Pregnant woman dies in UCHG after being refused a termination

tolosenc

Stheno wrote: »

No offence, but no man would ever be in the situation where his medical treatment would be considered in term of the impact on a foetus, so that's a complete red herring.

Well, you thoroughly dismantled that straw man! Good job!

Stheno

hotmail.com wrote: »

Of course, but the point is that if there was similar situation a man would not be treated the same. Did you not understand the point I was making?

No to be honest. The woman was pregnant and begging for an abortion.
A man would never be in that situation.

Regardless of the gender here, the law ultimately discerned the treatment of the patient.

Trying to say Oh if it was a man it would be different is a complete strawman in my opinion.

hotmail.com

Stheno wrote: »

No to be honest. The woman was pregnant and begging for an abortion.
A man would never be in that situation.

Regardless of the gender here, the law ultimately discerned the treatment of the patient.

Trying to say Oh if it was a man it would be different is a complete strawman in my opinion.

The point is clearly that the law is sexist towards women. Do you seriously not see that?

I.E. if men were in a position to have children, abortion would be legalised centuries ago.

Seaneh

hotmail.com wrote: »

The point is clearly that the law is sexist towards women. Do you seriously not see that?

I.E. if men were in a position to have children, abortion would be legalised centuries ago.

There are no words...

Stheno

irishfeen wrote: »

Dead right, it would be initially proved illegal by silly laws but the will of the people would eventually clear the doctor through the High Court/European Court.

Crimes committed here are regulated/judged by Irish law.

The doctor would be found guilty according to our current law, despite Irish Supreme Court and European Court of Human RIghts rulings.

jill_valentine

tony81 wrote: »

God works in mysterious ways.

You are an absolutely disgusting human being.

seenitall

irishfeen wrote: »

Dead right, it would be initially proved illegal by silly laws but the will of the people would eventually clear the doctor through the High Court/European Court.

Eventually... but in the eventual cases that present, the eventual doctors, for lord knows what silly reason, are reluctant to act counter the laws of the land...

Stheno

hotmail.com wrote: »

The point is clearly that the law is sexist towards women. Do you seriously not see that?

I.E. if men were in a position to have children, abortion would be legalised centuries ago.

No the law cannot be sexist in an instance where one gender is capable of an act that another gender is not.

Giving birth/carrying a child to term/aborting a child would fall under that status.

Stheno

tolosenc wrote: »

I can scarcely imagine what further horrors the Catholic church can inflict on this country. Rape and abuse of countless children, psychological abuse and shaming of women... They are a disgrace to the Christian faith. I'm a tolerant person, but any such organisation should be permanently banished from this country.

Tolosenc, it's the govt. not the church to blame here. The church lost their influence in this matter when the public voted for limited abortion twenty years ago.

The govt. haven't implemented the wishes of the people

They are the disgrace, not the Church in this instance.

hotmail.com

Stheno wrote: »

No the law cannot be sexist in an instance where one gender is capable of an act that another gender is not.

Giving birth/carrying a child to term/aborting a child would fall under that status.

I really don't think you see what point I'm making regarding the sexist law that prohibits women from having an abortion in this country. My thesis is that if men were the ones that had children, then abortion would be legalised ages ago.

There is a clear attitude that women do not have the right to decide how they should deal with their own bodies among some people in this country, including yourself. Some people, including yourself, believe that women should have a baby against their wishes. Pretty shameful.

irishfeen

Stheno wrote: »

Crimes committed here are regulated/judged by Irish law.

The doctor would be found guilty according to our current law, despite Irish Supreme Court and European Court of Human RIghts rulings.

seenitall wrote: »

Eventually... but in the eventual cases that present, the eventual doctors, for lord knows what silly reason, are reluctant to act counter the laws of the land...

Yes so eventually any doctor would be cleared of all charges as to the will of the people in the many referendums held, I know it would be a brave doctor to take on the state but surely any life is worth saving if deep down they know in their heart it is the right thing to do (As to the 1992 amendment - the will of the people)

MagicSean

hotmail.com wrote: »

No justification for saying that this is a "Catholic country". I well believe that this was said as many people still believe that this is a Catholic country. Shameful and disgusting.

