Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Silvio.Dante

Dades wrote: »

If you want people to respond to *your* hypothetical scenarios - which many have - then you need to be prepared to reciprocate.

That you find the scenario unlikely or uncomfortable matters not.

There's a difference between possible scenarios which I have dealt with in detail already, as my posting history in this thread will confirm, and Straw Men. I don't do Straw Men...

The Mad Hatter

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

While your views are still still an athema to where I come from on the scale its interesting that you would deny a woman her directly expressed wish to take the life of the baby at 27 weeks.

Basic reading comprehension isn't your forte, is it?

lazygal

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Thanks again for the detailed response.

Clearly you differ greatly with rebelkid and Nodin for example.

While your views are still still an athema to where I come from on the scale its interesting that you would deny a woman her directly expressed wish to take the life of the baby at 27 weeks.

Many within the Feminist movement would rail against such deprivation (as they would see it)...

Who in the feminist movement?

B0jangles

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

There's a difference between possible scenarios which I have dealt with in detail already, as my posting history in this thread will confirm, and Straw Men. I don't do Straw Men...

The only distinction I can see is that you regard every scenario you bring up as valid and every scenario brought up by anyone else as a straw man.

Dades

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

There's a difference between possible scenarios which I have dealt with in detail already, as my posting history in this thread will confirm, and Straw Men. I don't do Straw Men...

I don't think you understand what a Straw Man is. You're simply being asked what course(s) of action you would, or would not condone in a given scenario. Just like what you are asking of other posters.

You can expressly refuse to answer the question, however this may result in you forfeiting your right to pose your own hypothetical questions.

Silvio.Dante

For those who seem confused about the term Partial Birth Abortion allow me to clarify..:

Partial-Birth Abortion is a procedure in which the abortionist pulls a living baby feet-first out of the womb and into the birth canal, except for the head, which the abortionist purposely keeps lodged just inside the cervix (the opening to the womb). The abortionist punctures the base of the baby’s skull with a surgical instrument, such as a long surgical scissors or a pointed hollow metal tube called a trochar. He then inserts a catheter (tube) into the wound, and removes the baby's brain with a powerful suction machine. This causes the skull to collapse, after which the abortionist completes the delivery of the now-dead baby.


Anyone open to this procedure being an option in this country..?

Silvio.Dante

Dades wrote: »

I don't think you understand what a Straw Man is. You're simply being asked what course(s) of action you would, or would not condone in a given scenario. Just like what you are asking of other posters.

You can expressly refuse to answer the question, however this may result in you forfeiting your right to pose your own hypothetical questions.

Listen Dades. If folk find my questioning uncomfortable for whatever reason, thats fine and may be a good thing as they should be unconmfortable about some of the real scenarios about killing unborn babies are...

Silvio.Dante

lazygal wrote: »

Who in the feminist movement?

Both members of the Daly/Bacik axis have openly stated that a decision to abort unborn baby should be a private one between the woman and her doctor...

lazygal

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Both members of the Daly/Bacik axis have openly stated that a decision to abort unborn baby should be a private one between the woman and her doctor...

Like in Canada? Like all other medical procedures?

Stark

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Both members of the Daly/Bacik axis have openly stated that a decision to abort unborn baby should be a private one between the woman and her doctor...

And what's wrong with that? I'd trust a doctor far more than a priest to make the best decision for both mother and fetus.

The Mad Hatter

lazygal wrote: »

Like in Canada? Like all other medical procedures?

Like kiwi_in_IE said should happen?

Bannasidhe

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

There's a difference between possible scenarios which I have dealt with in detail already, as my posting history in this thread will confirm, and Straw Men. I don't do Straw Men...

Answer the question please Silvio.

Is it preferable to deny a woman vital medication causing long term damage to her physical and/or mental health to protect a fetus?

I can understand your reluctance to answer as it wouldn't paint you as either a compassionate person or as someone who is concerned about the welfare of pregnant women.

That does not make it a strawman.

eviltwin

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Both members of the Daly/Bacik axis have openly stated that a decision to abort unborn baby should be a private one between the woman and her doctor...

Isn't that the way ALL medical decisions should be?

Bannasidhe

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Listen Dades. If folk find my questioning uncomfortable for whatever reason, thats fine and may be a good thing as they should be unconmfortable about some of the real scenarios about killing unborn babies are...

Are you uncomfortable about the real-life scenarios that may occur if the health of a pregnant woman is secondary to the well-being of a fetus?

Answer the question please Silvio.

Is it preferable to deny a woman vital medication causing long term damage to her physical and/or mental health to protect a fetus?

Kiwi in IE

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Thanks again for the detailed response.

Clearly you differ greatly with rebelkid and Nodin for example.

While your views are still still an athema to where I come from on the scale its interesting that you would deny a woman her directly expressed wish to take the life of the baby at 27 weeks.

