8th Amendment

19-06-2015 12:13PM

It was a suggestion, not an attempt at moderation.

Again, you are simply confusing colloquial usage of terms.

It's just as illogical to call a car a baby, yet people do. It has no bearing on the conversation regarding the 8th Amendment however.

A fetus becomes a baby when it is born. Just in the same way that an adult becomes a corpse/cadaver when it dies.

Kev W · 19-06-2015 12:15PM

conorh91 wrote: »

I suggest you leave moderating to the moderators. It's illogical that an unborn is a baby when wanted, and possibly not even a human being when not.

Now it is arguable that a foetus only becomes a baby during late pregnancy, maybe at viability. But that was my original point: it's all quite arbitrary.

Yes it would. Well, to me anyway. It's just a clump of cells to you, right? Is it human? Many people doubt it.

Did I say a fetus that close to birth was a clump of cells? I don't recall saying that. This whole "not human" thing is entirely your invention though.

conorh91 · 19-06-2015 12:17PM

Kev W wrote: »

Did I say a fetus that close to birth was a clump of cells? I don't recall saying that.

What is it? Is it a baby or something less than a baby?

This whole "not human" thing is entirely your invention though.

It is regularly argued that foetuses are not human beings.

K-9 · 19-06-2015 01:33PM

On the suicide thing, I just can't see how you can make a mother go the full term and give birth. Seriously conorh91, would you be comfortable with forcibly detaining a pregnant woman in a higher security psychiatric ward like that?

It would involve security lock downs, maybe physical restraining her, I think you're seriously underestimating how strong willed and determined a suicidal person is.

Godge · 19-06-2015 02:05PM

krankykitty wrote: »

I think abortion should be a private matter between a woman and her doctor. It's not for me to judge a decision another woman makes.

In principle what you are saying is correct. However, that statement means that a woman could have an abortion and kill the fetus right up until five minutes before labour.

All rights come with responsibilities. I have the right to drink alcohol. I have also the responsibility to do so in moderation, to not drive when under the influence of alcohol. If I drive while under the influence, I commit a crime, even though I theoretically have the right to bodily integrity, to pour as much alcohol as I want into my system. With other drugs my rights to do what I like are even more circumscribed as they are banned.

Society therefore should set reasonable laws between what a woman is allowed to do and the rights, however limited, of the the unborn.

An abortion law that allows for termination up until 20/22 weeks for almost any reason is a fair compromise.

pmasterson95 · 19-06-2015 02:13PM

K-9 wrote: »

On the suicide thing, I just can't see how you can make a mother go the full term and give birth. Seriously conorh91, would you be comfortable with forcibly detaining a pregnant woman in a higher security psychiatric ward like that?

It would involve security lock downs, maybe physical restraining her, I think you're seriously underestimating how strong willed and determined a suicidal person is.

I also wonder what those who advocate baby camps think will happen the child. After all that (literal) forced labour. What become of this forcibly born baby? Presumably after that enforced ordeal the poor mother wont feel any need to take the child. Will these advocates be willing to take on the unwanted child that they forced into the world? Or do they loose interest once its born.

For those who pretend to be "pro-life" they clearly dont give a **** about the mothers life, but I wonder do they care about the life of the child that they forced into the world?

traprunner · 19-06-2015 02:16PM

pmasterson95 wrote: »

I also wonder what those who advocate baby camps think will happen the child. After all that (literal) forced labour. What become of this forcibly born baby? Presumably after that enforced ordeal the poor mother wont feel any need to take the child. Will these advocates be willing to take on the unwanted child that they forced into the world? Or do they loose interest once its born.

For those who pretend to be "pro-life" they clearly dont give a **** about the mothers life, but I wonder do they care about the life of the child that they forced into the world?

I think it's evident that they don't tend to care otherwise they would confront any adult seen slapping a child or shouting at them in public.

am946745 · 19-06-2015 04:57PM

As specialists with significant experience in the field of obstetrics and gynaecology, we are shocked at the unwarranted and unfounded allegations made by Amnesty International in relation to obstetrical practice in Ireland.

In Amnesty’s report She is Not a Criminal, serious allegations are made against doctors working in Irish hospitals when it comes to the management of miscarriage and pregnancy loss. These allegations, which are not supported by factual evidence in the report, misrepresent the standard of practice in Ireland when it comes to the management of pregnancy loss.

The claim that women are forced to carry a “dead baby” inside them for months after miscarriage it is at best a gross misrepresentation, and at worst, a callous attempt to discredit and shame Irish obstetricians. The purpose seems to be to provoke a debate on the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution, something that really has nothing to do with the management of miscarriage.