Would a man have been treated the same way? No bloody way.

A pregnant man would.

And according to the last census this is a Catholic country. A look at our laws on same sex marriage an abortion would also support that view.

jill_valentine

Stheno wrote: »

No the law cannot be sexist in an instance where one gender is capable of an act that another gender is not.

Giving birth/carrying a child to term/aborting a child would fall under that status.

Sexist may be the wrong word in the strictest terms, but the poster's point is clear.

While situations like this are permitted to happen, it is the expressed attitude of the Irish state that women are to understand that their rights over their own life, health and bodies are subjective in a way that those of men are not.

Men cannot get pregnant, so their lives and bodies are unquestionably their own. But women can, and so their sovereignty over themselves is guaranteed only until pregnancy, in which case, suddenly a bunch of strangers get to make decisions about them that could potentially result in their death.

seenitall

irishfeen wrote: »

Yes so eventually any doctor would be cleared of all charges as to the will of the people in the many referendums held, I know it would be a brave doctor to take on the state but surely any life is worth saving if deep down they know in their heart it is the right thing to do (As to the 1992 amendment - the will of the people)

I think you missed my point there by a mile, irishfeen. But never mind, it's late and I have to go to sleep.

My thoughts are with the young woman's family, RIP.

Mods, sorry about the LOLs and sarcasm, got carried away with anger (and it was on her behalf).

endacl

Condolences to the poor woman's husband on the loss of his wife and child. A little ashamed of my nation on reading this. Time to sort this sh1te out once and for all. It won't affect me, but it might affect my sister.

hotmail.com

MagicSean wrote: »

A pregnant man would.

And according to the last census this is a Catholic country. A look at our laws on same sex marriage an abortion would also support that view.

We are a republic where all people are treated equally. I'm sorry but are you being deliberately silly? Just because there is a majority of Catholics in the country doesn't make it a Catholic country. There is a separation of church and state.

Stheno

hotmail.com wrote: »

I really don't think you see what point I'm making regarding the sexist law that prohibits women from having an abortion in this country. My thesis is that if men were the ones that had children, then abortion would be legalised ages ago.

There is a clear attitude that women do not have the right to decide how they should deal with their own bodies among some people in this country, including yourself. Some people, including yourself, believe that women should have a baby against their wishes. Pretty shameful.

Actually since I was 19 and voted for the first time (and travelled for two hours to vote as I was in college) I have always believed in the right of women to have an abortion.

I personally wouldn't have one under most circumstances, but can imagine ones where I would

That right is precious to me.
Your argument is a complete strawman on the grounds of gender bias, who knows? If men were the ones to carry children women might be more dominant in society from day one.

Ridiculous argument. The fact this is a very conservative country that has allowed it's government to ignore a mandate from a majority of voters to allow abortion in limited circumstances which may have saved this woman's life is of far more import to me than your silly gender argument.

irishfeen wrote: »

Yes so eventually any doctor would be cleared of all charges as to the will of the people in the many referendums held, I know it would be a brave doctor to take on the state but surely any life is worth saving if deep down they know in their heart it is the right thing to do (As to the 1992 amendment - the will of the people)

And after years in prison and ostracisation from their profession the doctor is declared innocent, what do they do? I'd rather work within the system, and use it to garner support and action, as this article seems to be doing, then ruin my life.

In fact if we do ever see our wishes from 1992 enacted in law, I'd like it named after Savita Halappanavar. The Savita law would remind us of what happened in this country as a result of our government ignoring our wishes for years and personalise it too.

Stheno

MagicSean wrote: »

A pregnant man would.

And according to the last census this is a Catholic country. A look at our laws on same sex marriage an abortion would also support that view.

Just because the majority of people here are Catholic, does not mean this is a a country ruled by Catholics, at last count we have Jews, Protestants and agnostics/atheists in our parliament.

Personally I think we are a backward country and far to slow to address social issues.

