Praveen Halappanavar says he has received abusive letters

_Whimsical_

wretcheddomain wrote: »

All this for suggesting you guys may be wrong. :eek: :rolleyes:

The problem is that you guys have no more evidence than I do to make a 100% conclusion that he is grieving as possible. You keep saying the arguments and explanations to support your view but are not open to the fact that you may be wrong. As we've adduced, we don't know the mind of Praveen so essentially we are all guessing. My conclusion is that there's a distinct lack of sincerity, not complete lack, but a lack to some degree.

Don't be so closed minded to think that the world is filled with laughter, love, rabbits and rainbows. Sometimes, however tragic the circumstances, and however unpopular and unlikely the view is, you may be wrong.

Absolutely horrified at your attitude. That a persons grief can be measured by strangers who get the odd glimpse of them on the telly is utterly ridiculous.


I think Praveen has shown himself to be an exceptional husband. It has been heartbreaking to see him go through this largely alone without the comfort of his extended family here to support him. I think he has honoured Savita heroically


The truth is that nothing will bring his wife back,money won't ease his loss or grief. The people who will benefit from his action now are the people of Galway and the people of Ireland. Savitas medical care was dreadfully inadequate. Simple checks would have saved her life. As tragic as they are cases like this will see lax hospital care standards highlighted and changed.I hope he wins a huge settlement and that the people who took such poor care of his wife will be shamed and such poor standards of care will be changed. That will hopefully be Savitas legacy and it will be thanks to her husband if it is.

homerjay2005

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

The fact that he has been receiving abusive letters is disturbing.

and as equally appaling as the threats made to some staff in Galway Hospital also. both "sides" were at it.

LizT

wretcheddomain wrote: »

The reason I came to that conclusion was that I've asked multiple times over the course of this thread, 'Are people willing to accept they might be wrong?', and not one poster was willing to come forward to accept that my perspective, or other versions of my perspective, may still hold some degree of water, even a drop. When no posters come forward, and the posters who make abuse get repeatedly thanked, then I came to that conclusion.

Perhaps if you provided some argument other than
"he didn't really 'care' as much as a husband should do. He didn't even appear despondent"

" To be so reserved on interview, being watched by hundreds of thousands, and appear so indifferent soon after she died, does not make sense to me at all. I think anyone who cared would not be able to even withstand such an interview with all the pressure that comes with it. I think my view on this is reasonable despite the objections here."
people would come around.

You have in fact admitted that

I don't think I should have made a generalisation or blanket understanding.

so what now? You want people to agree with you, even though you have admitted you were slightly in the wrong?

Malari

wretcheddomain wrote: »

The reason I came to that conclusion was that I've asked multiple times over the course of this thread, 'Are people willing to accept they might be wrong?', and not one poster was willing to come forward to accept that my perspective, or other versions of my perspective, may still hold some degree of water, even a drop. When no posters come forward, and the posters who make abuse get repeatedly thanked, then I came to that conclusion.

I think the point is that it actually doesn't matter. Maybe he's not grieving enough for you, maybe he is but has a good way of controlling it.

Maybe he never loved her and was stuck in an arranged marriage. Still, so what. His wife and his unborn child died as a result of a HSE fcuk-up and he deserves to find out exactly why that happened and be compensated as a result. What he's persuing will help save the lives of other women in the same situation as his wife was. I applaud him, no matter what his motivations are.

efb

Who sits down and thinks its a good thing to send these hate filled messages?

eyescreamcone

Factor in Savita was a successful Dentist and could be expected to have earned more than 75000 per year (conservative estimate) for the rest of her career.
Factor in the negligence of the HSE.
Factor in the media exposure and the need to have a confidentiality clause surrounding the award amount.

I would estimate an award north of €3,500,000.

He deserves every cent for what he's gone through.
And I reckon he'd swop any amount just to have his wife back.
Poor guy.

As for those who sent the hate mail - keep fighting your losing battle.
On demand abortion is the future and you know it!!!

OldNotWIse

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Ah... crazy pro-lifers. So full of "compassion" for the unborn, yet utterly hate-filled otherwise. So really, I don't think they care about the unborn at all actually, just doing what the looney old testament tells them to.

I love too how that "wretched" person made a dig at this man being upset at losing a "very young, successful" wife, implying - for absolutely no reason - that she was a trophy to him.

"I'm just expressing an unpopular opinion" - code for acting the ****. There is no cause for believing these things about the man - but it makes you and that Cavehill person and that Padd person and the one other thanker... look... kinda bad-ass. Go ye. You "christian" people.

Generalise much?

