oscarBravo wrote: » Bloody hell:https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/how-abortion-opponents-secretly-bought-a-virginia-abortion-clinic/2016/02/04/08a3b1c4-c4f5-11e5-8965-0607e0e265ce_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_dvorak-1130am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
“We had an 11-year-old girl come in with her parents. They thought she was pregnant,” Lohman said. “Turns out she wasn’t. But we gave them all the information.” Did they consider reporting a sexually active 11-year-old to authorities? “Oh no, we don’t do that. We’re not doctors, so we don’t have to,” Lohman said. They tell women that condoms can be porous and unreliable. They tell women they’ll have a hard time getting pregnant again after an abortion.
Cabaal wrote: » More on The Times storyhttp://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/02/03/i-was-told-to-fake-a-miscarriage/
Cabaal wrote: » I only see Absolam's posts when quoted so hence why I normally won't respond. But the reality is keeping a fetus with a fatal abnormality "alive" is detrimental to the mother's mental well being. She knows its fetal, if she clearly wants to put an end to things early without going to term and giving birth to a fetus that will either be dead when born or dead very very shortly after birth then that is her decision. To ignore her decision and the reality of the situation ignores the women's mental health and her bodily integrity, in this day and age to simply ignore the mental well being of a person is desperate.
Cabaal wrote: » In addition, Absolam claiming you're not sure who benefits from this situation is disingenuous when you know the stresses such a situation puts on a mother. Yet you seem to get some weird kick out of looking to unnecessarily prolonging the mental anguish for a women in this situation and claiming that an abortion benefits nobody. The fetus has a fatal fetal abnormality, it will not benefit from coming to term...unless you think suffering, pain and death after coming to term is a benefit.
Shrap wrote: » Certainly haven't picked up on that from you (the smiley face assumes too much).
Shrap wrote: » Nobody has described acting to help someone else without gaining any benefit as mercenary, so that makes no sense whatsoever. And the unborn in this case was not going to be benefited by having its death prevented, was it? In fact, it was possibly a kindness to speed up the process.
Shrap wrote: » For sure. Mind you, the chilling effect includes the fact that her consultant could hardly ask other consultants to verify she'd be cared for after the event.
lazygal wrote: » her consultant allegedly declined to confirm that Sarah would be cared for on her return home when contacted by British doctorsThat line would suggest to me that Sarah could be refused care from doctors after travelling home. There's a chilling effect there-the attitude might come across as being supportive of the right to travel while implying that if you do so, don't expect the right to medical treatment on your return. That could put women off seeking medical help.
Shrap wrote: » It doesn't say that as far as I can see. I imagine that she wouldn't be refused treatment, but telling consultants about her trip to England for the purposes of abortion and then carrying out the second part of the abortion at home (delivery of dead fetus) would presumably leave her open to prosecution.
lazygal wrote: » Did her consultant tell another medical professional that treatment would be refused to a woman who has availed of a service that is legal in the UK on her return to Ireland? How would such treatment be refused? Am I reading that right, that doctors can refuse to treat a pregnant woman who has availed of termination services elsewhere?
A mother of two who was pregnant with a baby suffering from a fatal foetal abnormality claims that she was advised to travel to Britain to undergo the first part of a termination before travelling home and faking a miscarriage. Sarah, whose name has been changed to protect her identity, said she was told to travel to a British hospital to have an injection that would stop her baby’s heart, before returning to Ireland and saying that she believed that she had miscarried. However, her consultant allegedly declined to confirm that Sarah would be cared for on her return home when contacted by British doctors. Sarah described her experience as “horrific” and said that she was forced to travel to Britain twice before finally having a termination at almost 24 weeks. She ended up having to smuggle her son’s body home in the back of her car and then became seriously ill with sepsis. “When I came back to Ireland I was to present myself at [the hospital] with lack of movement. I was not supposed to tell them what I had done. I had to play out this drama; what’s our story? What’s the lie I have to keep up?” Sarah said. “They were going to scan me, they were going to tell me that they were very sorry, that the baby had passed away. I was not to let on that I had had a feticide injection, and then I was supposed to be induced and deliver.” “…Three consultant obstetricians have separately confirmed to The Times that they were aware of other Irish hospitals telling women they can go to England for the first half of a termination.” “One said that consultants who told women about the practice could face legal action if they were seen to be taking part in the second half of an illegal abortion.”
Cabaal wrote: » The fetus has a fatal fetal abnormality, it will not benefit from coming to term...unless you think suffering, pain and death after coming to term is a benefit.
Absolam wrote: » I'm not sure who benefits from preventing the deaths of the unborn other than the unborn, and I'm dubious that acting to help someone else without gaining any benefit (apart from perhaps the pleasure of their company some time in the future?) can be called mercenary. But I do agree that there's an argument to be made for lessening the misfortune of people in Sarahs circumstance. I think you knew that already though
Shrap wrote: » Loving how you describe this characterisation as mercenary, rather than the position that put her there in the first place - the necessity of avoidance at all cost of having an abortion on Irish soil. Her misfortune could have been much lessened were it not for that.
Absolam wrote: » I feel sorry for couples in that position too. I'll admit characterising her situation as 'business as usual' seems a rather mercenary segue-way into co-opting her misfortune to serve an agenda that far outreaches her circumstances, but I suspect that possibility wasn't lost on Ms Coyne either, who managed to make four articles of it.
Cabaal wrote: » Anything good in the The Times today? Business as usual then, exporting our problems instead of providing proper healthcare and support for women in Ireland. I feel so sorry for the doctors trying to help women in such a situation in the only proper way they can, there hands are tied but a backwards law that hurts women and couples.
A mother of two who was pregnant with a baby suffering from a fatal foetal abnormality claims that she was advised to travel to Britain to undergo the first part of a termination before travelling home and faking a miscarriage. Sarah, whose name has been changed to protect her identity, said she was told to travel to a British hospital to have an injection that would stop her baby’s heart, before returning to Ireland
Tonight. At 7pm in the Davis Theatre at Trinity College Dublin. Trinity’s student union and its law society will hold a debate about the legal consequences of repealing the 8th amendment. Speakers will include lecturer in law at the University of Kent Mairead Enright; Professor Fiona de Londras, chair of Global Legal Studies at the University of Birmingham; and Professor William Binchy, former Regius Professor of Laws and a Fellow of Trinity College. FIGHT!
PlainP wrote: » http://www.rabble.ie/2016/01/31/easter-despising/ They're at it again. "Good" Christians harassing young women/girls/mothers outside the abortion referral clinic. Have these dick*heads nothing better to be doing with their time.
Some governments in Latin America have advised women not to get pregnant for a matter of months or years, because of the risk of birth defects from the Zika virus. It is suspected that there is a link between expectant mothers getting Zika, and their babies being born with microcephaly (an abnormally small head). This can be deadly, and some children who survive face intellectual disability, vision problems and development delays. A group of Brazilian lawyers, activists and scientists have decided to ask the country's supreme court to allow abortions for women who have contracted the virus.
What has the Vatican said? Latin America is largely Catholic. The Church opposes all forms of abortion. Contraception is also against Church rules, but this is more regularly flouted by believers across the world. The BBC asked the Vatican press office on Friday whether teaching would be amended on contraception or abortion. A spokesperson said: "For the moment there is no comment about this."