FanadMan

I'm going to bed crying! My condolences and love to the family xx

hotmail.com

Stheno wrote: »

Actually since I was 19 and voted for the first time (and travelled for two hours to vote as I was in college) I have always believed in the right of women to have an abortion.

I personally wouldn't have one under most circumstances, but can imagine ones where I would

That right is precious to me.
Your argument is a complete strawman on the grounds of gender bias, who knows? If men were the ones to carry children women might be more dominant in society from day one.

Ridiculous argument. The fact this is a very conservative country that has allowed it's government to ignore a mandate from a majority of voters to allow abortion in limited circumstances which may have saved this woman's life is of far more import to me than your silly gender argument.

I was trying to demonstrate the clear sexist nature of the law because it clearly discriminates against WOMEN from deciding on the health of their own bodies.

No comparable law would ever be inflicted upon men, never.

irishfeen

seenitall wrote: »

I think you missed my point there by a mile, irishfeen. But never mind, it's late and I have to go to sleep..

Maybe so mate, I'm not an expert in law so don't be too hard on me ... It's hard to understand the whole thing.

Stheno

hotmail.com wrote: »

I was trying to demonstrate the clear sexist nature of the law because it clearly discriminates against WOMEN from deciding on the health of their own bodies.

No comparable law would ever be inflicted upon men, never.

IN most circumstances women have access to travel and information.

In the rare circumstance such as this, women are fecked due to the government not taking action.

Still boils down to government inaction, nothing more.

IF the right legislation was in place this woman would have lived, nothing to do with her gender, more government inactivity/ennui.

So your argument is a complete strawman.

Scottie Dundee

My advice to arrogant medical people everywhere is to start treating patients as human beings and try to cut down on the mistakes/negligence.

Stheno

Scottie Dundee wrote: »

My advice to arrogant medical people everywhere is to start treating patients as human beings and try to cut down on the mistakes/negligence.

My advice to them would be to be cognisant of the law in the country they work in, and in the case of an emergency have the legal team on standby and on your side.

hotmail.com

Stheno wrote: »

IN most circumstances women have access to travel and information.

In the rare circumstance such as this, women are fecked due to the government not taking action.

Still boils down to government inaction, nothing more.

IF the right legislation was in place this woman would have lived, nothing to do with her gender, more government inactivity/ennui.

So your argument is a complete strawman.

If abortion was legal, then this wouldn't happen. I don't understand what you mean by strawman.

Women should not have to rely on information and travel to decide what to do with their own bodies. What a completely ridiculous sexist put down to suggest they should be content with that. And only in "rare" circumstances is government inaction to blame. Pathetic.

The law needs to change entirely to allow abortion.

Sorcha16

hotmail.com wrote: »

Women should not have to rely on information and travel to decide what to do with their own bodies. What a completely ridiculous sexist put down to suggest they should be content with that.

In an ideal world, we could all be trusted to make the right decisions and only use abortion in medical circumstances or as a last resort for an unwanted pregnancy.

Unfortunately, not all adults are responsible enough to deal with decisions of this magnitude. There are some women who view abortion as a means of contraception and if legalised, would freely avail of it without a second thought.

As the law must aim to be non-discriminatory, it caters to the lowest common denominator and unfortunately results in restricting choices for the rest of us.

FanadMan

Stheno wrote: »

My advice to them would be to be cognisant of the law in the country they work in, and in the case of an emergency have the legal team on standby and on your side.

How come that consultant isn't facing murder charges? He willfully let her die because "this is a Catholic country". I really hope this is brought up in the Dail - let them know what happens when the church helps run the laws of the land.

danger mouse

I still agree that abortion should be illegal. The rights of the unborn child should always be preserved. I can't comment on this case, like everyone else we don't know the full facts and can't make a full informed comment on this case.

hotmail.com

Sorcha16 wrote: »

In an ideal world, we could all be trusted to make the right decisions and only use abortion in medical circumstances or as a last resort for an unwanted pregnancy.

