Abortion Discussion

lazygal

Cabaal wrote: »

and yet some people try label it as murder, its clearly no such thing under our laws.

An abortion is clearly thought out and yet its still not murder because you can be fined for it even if you carry it out in Ireland and break the law. Last time I checked I won't be fined if I shot and killed somebody after putting planning into how I'd shoot them.

It kind of puts massive holes in the usage of the word "murder" by some people as very clearly the Irish state does not see a fetus as equal to a actual human being.

The "child from conception" argument holds no legal water. In Ireland if you present with a miscarriage before 12 weeks no attempt is made to treat the unborn child. If your unborn child dies before 24 weeks it is legally classed as a miscarriage and no death certificate is issued. We don't pay child benefit from conception. We don't restrict travel if a woman intends to murder an unborn child. The unborn is a meaningless phrase.

Delirium

We have been given information that the migrant woman at the centre of the current forced pregnancy was 'committed' to a psychiatric hospital following her initial request for termination. It’s already known that the initial request was made when she was 8 weeks pregnant.

It was this crucial period in which she was being held incommunicado which led directly to the Caesarian option being possible to impose as an ‘alternative’ to allowing her to access the abortion she had asked for.

All those running the system which imposed such barbaric treatment on this women don’t want to talk about individual cases. Of course they don’t, when you can get away with speaking in broad generalisations you can avoid facing up to the barbaric situations created by the laws you administer and maintain. The victims of this system become a mere statistic.

More on Workers Solidarity Movement FB page

Nodin

SW wrote: »

More on Workers Solidarity Movement FB page

Christ help us if that's true.

lazygal

SW wrote: »

More on Workers Solidarity Movement FB page

If that is true this is extremely scary. Will all pregnant women at risk of suicide be simply incarcerated in psychiatric institutions until foetal viability?

Cabaal

lazygal wrote: »

If that is true this is extremely scary. Will all pregnant women at risk of suicide be simply incarcerated in psychiatric institutions until foetal viability?

Isn't this exactly what some people on the no choice side actually suggested though? Guess they got their wish, yet they are still going to do a silly protest on Saturday

iwantmydinner

Oh my god it's happening. The "perinatal hospices". Jesus.

Obliq

lazygal wrote: »

If that is true this is extremely scary. Will all pregnant women at risk of suicide be simply incarcerated in psychiatric institutions until foetal viability?

We predicted that eventuality at the time of the legislation :mad:

lazygal

Cabaal wrote: »

Isn't this exactly what some people on the no choice side actually suggested though? Guess they got their wish, yet they are still going to do a silly protest on Saturday

Noted empathist Ronan Mullen proposed perinatal hospice care for women dealing with fatal foetal abnormalities. Maybe the Women could all be helped in the same place. They could do some laundry to pass the time and defray expenses too. Because of course the solution to every single crisis pregnancy is to remain pregnant.

veliktom

I know it has been stated before but the whole personhood debate is the crux of the matter. It all boils down to at what point you define personhood.

I can see where the pro-life side are coming from in that if you believe that a zygote/blastocyst/embryo/fetus is a person, then you would be against the destruction of same without a very good reason. It is then easy to argue that the life of an unborn person is equal to a born person.

My view is that what start out as a collection of human cells attains personhood gradually, and there is no accurate way of defining precisely when this is, but as a society we can make a reasonable attempt to do so. Once this is done, rights can be apportioned appropriately between the born and the unborn, with the unborn gaining more rights as the pregnancy progresses. This process does not stop at birth either, as a child does not have the same rights as a mature adult.

So in terms of abortion, it make sense to me that it is allowed unconditionally in the first trimester. The second trimester is a grey area but should be left up to medical professionals to decide on and not politicians (I believe Canada has no legislation for example). In the third trimester an abortion should result in a live birth and the state taking over if the mother does not want the child, as per the case being discussed presently.

Cabaal

lazygal wrote: »

Noted empathist Ronan Mullen proposed perinatal hospice care for women dealing with fatal foetal abnormalities. Maybe the Women could all be helped in the same place. They could do some laundry to pass the time and defray expenses too. Because of course the solution to every single crisis pregnancy is to remain pregnant.

