Death of Savita Halappanavar and the abortion issue

Silvio.Dante

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Then why not let the pregnancy be terminated?

Would you prefer to allow the radiotherapy/chemotherapy/x rays etc to slowly poison the fetus - because that is what happens.

I have had cancer treatment twice and I barely survived it - a fetus would have no chance against the chemical cocktail - never mind the radiotherapy which causes burns from the inside out. As for the effect of X-rays on a fetus....:eek:

The treatment will slowly kill the fetus in most cases - should it survive to birth it will have serious defects, most likely be riddled with cancer and little chance of survival with no quality of life.

That is why pregnant women in Ireland are currently denied cancer treatment - it is considered that such treatment will terminate the pregnancy making it essentially an abortion - but one that inflicts a lingering death.

No doubt you would chose an abortion...:rolleyes:

However the pregnancy wouldn't be endangering your life.

I find your certainty about the radio therapy killing the baby interesting.

Is this inevitable..?

Silvio.Dante

_rebelkid wrote: »

Happy to know that you're through it.

As am I...:)

Flier

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Sadly, b)

So you'd rather slowly poison the foetus, put it through prolonged and protracted pain, only for it to die along the way (most probably - and if not be severly damaged) rather than allowing an abortion?

I wouldn't treat the dogs in the street with such disregard.

Lingua Franca

Agreed, it would be barbaric.

Radiation Exposure to the Embryo or Fetus from Therapy Procedures that Do or Could Involve Exposure to the Abdomen
One form of radiation therapy for cancer and other diseases is the administration (oral or by injection) of radioactive materials to treat various disease states. The most common of these is oral administration of radioactive iodine, which is used to treat hyperthyroidism or cancer of the thyroid. Another form of therapy, radioactive seeds, can be placed into various organs and tissues to treat cancer. And finally, radiation emitted from large machines (linear accelerators) can be used to treat cancer and other diseases. In nearly all instances, these uses of radiation will not occur when a woman is pregnant because the physician will be aware of the pregnancy and, therefore, take that into consideration before deciding to do these procedures. If the physician believes that delaying the procedure until the baby is born would be a significant risk to the mother, then s/he may decide to proceed and will share with you the possible risks of the radiation exposure to the unborn child.

Occasionally, radioactive iodine for the treatment of hyperthyroidism or cancer of the thyroid is administered to a woman who may not yet know she is pregnant. In these instances, it is essential that the exposure to the embryo or fetus be determined before any counseling can be provided. It is recommended that this determination be obtained from the health physicist, a nuclear medicine physician, or a radiation oncologist associated with the institution where the procedure took place.

Since radiation treatment for cancer involves quite high doses of radiation, it is very likely that the embryo will be affected if radiation therapy is initiated during pregnancy. In the early stages of pregnancy, embryo sensitivity is such that dosages of hundreds of rad per day of fractionated radiation therapy would not allow the embryo to survive. When exposures occur later in gestation, embryo sensitivity decreases but is still vulnerable to the cell-killing effects. Thus, there is still concern about radiation effects even though the embryo might survive.

It is possible that even with radiation therapy to other parts of the body, the embryo might receive an exposure that increases the risk of biological effects. Again, it is essential that the exposure to the embryo or fetus be determined before any counseling can be provided. It is recommended that this determination be obtained from the health physicist, a nuclear medicine physician, or a radiation oncologist associated with the institution where the procedure took place.

http://hps.org/hpspublications/articles/pregnancyandradiationexposureinfosheet.html

Silvio.Dante

Flier wrote: »

So you'd rather slowly poison the foetus, put it through prolonged and protracted pain, only for it to die along the way (most probably - and if not be severly damaged) rather than allowing an abortion?

I wouldn't treat the dogs in the street with such disregard.

So radiotherapy always kills unborn babies, doc..?

Silvio.Dante

Lingua Franca wrote: »

Agreed, it would be barbaric.



http://hps.org/hpspublications/articles/pregnancyandradiationexposureinfosheet.html

Do you believe in a woman's 'right to chose' beyond X..?

Silvio.Dante

I see from posts and thanks that my A + A fanclub are following me around...;)

Flier

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

So radiotherapy always kills unborn babies, doc..?

Where did I say that it always does?? Go talk to a radiotherapist and find out why they don't recommend radiotherapy for pregnant women - hell go talk to a radiologist and find out why they don't even recommend x rays for pregnant women.

I would absolutely hate to see the results of a chemo and radiotherapy regime on a foetus - because a foetus is full of dividing and deveoloping cells it will be affected disproportionately. That's why pregnant women don't get chemo or radiation.

Where is your compassion for these women Silvio? If it was your loved one, would you be so callous? Have you ever even been near to such a situation?

_rebelkid

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

I see from posts and thanks that my A + A fanclub are following me around...;)

Don't flatter yourself.

We follow the injustice, you just happen to be a proporter of the same.

Silvio.Dante

Flier wrote: »

Where did I say that it always does?? Go talk to a radiotherapist and find out why they don't recommend radiotherapy for pregnant women - hell go talk to a radiologist and find out why they don't even recommend x rays for pregnant women.

I would absolutely hate to see the results of a chemo and radiotherapy regime on a foetus - because a foetus is full of dividing and deveoloping cells it will be affected disproportionately. That's why pregnant women don't get chemo or radiation.

Where is your compassion for these women Silvio? If it was your loved one, would you be so callous? Have you ever even been near to such a situation?

In fact are there cases where a baby has been delivered without any ill effect from radio therapy, doc..?