Many within the Feminist movement would rail against such deprivation (as they would see it)...[/

I can't speak for nodin or rebelkid, but I doubt anyone in here is advocating terminating a foetus that can be taken out live and survive in an incubator to be adopted. The method of extraction for foetuses dead or alive is the same.

I believe a woman has the ultimate right to terminate a pregnancy at any stage, but if termination of the foetus can be avoided while doing this it should be, so long as the woman is not put at risk.

Dades

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Listen Dades. If folk find my questioning uncomfortable for whatever reason, thats fine and may be a good thing as they should be unconmfortable about some of the real scenarios about killing unborn babies are...

Okay, Silvio. You have officially been warned.

Ignoring parts of posts and talking around responses results in a wearisome experience for other posters willing to engage in actual debate.

Getting yourself banned for just soapboxing your views won't do your cause any good so do try and engage so it doesn't come to that. We really don't like banning people here.

THIS POST IS NOT UP FOR DISCUSSION.

Silvio.Dante

Stark wrote: »

And what's wrong with that? I'd trust a doctor far more than a priest to make the best decision for both mother and fetus.

The little matter of intentionally ending the life of her unborn baby...

Silvio.Dante

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Thanks again for the detailed response.

Clearly you differ greatly with rebelkid and Nodin for example.

While your views are still still an athema to where I come from on the scale its interesting that you would deny a woman her directly expressed wish to take the life of the baby at 27 weeks.

Many within the Feminist movement would rail against such deprivation (as they would see it)...[/

I can't speak for nodin or rebelkid, but I doubt anyone in here is advocating terminating a foetus that can be taken out live and survive in an incubator to be adopted. The method of extraction for foetuses dead or alive is the same.

I believe a woman has the ultimate right to terminate a pregnancy at any stage, but if termination of the foetus can be avoided while doing this it should be, so long as the woman is not put at risk.

How many viable babies are put into incubator and given a chance of survival in Marie Stopes Clinics around the world..?

Kiwi in IE

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

How many viable babies are put into incubator and given a chance of survival in Marie Stopes Clinics around the world..?

You tell me how many foetuses are aborted in Marie Stopes clinics at 34 weeks for financial reasons? Do you have any statistics to back up your accusations of these supposed happenings?

Bannasidhe

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Listen Dades. If folk find my questioning uncomfortable for whatever reason, thats fine and may be a good thing as they should be unconmfortable about some of the real scenarios about killing unborn babies are...

A teenager with leukemia has died after authorities refused, for nearly three weeks, to let her undergo chemotherapy because she was pregnant. The unnamed daughter of Rosa Hernandez was told by doctors she needed chemotherapy; however, there is a strict abortion ban in the Dominican Republic and the treatment was likely to terminate her pregnancy. At the time, she was 9 weeks along.

http://now.msn.com/pregnant-teen-with-cancer-dies-after-doctors-delay-chemotherapy-because-it-may-have-terminated-her-pregnancy

in Nicaragua, a case went all the way to the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights when a 27-year-old woman, Amalia, was denied treatment for her cancer because she was pregnant. And in Colombia in 2006, the laws were liberalized because of the case of Marta Solay, a mother of three who had cervical cancer.

http://www.everydayhealth.com/leukemia/0823/death-of-pregnant-teen-with-cancer-fuels-abortion-controversy.aspx

That bill [in Kansas] extends the state’s “conscience” provision for medical personnel to include the right to refuse to refer a woman to an abortion provider, or prescribe or administer a prescription or treatment that terminates a pregnancy.
Taken to its extreme, the legislation could empower doctors and medical staffers to refuse to provide birth control or even chemotherapy to a pregnant cancer patient.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/09/1090094/-Kansas-bill-lets-doctors-deny-chemotherapy-to-pregnant-women


Oh and look - it has already happened in Ireland but you know that as this story has already been linked and you commented on it.

woman who was terminally ill with cancer was refused an abortion at Cork University hospital and had to travel to Britain to have the procedure.

Michelle Harte (39) from Wexford told The Irish Times that doctors at Cork University Hospital advised her for medical reasons to terminate her pregnancy but then refused to carry out the procedure.

A previous Irish court judgement had allowed such a procedure where the mother’s life was in danger. However the ethics committee refused to allow an abortion because they claimed no “immediate threat”.

“I couldn’t believe the decision [to refuse an abortion in Ireland] when it came,” she said.

“Apparently, my life wasn’t at immediate risk. It just seemed absolutely ridiculous.”

She travelled to Britain for the abortion during the summer.

“She was very unwell,” said her partner, Neil Doolan (28) from Wexford. “She was very stressed out, physically very weak, nauseous and vomiting.”

Shortly after she came back her condition worsened. “The delay in having an abortion could well have made my condition worse. It certainly didn’t help,” she said.