Unfortunately, not all adults are responsible enough to deal with decisions of this magnitude. There are some women who view abortion as a means of contraception and if legalised, would freely avail of it without a second thought.

As the law must aim to be non-discriminatory, it caters to the lowest common denominator and unfortunately results in restricting choices for the rest of us.

All I can say is what??

Women can make their own minds up if they want to have an abortion. Mentioning contraception etc is you just being judgmental and not dealing with the issue at all. The issue is a woman's right to choose the health of her own body.

It's too late for me to continue on any longer, but I have no idea what you mean about the law catering for the lowest common donominator. I can only assume that you are being once again judgmental in some warped way. Lowest common denominator. Seriously wtf?

hotmail.com

danger mouse wrote: »

I still agree that abortion should be illegal. The rights of the unborn child should always be preserved. I can't comment on this case, like everyone else we don't know the full facts and can't make a full informed comment on this case.

So why bother post?

FanadMan

danger mouse wrote: »

I still agree that abortion should be illegal. The rights of the unborn child should always be preserved. I can't comment on this case, like everyone else we don't know the full facts and can't make a full informed comment on this case.

But yet you still commented. To paraphrase The Simpsons......"Won't somebody please think of the mother"

Cookie_Monster

Sorcha16 wrote: »

There are some women who view abortion as a means of contraception and if legalised, would freely avail of it without a second thought.

and why shouldn't they?
do you feel a random clump of cells should have more right than a fully developed person?

danger mouse

hotmail.com wrote: »

So why bother post?

Because this is my opinion and I'm entitled to express it, how I see fit.

Sorcha16

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

and why shouldn't they?
do you feel a random clump of cells should have more right than a fully developed person?

They shouldn't because there are a multitude of more humane ways to prevent pregnancy that don't involve a loss of life. I don't think that random clump of cells you refer to should be disposed of like yesterday's newspaper because the person growing them is too reckless to take other precautions.

As I've already said and will reiterate for you again, I think abortion should only be used in medical circumstances or as a last resort in unwanted pregnancy and absolutely not as a means of contraception.

In fact, to even suggest that abortion is acceptable as a contraceptive is just baffling

FanadMan

Sorcha16 wrote: »

They shouldn't because there are a multitude of more humane ways to prevent pregnancy that don't involve a loss of life. I don't think that random clump of cells you refer to should be disposed of like yesterday's newspaper because the person growing them is too reckless to take other precautions.

As I've already said and will reiterate for you again, I think abortion should only be used in medical circumstances or as a last resort in unwanted pregnancy and absolutely not as a means of contraception.

In fact, to even suggest that abortion is acceptable as a contraceptive is just baffling

If any circumstance could be classed as medical, and warranting a medical abortion, this was it. Obviously the doctor involved was covering his own behind to the detriment of his patient. Thought a doctors first concern is for the welfare of his patient.

danger mouse

Sorcha16 wrote: »

They shouldn't because there are a multitude of more humane ways to prevent pregnancy that don't involve a loss of life. I don't think that random clump of cells you refer to should be disposed of like yesterday's newspaper because the person growing them is too reckless to take other precautions.

As I've already said and will reiterate for you again, I think abortion should only be used in medical circumstances or as a last resort in unwanted pregnancy and absolutely not as a means of contraception.

In fact, to even suggest that abortion is acceptable as a contraceptive is just baffling

How can you say that. An unwanted pregnancy should not be a reason to abort a child. We need to fully protect the rights of the unborn child no matter what circumstances a women gets herself into, an abortion is not a life style choice. It is murder as far as I'm concerned. We fully need to protect the unborn as they have no voice and are the most vulnerable members of society.

whiteandlight

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

You got to love boards.ie dont you?
A person posts a story along with a screen shot of a newspaper, also states it was mentioned on a popular tv3 programe tonight .... Only to get met with accusations and proof of validation required

But yet the amount of "this happened to me today" threads in after hours are taken as fact :rolleyes:

Excuse me, the OP includes a blury picture with an unreadable article. Vincent Browne was not mentioned in the OP. a google search and a run of the rte news app threw up nothing but this boards.ie page. I think a bit of healthy scepticism was warranted in that case. Now there's more info I'm happy to believe it but I did go and check before questioning its validity.

banquo

FWIW, I think the doctor was lamenting that he couldn't terminate the pregnancy with the 'Catholic country' comment.

