Abortion in Ireland: 2 years on

WrenBoy · 01-07-2020 5:47pm

ELM327 wrote: »

Think of all the sperm that get slaughtered every day.
Or all the eggs that get slaughtered as each menstrual cycle passes for each eligible woman. Both of these are potential lives too. The same as an embryo or fetus

We don't do an elective (for the most part) medical procedure to end the development of sperm and eggs, those are natural processes of unused sperms and eggs.

uptherebels · 01-07-2020 6:04pm

omerin wrote: »

I didn't vote, didn't think there was a point it was so clear cut what way it was going. Unfortunately in the course of my life the amount of competent politicians could be counted on one hand and there would still be some fingers spare. They had a relatively straight forward job to construct a compromise in the legislation that would allow abortions in certain cases and not to let it be seen as a form of contraception. They failed. I'm not going to go into this further as it has been done to death.

It was a particularly sad day when they announced the stats, and they will continue to advise on the numbers in the years to come. There are no winners. Education needs to be ramped up across the board.

They did find a compromise, a limit of 12 weeks.
If you see abortion as a form of contraception then you don't understand what contraception actually is.

SusieBlue · 01-07-2020 6:10pm

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

The alternative is backed by our leading health officials. Pregnancy is safe. Not perfect, things can go wrong as in any medical situation but the numbers are very very low.

Tell me what illness you are referring to please or is this your usual method of throwing out arguments with zero backing?

I have already given you a list of the most common risks, conditions and side effects of pregnancy,

Gestational diabetes, pre eclampsia, sciatica, varicose veins, swelling of the limbs, pelvic issues, hyperemesis gravidarum (HG), incontinence, anemia, deep vein thrombosis, and placenta previa are some of the more common conditions.

Then after the birth you have the recovery from delivery/c-section, post natal depression, long term back, hip and pelvic issues, incontinence, and instances where the diabetes and high blood pressure doesn’t go away.

No one should have to take any or all of that on unless they choose to. The idea that a woman should have to go through that in order to satisfy another persons moral compass, a person who won’t have to take the risk or live with the consequences, is abhorrent to me.

Igotadose · 01-07-2020 6:17pm

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

All the mental affects are equally so in abortions. Counseling is very much recommended following an abortion for a reason.

Where would that be? Most women having abortions are happy with the outcome - something like in excess of 95% in many studies.

So, give us some data, or have you *cough* reached the End of The Road with your blatant assertions of your opinion as something resembling facts?

BTW, you misspelled Leprechaun.

SusieBlue · 01-07-2020 6:24pm

An independent study on abortion in Ireland found that 97% of women were happy with their decision and 98% of women would recommend it to women in similar circumstances.

The most common feelings felt in the aftermath were relief and satisfaction. Over 94% said they had no regrets about their choice.

So women overwhelmingly do not have regrets, and even if they did, that still isn’t a legitimate reason to take the choice away from others.

Igotadose · 01-07-2020 6:35pm

SusieBlue wrote: »

An independent study on abortion in Ireland found that 97% of women were happy with their decision and 98% of women would recommend it to women in similar circumstances.

The most common feelings felt in the aftermath were relief and satisfaction. Over 94% said they had no regrets about their choice.

So women overwhelmingly do not have regrets, and even if they did, that still isn’t a legitimate reason to take the choice away from others.

Matches the US numbers of 95% plus. But, numbers don't really matter to the anti-choice crowd, including the newbies on this thread. They've probably never looked at the stories on https://shoutyourabortion.com/

Bannasidhe · 01-07-2020 6:42pm

Igotadose wrote: »

Matches the US numbers of 95% plus. But, numbers don't really matter to the anti-choice crowd, including the newbies on this thread. They've probably never looked at the stories on https://shoutyourabortion.com/

or https://www.facebook.com/InHerIrishShoes/

cournioni · 01-07-2020 7:07pm

Igotadose wrote: »

Matches the US numbers of 95% plus. But, numbers don't really matter to the anti-choice crowd, including the newbies on this thread. They've probably never looked at the stories on https://shoutyourabortion.com/

Unfortunately you cannot ask the unborn baby about their feelings on the matter.

Larbre34 · 01-07-2020 7:13pm

Some excellent posts by SusieBlue.

I would vote Yes again without a moment's hesitation.

Igotadose · 01-07-2020 7:24pm

cournioni wrote: »
Unfortunately you cannot ask the unborn baby about their feelings on the matter.