Read more: http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Terminally-ill-woman-refused-abortion-in-Cork-hospital--112236794.html#ixzz2IhgE5CZR
Follow us: @IrishCentral on Twitter | IrishCentral on Facebook]

Mr Boylan said her obstetrician was willing to perform a termination but was “hamstrung” by legal issues. The issue was referred to the hospital’s “ad hoc” ethics committee.

Appalling delay

He said there was an absence of clear guidelines about what to do and an “appalling delay” ensued. After the committee refused the termination, there were further delays because Ms Harte did not have a passport.

“I couldn’t believe the decision [to refuse an abortion in Ireland] when it came,” Ms Harte, who was then 39, told The Irish Times in December 2010. “Apparently my life wasn’t at immediate risk. It just seemed absolutely ridiculous.”

Her condition worsened significantly during this time and she was not able to receive cancer treatment because she was pregnant. She eventually travelled to Britain for an abortion; she had to be helped on to the aircraft due to a deterioration in her condition.

http://europeanprochoicenetwork.wordpress.com/2012/11/24/ireland-state-settled-with-now-deceased-cancer-patient-who-was-denied-abortion/

The Mad Hatter

But have you been denied your meds, Bannasidhe? It's a ridiculous scenario that could never ever happen, don'tcha know.

Silvio.Dante

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

You tell me how many foetuses are aborted in Marie Stopes clinics at 34 weeks for financial reasons? Do you have any statistics to back up your accusations of these supposed happenings?

I won't pretend I have such detailed Stats but I think we can both agree that viable babies' lives are deliberately ended is such clinics..?

Can you countenance such activities in Ireland..?

Silvio.Dante

Bannasidhe wrote: »

http://now.msn.com/pregnant-teen-with-cancer-dies-after-doctors-delay-chemotherapy-because-it-may-have-terminated-her-pregnancy


http://www.everydayhealth.com/leukemia/0823/death-of-pregnant-teen-with-cancer-fuels-abortion-controversy.aspx

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/09/1090094/-Kansas-bill-lets-doctors-deny-chemotherapy-to-pregnant-women


Oh and look - it has already happened in Ireland but you know that as this story has already been linked and you commented on it.





Read more: http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Terminally-ill-woman-refused-abortion-in-Cork-hospital--112236794.html#ixzz2IhgE5CZR
Follow us: @IrishCentral on Twitter | IrishCentral on Facebook]

http://europeanprochoicenetwork.wordpress.com/2012/11/24/ireland-state-settled-with-now-deceased-cancer-patient-who-was-denied-abortion/

Whats your point..?

Silvio.Dante

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

But have you been denied your meds, Bannasidhe? It's a ridiculous scenario that could never ever happen, don'tcha know.

Spot on...

Bannasidhe

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

But have you been denied your meds, Bannasidhe? It's a ridiculous scenario that could never happen.

I'm not pregnant, Hatter.

But if I was -

If you’ve been taking medicines other than insulin to control your blood glucose levels, you’ll need to stop taking them. Research studies have not yet proved that diabetes medicines other than insulin are safe for use during pregnancy.

http://www.shopdiabetes.org/559-Diabetes-And-Pregnancy.aspx?loc=pregnantwomen

Bannasidhe

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Whats your point..?

A demonstration that the refusal of treatment has already happened.

Did you miss this?

A teenager with leukemia has died after authorities refused, for nearly three weeks, to let her undergo chemotherapy because she was pregnant. The unnamed daughter of Rosa Hernandez was told by doctors she needed chemotherapy; however, there is a strict abortion ban in the Dominican Republic and the treatment was likely to terminate her pregnancy. At the time, she was 9 weeks along.

Now, would you care to answer the question?

Is it preferable to deny a woman vital medication causing long term damage to her physical and/or mental health to protect a fetus?

kylith

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Whats your point..?

I think it's that, contrary to your assertions, women have been denied life saving medication because they are pregnant. Do you think this is acceptable?

Kiwi in IE

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I won't pretend I have such detailed Stats but I think we can both agree that viable babies' lives are deliberately ended is such clinics..?

Can you countenance such activities in Ireland..?

No Silvio, not viable BABIES, viable FOETUSES. And of course viable foetuses are terminated in such clinics! They are abortion clinics and an abortion is the termination of a viable foetus. And yes I think 'such activities' should be available in Ireland. I think I have made that clear on numerous occasions. Your point is?

Kiwi in IE

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

But have you been denied your meds, Bannasidhe? It's a ridiculous scenario that could never ever happen, don'tcha know.

Silvio, I think The Mad Hatter was being a tad facetious!

Sycopat

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

I won't pretend I have such detailed Stats but I think we can both agree that viable babies' lives are deliberately ended is such clinics..?

Can you countenance such activities in Ireland..?

Why should anyone agree with anything you say if you can't back it up when asked to?