Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

PopePalpatine

swampgas wrote: »

The galling thing is these women had a choice, and they now want to deny other women the same choice they had. It's really quite perverse. With choice comes the possibility of regretting that choice. You really can't have risk free choices in life.

The likes of "Women Hurt" remind me of Samuel L. Mothafuckin' Jackson's character in "Django Unchained".

Sarky

Sort of relevant (also any excuse(Also also Really NSFW. Or polite company)):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acQ8_9SmphY

Hotblack Desiato

Reminiscent of the 'self loathing Jew'

GCU Flexible Demeanour

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/maternity-hospital-masters-differ-over-suicide-provision-in-planned-legislation-1.1398058

<...>Dr Mahony said a woman who was intent on suicide was indeed at risk of dying. She needed to be assessed appropriately, believed, and expert psychiatric care provided.

Dr Sam Coulter Smyth, master of the Rotunda Hospital, said the loss of life from self-destruction was an extraordinarily rare situation, with incidence of suicide in pregnancy of the order of one in a half-million pregnancies, as per UK figures.

‘No evidence’
“Our psychiatric colleagues tell us that there is currently no available evidence to show that termination of pregnancy is a treatment for suicidal ideation or intent and, as obstetricians, we are required to provide and practise evidence-based treatment,” he added. “It, therefore, creates an ethical dilemma for any obstetrician who is requested to perform a termination of pregnancy with the treatment of somebody who has suicidal ideation or intent.’’ <...>

Again, this issue just won't go away. It's like a boomerang made out of bullsh*t.

Turtwig

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Again, this issue just won't go away. It's like a boomerang made out of bullsh*t.

It's quite simple really. No evidence exists but that's because no substantial research into the effects of abortion on suicidal ideation has been carried out. It might turn out that abortions during SI cause a plethora of problems or it could equally turn out that abortions during SI are the solution for the life, the universe and everything in between - we just don't know.

In my view, this isn't grounds to definitely rule out abortion as a treatment, because each individual case in different and you never know when or where there may exist the exceptional case where an individual does need the pregnancy to be terminated - that provision should be provided for in law and regulations.

Obliq

Jernal wrote: »

In my view, this isn't grounds to definitely rule out abortion as a treatment, because each individual case in different and you never know when or where there may exist the exceptional case where an individual does need the pregnancy to be terminated - that provision should be provided for in law and regulations.

Has to be, because that's what we had to vote on. The people spoke and answered the question put to them at the time of the referendum. No matter that it was a stupid question to allow a get-out clause from having to ask us the right questions. Now it's a worse sad and sorry mess. Anyone surprised?

Turtwig

Obliq wrote: »

Has to be, because that's what we had to vote on. The people spoke and answered the question put to them at the time of the referendum. No matter that it was a stupid question to allow a get-out clause from having to ask us the right questions. Now it's a worse sad and sorry mess. Anyone surprised?

Oh yeah, I agree given the current situation it has to happen. I was more referring to the idea that, regardless of there being a mandate from the X-case or referendums, it should still happen.

Obliq

Jernal wrote: »

Oh yeah, I agree given the current situation it has to happen. I was more referring to the idea that, regardless of there being a mandate from the X-case or referendums, it should still happen.

Yup.

Turtwig

Looks like Iona's psychiatry focus did have an tiny impact, but they got a bigger problem.

A new opinion poll shows a majority in favour of allowing abortion on grounds of suicide, although support has slipped over the past three months.
The Millward Brown poll for tomorrow's Sunday Independent also shows an increase in support for Sinn Féin. Carried out over 12 days running up to last Thursday among just under 1,000 voters around the country, the poll measures support for allowing abortion in a range of situations. 53% believe abortion is acceptable where the woman's life is threatened by reason of suicide – 5% lower than in February. 72% say abortion should be allowed in cases of rape, 78% where there is a threat to life other than suicide, 69% where there is a long term threat to health, with just 28% supporting a woman's right to choose to have an abortion for other reasons.

