Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Morag

This action to email your TD to demand they legislate for the X case asap is finishing on Friday, if you haven't gotten around to used it please consider doing so now.
http://www.nwci.ie/takeaction/show-your-support-for-legislate-for-x/

MrPudding

Absolam wrote: »

To be a little more even-handed, whilst the term 'abortion' is obviously broad, for some the word is synonomous with at will termination, which carries a different connotation (again, to some) to medically neccasary termination. The former being less palatable than the latter to many people, even those without a fundamentalist religious perspective.

Which is fine, as long as this this semantic slight of hand is not used to, say for example, argue that abortions do not happen in Ireland and that they are never needed to save the life of a mother.

MrP

Bobby42

Absolam wrote: »

To be a little more even-handed, whilst the term 'abortion' is obviously broad, for some the word is synonomous with at will termination, which carries a different connotation (again, to some) to medically neccasary termination. The former being less palatable than the latter to many people, even those without a fundamentalist religious perspective.

Yeah I can understand sometimes when people hear the word abortion they only think of terminations in the context of deciding not to continue with a pregnancy.

aloyisious

The address below is for a column in today's Irish Examiner by Victoria White. It's about 18 para's long.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/victoria-white/x-case-is-irrelevant-to-savitas-death-the-problem-is-the-eighth-amendment-228618.html

There is one thing in it that puzzle's me. There's reference in it to John Rogers SC and his opinion on the 8th Amendment. Victoria say's (Para 19) we are not prepared to give the eight amendment the force of law. If it's in the constitution, surely it has the force of law and would be part of the base on which any legislation would rest?

GCU Flexible Demeanour

MrPudding wrote: »

Which is fine, as long as this this semantic slight of hand is not used to, say for example, argue that abortions do not happen in Ireland and that they are never needed to save the life of a mother.

Tbh, the semantic issue might make debate a little fruitless, but the key point is substantive. What Peter Boylan's testimony raises is the possibility that no useful law can be framed that limits access to abortion on grounds of medical assessment of risk.

aloyisious wrote: »

The address below is for a column in today's Irish Examiner by Victoria White. It's about 18 para's long.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/victoria-white/x-case-is-irrelevant-to-savitas-death-the-problem-is-the-eighth-amendment-228618.html

There is one thing in it that puzzle's me. There's reference in it to John Rogers SC and his opinion on the 8th Amendment. Victoria say's (Para 19) we are not prepared to give the eight amendment the force of law. If it's in the constitution, surely it has the force of law and would be part of the base on which any legislation would rest?

Good article. She actually tries to confront the issues. On the 'force of law', I think what she's driving at is, to access your Constitutional right to abortion, you'd have to apply to the Courts. Contrast that with, for the sake of argument, a system where a law might set out a process through which a woman might apply for an abortion on grounds of suicide, and be assessed by a statutory board of examiners with the specific function to rule in such cases. The law might specify exact criteria, and the like. If a woman wanted to avail of her Constitutional right to an abortion today, in a situation where her doctor was refusing a termination, she would need to apply to the Courts.

While people can and do apply to the Courts where they feel Constitutional rights have been denied, it's a considerable obstacle.

aloyisious

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Tbh, the semantic issue might make debate a little fruitless, but the key point is substantive. What Peter Boylan's testimony raises is the possibility that no useful law can be framed that limits access to abortion on grounds of medical assessment of risk.
Good article. She actually tries to confront the issues. On the 'force of law', I think what she's driving at is, to access your Constitutional right to abortion, you'd have to apply to the Courts. Contrast that with, for the sake of argument, a system where a law might set out a process through which a woman might apply for an abortion on grounds of suicide, and be assessed by a statutory board of examiners with the specific function to rule in such cases. The law might specify exact criteria, and the like. If a woman wanted to avail of her Constitutional right to an abortion today, in a situation where her doctor was refusing a termination, she would need to apply to the Courts.

While people can and do apply to the Courts where they feel Constitutional rights have been denied, it's a considerable obstacle.

OK, ta for that. Plus apology for error when i said there were about 18 para's in the article, then listed para 19 as the item of interest.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/limited-number-of-verdicts-available-to-savita-jury-1.1364932

Helpful little article, explaining what the job of the inquest actually amounts to

<...> Today, coroner Dr Ciarán MacLoughlin will present his summary of the case and charge the jury. The six men and five women on the jury will then retire to consider their verdict, which is expected later in the day.<...>

The verdict in an inquest is a short summary of the circumstances of death and a conclusion on the means by which death occurred. The jury may also decide to make recommendations, which have to be of a general nature and must not censure or exonerate any person in relation to the death. Dr MacLoughlin, who is a GP from Clifden and also holds a legal degree, may also choose to make some recommendations of his own.

Among the verdicts open to the jury are accidental death, death by natural causes, death by misadventure, medical misadventure, an open verdict and one of unlawful killing. Other possible verdicts such as suicide or stillbirth clearly do not apply in this instance.