The standard of practice for the management of miscarriage is the same in Ireland as it is in any other developed nation, regardless of the law on abortion. Once foetal demise is confirmed via an ultrasound scan, there are three options available to the woman; a conservative “watch and wait” approach; medical management, which uses drugs to induce delivery; or surgical management in which the womb is surgically evacuated.

Amnesty’s report seems to suggest that women in Ireland are offered no help at the time of miscarriage and are left with dead foetuses inside of them because of some perceived legal restrictions. This is simply not true.

As soon as a miscarriage has been confirmed, a care plan is formulated between the patient and her doctor, and the best interests of the woman are always prioritised.

Occasionally, and as per national guidelines, a repeat scan will be indicated to confirm that foetal demise has indeed occurred. However, this is consistent with international best practice, and is not a reflection of the law of this country in relation to abortion. Doctors do not delay treatment other than when that is clinically indicated. If individual doctors have done so in the past, then that is a reflection on individual practice and not on standard practice in Ireland.

Amnesty would do well to look at international reports, which place Ireland high on the leader board in obstetrical care, particularly when it comes to our low rates of maternal death and low perinatal mortality.

Many doctors are supportive of Amnesty International but it is not appropriate for an international body concerned with the human rights of all people to make such broad and sweeping statements about the practice of obstetrics in Ireland when our statistics and guidelines on these matters speak for themselves. –

Is mise,

Prof JOHN BONNAR, Professor Emeritus Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Trinity College Dublin;

Dr PATRICK CONWAY, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Co Meath;

Dr TREVOR HAYES, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, St Luke’s General Hospital, Kilkenny;

Dr CHRIS KING, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Letterkenny General Hospital;

Dr SUBHASH KOHLI, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Co Kildare;

Dr DERMOT MacDONALD, Former Master of National Maternity Hospital, Dublin;

Dr EAMON McGUINNESS, Consultant Obstetrician Gynaecologist, and St James’s Hospital, Dublin;

Dr JOHN MONAGHAN,Dr KHAWAJA NAVEED ANJUM, Consultant Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Portiuncula Hospital, Co Galway.

Black Menorca · 19-06-2015 05:41PM

am946745 wrote: »

As specialists with significant experience in the field of obstetrics and gynaecology, we are shocked at the unwarranted and unfounded allegations made by Amnesty International in relation to obstetrical practice in Ireland.

In Amnesty’s report She is Not a Criminal, serious allegations are made against doctors working in Irish hospitals when it comes to the management of miscarriage and pregnancy loss. These allegations, which are not supported by factual evidence in the report, misrepresent the standard of practice in Ireland when it comes to the management of pregnancy loss.

The claim that women are forced to carry a “dead baby” inside them for months after miscarriage it is at best a gross misrepresentation, and at worst, a callous attempt to discredit and shame Irish obstetricians. The purpose seems to be to provoke a debate on the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution, something that really has nothing to do with the management of miscarriage.

The standard of practice for the management of miscarriage is the same in Ireland as it is in any other developed nation, regardless of the law on abortion. Once foetal demise is confirmed via an ultrasound scan, there are three options available to the woman; a conservative “watch and wait” approach; medical management, which uses drugs to induce delivery; or surgical management in which the womb is surgically evacuated.

Amnesty’s report seems to suggest that women in Ireland are offered no help at the time of miscarriage and are left with dead foetuses inside of them because of some perceived legal restrictions. This is simply not true.

As soon as a miscarriage has been confirmed, a care plan is formulated between the patient and her doctor, and the best interests of the woman are always prioritised.

Occasionally, and as per national guidelines, a repeat scan will be indicated to confirm that foetal demise has indeed occurred. However, this is consistent with international best practice, and is not a reflection of the law of this country in relation to abortion. Doctors do not delay treatment other than when that is clinically indicated. If individual doctors have done so in the past, then that is a reflection on individual practice and not on standard practice in Ireland.

Amnesty would do well to look at international reports, which place Ireland high on the leader board in obstetrical care, particularly when it comes to our low rates of maternal death and low perinatal mortality.

Many doctors are supportive of Amnesty International but it is not appropriate for an international body concerned with the human rights of all people to make such broad and sweeping statements about the practice of obstetrics in Ireland when our statistics and guidelines on these matters speak for themselves. –

Is mise,

Prof JOHN BONNAR, Professor Emeritus Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Trinity College Dublin;

Dr PATRICK CONWAY, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Co Meath;

Dr TREVOR HAYES, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, St Luke’s General Hospital, Kilkenny;

Dr CHRIS KING, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Letterkenny General Hospital;

Dr SUBHASH KOHLI, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Co Kildare;

Dr DERMOT MacDONALD, Former Master of National Maternity Hospital, Dublin;

Dr EAMON McGUINNESS, Consultant Obstetrician Gynaecologist, and St James’s Hospital, Dublin;

Dr JOHN MONAGHAN,Dr KHAWAJA NAVEED ANJUM, Consultant Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Portiuncula Hospital, Co Galway.