Imagine if those were referendums results and the piece highlighted in bold had to be legislated for by our polticians. :eek:

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Jernal wrote: »

It's quite simple really. No evidence exists but that's because no substantial research into the effects of abortion on suicidal ideation has been carried out. It might turn out that abortions during SI cause a plethora of problems or it could equally turn out that abortions during SI are the solution for the life, the universe and everything in between - we just don't know.

In fairness, if it was simple there would be some kind of consensus within the medical profession. There clearly isn't. I can agree, from a policy making point of view, it's all a bit of a clusterf*ck. The one bit of the X case judgement that makes no sense is the bit that the electorate have confirmed by referendum.

But I'd suggest, if there was an order of priority, you'd expect non-viable fetus to be inserted as a ground long before we attempted to push back the frontiers of human knowledge by including suicide. And that wouldn't have any direct connection to a threat to life (thereby requiring yet another referendum).

However, Irish policy-making is normally along the lines that we see. We're expending a lot of attention on a policy non-issue, and ignoring the obvious signals from reasonably sane and informed stakeholders, that we're embedding a little bit of incoherence in the legislative code.

Turtwig

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

In fairness, if it was simple there would be some kind of consensus within the medical profession. There clearly isn't. .

You can't have consensus when there's little to no research carried out. Really, all that can be said about the suicide issue is pure speculation. I appreciate it's a tough policy issue but expecting a scientific resolution in the next few days or months is unrealistic. Talking about abortion as being good or bad for suicidal ideation is just wrong - that's where it's simple.

There probably is no evidence that abortion is a treatment for the flu but we haven't outlawed that specific case. Why don't we outlaw each and every malady that couldn't possibly fit the criteria of there being a serious risk to the life of the woman? Or we could just be practical and leave it up to doctors to determine when the woman's life is sufficiently at risk that an abortion could be carried out and not just single out suicide because we're woefully ignorant.

aloyisious

Jernal wrote: »

It's quite simple really. No evidence exists but that's because no substantial research into the effects of abortion on suicidal ideation has been carried out. It might turn out that abortions during SI cause a plethora of problems or it could equally turn out that abortions during SI are the solution for the life, the universe and everything in between - we just don't know.

In my view, this isn't grounds to definitely rule out abortion as a treatment, because each individual case in different and you never know when or where there may exist the exceptional case where an individual does need the pregnancy to be terminated - that provision should be provided for in law and regulations.

Yup, any kind of study on suicidation, or pregnant women who've followed through on suicide threats on being denied access to abortion here, would have to be largely Post Mortem in nature, hardly the best way to get factual evidence to base a factual study on, unless in fact those opposed to abortion being allowed have no problem playing God with the lives of both the pregnant women, and the foetus they are allegedly determined to save, like lab-rat subjects to experimented-on.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Jernal wrote: »

There probably is no evidence that abortion is a treatment for the flu but we haven't outlawed that specific case. Why don't we outlaw each and every malady that couldn't possibly fit the criteria of there being a serious risk to the life of the woman? Or we could just be practical and leave it up to doctors to determine when the woman's life is sufficiently at risk that an abortion could be carried out and not just single out suicide because we're woefully ignorant.

But, in fairness, isn't this skirting around the point, which is the inclusion of a mental health ground. (Incidently, all the time in these exchanges, the back of my mind is going "and here we are again, trapped in this pointless and largely irrelevant discussion about suicide.")

I'd absolutely agree that you wouldn't envisage legislation specifying two lists of ailments, one in which abortion was allowed and the other where it isn't. But the point about a mental health ground is it raises issues like the possibility of diminished capacity to make decisions. That's why we've guys like the Master of the Rotunda and a reasonably large amount of psychiatrists saying that linking the two things in this manner is just dumb. It absolutely is like saying we'll consider abortion as a possible cure for the flu, just because the Supreme Court found the only way of allowing a pregnant 14 year old to have an abortion was because she said she had the flu,

I mean, we can take it to ridiculous extremes. We can ask if women who are taking cough mixture should be deemed to have diminished responsibility, on grounds that it makes you drowsy. But the whole discussion around suicide is bullsh*t. Pure, Frankfurtian bullsh*t. Right down to the Master of Holles Street saying she finds the suggestion that a woman would lie to get an abortion personally insulting. Bullsh*t.