Also, on what planet are all pro-lifers christian??

wretcheddomain

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Yes. I don't think I should have made a generalisation or blanket understanding.

The way I see it, your argument was based around this point - the lack of visible grief - by admitting this point was incorrect you have not just just severely weakened, but in my opinion, lost your argument.

Is there a chance that the man does not care that his wife is dead? absolutely, this applies to all deaths. Does any of your argument prove this to be the case. No, it doesn't.

OldNotWIse

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Factor in Savita was a successful Dentist and could be expected to have earned more than 75000 per year (conservative estimate) for the rest of her career.
Factor in the negligence of the HSE.
Factor in the media exposure and the need to have a confidentiality clause surrounding the award amount.

I would estimate an award north of €3,500,000.

He deserves every cent for what he's gone through.
And I reckon he'd swop any amount just to have his wife back.
Poor guy.

As for those who sent the hate mail - keep fighting your losing battle.
On demand abortion is the future and you know it!!!

I'd bet money that its not










.....actually no.....I'd keep my money, but never worry that it will be the future.

Cavehill Red

padd b1975 wrote: »

Had to get his publicity from the media first....

This is what concerns me about this from the very start. I fully think that Ireland ought to have worked out its legal position on abortion decades ago, and I also think that any death of a healthy young woman in an Irish hospital warrants a significant and conclusive investigation.
What I find a bit off about this particular case is how the husband is conducting his affairs via the media. I suspect he would have much more support and credibility if he did not seek to blacken the names of medical professionals, and now the Irish people, via the press but instead took his concerns firstly to the relevant authorities.

wretcheddomain

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

You "christian" people.

I'm an atheist and pro-choice.

LizT wrote: »

You have in fact admitted that

so what now? You want people to agree with you, even though you have admitted you were slightly in the wrong?

Whoopsadaisy provided an account whereby she showed my generalisation to be a false one. I don't mind admitting when I'm wrong. But this doesn't mean that all cases are the same as Whoopsadaisy.

efb wrote: »

Who sits down and thinks its a good thing to send these hate filled messages?

At no point have I given a 'hate filled' message. I'm offering a point of contention. I don't sit down and decide to randomly form an opinion.

Deleted User wrote: »

The way I see it, your argument was based around this point - the lack of visible grief - by admitting this point was incorrect you have not just just severely weakened, but in my opinion, lost your argument.

Is there a chance that the man does not care that his wife is dead? absolutely, this applies to all deaths. Does any of your argument prove this to be the case. No, it doesn't.

I agree with the second paragraph but the first part I explained above i.e. that many people will experience grief in different ways but I'm open to the possibility that Praveen was not as sincere as we would like to believe he was.

This actually makes me really sad. Is this the way the world is now?

I was recently talking to my mother about my aunt, who with her then-husband opened the first family planning clinic in Galway in their own home. My mum remarked about how there were people stood outside their house almost every morning doing the rosary.

It seems that if that had happened now, my aunt would have received death threats and vile remarks.

I mean, seriously? Death threats? Is that how we deal with opinions that go against our own in 2013? How is that moral? How is that right?

endacl

How 'sincere' he was is nobody's business but his own.

wretcheddomain

wretcheddomain wrote: »

I agree with the second paragraph but the first part I explained above i.e. that many people will experience grief in different ways but I'm open to the possibility that Praveen was not as sincere as we would like to believe he was.

The most likely scenario to a man losing his wife and child, is to be filled with grief, you said this yourself. Why anyone would want to push to argue against this natural logic is truly beyond me. You are fighting against what is human nature.

The man has done nothing to suggest he is a careless money hungry man, absolutely nothing, but by not shedding tears in a television interview, this is what he is being accused of.

It is, quite frankly, mind boggling.

o1s1n

wretcheddomain wrote: »

but I'm open to the possibility that Praveen was not as sincere as we would like to believe he was.

And why is your default position one of scepticism? What evidence do you possibly have to say he's in fact lying?

You are the one who is going against the grain and saying the guy is not telling the truth, therefore the burden of proof lies with you to show us why this is the case.

wretcheddomain

endacl wrote: »

How 'sincere' he was is nobody's business but his own.

I'm being sincere in giving my opinion but you seem to think it's your business to comment on mine.

:rolleyes:

efb

efb wrote: »

Who sits down and thinks its a good thing to send these hate filled messages?

The same gob****es that complain about Holly Willoughby wearing a dress.

wretcheddomain

o1s1n wrote: »

And why is your default position one of scepticism? What evidence do you possibly have to say he's in fact lying?