Morag

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Do you believe in a woman's 'right to chose' beyond X..?

Yes, as X only is about the life of the woman and not about her health or terminations for fatal fetal abnormalities.

Silvio.Dante

_rebelkid wrote: »

Don't flatter yourself.

We follow the injustice, you just happen to be a proporter of the same.

this from someone who could countenance partial birth abortions...:(

Silvio.Dante

Morag wrote: »

Yes, as X only is about the life of the woman and not about her health or terminations for fatal fetal abnormalities.

Would you suport the woman's right to choose beyond cases of threats to the her health and fatal fetal abnormalities..?

_rebelkid

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

this from someone who could countenance partial birth abortions...:(

In the case of Anencephaly, yes. Or did you not comprehend that as well, seeing as you were too busy plastering everyone as baby killers?

The only people who came up with IDX were pro lifers. It has happened, but it doesn't. It will never happen in Ireland, so it is not an issue in Ireland's abortion debate.

Morag

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Would you suport the woman's right to choose beyond cases of threats to the her health and fatal fetal abnormalities..?

Yes I like the majority of people who were survyed would want women to have the right to have an abortion here in Ireland in the cases of threat to her life, her health, fatal fetal abnormalities and in the cases of rape and incest.

Legislation for X case won't cover
Right to Health
Rape/incest
Fatal Fetal abnormalities

and it certainly won't result in abortion 'on demand'.

For Right to Health, Rape/Incest,Fatal Fetal Abnormalities we may well need to amend or repeal the 8th amendment. So lets just get X case legislation in place finally as it will be next month 21years form the X case court judgement.

Silvio.Dante

_rebelkid wrote: »

In the case of Anencephaly, yes.
.

Now we're getting down to the barbarism of the Choicers.

Do you know how many countries are morally redundant enough to legalise partial birth abortions on this planet..?

Silvio.Dante

Morag wrote: »

Yes I like the majority of people who were survyed would want women to have the right to have an abortion here in Ireland in the cases of threat to her life, her health, fatal fetal abnormalities and in the cases of rape and incest.

Legislation for X case won't cover
Right to Health
Rape/incest
Fatal Fetal abnormalities

and it certainly won't result in abortion 'on demand'.

For Right to Health, Rape/Incest,Fatal Fetal Abnormalities we may well need to amend or repeal the 8th amendment. So lets just get X case legislation in place finally as it will be next month 21years form the X case court judgement.

The list is growing.

Would you support the woman's right to choose beyond cases of threats to the her health, fatal fetal abnormalities and rape/incest..?

Morag

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

The list is growing.

Would you support the woman's right to choose beyond cases of threats to the her health, fatal fetal abnormalities and rape/incest..?

What do you mean....:)

_rebelkid

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Now we're getting down to the barbarism of the Choicers.

Do you know how many countries are morally redundant enough to legalise partial birth abortions on this planet..?

Do you even know what Anencephaly is?


http://anencephaly.net/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002547/


And a nice article from 2007:
http://www.independent.ie/unsorted/migration/ireland-has-worlds-highest-number-of-anencephaly-cases-669196.html

_rebelkid

Morag wrote: »

What do you mean....:)

He means would you want abortion on demand. It's a trick he tried on me before.

_rebelkid

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Now we're getting down to the barbarism of the Choicers.

It's hardly barbaric to not put a mother through emotional and physical anguish, just so she can watch her baby die in front of her when it is born.

Letting mothers die because of a foetus fetish, however, is barbaric.

Silvio.Dante

Morag wrote: »

What do you mean....:)

All of a sudden you're playing dumb. Don't belittle yourself please.

Would you support a woman's right to an abortion for other reasons apart from threats to the her health, fatal fetal abnormalities and rape/incest..?

Silvio.Dante

_rebelkid wrote: »

It's hardly barbaric to not put a mother through emotional and physical anguish, just so she can watch her baby die in front of her when it is born.

Letting mothers die because of a foetus fetish, however, is barbaric.

So rather than deliver her baby and say goodbye to him/her after carrying the baby for nine months you'd rather carry out a partial birth abortion?

You're some piece of work...

Silvio.Dante

_rebelkid wrote: »

He means would you want abortion on demand. It's a trick he tried on me before.

How is it a trick?

Our Morag has gone all coy for some reason. I'm just intrigued as to why...

_rebelkid

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

So rather than deliver her baby and say goodbye to him/her after carrying the baby for nine months you'd rather carry out a partial birth abortion?

You're some piece of work...

I'm not the one carrying out the abortion.

It is a mothers choice how they want to see the end of their off spring.

If it was my loved one, I'd want them and what would have been our child to go through as little pain as possible.

You, on the other hand, want them to spend 7 months dreading the day they have to say goodbye, knowing that they will only get to spend a tiny amount of time with their child, probably in an incubation unit. They might not even get to hold their child, and you want to put them through all that?

If there's any horrid barbarian here, its you.

Morag

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

All of a sudden you're playing dumb. Don't belittle yourself please.

Would you support a woman's right to an abortion for other reasons apart from threats to the her health, fatal fetal abnormalities and rape/incest..?

This is the politics forum, the discussion is about the pending legislation
and how it needs to be put in place as it was the will of the nation as put to them twice in referendum and even then it will not go far enough to allow for the right to have an abortion which the people have said they will support.

As for me personally I would be in favor of legislation to allow for the abortion pill to be prescribed here.

K-9

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

How is it a trick?

Our Morag has gone all coy for some reason. I'm just intrigued as to why...

You've had 20 or more out of the last 30 replies, slightly monopolising the debate.