So you agree then, the poster who made up the mental health nonsense about abortion, was in fact making it up?

cournioni · 01-07-2020 7:31pm

Igotadose wrote: »

So you agree then, the poster who made up the mental health nonsense about abortion, was in fact making it up?

Haven’t even read it to be honest. I’m more appalled at the attitudes towards the unborn by pro choicers here.

moon2 · 01-07-2020 8:00pm

cournioni wrote: »

Haven’t even read it to be honest. I’m more appalled at the attitudes towards the unborn by pro choicers here.

I'm appalled by some of the attitudes towards the born too.

cournioni · 01-07-2020 8:32pm

moon2 wrote: »

I'm appalled by some of the attitudes towards the born too.

Are the born being intentionally killed?

Quantum Erasure · 01-07-2020 8:41pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Manach, what did the pro-abortion badges look like? I don’t recall any that said that..

they said Repeal, mostly

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

...it was clear what the legislation would be; and they celebrated even with that knowledge. So, for the people that celebrated, it WAS reason to celebrate?

chosen1 · 01-07-2020 8:43pm

I was a No voter was would still vote no if there was another referendum in the morning.

However, I feel that I had very little in common with the No campaign and I would think they were partly responsible for the high Yes vote. The yes campaign did very well in persuading people on the fence by focusing on the rape, FFA and mothers health endangerment side of things. I have no issue with abortion in these cases and would favour legislation for this and a change to the constitution. The numbers yesterday show that at least the health aspect of the abortion numbers are a tiny minority of cases.

The No side had no connection with me or others I've spoken to who also voted no. They were heavily influenced by religious affiliations and only focused on the abortion is murder in all circumstances line. The connection to Iona and Gemma O'D was enough to throw anyone off.

It unfortunately looks like we will have abortion in this country now for the foreseeable future so I would hope that the government will actually focus on the high numbers who seek it and try and reduce it. We were told that education and free contraception would be rolled out but look at how that panned out. Instead, they're using tax money to fully pay for abortion services for women, but abandoned any plans to either subsidise contraception or make it completely free. It would be great if this would change going forward but I wouldn't hold out much hope.

SusieBlue · 01-07-2020 8:50pm

I don’t understand these posts saying we have abortion now, as if it’s a new or modern concept.

Since the dawn of time, abortion has existed. It has always been in Ireland and it will always be in Ireland.

So long as there are women falling pregnant, there will be women who cannot continue with the pregnancy requiring a termination.

We previously exported these problems to the UK, and before that women used more dangerous methods such as poisoning, hangers, and butchered back street procedures to end their pregnancies.
The only difference is that we are now actually acknowledging what was already happening by regulating it and making it legal, and thus safer for women.

It has always been here though, that’s undeniable. We just swept it under the carpet with our fingers in our ears, proudly declaring ourselves to be an abortion free country.

Loafing Oaf · 01-07-2020 8:53pm

chosen1 wrote: »

We were told that education and free contraception would be rolled out

Apparently free contraception is in the PFG

moon2 · 01-07-2020 9:06pm

cournioni wrote: »

Are the born being intentionally killed?

Intentially denying medical treatment can be equated to being intentionally killed. Abortion cannot.

However I don't think this conversation is going to convince either of us to change our minds.

Quantum Erasure · 01-07-2020 9:24pm

moon2 wrote: »

Intentially denying medical treatment can be equated to being intentionally killed. Abortion cannot.

Thats some cognitive dissonance going on there

01-07-2020 9:31pm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Do you have stretch marks?

They are commonly described as " disfiguring skin condition that can have a deep psychological impact" (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) by experts who advise not trivialising them as

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-38692922#:~:text=Like%20many%20disfiguring%20skin%20conditions,lead%20to%20body%20image%20issues.

And here you are - trivialising a disfiguring skin condition and the effect that can have as pathetic.

I have a large, visible scar. Far more visible than stretch marks and actually yes, I have scars on my stomach area as well.

But I'm sure that's far more damaging than having your baby physically removed and thrown in the bin.

****ing stretch marks as a reason for abortion. I'm done. Some people can't be reasonable in a conversation

Bannasidhe · 01-07-2020 9:44pm

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

****ing stretch marks as a reason for abortion. I'm done. Some people can't be reasonable in a conversation

Except no one said it was a reason.
Someone said it was often a side effect of pregnancy and they also said it was one of the minor ones.

So indeed. Some people can't be reasonable in a conversation.