You are the one who is going against the grain and saying the guy is not telling the truth, therefore the burden of proof lies with you to show us why this is the case.

It was never a default position of scepticism. I watched the interview like everyone else and my opinion emerged from watching it. I didn't watch it with a pre-conceived bias at all.

As for 'lying', that's a strong word. A lack of sincerity doesn't constitute lying.

o1s1n

wretcheddomain wrote: »

It was never a default position of scepticism. I watched the interview like everyone else and my opinion emerged from watching it. I didn't watch it with a pre-conceived bias at all.

As for 'lying', that's a strong word. A lack of sincerity doesn't constitute lying.

If you are saying that his 'lack of sincerity' has evolved to a point where he's trying to basically scam money from the state through a court case then I would call the word 'lying' very apt.

So basically your whole argument boils down to a 'hunch' from watching him in an interview.

Seriously? You're willing to come onto a forum and publicise the viewpoint that this guy is trying to fool us all based on a hunch?

endacl

wretcheddomain wrote: »

I'm being sincere in giving my opinion but you seem to think it's your business to comment on mine.

:rolleyes:

You entered a discussion. On a discussion board.

efb

I was talking about the letter writers

wretcheddomain

o1s1n wrote: »

Seriously? You're willing to come onto a forum and publicise the viewpoint that this guy is trying to fool us all based on a hunch?

But everyone else's view is also based on a hunch, only it's the 'correct' view to take regardless, 'Bandwagon Effect', and all that. People will always gravitate for the consensus view without considering the alternative given its unpopularity. I didn't deliberately arrive at an unpopular perspective but that's the view I arrived at upon watching the interview and several other appearances before that.

padd b1975

endacl wrote: »

How 'sincere' he was is nobody's business but his own.

Where do you think his "compo" is going to come from if he wins his case?

It's everybody's business, let there be no doubt about that.

wretcheddomain

wretcheddomain wrote: »

But everyone else's view is also based on a hunch,

No. Everyone else's view is based on human nature.

wretcheddomain

Deleted User wrote: »

No. Everyone else's view is based on human nature.

Human nature is selfish as well as caring. We all know this too well.

endacl

wretcheddomain wrote: »

But everyone else's view is also based on a hunch, only it's the 'correct' view to take regardless, 'Bandwagon Effect', and all that. People will always gravitate for the consensus view without considering the alternative given its unpopularity. I didn't deliberately arrive at an unpopular perspective but that's the view I arrived at upon watching the interview and several other appearances before that.

My view, and I can only speak for myself, is based on an empathetic response. On the thought of how I might feel if I were in that position. I'd imagine that this would be true of many.

suicide_circus

presumably he is taking a case regarding the undetected sepsis ?

medical professionals do their best day in day out to save lives. these people are human, mistakes are made. some times people die

mikom

wretcheddomain wrote: »

But everyone else's view is also based on a hunch,

I've a hunch his wife is dead.

wretcheddomain wrote: »

While I'm fully against those abusive letters he has received, I do think there's something suspicious about him. When I watched the interview with Miriam O'Callaghan, I got the distinct impression he didn't really 'care' as much as a husband should do. He didn't even appear despondent. I'm aware that organised marriages occur within their faith and so it wouldn't surprise me if this is how it happened and would explain his lack of emotion for the situation. I knew he would eventually sue the HSE for cash and this fits perfectly within my model that he is merely thinking of his own pockets to capitalise on her death. I know that sounds bad given the tragic circumstances in which she died but if I had a wife that died in such circumstances, I personally would not want to gain a cent from it. I think there's something morally reprehensible, as well as suspicious, to gain cash at the expense of a death.


(3) thanks from: CuriousG, Madcon, OldNotWIse

Original post and "thankers" noted.

suicide_circus

mikom wrote: »

Original post and "thankers" noted.

Youre on my list now, Tony

kylith

Cavehill Red wrote: »

This is what concerns me about this from the very start. I fully think that Ireland ought to have worked out its legal position on abortion decades ago, and I also think that any death of a healthy young woman in an Irish hospital warrants a significant and conclusive investigation.
What I find a bit off about this particular case is how the husband is conducting his affairs via the media. I suspect he would have much more support and credibility if he did not seek to blacken the names of medical professionals, and now the Irish people, via the press but instead took his concerns firstly to the relevant authorities.

And if he hadn't gone to the media with it what do you think would have happened? Do you think that abortion legislation would be being implemented at all? Taking the 'official' route in this country is the best way to get nothing done. No-one does anything until someone goes to the press and the whole country is in uproar.

Seedy Arling

mikom wrote: »

Original post and "thankers" noted.

