itself - or am I just being paranoid?

Call me Al

gcgirl wrote: »

Really only fatal fetal abnormalitis are picked up in 2 trimester as most terminations are done in first trimester

well considering many women don't have access to scans until well past the 25 week mark it makes it kind of difficult to assess for fetal abnormalities of any severity until well past what could be a cut off mark.

gcgirl

meeeeh wrote: »

At six months abortion is not a minor procedure. I'm pro choice but allowing abortions when the fetus could be viable without proper consultation or limitations is crazy.

Really only fatal fetal abnormalitis are picked up in 2 trimester as most terminations are done in first trimester

Edit ; due to scans being not done till well into 2nd trimester

pwurple

LittleBook wrote: »

Fine Gael haven't the cahones for this.

To be fair to them, FF didn't have the cahones either. The last referendum on this was 2002!

It's a political hot potato.

lazygal

LittleBook wrote: »

But I think a lot of people will find it hard to forgive them for this fiasco and their general incompetency in the area of health ... to the point where they'll switch back to Fianna Fail? Maybe.

FF have started to repeat that its a 'prolife' party and I have sneaky suspicion that they smell some political capital to be made out of pandering to the conservative voters who don't think any abortion legislation is acceptable.

LittleBook

fits wrote: »

The back benchers of course. Who seem to have forgotten that they've been given a mandate in three referendums to legislate for this. As legislators, they need to do their job.

Fine Gael haven't the cahones for this. They were a shoo-in in the last election because many people who would normally have voted for Fianna Fail simply couldn't bring themselves to do it.

Unfortunately Fine Gael seem to have translated this (probably temporary) repulsion for Fianna Fail into support for their right-wing policies.

When they get their asses handed to them in the next election they'll be crying about how the people voted them out because of austerity and sure they were only doing their best to get the country out of the mess Fianna Fail created!

But I think a lot of people will find it hard to forgive them for this fiasco and their general incompetency in the area of health ... to the point where they'll switch back to Fianna Fail? Maybe.

eviltwin

Fuming about this and actually really upset by it. It just shows what people think of women who have abortions and the kind of character they have that they have to be subjected to something like this. Its so insulting.

I've had depression in the past and I know that even going to see my GP who I have known for years terrified me, no way would I have put myself through a panal of people as per the proposals.

Imagine how desperate a woman would have to be to do that given how "easy" it is to get to the UK, the thoughts of someone so vulnerable being picked apart like that really upsets me.

fits

The back benchers of course. Who seem to have forgotten that they've been given a mandate in three referendums to legislate for this. As legislators, they need to do their job.

Morag

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/holles-st-chief-backs-panel-of-two-medics-29220731.html

THE Master of the National Maternity Hospital in Holles Street, Dr Rhona Mahony, has said that in cases where pregnant women are genuinely suicidal, they should be assessed by two psychiatrists backed up by a review panel.

However, she described the idea that they should be seen by a succession of doctors as unworkable and "not humane".

She was speaking after she gave a talk for Women on Air at the Radisson Blu in Dublin's city centre last night.

Dr Mahony said that she believed that it would be "very reasonable" for a woman who has expressed suicidal ideation to be assessed by two psychiatrists.

"They would be looking at her complete care pathway, not simply the issue of termination," she said.

"I think a woman's views should be respected and the woman's situation should be respected."

In order to safeguard the care pathway, a review panel – who would not meet with the woman unless she requested it – would consider the psychiatrist's recommendation and could then come to a "reasonable decision".

"She must not be made see doctor after doctor after doctor. That is not humane, it is not sensible or workable," she said.

So the Masters of Maternity hospitals don't want this and neither do the College of Psychiatry, and neither do 2 out of the 3 perinatal psychiatrist in the country, so what was the point of the hearings at the start of the year and getting professional medical opinions if they are going to ignore it?

If the medical professionals don't see the need for what the Minister for health is proposing then who is he trying to appease?

Macha

sam34 wrote: »

Off topic but I have to correct this. Two psychiatrists cannot "get you locked away for life". It is not possible legally for two psychiatrists, or indeed any number of psychiatrists, to lock someone up for life.

Sorry for going offtopic but I hate this kind of misinformation being spread about psychiatry, as I think it deters people from seeking help.

Oh dear, sorry about that. I heard it from a colleague but should have checked it before I wrote it.

sam34

Morag wrote: »

I wonder if you know and if you could share with us what happens if someone says they are suicidal and then it's found that they don't meet the critea?
Is it true they can be held for observation to find out what the 'real' issue is?

I don't fully understand the question- meet the criteria for what?

but in general: you can either be admitted to a psychiatric unit on a voluntary basis or involuntary.

if its an involuntary admission, there's assessments and paperwork to be done before the person reaches the psych unit, they'll have to have been seen by an 'applicant' (usually family member or a guard) and seen by a GP, both of whom will have to sign statutory forms. when the person arrives on the unit, they have to be seen by a consultant psychiatrist within 24 hours and a decision made as to whether they are a) discharged b) remain in unit on voluntary basis or c) detained on involuntary basis.

so that period of time between their arrival and the consultation assessment provides a good opportunity for nursing and medical assessment and observation.

now, key thing is that to be detained under the mental health act you have to be suffering from a mental illness. (obviously there's more to it than that but that's the first criterion). sounds obvious... but often you get people brought in 'on forms' where there's no mental illness. they might be a danger to others because they're an aggressive drunk, or an angry person, or an a**hole etc. that's a matter for the guards to deal with, not the psych services.
it becomes more emotive if it's a claim of suicidality, but the law is the same, if they do not have a mental illness they cannot be detained against their will. they can stay in hospital on a voluntary basis, but not an involuntary one.