Wow, great letter.

Hopefully Rhona will concentrate on cleaning her hospital, instead of advocating for killing unborn babies in future.

Black Menorca · 19-06-2015 05:43PM

pmasterson95 wrote: »

I also wonder what those who advocate baby camps think will happen the child. After all that (literal) forced labour. What become of this forcibly born baby? Presumably after that enforced ordeal the poor mother wont feel any need to take the child. Will these advocates be willing to take on the unwanted child that they forced into the world? Or do they loose interest once its born.

For those who pretend to be "pro-life" they clearly dont give a **** about the mothers life, but I wonder do they care about the life of the child that they forced into the world?

Disgusting, crass comments.

pmasterson95 · 19-06-2015 05:46PM

Black Menorca wrote: »

Disgusting, crass comments.

So is that a no then? You proudly supported funding forced births last night but now you dont want consequences?

Delirium · 19-06-2015 05:51PM

am946745 wrote: »

Prof JOHN BONNAR, Professor Emeritus Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Trinity College Dublin;

Dr PATRICK CONWAY, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Co Meath;

Dr TREVOR HAYES, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, St Luke’s General Hospital, Kilkenny;

Dr CHRIS KING, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Letterkenny General Hospital;

Dr SUBHASH KOHLI, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Co Kildare;

Dr DERMOT MacDONALD, Former Master of National Maternity Hospital, Dublin;

Dr EAMON McGUINNESS, Consultant Obstetrician Gynaecologist, and St James’s Hospital, Dublin;

Dr JOHN MONAGHAN,Dr KHAWAJA NAVEED ANJUM, Consultant Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Portiuncula Hospital, Co Galway.

Worth noting that all the doctors, with the exception of Dr King, are signatories of the Dublin Declaration and firmly in the pro-life camp.

Although it's not the first time he has written to object to pro-choice comments (with much of the same group of doctors

So consider me somewhat skeptical of their claims since there aren't both pro-life and pro-choice (to avoid bias from one side or the other) doctors signing the letter.

Black Menorca · 19-06-2015 05:55PM

pmasterson95 wrote: »

So is that a no then? You proudly supported funding forced births last night but now you dont want consequences?

Not worthy of reply. If you retract your insulting attack and apologise, I'll get back to you. until then? Your posts will not be replied to by myself.

ProfessorPlum · 19-06-2015 05:56PM

Black Menorca wrote: »

Wow, great letter.

Hopefully Rhona will concentrate on cleaning her hospital, instead of advocating for killing unborn babies in future.

Did you read the letter at all? The subject was the management of miscarriage. It was nothing at all to do with abortion.
Do you know Rhona very well - you do seem awfully familiar, or is it just a lack of respect for her, as well as the women for whom she advocates.
Dr Mahony has never advocated for abortion - just for the ability to care for pregnant women and their babies, as per best practice, without fear of prosecution of either doctors or the women they care for.
Shame on you for suggesting otherwise.

You'll be glad to know that Dr Mahony is spearheading the move of the NMH to a brand new campus at SVH, as she says the old buildings at the present site on Holles St are not fit for purpose. So yes, she is doing something to improve her hospital (older buildings are acknowledged to be difficult to maintain hygiene standards)

pmasterson95 · 19-06-2015 05:58PM

Black Menorca wrote: »

Not worthy of reply. If you retract your insulting attack and apologise, I'll get back to you. until then? Your posts will not be replied to by myself.

What insulting attack? I asked a question. Or is it classed insulting that I actually asked about the life of the child post-forced-birth, when forced birth was being advocated and you even said you'd support the scheme? Surely you can say whats next for the child?

Black Menorca · 19-06-2015 06:04PM

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Did you read the letter at all? The subject was the management of miscarriage. It was nothing at all to do with abortion.
Do you know Rhona very well - you do seem awfully familiar, or is it just a lack of respect for her, as well as the women for whom she advocates.
Dr Mahony has never advocated for abortion - just for the ability to care for pregnant women and their babies, as per best practice, without fear of prosecution of either doctors or the women they care for.
Shame on you for suggesting otherwise.