Internet: Serious business.

mikom

suicide_circus wrote: »

Youre on my list now, Tony

In the black book for coming in from the Dhisco late.

padd b1975

mikom wrote: »

Original post and "thankers" noted.

Hate to be one of those guys.:o:o

wretcheddomain

mikom wrote: »

I've a hunch his wife is dead.



Original post and "thankers" noted.

I read that word differently, but thankfully, it wasn't what I misread it as. :P

Nice to know I'm on your list though - feel special now.

mikom

wretcheddomain wrote: »

I read that word differently, but thankfully, it wasn't what I misread it as. :P

The quotation marks worked so.

eyescreamcone

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I'd bet money that its not










.....actually no.....I'd keep my money, but never worry that it will be the future.

The opinion polls would suggest that you are wrong and that the % who want abortion on demand is growing (40% at the moment). Over time the numbers will eventually fall in favour of those who want the choice in all circumstances.

Others will say that abortion on demand is here already.
You just have to travel for 45 minutes to avail of this option that will be readily available closer to home soon enough!

Femme_Fatale

Deleted User wrote: »

No. Everyone else's view is based on human nature.

More than that: it's based on evidence, like... um... a dead wife.

Someone said too "Well if my wife had died I would have bla bla". Nobody would have a clue what they would do until it actually happens to them.

wretcheddomain

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

More than that: it's based on evidence, like... um... a dead wife.

You're on my list now. :cool:

Femme_Fatale

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

More than that: it's based on evidence, like... um... a dead wife.

Someone said too "Well if my wife had died I would have bla bla". Nobody would have a clue what they would do until it actually happens to them.

Yep.

Sure wretcheddomain's whole argument was based around the fact that it's natural to grieve, but that Praveen wasn't showing emotion. If he thinks it's so natural to grieve, and admits that not showing emotion means little, then he is really fighting against himself which is funny really.

Lady Chatterton

wretcheddomain wrote: »

While I'm fully against those abusive letters he has received, I do think there's something suspicious about him. When I watched the interview with Miriam O'Callaghan, I got the distinct impression he didn't really 'care' as much as a husband should do. He didn't even appear despondent. I'm aware that organised marriages occur within their faith and so it wouldn't surprise me if this is how it happened and would explain his lack of emotion for the situation. I knew he would eventually sue the HSE for cash and this fits perfectly within my model that he is merely thinking of his own pockets to capitalise on her death. I know that sounds bad given the tragic circumstances in which she died but if I had a wife that died in such circumstances, I personally would not want to gain a cent from it. I think there's something morally reprehensible, as well as suspicious, to gain cash at the expense of a death.

This has to be the most offensive and depressing post I've ever read on Boards

Cavehill Red

kylith wrote: »

And if he hadn't gone to the media with it what do you think would have happened? Do you think that abortion legislation would be being implemented at all? Taking the 'official' route in this country is the best way to get nothing done. No-one does anything until someone goes to the press and the whole country is in uproar.

Nonsense. We have well-established methodologies for investigating cases of alleged medical negligence that deal perfectly adequately with many other similar issues.
We're not talking about potholes in the road here. Ireland has a multi-levelled system of investigation regarding medical negligence that this man has accessed, and decided he doesn't like for some reason. Trial by media is not preferable, and yet, despite some of his comments to the Irish Times having been found at best unproven and at worst false by actual investigation, he is still using this mode of critique.
For me, it undermines whatever argument he is trying to make to be honest. It suggests he would rather have his opinion heard by media loudhailer than actually get to the facts of the matter via proper investigation.

MrsD007

MrsD007 wrote: »

This has to be the most offensive and depressing post I've ever read on Boards

Look on the brightside, it is just one post lost in sea of postive thoughts for Praveen Halappanavar. The overwhelming majority does not think like this

kylith

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Nonsense. We have well-established methodologies for investigating cases of alleged medical negligence that deal perfectly adequately with many other similar issues.
We're not talking about potholes in the road here. Ireland has a multi-levelled system of investigation regarding medical negligence that this man has accessed, and decided he doesn't like for some reason. Trial by media is not preferable, and yet, despite some of his comments to the Irish Times having been found at best unproven and at worst false by actual investigation, he is still using this mode of critique.
For me, it undermines whatever argument he is trying to make to be honest. It suggests he would rather have his opinion heard by media loudhailer than actually get to the facts of the matter via proper investigation.

I'm sorry, but I disagree. I believe that had he insisted on an investigation but not gone to the media a verdict would have been returned that she died of sepsis and there was nothing that could have been done.