re the number of docs involved and the duration: an initial detention order is valid for 21 days. ( they might be discharged before that, but 21 days is max time on that order). within that 21 days they will be seen by an independent consultant and they will have a solicitor appointed. they will have a tribunal hearing to review the detention, consisting of another consultant, a barrister and a lay person. (don't get me started on how there is a non-healthcare staff majority on the deciding panel who are looking at the treatment of the most severely ill people...! some of the questions asked by the lay people at tribunals display a frightening level of ignorance of mental illness). if that order is affirmed, the next one is valid for up to three months, and when that next one is signed the process re tribunal and independent opinions starts again. after the three month one, the next is a 6 month, and any thereafter are 12 months. Thor durations are max durations, not a guarantee that they'll be in that long, and it's rare for people to be on 6 or 12 month detention orders.

hope that answers the question, if not, let me know!

Morag

sam34 wrote: »

Off topic but I have to correct this. Two psychiatrists cannot "get you locked away for life". It is not possible legally for two psychiatrists, or indeed any number of psychiatrists, to lock someone up for life.

Sorry for going offtopic but I hate this kind of misinformation being spread about psychiatry, as I think it deters people from seeking help.

I wonder if you know and if you could share with us what happens if someone says they are suicidal and then it's found that they don't meet the critea?
Is it true they can be held for observation to find out what the 'real' issue is?

Morag

Frito wrote: »

I wonder if the 'panel of medics' condition re suicidality is a way for FG to legislate for abortion whilst maintaining the status quo of women travelling abroad for the procedure. A bit like certain US states (Kansas?) where restriction after restriction is placed to make abortion inaccessible.

It certainly seems that way, the same as what they did with the blasphemy legislation it's unworkable.

Draft General Scheme of the Protection of Maternal Life Bill 2013

Risk of loss of life from self-destruction

Provide that

1. A person shall not be guilty of an offense under….when a medical procedure referred to in… is carried out by a register medical practitioner

at an appropriate location at which mental health services are also provided and in relation to such mental health services at least one of the psychiatrists referred in this head is employed.

one obstetrician and two psychiatrists have jointly certified that in their reasonable opinion

there is a real and substantial risk of loss of the pregnant woman’s life from self-destruction and this risk can only be averted by medical procedure in the course of which or as a result of which unborn human life is destroyed.

one obstetrician and two psychiatrists have revived the opinion referred to… and certified that they are of the same opinion.

2 At least one of the psychiatrists refereed to in… shall be a perinatal psychiatrist.

1`+2+1+2=6 and after Reily stated women wouldn't have to see 6 drs.

Frito

I wonder if the 'panel of medics' condition re suicidality is a way for FG to legislate for abortion whilst maintaining the status quo of women travelling abroad for the procedure. A bit like certain US states (Kansas?) where restriction after restriction is placed to make abortion inaccessible.

meeeeh

rainbow kirby wrote: »

24 weeks is the limit in the UK, and abortions at that stage are extremely rare and generally performed in the case of severe/fatal foetal abnormalities.

And I agree with that.

rainbow kirby

meeeeh wrote: »

At six months abortion is not a minor procedure. I'm pro choice but allowing abortions when the fetus could be viable without proper consultation or limitations is crazy.

24 weeks is the limit in the UK, and abortions at that stage are extremely rare and generally performed in the case of severe/fatal foetal abnormalities.

meeeeh

Sulla Felix wrote: »

First, I'm an advocate of pretty a pretty liberal abortion regime. Set a guideline date (end of second trimester give or take I feel) and anyone should be able to walk into a clinic and have an abortion. No more questioning than you'd get if you went in for any other minor surgery.
.

At six months abortion is not a minor procedure. I'm pro choice but allowing abortions when the fetus could be viable without proper consultation or limitations is crazy.

confusticated

rainbow kirby wrote: »

1983, and that amendment only passed by a relatively small margin then. Irish society has changed massively since then, the youngest people who would have voted then are in their late forties now, there are a hell of a lot of people who have never got to have their say on the issue.

And those people are the ones most likely to be affected by this.

sam34

Macha wrote: »

What is their stance? I heard somewhere that the Irish association of psychiatrists had refused to participate in the proposed system of 6.

If two is enough to get you locked away for life, two should be more than enough for this. Anything more is inhumane.

I have to just say I'm completely disgusted by this debate and the Fine Gael backbenchers who are putting the brakes on this issue.

Off topic but I have to correct this. Two psychiatrists cannot "get you locked away for life". It is not possible legally for two psychiatrists, or indeed any number of psychiatrists, to lock someone up for life.

Sorry for going offtopic but I hate this kind of misinformation being spread about psychiatry, as I think it deters people from seeking help.

Sulla Felix

First, I'm an advocate of pretty a pretty liberal abortion regime. Set a guideline date (end of second trimester give or take I feel) and anyone should be able to walk into a clinic and have an abortion. No more questioning than you'd get if you went in for any other minor surgery.

But, just to add a little balance, I do understand why some of the anti-abortion crowd are so vehement. I don't agree with the perspective, but theirs is that the fetus is actually a baby. So it's no wonder they get upset. It's an emotive subject but I try to keep that in mind when talking to those people.