Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Sarky

You have a very, um, liberal definition for insult, eireannBEAR...

eireannBEAR

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Well, not alone are anti-abortionists anti-life, they are also anti-fun as well.

this post is off topic and offensive brian please stop,thanks.

MagicMarker

bumper234 wrote: »

How do you know rats don't have souls? How do you know humans do have souls?

Is this a serious question or what?

eireannBEAR

Mark Hamill wrote: »

FYI, I support the women who get the abortions.

It would be great if no-one ever needed an abortion, if no-one was ever raped or got sick or suffered from mental health issues, or foetuses never got sick or malformed, of if everyone felt they had the social of self support they felt they needed to go through with the pregnancy. But, well, that's not the world your god created, is it? I would rather be pragmatic and help those I can, than be absolutist and help no-one.

im not religious at all what do you mean by the ''your god'' comment???

Delirium

Psychiatrist criticises ‘impractical’ Creighton amendments

Ms Creighton has suggested changes to provide for a speedy assessment of whether a woman was suicidal, dialectical behaviour therapy, a twice a week evaluation and a care team meeting once every two weeks to assess the patient’s stability.

Dr Anthony McCarthy of Holles Street maternity hospital described Ms Creighton’s proposed amendments as “extraordinary”.

He said it was “totally impractical” to expect psychiatrists to complete assessments within two hours and for social workers to complete a psycho-social assessment within twenty-four hours especially as “some emergency departments in the country do not have a liaison psychiatrist - full stop”.

Mark Hamill

eireannBEAR wrote: »

im not religious at all what do you mean by the ''your god'' comment???

Then where do you get your absolutism from?

eireannBEAR

koth wrote: »

Psychiatrist criticises ‘impractical’ Creighton amendments

one?? you are better off ignoring psychiatrists as 90% of them oppose suicide in this bill.

Zombrex

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Well, not alone are anti-abortionists anti-life, they are also anti-fun as well.

Well my theory is that the anti-abortionist side isn't really anything to do with being "pro-life", it is to do with not liking the idea of woman having sex without "suffering the consequences", and being greatly unnerved by the idea of unthinking sexual activity.

Most anti-abortion people who get very worked up about the "poor baby" being terminated don't bat an eyelid at the fact that 8 out of 10 "poor babies" are naturally miscarried by the woman's own body, for various reasons to there being something wrong with the pregnancy to the timing just not being right. Nature is far from precious with these "poor innocent babies".

But all that is fine because it is "natural". What they don't like is a woman deciding to terminate her pregnancy. You shouldn't be allowed do that because you had sex and you must now face any problems that having sex brings. You can't just have sex without thinking and then later decide not to face the consequences of that.

Like most things that have strong religious side to it, it is all really about hang ups over sex

eireannBEAR

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Then where do you get your absolutism from?

science where do you get yours???

do you even know what i support or have you made up a picture in your head?

Mark Hamill

eireannBEAR wrote: »

one?? you are better off ignoring psychiatrists as 90% of them oppose suicide in this bill.

Link?

bumper234

MagicMarker wrote: »

Is this a serious question or what?

Of course it's a serious question. You have made a statement of fact that i would like you to back up with evidence.

bumper234

eireannBEAR wrote: »

this post is off topic and offensive brian please stop,thanks.

Back seat moddimentz

MagicMarker

bumper234 wrote: »

Of course it's a serious question. You have made a statement of fact that i would like you to back up with evidence.

I was being facetious.

Mark Hamill

eireannBEAR wrote: »

science where do you get yours???

What science? Because all the science in the past few pages has completely contradicted you.

eireannBEAR wrote: »

do you even know what i support or have you made up a picture in your head?

If there is a picture in my head then I am sure that you posted it there.

Explain to me exactly what you support then. Where and when can an abortion be got, in your opinion?

Delirium

eireannBEAR wrote: »

one?? you are better off ignoring psychiatrists as 90% of them oppose suicide in this bill.

Any source for that claim?