I firmly believe that had he not gone to the media to highlight the fact that his wife was denied a termination on religious grounds that we would not be seeing any legislation on the issue now.

gobnaitolunacy

wretcheddomain wrote: »

While I'm fully against those abusive letters he has received, I do think there's something suspicious about him. When I watched the interview with Miriam O'Callaghan, I got the distinct impression he didn't really 'care' as much as a husband should do. He didn't even appear despondent. I'm aware that organised marriages occur within their faith and so it wouldn't surprise me if this is how it happened and would explain his lack of emotion for the situation. I knew he would eventually sue the HSE for cash and this fits perfectly within my model that he is merely thinking of his own pockets to capitalise on her death. I know that sounds bad given the tragic circumstances in which she died but if I had a wife that died in such circumstances, I personally would not want to gain a cent from it. I think there's something morally reprehensible, as well as suspicious, to gain cash at the expense of a death.

Good on you, Matlock. To quote an animated tv show that shall remain nameless...'hearsay and conjecture are kinds of evidence'

General General

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Nonsense. We have well-established methodologies for investigating cases of alleged medical negligence that deal perfectly adequately with many other similar issues.
We're not talking about potholes in the road here. Ireland has a multi-levelled system of investigation regarding medical negligence that this man has accessed, and decided he doesn't like for some reason. Trial by media is not preferable, and yet, despite some of his comments to the Irish Times having been found at best unproven and at worst false by actual investigation, he is still using this mode of critique.
For me, it undermines whatever argument he is trying to make to be honest. It suggests he would rather have his opinion heard by media loudhailer than actually get to the facts of the matter via proper investigation.

Do we now? & what are you basing that opinion on?

Cody Pomeray

homerjay2005 wrote: »

and as equally appaling as the threats made to some staff in Galway Hospital also. both "sides" were at it.

I wouldn't like to get into some sort of hierarchy of wrongdoing, but exposing a grieving spouse to hate mail, for protesting the un-necessary death of his wife, is particularly abominable.

Issuing personal attacks on individuals involved with this case is always wrong, but Praveen Halappanavar's experiences with knuckle draggers are especially difficult to comprehend.

OldNotWIse

eyescreamcone wrote: »

The opinion polls would suggest that you are wrong and that the % who want abortion on demand is growing (40% at the moment). Over time the numbers will eventually fall in favour of those who want the choice in all circumstances.

Others will say that abortion on demand is here already.
You just have to travel for 45 minutes to avail of this option that will be readily available closer to home soon enough!

OK. I'll believe it when I see it.

Zen65

kylith wrote: »

I firmly believe that had he not gone to the media to highlight the fact that his wife was denied a termination on religious grounds that we would not be seeing any legislation on the issue now.

That's not why she was refused a termination. We know nothing of the religious beliefs of the consultant on duty.

What we do know is that the consultant believed that the legal position was unclear, but did not seek a second opinion (AFAIK - please correct me if I'm wrong). We also know that the monitoring of the patient was deficient.

Z

paperclip2

Pontificating about how someone 'should' react to grief is beyond laughable. Anyone who thinks there's a standard response to a loss has some serious copping on to do. You cant predict grief and how you will react to it. I've told this on boards before but when my brother died in an accident there was a lot of laughter in our house at the time. We were shocked, distraught, heart-broken and in dreadful emotional pain but we could still laugh, joke, disconnect from the pain for a few moments.
Grief has the capacity to literally wipe us out, its like setting off an atomic bomb in your consciousness. The mind will do anything to shield us from being totally overwhelmed and unable to function. In my case it meant that for some of the time after my brothers death I was manic, some of the time I was robotic, sometimes I was very calm, collected and detached, and some of the time I was a complete blubbering mess.
Saying that Praveen, or indeed anyone, isn't 'sad' enough at a loss in my opinion shows not just a spectacular lack of awareness but a grubby meanspiritedness.

And if we want to drag in a cultural angle, in the Hindu faith extensive grieving is considered bad for the body and soul as it creates negative karma that follows one to the next level of existence. Maybe that had better be considered before one starts musing about the status of the Halapanavarrs marriage.

kylith

Zen65 wrote: »

That's not why she was refused a termination. We know nothing of the religious beliefs of the consultant on duty.

What we do know is that the consultant believed that the legal position was unclear, but did not seek a second opinion (AFAIK - please correct me if I'm wrong). We also know that the monitoring of the patient was deficient.

Z

The legal position was unclear, and the midwife admitted that she had told him 'there's nothing we can do, this is a Catholic country'. That is a denial on religious grounds.