Sorcha16

FanadMan wrote: »

If any circumstance could be classed as medical, and warranting a medical abortion, this was it.

I couldn't agree more

IsMiseLisa

Jesus Christ.

Selfish as this is to say, I hope something like this never happens to me.

I also hope this case sparks some kind of change. The fact she was Hindi will probably mean the outcry won't be near as large as if she'd been an Irish girl, but ****ing hell, the poor woman deserves some kind of justice! The pain she must have spent her last couple of days in (knowing both that she was miscarrying and possibly dying herself) coupled with agony of her symptoms...appalling!

banquo

Tenner bets the mods online now took one look at this thread title and opened the whiskey.

You have my sympathy.

positron

As someone from India, my most sincere sympathies and condolences to Praveen and the extended family Savita has left behind.

Trust me when I say this - Indians would be shocked to the core to read this news in todays papers there because this sort of stuff is unheard of and unimaginable to the vast majority there. If you are going to say worse things happen in India, you are right, but it's rare, and it's less shocking as that type of stuff would be coming from the very poor, very remote and backward parts of India. If anyone with basic education, and enough means to feed and cloth themselves, failed by the system in the name of archaic religious doctrines is not only unimaginable today in India, in certain parts of the country, there would be such a strong backlash from the mourning relatives, the police would usually put the doctors involved behind the bars straight away for their own safety. A hospital or a group doctors failing a pregnant woman is absolute no-no in India, and any sign of negligence or lack of care is totally frowned up on and the law comes down heavily on them, eve if the public spares them for some unusual reason.

Again, what an unfortunate and tragic story, and how Ireland becomes a laughing stock yet again in the international stage!

HeyThereDeliah

This is a catholic country even if some posters might want to argue otherwise.

My personal opinion is a woman's life should always be more important than the life of the baby she is carrying. It's sad this young woman's life ended like this in a hospital where she could have been saved.

I understand the doctors are restricted here but unless the outcome was going to be the same someone should have saved her.

RIP to her.

Nodin

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

This is a catholic country even if some posters might want to argue otherwise..

No, its supposed to be a secular republic. And the sooner we make that a reality as oppossed to a phrase the better.

HeyThereDeliah

Nodin wrote: »

No, its supposed to be a secular republic. And the sooner we make that a reality as oppossed to a phrase the better.

It's to early to argue religion, I'm having a nice cup of tea. I still don't agree btw.

who the fug

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

It's to early to argue religion, I'm having a nice cup of tea. I still don't agree btw.

Is that white or black tea Nodin takes his tea seriously


Back on topic, think I will wait till the full story comes out before getting off the fence on this

Nodin

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

It's to early to argue religion, I'm having a nice cup of tea. I still don't agree btw.

We aren't arguing religion, and you agreeing or not makes no difference to the reality. However, if you can find anything in the states constitution that declares the state "catholic" in nature, I'll gladly concede the point.

billybudd

Sympathy & condolence to the family and RIP to the lady and baby.

Whos is to blame?

The CC, no.

The HSE,no.

The doctor,no.

The people of Ireland, yes.

The government, yes.

It has been 20 years since this should have been legislated and yet the cowardly government has refuded to act on it and people generally ignore it until something like this happens and then take great glee from blaming everyone but themselves.

The people of Ireland spoke, the government ignored this and as usual we just accepted it.

I will be asking questions of my local TD's this week, will you? or just another fake outpour of meek anger on the internet? we have a choice here, unlike that poor lady and family.

Nodin

who the fug wrote: »

Is that white or black tea Nodin takes his tea seriously

Tea=srs bzniss

billybudd

Nodin wrote: »

Tea=srs bzniss

If you thought that was true, you would call it its proper name:Tae.:D