Abortion Discussion

lazygal

PopePalpatine wrote: »

After reading Prof Casey's bullsh*t, now I'm starting to understand why Donal Walsh was given a platform for his very ill-informed essay.

I fear for any person who has to turn to Casey for advice. Does she treat patients, does anyone know?

Frito

AFAIK Prof Casey has a clinic at the Mater.

I think her argument is a bit of a red herring, although I can sympathise with a human response of being 'side-stepped' in this issue due to her position (I acknowledge she argues an evidence-base for an anti-abortion stance but she hasn't discussed it in the article).

She is missing the role of primary care in managing mental illness, ie should there be an underlying mental illness the GP can treat this and refer to psychiatry if the condition is complex or fails to respond to treatment. The point of the assessment by panel is to consider whether an abortion is lawful on the grounds of maternal risk by suicide. It's much like a mental health tribunal, it's scope is to consider whether a detention under the mental health act is lawful, not to determine treatment.

Nodin

lazygal wrote: »

I fear for any person who has to turn to Casey for advice. Does she treat patients, does anyone know?

She did, at one stage.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/girl-born-disabled-awarded-500000-in-court-settlement-26631023.html

PopePalpatine

"Family and Life" are refusing to comply with SIPO - Sunday Times.

I wouldn't be surprised if SIPO was designed to be toothless by pro-lifers in previous governments. *le sigh*

aloyisious

PopePalpatine wrote: »

"Family and Life" are refusing to comply with SIPO - Sunday Times.

I wouldn't be surprised if SIPO was designed to be toothless by pro-lifers in previous governments. *le sigh*

It'd be interesting to know what section of the Electoral Act SIPO believes the group are breaking, and why SIPO believes there can be no prosecution taken under the Electoral Act, a long-standing piece of statute law.

The Black Oil

Browsing Google Scholar for something completely unrelated and found this today. Perhaps someone with a college log in can tell us a bit more about the paper.

Source

Abstract

This paper examines the content of Post Abortion Syndrome (PAS) claims, the social actors involved and how this social diagnosis bypassed professional dissent and diffused into public policy in the United States. Previous works on the spread of PAS focus on almost exclusively on anti-abortion think tanks and policymakers. Missing from these analyses, however, is an emphasis on the grassroots-level actions undertaken by evangelical crisis pregnancy center (CPC) activists in introducing and circulating PAS claims. The CPC movement introduced PAS claims and provided the fodder for anti-abortion think tanks to construct evidence of pro-life claims. Despite dissent from health professionals and academic researchers, CPC PAS claims successfully diffused into federal and state abortion policy. I draw upon Brown et al.’s social diagnosis framework and Armstrong's five-stage model of diagnosis development to frame this account.

Doctor Strange

The Black Oil wrote: »

Browsing Google Scholar for something completely unrelated and found this today. Perhaps someone with a college log in can tell us a bit more about the paper.

I'll try while I'm on-campus tomorrow.

aloyisious

Relative to those who oppose abortions here, this report might make the churches and others Pro-Birth happy. It concern's the first (reported) birth at the Rotunda by way of a new human IVF variation - Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection.

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/mothers-babies/first-baby-is-born-here-to-couple-using-new-method-of-ivf-29917081.html

The address below is for info on IVF and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIntracytoplasmic_sperm_injection&ei=k0TWUvi2K9Lo7Absv4HwBw&usg=AFQjCNENCCPTNt8SFofjOfUFhfL8s3Om7A&bvm=bv.59378465,d.ZGU

Doctor Strange

I was able to download that article. I'll run through it after my exam and post up important info.

drkpower

aloyisious wrote: »

Relative to those who oppose abortions here, this report might make the churches and others Pro-Birth happy. It concern's the first (reported) birth at the Rotunda by way of a new human IVF variation - Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection.

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/mothers-babies/first-baby-is-born-here-to-couple-using-new-method-of-ivf-29917081.html

The address below is for info on IVF and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIntracytoplasmic_sperm_injection&ei=k0TWUvi2K9Lo7Absv4HwBw&usg=AFQjCNENCCPTNt8SFofjOfUFhfL8s3Om7A&bvm=bv.59378465,d.ZGU

FYI, the ICSI bit isn't new (it's been around for a while) it's the combination of ICSI with the natural cycle which is new.

The Black Oil

UK Independent - The biggest lie of the anti-choice movement is that it is they who deal in harsh realities

Commentary on the Pope's recent 'throwaway culture' remarks.

It should not need reiterating, but bearing children you do not want is not like doing the recycling, or deciding you don’t really need that car, or giving the money you would spend on clothes to charity. It is exhausting, dangerous, bloody and violent. It involves sacrifice, albeit a mundane, everyday sacrifice that most of us barely notice. Pregnancy transgresses the boundaries of your own body. However difficult it is to think of something so commonplace as sacred and personal, that is what it is. Every pregnancy is a unique experience, in a body that is no one else's, within the context of a life that no one else can live. To give of yourself to give life to another, whatever the consequences, must always be a decision made freely. The biggest lie of the anti-choice movement is that they are the ones who deal in harsh realities. For them the harshest reality of all is that pregnant women and girls are people, too (the whole debate would be so much more straightforward if they weren't).

~

I am pro-choice and I am willing to live with blood on my hands if it means all women have the choices I expect for myself. I don't want perfection, I want humanity. Life is more than a flickering heartbeat on a black and white screen. Empathy should extend, not just to those who “will never see the light of day,” but to those who have bodies and lives that outside observers can neither idealise nor share.

iwantmydinner

The Black Oil wrote: »

UK Independent - The biggest lie of the anti-choice movement is that it is they who deal in harsh realities

Commentary on the Pope's recent 'throwaway culture' remarks.