Turtwig

Lots of illnesses will affect a person's mental capacity in certain ways. Doctors and Psychiatrists are more than capable of assessing whether someone's decisions making has been compromised. Many folks with mental illness can choose to to put together advance decisions in a recorded document. Should a future situation arise where the severity of the illness has compromised the competency of their thought processes. Any treatment other than emergency based procedures would have to approved by the patient's third party who was given responsibility in making decisions for unforeseen circumstances or circumstances where the doctors think it's best to go against the patient's original wishes.


Personally, I think the "capacity to make decisions" is a total red herring. Physical illnesses can also potentially affect someone's capacity for decision making.

I also find it scary how many people, including those who are mentally ill, believe that being mentally ill somehow means you have a guaranteed disposition towards incompetent decision making.

What's the difference between:
Women will lie to seek to an abortion.
Black people will lie to see an abortion.

Personally, I think both statements are offensive. Some women may lie, but that'll have nothing to do with their sex, it'll be down to their personality.
There's an implicit assumption being made that women who seek abortions are going to be dishonest,sly and sneaky. Which is quite the leap of faith to make given that you won't even know their individual circumstances that drive them into seeking the abortion in the first place. What if they're genuine?

lazygal

The other thing about the 'floodgates' argument is that it implies women don't really want to be pregnant and have babies, and only do so because they don't have the option of abortion on request, no questions asked. I find that so insulting, like there aren't couples trying desperately hard to get pregnant or women going to all sorts of lengths to try to conceive. Its almost as if women have to be forced into pregnancy and birth, and by even cracking open the slim chances of getting an abortion on mental health grounds will lead to women queueing up for their abortions after every monthly pregnancy. I've spent time reading trying to conceive threads on this and other forums and those who keep pontificating about how the 'floodgates' will be open might do well to read about what women and men go through when they're having difficulties conceiving, and open their eyes a bit to the other side of the coin.

lazygal

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/05/19/going-postal/#comments

Also, anyone got one of these in the door recently?

Bobby42

This sort of stuff reeks of desperation.

Bannasidhe

lazygal wrote: »

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/05/19/going-postal/#comments

Also, anyone got one of these in the door recently?

Cork Pro-Life eh?

Please let them come to my door...oh please please. I shall unleash the jack russells of hell!

Obliq

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Cork Pro-Life eh?

+1
Please, oh please let them go to Bann's door.....

HurtLocker

lazygal wrote: »

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/05/19/going-postal/#comments

Also, anyone got one of these in the door recently?

Lol. They godwinned it.

Sarky

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Cork Pro-Life eh?

Please let them come to my door...oh please please. I shall unleash the jack russells of hell!

Ooh, we could have a competition to see who deals with them in the most interesting way!

Galvasean

Ring him and put on a bad German accent?

"Everyvone vas on vacation!

Ve vere invited!!!!"

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Jernal wrote: »

Personally, I think the "capacity to make decisions" is a total red herring. Physical illnesses can also potentially affect someone's capacity for decision making.
I also find it scary how many people, including those who are mentally ill, believe that being mentally ill somehow means you have a guaranteed disposition towards incompetent decision making.

In fairness, this is a little hyperbolic. As I said

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

We can ask if women who are taking cough mixture should be deemed to have diminished responsibility, on grounds that it makes you drowsy.

We don't have to go to these ridiculous extremes to appreciate the reasonably coherent and comprehendible view that if someone presents demanding a particular thing and threatening suicide if it's not delivered, the correct response is not necessarily to deliver the demand.