Sarky

They didn't waste much time before flinging mud at Dr. Boylan:

http://www.thelifeinstitute.net/current-projects/savita-inquest/who-is-peter-boylan/

Turtwig

Sarky wrote: »

They didn't waste much time before flinging mud at Dr. Boylan:

http://www.thelifeinstitute.net/current-projects/savita-inquest/who-is-peter-boylan/

I'm surprised it took them so long. Did they not know in advance he'd at the inquest?

PopePalpatine

That /current_projects/ sub-heading creeped me out...it seems like a euphemism for "we should throw petrol bombs at his property, like our inbred US counterparts!"

Sarky

Jernal wrote: »

I'm surprised it took them so long. Did they not know in advance he'd at the inquest?

Well, yeah, but proper procedure for conservative nutbags is to only complain AFTER things don't go your way, and then to do it in the most inappropriate manner possible.

Turtwig

Sarky wrote: »

Well, yeah, but proper procedure for conservative nutbags is to only complain AFTER things don't go your way, and then to do it in the most inappropriate manner possible.

Oops, yeah, I forgot that.:o

lazygal

Sarky wrote: »

Well, yeah, but proper procedure for conservative nutbags is to only complain AFTER things don't go your way, and then to do it in the most inappropriate manner possible.

While complaining about bias in the media/inquiry/witness makeup/whatever isn't matching their agenda.

Sarky

Correction: While complaining in paper columns, tv shows, inquiries and conventions about bias in the media/inquiry/witness makeup/whatever

Obliq

".......the sepsis was caused by E.coli ESBL - a virulent bacteria which is very resistant to antibiotics and has a fatality rate of up to 60%."

WHAT? No indication of where this, ahem, statistic comes from. Jaysus. UP TO 60%. Tis lethal stuff so. We could have avoided an inquiry altogether and just asked the Life Institute.

Sarky

That'll doubtless be one of those "top medical experts" that are apparently so top and so expert that they don't even need to reveal their names, probably because everyone should know them already.

robindch

PopePalpatine wrote: »

That /current_projects/ sub-heading creeped me out...

For me, it suggests the existence of an Orwellian production line of manufactured outrage, lies and the rest.

Bobby42

Youth Defence clutching at straws.

"jury doesn't recommend legalisation of abortion"

eh, they weren't in a position to place any recommendation on legislation.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Obliq wrote: »

".......the sepsis was caused byE.coli ESBL - a virulent bacteria which is very resistant to antibiotics andhas a fatality rate of up to 60%."

WHAT? No indication of where this, ahem, statistic comesfrom. Jaysus. UP TO 60%. Tis lethal stuff so. We could have avoided an inquiryaltogether and just asked the Life Institute.

You are absolutely right to suspect and query any un-sourced statistic. However, FFS, can we just Google these claims to see which are actually worth debunking. Because the one you've picked isn't fertile ground

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17574678
J Infect. 2007 Sep;55(3):254-9. Epub 2007 Jun 14.
Mortality following bacteraemic infection caused by extendedspectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producing E. coli compared to non-ESBL producingE. coli.
<...> A significantly higher proportion of patientsdied following a bacteraemic infection caused by ESBL producing E. coli, 28/46(60.8%), compared to non-ESBL producing E. coli, 73/308 (23.7%). <...>
CONCLUSIONS:
Mortality following bacteraemic infection caused by ESBLproducing E. coli was significantly higher than non-ESBL producing E. coli.These findings have serious implications for antibiotic prescription, ascephalosporins are ineffective treatment for many E. coli infections.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Bobby42 wrote: »

Youth Defence clutching at straws.

"jury doesn't recommend legalisation of abortion"

eh, they weren't in a position to place any recommendation on legislation.

Indeed, as clearly stated by the Coroner when advising the jury. In fact, his summing-up is a fair account of the significant points that have arisen.

http://www.thejournal.ie/savita-inquest-jury-given-choice-of-two-verdicts-by-coroner-876152-Apr2013/

Dr Ciarán McLoughlin told the jury that Dr Astbury admitted there were systemic failures in the checking of the patient’s vital signs during a period of her treatment over the next seven days. Another witness Dr Peter Boylan spoke of deficiencies in the patient’s medical management.

Before discharging the jury, the coroner told the six women and five men that if they found the facts heard from witnesses – about blood samples not being acted upon and the “inordinate delay” in reporting back to the ward, about the conflict of evidence between medical and nursing staff which may not have occurred if there were separate notes and the systemic failures noted by Dr Astbury – to be deficiencies, they they could return a verdict of medical misadventure. He added that this does not infer civil or criminal liability.

He described a systems failure as “one that could affect more people in the future unless rectified”.

Addressing the controversial issue of Ireland’s abortion legislation, Dr McLoughlin said, “It is not for the court to advise the Oireachtas but they may take cognisance of these proceedings.”

He described the Medical Council’s guidelines on abortion as “very brief” and in his first recommendation to the jury, he told them they could advise the council to lay out when exactly a termination can be carried out if there is a risk to the life of the mother.

He said doctors who practice medicine in good faith should not have to labour under the threat of sanctions as severe as prison or being erased from the medical register, which puts them on a “path of ignominy and shame”.