That extract you've quoted is basically perfect.

Frito

It would appear that pro-life protestors in Massachusetts are challenging the buffer-zone around abortion clinics via freedom-of-speech arguments.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/15/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-challenged-in-us-supreme-court

I don't think they will be successful, their right to free speech is maintained, they just do not have the right to approach women entering clinics within a certain area.
It's almost as if they're arguing free speech is the right to make people listen.

iwantmydinner

Frito wrote: »

It would appear that pro-life protestors in Massachusetts are challenging the buffer-zone around abortion clinics via freedom-of-speech arguments.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/15/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-challenged-in-us-supreme-court

I don't think they will be successful, their right to free speech is maintained, they just do not have the right to approach women entering clinics within a certain area.
It's almost as if they're arguing free speech is the right to make people listen.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if this is exactly what they think the right to free speech is.

Brian Shanahan

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Wouldn't surprise me at all if this is exactly what they think the right to free speech is.

No, their concept of a right to free speech runs more like, "I can say anything I want, but once someone says something I don't agree with they should be gagged".

Piliger

Frito wrote: »

It would appear that pro-life protestors in Massachusetts are challenging the buffer-zone around abortion clinics via freedom-of-speech arguments.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/15/abortion-clinic-buffer-zones-challenged-in-us-supreme-court

I don't think they will be successful, their right to free speech is maintained, they just do not have the right to approach women entering clinics within a certain area.
It's almost as if they're arguing free speech is the right to make people listen.

What they want to do is to shout and scream and bully and scare the sh1t out of any woman approaching the clinics and intimidate them into leaving. They have no interest in free speech whatsoever.

Morag

As much as RTE have gotten stick of late, they have actually covered the story of a woman
who is the member of the deaf community, who was pregnant after using the MAP
and after non directive counseling, opted not to go to the UK but to order abortion pills online.

http://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/10241486/#pos=516

The segment of the show Hands On, also provides a recap of of the legal situation about abortion
for the deaf community.

This is pretty ground breaking, esp as the woman under the new protection of life in maternity law could face 14 years in prison.

druss

TD urges enquiry into pro-life group seeking €7k donations

..and the same group brings 10 politicians to New York on an "educational fact finding trip". I was not shocked and stunned at the names.

“Does your blessings allow a gift that would pay 10 per cent of what is needed to defend ourselves, that’s a gift of €2,800?

“Is there a way you can fund 20 per cent of what this fight against Government intimidation will cost? That means sacrificing €5,600.

“Has our Lord rewarded you with blessings that lets you assume one quarter of this burden with a gift of €7,000?”

Bannasidhe

Why would a woman want an abortion?

'I don't know....it's a question I never even thought about'

:rolleyes:

lazygal

A woman wants an abortion because she no longer wishes to be pregnant. Reasons beyond that are irrelevant.

Turtwig

lazygal wrote: »

A woman wants an abortion because she no longer wishes to be pregnant. Reasons beyond that are irrelevant.

We'll decide what's relevant!:mad:

:pac:

Bannasidhe

Jernal wrote: »

We'll decide what's relevant!:mad:

:pac:

Baaaaybeeeees are relevant!

Turtwig

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Baaaaybeeeees are relevant!

Until birth.

Brian Shanahan

Jernal wrote: »

Until birth.

Unless they become braindead and need hooking up to a machine. Then their lives become important again.

Turtwig

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Unless they become braindead and need hooking up to a machine. Then their lives become important again.

Yeah damn, forgot about that.

Brian Shanahan

Jernal wrote: »

Yeah damn, forgot about that.

I forgot to add one last thing with that, the braindead are only important if they are also white. No point keeping a black person alive according to the mass of the "pro-life" crowd (in the US, I'm not so sure if the Irish anti-abortionists are as wacko about race or the braindead as the US crowd are), they're not truly human after all.

Frito

aloyisious wrote: »

Also incidentally on the issue of pregnancy and life-saving, there's this court decision in Texas which has refused to allow the switch-off of life-treserving machines from a clinically-dead woman because she is pregnant. http://www.independent.ie/world-news/americas/husband-protests-as-hospital-refuses-to-switch-off-pregnant-womans-life-support-29900928.html

The piece seem's centred on the woman and her husband, and the right of NOK to have the hospital switch off the machines. I was a bit surprised to find no mention in the article as to whether he might like to have his wife's latest pregnancy go to full term and end in a successful birth, or whether his wife had also said that she would want the machines switched-off knowing her pregnancy would also be terminated as a result.

Follow-up

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/24/texas-judge-hospital-life-support-brain-dead-pregnant-woman

aloyisious

Frito wrote: »

Follow-up

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/24/texas-judge-hospital-life-support-brain-dead-pregnant-woman

Thanks's for that update. I had a look at my original post and can't see how/why I got the title wrong. The hospital was following Texas Law, not a court order, apologies.

Ta also to bannaside for the Ohio legislator interview. maybe, just maybe, he might go to the bother of thinking that question through.

Brian Shanahan

One thing that I noticed the other day re the opening meeting of the Irish branch of UKIP, was that Lucinda Creighton was still spouting the lie that Fine Gael reneged on a promise before the election to ensure abortion didn't happen with their recent protection of life bill.

Is she so stupid that she can't read her own party's election manifesto, or is she so stupid that she thinks she won't be caught out with so transparent a lie?

robindch

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Is she so stupid that she can't read her own party's election manifesto, or is she so stupid that she thinks she won't be caught out with so transparent a lie?

I'm not sure that Alive would be so outrageous as to correct a convenient lie.