Jernal wrote: »

What's the difference between:
Women will lie to seek to an abortion.
Black people will lie to see an abortion.
Personally, I think both statements are offensive. Some women may lie, but that'll have nothing to do with their sex, it'll be down to their personality.

I'm afraid, as I see it, this is just playing around with language to see if grounds for offence can be manufactured. For what it's worth, the difference between those two statements is that only women need abortions. Samuel L Jackson will never be a position where he'd potentially need to confront Irish abortion law.

What's more germaine is how offence is pretended by reading a reasonably coherent view as something that it's evidently not. If we say Cretan women will lie to obtain abortions, we're not saying all Cretan women are liars. Now, we might need to confirm that we'd see the word "Some" as implicit there. In the political context, if we don't, then clearly some will pretend there's an implicit "all", so they can claim offence. But I don't think anyone thinks that an Irish consultant with an annual income that would rival a small African country will ever need to fake symptoms to obtain anything at all.

That said, as always, I'm getting caught in the very discussion that I think is irrelevant. The point is not whether Irish women should feel offended because some say that a subset of the subset of Irish women who seek abortions may lie in the hope of being able to access a service domestically. The point is that drafting legislation that seems to expect abortion to be prescribed as a treatment for suicide is a little gaga.

Obliq

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

What's more germaine is how offence is pretended by reading a reasonably coherent view as something that it's evidently not.

No pretending to offence here lovey. I've been telling you about the offence this whole bolloxing legislative mess is causing for quite a long time actually, as have the rest of us.

Have a reminder:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=82325795&postcount=3671

...and while you're about it, take a little look around the comments at that time and consider the pretence in this ......."That said, as always, I'm getting caught in the very discussion that I think is irrelevant." Mmmmm, you've struggled SO HARD to stay away from this very discussion alright. Well done you :rolleyes:

Corkfeen

Sarky wrote: »

Ooh, we could have a competition to see who deals with them in the most interesting way!

I'm not sure if they'll come to our house. It's in the middle of nowhere, only jehovah witnesses for us .

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Obliq wrote: »

No pretending to offence here lovey. I've been telling you about the offence this whole bolloxing legislative mess is causing for quite a long time actually, as have the rest of us.

Ah, yeah, I've never said that manufactured offence wasn't fun, or that it was inconsistent with a warm feeling of self-righteousness. Just that it doesn't constitute deliberation.

Obliq wrote: »

Have a reminder:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=82325795&postcount=3671

...and while you're about it, take a little look around the comments at that time and consider the pretence in this ......."That said, as always, I'm getting caught in the very discussion that I think is irrelevant." Mmmmm, you've struggled SO HARD to stay away from this very discussion alright. Well done you :rolleyes:

I've had a look back, and wouldn't change anything I said. I'd still reject an attempt to rush past a point by someone ranting about how angry they are.

wp_rathead

Oh christ, he is back

@declanganley wrote:

'Once more into the breach dear friends'. Give lifts to friends & neighbours, organise transport, get to Merrion Sq June 8th. #Vigil4Life

Delirium

Majority of FF Senators and TDs now believed to support abortion legislation

A majority of Fianna Fáil TDs and Senators are believed to be in favour in principle of the Protection of Life during Pregnancy Bill, according to party sources.

However, “a significant number’, as described by one source, particularly in the Seanad, remain strongly opposed to the suicide provision. Some Senators are privately saying they will vote against the Bill when it comes before the Oireachtas if the party decides to support it.

Fianna Fáil decided earlier this month to defer a decision on the matter until party health spokesman Billy Kelleher makes a report on the Oireachtas committee hearings on the heads of the Bill which conclude tomorrow.

Turtwig

wprathead wrote: »

Oh christ, he is back

I think you quoted the wrong tweet. Nothing about Christ being back in it.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

On a practical note, would the Constitution allow Sarah Connor to obtain an abortion?