The coroner also gave the jury eight other recommendations which it can accept or reject. It also has the power to make its own recommendations. He said nursing and medical staff should keep separate notes on patients; treatment plans should be explained so they can be understood by patients and relatives; protocols for sepsis should be written by the microbiology department in each hospital nationally and communications between staff on call and those coming on duty should be improved by dedicating time to an official handover meeting.

In his final recommendation, Dr McLaughlin recommended that no medical notes be added to the files of a deceased patient.

Bobby42

Obliq wrote: »

".......the sepsis was caused by E.coli ESBL - a virulent bacteria which is very resistant to antibiotics and has a fatality rate of up to 60%."

WHAT? No indication of where this, ahem, statistic comes from. Jaysus. UP TO 60%. Tis lethal stuff so. We could have avoided an inquiry altogether and just asked the Life Institute.

A lot of armchair microbiologists around these days.

Sarky

You can't trust them. Swivel chairs are what makes a good microbiologist. Also means you can have jousting matches in the office :pac:

Bannasidhe

Sarky wrote: »

You can't trust them. Swivel chairs are what makes a good microbiologist. Also means you can have jousting matches in the office :pac:

Swivel chairs are essential for all academics. :cool:

Morag

Just encase anyone wants to get involved or come to the next rally.

http://www.abortionrightscampaign.ie/calendar/upcoming/

April 22, 2013
Open Meeting for all Working Groups

Our monthly meetings provide an easy entry point for people who want to get more involved. If you are receiving updates but would like to become more active in the Abortion Rights Campaign, please feel free to come along to our next meeting on
22nd April 2013 at 7pm in the Teacher’s Club, 36 Parnell Square West, Dublin 1.


April 29, 2013
Legislate for X Protest – Action on X

Action on X demand X legislation by the summer. It must include:
• The risk of suicide as grounds for abortion
• No more than two medical practitioners’ opinions to approve an abortion
• State-wide access
• Access to abortion if a foetus has a fatal abnormality and cannot survive
• Decriminalisation of abortion

A large majority support X legislation – shown in recent Irish Times and Sunday Business Post polls. The Dáil must act for the majority – not defer to a minority.

An EU conference on Gender Equality will take place in Dublin Castle on April 29. Come and demand that the Irish government legislates to ensure women get equal medical treatment to men: the right to any treatment needed to protect their lives.

Join Action on X at City Hall Plaza, April 29th – 6pm

aloyisious

Just breezing through a downloaded film, and an Ad from the Life Institute pop's up about pregnant women, abortion and suicide. It quotes Prof Patricia Casey, Mater Hospital as saying that she had seen 400 pregnant women and it was her opinion that abortion was no help to pregnant women, with reference to suicidality.

Edit: on a line with this, has anyone seen/read about a proposal for any pregnant woman claiming she was feeling suicidal because of it and wanted the pregnancy terminated, said proposal that the woman must face a board of two (2) doctors and four (4) Psychiatrists to evaluate her. This sound's like a deliberate act of stacking the deck/stringing out the ultimate decision to avoid going along with the woman's wishes. To me such a panel may as well consist of two Bishops and four Cardinals, just keeping things "status quo".

The Black Oil

Was listening briefly to the radio yesterday and some guy, a TD, I think, said we should hold more Oireachtas hearings...

GCU Flexible Demeanour

aloyisious wrote: »

<...> to avoid going along with the woman's wishes. <...>

A panel of six does seem excessive, and I'd suggest chiefly reflects the problem of getting any proposal to legislate for the suicide ground past Fine Gael.

However, in approaching the issue, is it correct to describe a compulsion to suicide as a "wish"? IIRC, we've had posts on the suicide issue on this thread. If anything emerged from that, I think it was some level of recognitiion that, while suicide could be a perfectly rational response to a particular situation, it could also be evidence of mental illness. The suicide ground, if we take it seriously, simply is complex and is unlikely to be resolved by seeing it only as a free agent expressing a wish.

Bannasidhe

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

A panel of six does seem excessive, and I'd suggest chiefly reflects the problem of getting any proposal to legislate for the suicide ground past Fine Gael.

However, in approaching the issue, is it correct to describe a compulsion to suicide as a "wish"? IIRC, we've had posts on the suicide issue on this thread. If anything emerged from that, I think it was some level of recognitiion that, while suicide could be a perfectly rational response to a particular situation, it could also be evidence of mental illness. The suicide ground, if we take it seriously, simply is complex and is unlikely to be resolved by seeing it only as a free agent expressing a wish.

First things I though of in relation to this panel of 6 is who pays them?

How easy will it be to get 6 separate appointments or does a panel have to be arranged?

What sort of time frame are we talking about from time pregnancy is confirmed to sign off by 6th panelist?

It seems to me to be excessive, unworkable in practical terms, possibly expensive and another 'Irish' solution.

robindch

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

A panel of six

I'm glad they picked a number that won't result in a tie.

Bannasidhe

robindch wrote: »

I'm glad they picked a number that won't result in a tie.

I'm amazed they didn't decide everyone with a relevant medical qualification who practices with a 100km radius must sign off on it.