Better Than Christ · 01-07-2020 10:00pm

chicorytip wrote: »

Six thousand slaughtered in just two years. Think about that.

I remember all the tone policing that happened during the referendum. Mainly from 'sensible' pro-choice men like the late Noel Whelan telling young women that using angry language while talking about the state's denial of their bodily autonomy risked losing them the support of moderates. If anyone could've done with a bit of tone policing, it was the No side - throwing ludicrous and inaccurate terms like 'murdered' and 'slaughtered' around made them sound like a shower of nutters and fundamentalists and only served to drown out any reasoned arguments against repealing the Eighth.

Mr. Karate · 01-07-2020 10:24pm

Nearly 7,000 in the last year. So much for the promise of keeping it rare and in extreme emergencies.

cournioni · 01-07-2020 10:31pm

Mr. Karate wrote: »

Nearly 7,000 in the last year. So much for the promise of keeping it rare and in extreme emergencies.

Ah yeah but sure at least it stopped people from having to travel to have the healthy unborn killed. That makes it all okay.

Loafing Oaf · 01-07-2020 10:33pm

Mr. Karate wrote: »

Nearly 7,000 in the last year. So much for the promise of keeping it rare and in extreme emergencies.

Who said it would be only for extreme emergencies?

Experience_day · 01-07-2020 10:36pm

I'm glad as it means we can have people complaining about low populations in a couple years....and then we can import more third world people.

/s

Bannasidhe · 01-07-2020 10:36pm

Mr. Karate wrote: »

Nearly 7,000 in the last year. So much for the promise of keeping it rare and in extreme emergencies.

Who made that promise exactly and when did they make it?

No one. That's who.

It was never made.

By anyone.

It was always going to be by request up to 12 weeks. That was in the draft published before the vote even happened.

Deebles McBeebles · 01-07-2020 10:55pm

Was sticking this in CA really a good idea? What with all the angry little men in here. I realise the numbers have just been released but its hardly current affairs to speak about a referendum from 2018. Which is what the discussion has become.

I voted yes and would do so again and again. No one has the right to tell a woman that its not her choice or to make it any more difficult than it needs to be.

Loafing Oaf · 01-07-2020 10:55pm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Who made that promise exactly and when did they make it?

No one. That's who.

It was never made.

By anyone.

It was always going to be by request up to 12 weeks. That was in the draft published before the vote even happened.

Well Leo Varadkar did say abortion would be "safe, legal and rare" in the speech announcing the referendum. I think he realised immediately that 'rare' was a misstep and of at best dubious accuracy, and IIRC neither he nor any other government figure used the word again in this context.

But as you say, the draft legislation was published before the referendum, and people could make up their own minds whether abortion was likely to be 'rare' under those conditions.

xzanti · 01-07-2020 10:57pm

Glinda wrote: »

The number hovered around four thousand for decades. That's just the number who travelled to Britain and who also gave their address as being in Ireland.

The most likely explanation for the fall in numbers in recent years is 1. the availability of medical abortions (i.e. pills) that can be bought on the internet and taken at home in private without the need for surgery and 2. the inclusion now of women who would previously (and understandably) not have given their true home address when registering in Britain.

This is the first time there has ever been an accurate count of the number of Irish women availing of a safe and legal abortion service.

What is and isn't a good reason to have an abortion is only a question you need to form an opinion on if you are the person concerned, or they have asked you for advice. Otherwise, something is happening to their body, with potentially life-altering consequences, so the decision should be theirs. Nobody else has anywhere near as much to lose. So nobody else should get to decide.

Ultimately, despite recent legal changes, I think we are still struggling wiht the idea that a woman who has an abortion isn't doing anything wrong. We still have a little way to go on this one - I think some are still patting themselves on the back for forgiving these women, or tolerating their behaviour, but there is a lingering sense that the women should be ashamed. They shouldn't.

If you want to do something genuine about abortion rates, do something about unwanted pregnancy. And that would need to be something that works. But that would mean tackling a whole rats nest of issues, from misogynistic sexual shaming and stereotyping, to tackling education around consent, and allowing people real, free and educated control over their own sexual behaviour.

Funny, people who are against abortion are all too often against all the measures that have ever been shown to reduce it. You'd almost think it was really about controlling women...

Excellent post.

I wonder what Kathleen and Joseph would say if you asked them to hand out condoms outside their local teenage disco. But they're only too happy to heckle women outside hospitals with their little homemade coffins.

I voted yes and I would again. All day long!!!!

Abortion in Ireland: 2 years on

Comments