And what has that to do with Dr McCarthy stating that Creightons amendments are totally impractical?

eireannBEAR

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CD0QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.ie%2Firish-news%2Fmore-than-100-psychiatrists-disagree-with-abortion-proposal-29222046.html&ei=ay_cUeLFM-nm7AaUtYG4DQ&usg=AFQjCNHlZlXEV-eoj1RK7AhGq5UCRv2VEA&sig2=4VLxIpq9loofW2xcvS0vZA&bvm=bv.48705608,d.ZGU

90% polled.

bumper234

MagicMarker wrote: »

I was being facetious.

I know!!!! I was being sarcastic

Doctor Strange

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Link?

When I asked yesterday, I got a response saying the poster "is too busy to provide one" and we should search their posts for it.

oldrnwisr

eireannBEAR wrote: »

this regards rats and states that the findings are not comparable to a women???

You may want to re-read the article in question before making such an obtuse statement.

First of all, the article opens with:

"One of the findings common to experiments with laboratory animals and to surveys conducted on human subjects ..."

Furthermore, the author refers to studies on humans in defense of his conclusion about the the foetus. Where the author references rats alone it is to refer to studies which had sought, at that time, to examine the mechanism by which such a relationship occurs.

However, the conclusion drawn by the author in the article is borne out by the experimental obstetric evidence:

Transplacental Passage of Ketamine after Intravenous Administration

So in the context of Mark's original point about the efficacy of fetal anaesthesia delivered to the mother the article I linked to previously does indeed support Mark's point.

Mark Hamill

eireannBEAR wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CD0QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.ie%2Firish-news%2Fmore-than-100-psychiatrists-disagree-with-abortion-proposal-29222046.html&ei=ay_cUeLFM-nm7AaUtYG4DQ&usg=AFQjCNHlZlXEV-eoj1RK7AhGq5UCRv2VEA&sig2=4VLxIpq9loofW2xcvS0vZA&bvm=bv.48705608,d.ZGU

90% polled.

Without even going through the article, the very first line contradicts you:
"Nearly one in three of the country’s psychiatrists...".
One in three is 33%, not 90%

MagicMarker

eireannBEAR wrote: »

science where do you get yours???

You realise science is the reason abortions are so accessible?

Mark Hamill

eireannBEAR wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CD0QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.ie%2Firish-news%2Fmore-than-100-psychiatrists-disagree-with-abortion-proposal-29222046.html&ei=ay_cUeLFM-nm7AaUtYG4DQ&usg=AFQjCNHlZlXEV-eoj1RK7AhGq5UCRv2VEA&sig2=4VLxIpq9loofW2xcvS0vZA&bvm=bv.48705608,d.ZGU

90% polled.

And the second half of the first line reveals it for a strawman:

NEARLY one in three of the country’s psychiatrists who treat adults is concerned at the government’s proposal to introduce legislation which would allow a pregnant and suicidal have an abortion as treatment.

No-one is proposing abortion as a treatment for suicide ideation.

eireannBEAR

Mark Hamill wrote: »

What science? Because all the science in the past few pages has completely contradicted you.


If there is a picture in my head then I am sure that you posted it there.

Explain to me exactly what you support then. Where and when can an abortion be got, in your opinion?

suicide is not a valid reason for abortion infact in the research done its proven to cause more damage to women than a full term birth women who have had abortions are at a 30% greater risk of commiting suicide.

link previously posted.

eireannBEAR

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Without even going through the article, the very first line contradicts you:
"Nearly one in three of the country’s psychiatrists...".
One in three is 33%, not 90%

no 90% of psychiatrists polled. other have not made a statement eitherway.

in that case divide the 10% of pro choice in to the total number of psychiatrists and only 3% would support this law.

this.

Mark Hamill

eireannBEAR wrote: »

suicide is not a valid reason for abortion infact in the research done its proven to cause more damage to women than a full term birth women who have had abortions are at a 30% greater risk of commiting suicide.

link previously posted.

And another link previously posted showed that to be bunk. There is no increased risk of suicide for women from having an abortion.