You'll be glad to know that Dr Mahony is spearheading the move of the NMH to a brand new campus at SVH, as she says the old buildings at the present site on Holles St are not fit for purpose. So yes, she is doing something to improve her hospital (older buildings are acknowledged to be difficult to maintain hygiene standards)

It seems Rhona has so much time to advocate for a change to the Constitutional situation, one may wonder about her dedication to keeping her hospital clean and sterile.

Black Menorca · 19-06-2015 06:06PM

SW wrote: »

Worth noting that all the doctors, with the exception of Dr King, are signatories of the Dublin Declaration and firmly in the pro-life camp.

Although it's not the first time he has written to object to pro-choice comments (with much of the same group of doctors

So consider me somewhat skeptical of their claims since there aren't both pro-life and pro-choice (to avoid bias from one side or the other) doctors signing the letter.

So, would you allow Downs Syndrome babies to be aborted if the mother requested it, at any time during the pregnancy

ProfessorPlum · 19-06-2015 06:08PM

Black Menorca wrote: »

It seems Rhona has so much time to advocate for a change to the Constitutional situation, one may wonder about her dedication to keeping her hospital clean and sterile.

Is that the best you can do?

Why would hospitals need to be sterile? Seems an impossible and utterly futile task to me.

And as for her dedicating time to highlight the issues the 8th amendment causes - she of course values the life, and also very much values the health of the women and babies she cares for.

Godge · 19-06-2015 06:09PM

am946745 wrote: »

As specialists with significant experience in the field of obstetrics and gynaecology, we are shocked at the unwarranted and unfounded allegations made by Amnesty International in relation to obstetrical practice in Ireland.

In Amnesty’s report She is Not a Criminal, serious allegations are made against doctors working in Irish hospitals when it comes to the management of miscarriage and pregnancy loss. These allegations, which are not supported by factual evidence in the report, misrepresent the standard of practice in Ireland when it comes to the management of pregnancy loss.

The claim that women are forced to carry a “dead baby” inside them for months after miscarriage it is at best a gross misrepresentation, and at worst, a callous attempt to discredit and shame Irish obstetricians. The purpose seems to be to provoke a debate on the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution, something that really has nothing to do with the management of miscarriage.

The standard of practice for the management of miscarriage is the same in Ireland as it is in any other developed nation, regardless of the law on abortion. Once foetal demise is confirmed via an ultrasound scan, there are three options available to the woman; a conservative “watch and wait” approach; medical management, which uses drugs to induce delivery; or surgical management in which the womb is surgically evacuated.

Amnesty’s report seems to suggest that women in Ireland are offered no help at the time of miscarriage and are left with dead foetuses inside of them because of some perceived legal restrictions. This is simply not true.

As soon as a miscarriage has been confirmed, a care plan is formulated between the patient and her doctor, and the best interests of the woman are always prioritised.

Occasionally, and as per national guidelines, a repeat scan will be indicated to confirm that foetal demise has indeed occurred. However, this is consistent with international best practice, and is not a reflection of the law of this country in relation to abortion. Doctors do not delay treatment other than when that is clinically indicated. If individual doctors have done so in the past, then that is a reflection on individual practice and not on standard practice in Ireland.

Amnesty would do well to look at international reports, which place Ireland high on the leader board in obstetrical care, particularly when it comes to our low rates of maternal death and low perinatal mortality.

Many doctors are supportive of Amnesty International but it is not appropriate for an international body concerned with the human rights of all people to make such broad and sweeping statements about the practice of obstetrics in Ireland when our statistics and guidelines on these matters speak for themselves. –

Is mise,

Prof JOHN BONNAR, Professor Emeritus Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Trinity College Dublin;

Dr PATRICK CONWAY, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Co Meath;

Dr TREVOR HAYES, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, St Luke’s General Hospital, Kilkenny;

Dr CHRIS KING, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Letterkenny General Hospital;

Dr SUBHASH KOHLI, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Co Kildare;

Dr DERMOT MacDONALD, Former Master of National Maternity Hospital, Dublin;

Dr EAMON McGUINNESS, Consultant Obstetrician Gynaecologist, and St James’s Hospital, Dublin;

Dr JOHN MONAGHAN,Dr KHAWAJA NAVEED ANJUM, Consultant Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Portiuncula Hospital, Co Galway.

Nobody from Portlaoise or Galway hospital to talk about how great pregnancy and maternal care are in Ireland. Wonder why?

Godge · 19-06-2015 06:10PM

Black Menorca wrote: »

So, would you allow Downs Syndrome babies to be aborted if the mother requested it, at any time during the pregnancy

Up to 22 weeks, yes. See below.

Godge wrote: »

In principle what you are saying is correct. However, that statement means that a woman could have an abortion and kill the fetus right up until five minutes before labour.

All rights come with responsibilities. I have the right to drink alcohol. I have also the responsibility to do so in moderation, to not drive when under the influence of alcohol. If I drive while under the influence, I commit a crime, even though I theoretically have the right to bodily integrity, to pour as much alcohol as I want into my system. With other drugs my rights to do what I like are even more circumscribed as they are banned.

Society therefore should set reasonable laws between what a woman is allowed to do and the rights, however limited, of the the unborn.

An abortion law that allows for termination up until 20/22 weeks for almost any reason is a fair compromise.

pmasterson95 · 19-06-2015 06:10PM

I do think a true tv debate where these "pro-life" eejits cant hide or duck and dive would be hilarious. They struggle so horribly to defend what they spew.

Delirium · 19-06-2015 06:18PM

Black Menorca wrote: »

So, would you allow Downs Syndrome babies to be aborted if the mother requested it, at any time during the pregnancy

I would allow the woman to abort for any reason she wishes up to viability.

What relevance is that with regards to the post you quoted?

volchitsa · 19-06-2015 06:18PM

pmasterson95 wrote: »

I do think a true tv debate where these "pro-life" eejits cant hide or duck and dive would be hilarious. They struggle so horribly to defend what they spew.

Yes, remember Peter Mathews, on V Browne after Savita Halappanavar, iirc, admitting (how could he not?) that he would ensure his own daughter had a choice that he would prevent others having, via the law on FFA etc - and when pushed by VB came out with "Well we all have to die some time, and men used to die in the mines you know!" :eek:

Bring it on!!

Black Menorca · 19-06-2015 06:24PM

Godge wrote: »

Up to 22 weeks, yes. See below.

And beyond 22 weeks? Would you deny the woman her request?

Black Menorca · 19-06-2015 06:26PM

SW wrote: »

I would allow the woman to abort for any reason she wishes up to viability.

What relevance is that with regards to the post you quoted?

You would condone killing the baby at 34 weeks gestation and then delivering her dead body?

ProfessorPlum · 19-06-2015 06:31PM

Black Menorca wrote: »

You would condone killing the baby at 34 weeks gestation and then delivering her dead body?

Seriously, for the sake of decent debate and all of our sanity would you for gods sake go off and inform yourself before spouting nonsence.

That is not at all what s/he said, and if you had any clue what you were talking about, you'd know that.

Delirium · 19-06-2015 06:32PM

Black Menorca wrote: »

You would condone killing the baby at 34 weeks gestation and then delivering her dead body?

Is there anywhere in the world this is legal?

Black Menorca · 19-06-2015 06:38PM

SW wrote: »

Is there anywhere in the world this is legal?

So if a mother sought to have her Downs Syndrome baby aborted, intentionally killed at the hands of an abortionist at 34 weeks, you would deny her request?

lazygal · 19-06-2015 06:45PM

Black Menorca wrote: »

So if a mother sought to have her Downs Syndrome baby aborted, intentionally killed at the hands of an abortionist at 34 weeks, you would deny her request?

What are you on about? A viable foetus at 34 weeks would be delivered alive. My first child was delivered at 39 weeks, as per notes the decision was made to terminate the pregnancy because of potential danger to health and life. She wasn't killed at the hands of an abortionist, she was delivered by my consultant. Why do you think abortion=intentionally killed? Don't answer, all prolifers are absolutely obsessed with later term abortions/terminations/killing the disabled babies/abortionists/the abortion industry.
You do know because of the eighth amendment abortion in Ireland is available throughout pregnancy, even after a due date, because of the constitutional position? Or does a woman magically not have a threat to her life because of pregnancy after a certain point?

Black Menorca · 19-06-2015 06:48PM

lazygal wrote: »

What are you on about? A viable foetus at 34 weeks would be delivered alive. My first child was delivered at 39 weeks, as per notes the decision was made to terminate the pregnancy because of potential danger to health and life. She wasn't killed at the hands of an abortionist, she was delivered by my consultant. Why do you think abortion=intentionally killed? Don't answer, all prolifers are absolutely obsessed with later term abortions/terminations/killing the disabled babies/abortionists/the abortion industry.
You do know because of the eighth amendment abortion in Ireland is available throughout pregnancy, even after a due date, because of the constitutional position? Or does a woman magically not have a threat to her life because of pregnancy after a certain point?

But if you had your way and a woman turned up at a Marie Stopes outfit, cash in had, directly requesting her DS baby to be eliminated, would you deny her?

8th Amendment

Comments