Sure they even have past experience to work on here, they just need to tweak it abit and try not start selling children again...they'll be fine.

Also washing some clothes will give the women something to do and keep their minds off of the rape that caused the pregnancy.

It's all good, if they wash enough stuff it might even be profitable.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Jesus Christ is the Irish states answer to every unwanted pregnancy to stick the mothers in a home? We did it for years under the guidance of the catholic Church and now we seem to be doing it to rape victims so the state doesn't have to properly address the topic of abortion. If what is reported above is true, they effectively locked her up until the baby was developed enough to be live outside the womb.

It will also have the knock on effect of other women not engaging with this law as they will see what happened in this case. Therefore they will still go to England. The abortion legislation is effectively dead in the water from what I can see. I'd love to see a full scale referendum on the issue but I somehow doubt we are going to get it.

Cabaal

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

Jesus Christ is the Irish states answer to every unwanted pregnancy to stick the mothers in a home? We did it for years under the guidance of the catholic Church and now we seem to be doing it to rape victims so the state doesn't have to properly address the topic of abortion. If what is reported above is true, they effectively locked her up until the baby was developed enough to be live outside the womb.

Out of sight....out of mind,

Its the same reason why the government don't want to put the 8th to a vote, by failing to do so they hope it'll go away and people won't keep going on about it.

Zubeneschamali

kylith wrote: »

I really wish there was a male version of pregnancy because some men really don't seem to be able to grasp what it's like.

"If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament" - Florynce Kennedy

Nodin

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

Jesus Christ is the Irish states answer to every unwanted pregnancy to stick the mothers in a home? .......

If it's true. We'll have to wait for more confirmation.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Nodin wrote: »

If it's true. We'll have to wait for more confirmation.

Agreed, I did say if later in the post.

Loafing Oaf

Cabaal wrote: »

Isn't this exactly what some people on the no choice side actually suggested though? Guess they got their wish, yet they are still going to do a silly protest on Saturday

They seem to be suggesting that the legislation meant the process wasn't seen through, that the girl should have been 'helped' to bring her pregnancy to full term...

Richard Bingham

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

Extending that logic, I could ask you if you're glad that the woman had been raped so that the child is alive today instead of never having existed?

Because, had she not been raped, that particular baby would never have been born.

Do you not think that it is possible to hope for a good (or the better of a number of possible) outcome at which ever juncture a person becomes aware of the situation? Ralphdejones wasn't present when the rape occurred and it had already happened by the time he heard of the situation. The scenario is therefore where he finds himself, it is a given so to speak and his gladness or otherwise about it are irrelevant. Taking it from this point it is perfectly possible for him or anyone to be glad the child survived without being glad the rape happened. To suggest otherwise is just ridiculous. What your saying is that no good can come from something bad. If you lost your job and three months later managed to secure another job and someone told you they were glad you got a new job, would you reply "oh so your happy I lost my job"!

This discussion gets more ridiculous every day.

PopePalpatine

Cabaal wrote: »

Isn't this exactly what some people on the no choice side actually suggested though? Guess they got their wish, yet they are still going to do a silly protest on Saturday

I think it was Jack Kyle in this thread who pretty much salivated (I guess I can't get more sexually suggestive than that) at the thought of locking up women 'til birth.

The Black Oil

Ireland's approach to abortion seems to be mostly 'move it to another parish'.

Richard Bingham

Cabaal wrote: »

Simply existing isn't enough for people,

People deserve to have their mental health too and forcing a women to term is knowingly damaging a persons mental health in such an instance.

If your happy with "existence" as an acceptable standard for people then issues such as homelessness, poverty etc aren't a problem in your world it seems. After all the people still exist. Doesn't matter if its a miserable, depressing existence, life destroying experience...you still "exist".

In this case your happy to put a women through one of the most awful, violating experiences a women can go through. But its all ok at the end of the day as she'll still exist. Thats extremely worrying.

In June of last year when discussing the case of Anna Byrne

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/ireland/121120/woman-jumps-her-death-after-she-found-out-she-was-pregna

I asked the following question in this thread;

If a woman is suicidal because she has been told the child is going to be of a sex other than the one she hoped for, then I'm wondering will an abortion be granted i.e. would this have helped Anna Byrne?

At first other posters declined to give a view and said it didn't matter (many of these posters seemed quite angry with me for asking at the time for some reason) but when teased out most posters said that if the woman is suicidal for any reason she should be granted the abortion.

So now we are getting down to the good stuff! We've seen from what happened in the UK that once you allow limited abortion, the floodgates open (c190,000 abortion per year even though this was never intended and the law requires them to be medically certified so that it wouldn't turn into abortion on demand). The majority of the pro abortion side believe that if a woman says she is suicidal she should be granted an abortion even if the reason for her being suicidal is that she wants a child of a particular sex and the child she is carrying is of the opposite sex.

= sex selective abortion. If you lot get your way Ireland will have the most relaxed abortion regime in the world. Any reason. No time limit.

You lot are trying to turn this place into China.....

Delirium

Which is it, we're try to make Ireland have the most relaxed abortion legislation in the world or we're making it like China (i.e. forced abortions)?

Nodin

Richard Bingham wrote: »

...............

= sex selective abortion. If you lot get your way Ireland will have the most relaxed abortion regime in the world. Any reason. No time limit.

You lot are trying to turn this place into China.....

Sex selective abortion is illegal in China.

Have you any more nonsense you want discounted?

aloyisious

I'm going to be lazy here and not scroll back/examine all the posts and linked media reports. Does anyone know if, given that the panel were of the opinion that the young woman was a suicide-risk, they had her placed on suicide-watch or in secure custody to prevent her killing herself and terminating the feotus? If the panel did not take those steps, why didn't they; given the reports that the psychiatrists believed she was a suicide risk. I'm assuming that the obstetrician was not 100% sure she was not a suicide risk, given that he felt there was a need to do a caesarean section operation to remove the feotus from her womb.

A failure to take those obvious steps in the interval between her declaration that she would kill herself and her eventual agreement to the caesarean section operation would seem a little slipshod, unless there was a psychological re-evaluation of her state of mind to the effect that she was not likely to kill herself.

If there was a re-evaluation of the woman's mind-set and it was that she was NOT a suicide risk, then why did the medical team proceed with the caesarean operation, as the grounds for it were no longer there in their opinion.

Ralphdejones

aloyisious wrote: »

I'm going to be lazy here and not scroll back/examine all the posts and linked media reports. Does anyone know if, given the panel were of the opinion that the young woman was a suicide-risk, they had her placed on suicide-watch or in secure custody to prevent her killing herself and terminating the feotus? If the panel did not take those steps, why didn't they; given the reports that the psychiatrists believed she was a suicide risk. I'm assuming that the obstetrician was not 100% sure she was not a risk, given that he felt there was a need to remove the feotus from her womb.

A failure to take those obvious steps in the interval between her declaration that she would kill herself and the eventual agreement to the caesarean section operation would seem a little slipshod, unless there was a psychological re-evaluation of her state of mind to the effect that she was not likely to kill herself.

If there was a re-evaluation of the woman's mind-set and it was that she was NOT a suicide risk, then why did the medical

I seem to recall from one of the media reports she was placed on suicide watch in the last few days before the termination, but I don't know any more details than that.

rainbow kirby

SW wrote: »

Which is it, we're try to make Ireland have the most relaxed abortion legislation in the world or we're making it like China (i.e. forced abortions)?

I'd be quite happy to see it be like Canada - a decision made between a woman and her medical team.

inocybe

Cabaal wrote: »

and yet some people try label it as murder, its clearly no such thing under our laws.

An abortion is clearly thought out and yet its still not murder because you can be fined for it even if you carry it out in Ireland and break the law. Last time I checked I won't be fined if I shot and killed somebody after putting planning into how I'd shoot them.

It kind of puts massive holes in the usage of the word "murder" by some people as very clearly the Irish state does not see a fetus as equal to a actual human being.

legally there is a 14 year prison sentence possible

aloyisious

inocybe wrote: »

legally there is a 14 year prison sentence possible

I think that sentence refers to an act carried out outside the law.

I also recall media reports of some members of the Irish medical profession being reportedly unsure that if they operated within the guidelines and provided an abortion that one of their medical profession ethical committees would decide they had acted unethically and/or unprofessionally and take a court case against them on those grounds to have the licence to practice medicine cancelled with a prosecution and conviction for unlawful acts. Personally I thought at the time, when reading those stories, that they were scare stories being spread by those opposed to abortions full stop.

aloyisious

Ralphdejones wrote: »

I seem to recall from one of the media reports she was placed on suicide watch in the last few days before the termination, but I don't know any more details than that.

Ta for that, Ralph. I pressed something before I had completed my post and it went out unfinished. It's edited and completed above.

aloyisious

You'll probably read this story in a few hours time. Saturday in Dublin might get hot, with both Pro-choice and Anti-abortion rallies to be held on O'Connell St then.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/thousands-at-dublin-pro-choice-march-over-irish-abortion-laws-1.1902968

Thousands at Dublin pro-choice march over Irish abortion laws. Demonstrations also took place at Eyre Square in Galway, at Belfast’s City Hall, and at Cork’s Courthouse and Limerick and outside the Irish Embassy in Berlin.

Another pro-choice rally will take place on O’Connell Street this Saturday.

Separately anti-abortion groups, the Life Institute and Youth Defence, have given a name to the baby of the woman at the centre of the controvesy which was delivered prematurely by Caesarean section earlier this month. They have called the baby ‘Hope’ and are holding a vigil for the infant on Saturday. In a statement issued today they said the “You are not alone’ vigil for ‘Baby Hope’ will be held on Saturday at 4 pm on O’Connell Street. They are asking people to bring a candle.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/gerard-howlin/there-was-no-concern-for-savita-just-usual-self-satisfied-public-ire-282570.html
An opinion-piece: Para's 9 to 13 are interesting amongst the other parts of it.

Absolam

Obliq wrote: »

To be serious though - you are disingenuously omitting the point that her choices over same (your comment above) being limited do show complete disregard for her life, as her pregnancy was the reason she was suicidal.

The comment was referring to Cabaals statement of "complete disregard for her choice/control over her own body/life", rather than "complete disregard for her life", but anyway, you seem to be saying that limiting her choices by removing her facility to end her life shows disregard for her life, which seems a bit muddled to me. Would permitting her to commit suicide have shown greater regard for her life?

Obliq wrote: »

Bullsh1t. She's just undergone 16 weeks of torture at the hands of the Irish State.

I see you withdrew the allegation of torture further down the thread. Does my disgusting shamelessness still pertain?

Obliq wrote: »

Where's your shame man? Your prioritising the welfare/life of a foetus over her welfare/life disgusts me.

To be a little more specific, I'm prioritising the life of the foetus over the welfare of the woman. To address your other "/" options:
I would not prioritise the welfare of the foetus over the welfare of the woman.
I would not prioritise the life of the foetus over the life of the woman.
I would not prioritise the welfare of the foetus over the life of the woman.
Finally, I'm not catholic. I don't feel collectively attributable shame over imaginary transgressions.

Obliq wrote: »

Edit: To address your comment in bold - this is NOT like being denied what she wanted. It was being denied what she NEEDED. This is not like refusing a child an ice cream, so try not to belittle her experience to a "want".

I didn't say it was like being denied what she wanted, I said she was denied what she wanted. Nor did I say, or even imply, her desire was comparable to a child wanting an ice cream. She may have felt she NEEDED an abortion, and it was certainly a life altering circumstance, but it wasn't a life threatening one, so she didn't actually NEED one; she could survive without it. When she demonstrated suicidal ideation, her life was in danger it was agreed that she did NEED a termination or she would die, so it was provided.
However, I'm willing to stipulate that just as there are degrees of desire, there are also degrees of need. So the woman may have needed the abortion in order to be less distraught, or to improve her circumstances, or to be free of being pregnant. None of those needs rise to the level of need necessary to justify an abortion in my opinion, or in the opinion of the current law.