Delirium

eireannBEAR wrote: »

one?? you are better off ignoring psychiatrists as 90% of them oppose suicide in this bill.

eireannBEAR wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CD0QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.ie%2Firish-news%2Fmore-than-100-psychiatrists-disagree-with-abortion-proposal-29222046.html&ei=ay_cUeLFM-nm7AaUtYG4DQ&usg=AFQjCNHlZlXEV-eoj1RK7AhGq5UCRv2VEA&sig2=4VLxIpq9loofW2xcvS0vZA&bvm=bv.48705608,d.ZGU

90% polled.

So 90% of 30% of the total psychiatrists disagree. That's 32% of the psychiatrists, rather than the 90% you originally claimed.

Mark Hamill

eireannBEAR wrote: »

no 90% of psychiatrists polled. other have not made a statement eitherway.

Which would be fine if you hadn't said: "90% of [psychiatrists] oppose suicide in this bill." Your mistake here has tripled the value that your reference supports (ignoring whether or not the reference itself is valid), so it makes me wonder what else you have said that is also greatly exaggerated.

eireannBEAR

eireannBEAR wrote: »

no 90% of psychiatrists polled. other have not made a statement eitherway.

in that case divide the 10% of pro choice in to the total number of psychiatrists and only 3% would support this law.

this,

oldrnwisr

eireannBEAR wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CD0QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.ie%2Firish-news%2Fmore-than-100-psychiatrists-disagree-with-abortion-proposal-29222046.html&ei=ay_cUeLFM-nm7AaUtYG4DQ&usg=AFQjCNHlZlXEV-eoj1RK7AhGq5UCRv2VEA&sig2=4VLxIpq9loofW2xcvS0vZA&bvm=bv.48705608,d.ZGU

90% polled.

OK, I don't know whether you're being deliberately misleading but I'm willing, for the moment, to give you the benefit of the doubt.

The article states that there are 350 psychiatrists in total in Ireland. It then states that 302 of these were contacted or 86.3%. It then says that only 40% of this group responded to the survey. Therefore only 34.5% of all psychiatrists were polled. Of those psychiatrists, 113 agreed with the statement. Therefore only 32.2% of psychiatrists have a concern with the legislation and not 90% as you claimed:

eireannBEAR wrote: »

one?? you are better off ignoring psychiatrists as 90% of them oppose suicide in this bill.

Now as for your other mis-statement, abortion is not associated with negative psychological outcomes as this study shows:


Induced First-Trimester Abortion and Risk of Mental Disorder

This study shows that the incidence rate of psychiatric contact in those seeking first-term abortions went from 14.6 per 1000 person-years before abortion to 15.2 after. The 95% C.I. of the two groups overlapped, showing that there is no evidence to suggest that there is any negative psychological impact arising from abortion.
Pregnancy on the other hand is associated with significant increased negative psychological impact with incidence rates rising from 3.9 before to 6.7 after.

So, again your claim that:

eireannBEAR wrote: »

suicide is not a valid reason for abortion infact in the research done its proven to cause more damage to women than a full term birth women who have had abortions are at a 30% greater risk of commiting suicide.

link previously posted.

is wrong.

eireannBEAR

oldrnwisr wrote: »

OK, I don't know whether you're being deliberately misleading but I'm willing, for the moment, to give you the benefit of the doubt.

The article states that there are 350 psychiatrists in total in Ireland. It then states that 302 of these were contacted or 86.3%. It then says that only 40% of this group responded to the survey. Therefore only 34.5% of all psychiatrists were polled. Of those psychiatrists, 113 agreed with the statement. Therefore only 32.2% of psychiatrists have a concern with the legislation and not 90% as you claimed:




Now as for your other mis-statement, abortion is not associated with negative psychological outcomes as this study shows:


Induced First-Trimester Abortion and Risk of Mental Disorder

This study shows that the incidence rate of psychiatric contact in those seeking first-term abortions went from 14.6 per 1000 person-years before abortion to 15.2 after. The 95% C.I. of the two groups overlapped, showing that there is no evidence to suggest that there is any negative psychological impact arising from abortion.
Pregnancy on the other hand is associated with significant increased negative psychological impact with incidence rates rising from 3.9 before to 6.7 after.

So, again your claim that:



is wrong.

not true.

and also how can you suggest that psychiatrist that did not respond support the this law,thats crazy...where were these vast majority of psychiatrist during the senate hearings??? :eek: