Abortion Discussion

volchitsa

Two Sheds wrote: »

Lots of people die for lots of different reasons. This thread is about abortion.

And Savita Halappanavar needed an abortion. The two obstetricians involved in the investigation into her death both said that this would have given her the best chance of surviving, better than even the best care for sepsis - which of course she didn't get anyway. So not only did the Irish system refuse her the best care available, it also effectively deprived her of the second best care. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of our capacity to replace internationally recognized best practice in terms of obstetrical care by our own inferior standards of care made up as we go along.

Overheal

Two Sheds wrote: »

Maybe the medical personnel can use that in their defence?

The IFPA gave women great, dangerous advice, didn't they - despite no law being broken.

The IFPA gave them the only advice they could under the law, which was to go overseas. Correct? So if it is dangerous advice they were given, it's because Ireland's stance on abortion is detached from reality.

Two Sheds

Two Sheds wrote: »

As we've already seen the UN Convention tells us that childhood begins before birth. It looks as if the supporters of abortion have no time for The Rights of the Child.

The teenage-adult thing might apply, but only if you were using age as a justification for killing the teenager.

Once again, is that what it says? Be precise once more please.

oldrnwisr

Overheal wrote: »

The same lawmakers in the U.S. Wanting to defund PP are the same ones who want to shut down Medicare, social security, food stamps, and basically all the other systems in place that assist the disadvantaged; indeed a baby born, but not a baby fed - not just a quotable choice of words but actually how messed up some peoples viewpoint is on the situation.

Indeed.

oldrnwisr

Two Sheds wrote: »

Didn't one of those women die .. and another seriously injured?

Fortunately, Ireland remains a relatively safe place for women to have their babies and a safe place for babies to be allowed live. The same definitely can't be said of the UK.

I'm sorry but what is your point exactly?

After all it was you who said:

Two Sheds wrote: »

Lots of people die for lots of different reasons. This thread is about abortion.

What has abortion got to do with the relative safety of Ireland as a place to give birth?

Anyway, as it turns out you're wrong. Doubly so.

Firstly, as has already been established in previous abortion threads, abortion laws have no correlation with maternal health or mortality. Ireland has been relatively safe in the past because it has a western, efficiently funded healthcare system, not because it has prohibitions against abortion.

Secondly, the important point here is that Ireland has been a relatively safe place in the past. Not so much anymore though. As alaimacerc has pointed out, the number of maternal deaths has been increasing. This has already had an impact on our maternal mortality ratio (MMR). The latest figures from the WHO cover the period to the end of 2013. These figures show that Ireland now has a maternal mortality ratio (number of deaths per 1000 pregancies) of 9. This puts Ireland in joint 31st place with France and Malta. It is also a 33% increase since 1990 when MMR began to be monitored. A pregnant woman in Ireland now has a 1 in 5500 chance of dying while pregnant. This is compared with the now safest country in the world, Belarus where a woman has only a 1 in 45,200 chance of dying.
It is also representative of a relatively recent trend. Back in 2008, Ireland had managed to significantly lower its 1990 MMR figure and was 2nd in the world with an MMR of just 2. However in 2010 it slipped to 11th place and is now in 31st place.
Oh, and one last thing. With Ireland's recent decline in healthcare, Ireland is now a more dangerous place for a woman to give birth than the UK, contrary to your assertion. The UK has an MMR of 8 and a chance of death of 1 in 6900.

So, once again you're wrong. Gee, there's a shocker.


WHO Trends in Maternal Mortality 1990-2013

rainbow kirby

Two Sheds wrote: »

Fortunately, Ireland remains a relatively safe place for women to have their babies and a safe place for babies to be allowed live. The same definitely can't be said of the UK.

I would feel a hell of a lot safer having any future child of mine here in the UK than I would in Ireland. The 8th amendment affects more than just abortion - it is miscarriage management, choices in labour and birth, treatment of unrelated health issues during pregnancy etc, and I'd rather not have that in play.

Overheal

Two Sheds wrote: »

We're discussing killing children (yes, I do feel dirty) and you're concerned about rhetoric?

The reality is that age is used as a justification for killing children.

Notice how neither Irish or American culture considers a person's age from any point other than their birth. I do believe the Chinese consider pre-natal development in determining your age, but that is the only instance that I am aware of. At the same time, China has legal and state provided abortion.

Two Sheds

oldrnwisr wrote: »

I'm sorry but what is your point exactly?

After all it was you who said:



What has abortion got to do with the relative safety of Ireland as a place to give birth?

Anyway, as it turns out you're wrong. Doubly so.

Firstly, as has already been established in previous abortion threads, abortion laws have no correlation with maternal health or mortality. Ireland has been relatively safe in the past because it has a western, efficiently funded healthcare system, not because it has prohibitions against abortion.

Secondly, the important point here is that Ireland has been a relatively safe place in the past. Not so much anymore though. As alaimacerc has pointed out, the number of maternal deaths has been increasing. This has already had an impact on our maternal mortality ratio (MMR). The latest figures from the WHO cover the period to the end of 2013. These figures show that Ireland now has a maternal mortality ratio (number of deaths per 1000 pregancies) of 9. This puts Ireland in joint 31st place with France and Malta. It is also a 33% increase since 1990 when MMR began to be monitored. A pregnant woman in Ireland now has a 1 in 5500 chance of dying while pregnant. This is compared with the now safest country in the world, Belarus where a woman has only a 1 in 45,200 chance of dying.
It is also representative of a relatively recent trend. Back in 2008, Ireland had managed to significantly lower its 1990 MMR figure and was 2nd in the world with an MMR of just 2. However in 2010 it slipped to 11th place and is now in 31st place.
Oh, and one last thing. With Ireland's recent decline in healthcare, Ireland is now a more dangerous place for a woman to give birth than the UK, contrary to your assertion. The UK has an MMR of 8 and a chance of death of 1 in 6900.

So, once again you're wrong. Gee, there's a shocker.


WHO Trends in Maternal Mortality 1990-2013

You really should try reading what was written before wasting your time on contradicting an assertion that was never made.

Two Sheds

Overheal wrote: »

Notice how neither Irish or American culture considers a person's age from any point other than their birth. I do believe the Chinese consider pre-natal development in determining your age, but that is the only instance that I am aware of. At the same time, China has legal and state provided abortion.

The unborn have legal ages applied in order to conform with abortion legislation.

Two Sheds

Overheal wrote: »

The IFPA gave them the only advice they could under the law, which was to go overseas. Correct? So if it is dangerous advice they were given, it's because Ireland's stance on abortion is detached from reality.

The IFPA gave (and may still give) positively dangerous advice to women.

Some of the advice they gave about abortion was illegal, according to a leading lawyer, and some was medically dangerous, a top doctor says

.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/revealed-the-abortion-advice-that-could-put-lives-at-risk-28824188.html

otpmb

volchitsa wrote: »

And Savita Halappanavar needed an abortion. The two obstetricians involved in the investigation into her death both said that this would have given her the best chance of surviving, better than even the best care for sepsis - which of course she didn't get anyway. So not only did the Irish system refuse her the best care available, it also effectively deprived her of the second best care. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of our capacity to replace internationally recognized best practice in terms of obstetrical care by our own inferior standards of care made up as we go along.

Do you have a link for this?

sinead88

Two Sheds wrote: »

The IFPA gave (and may still give) positively dangerous advice to women.
.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/revealed-the-abortion-advice-that-could-put-lives-at-risk-28824188.html

Again, if we provided safe, legal abortion here in Ireland, none of this would happen. People who can afford to, are going to go abroad anyways, regardless of our laws here in Ireland and of any advice they are given. Our laws needlessly endanger womens' lives.

Overheal

Two Sheds wrote: »

The unborn have legal ages applied in order to conform with abortion legislation.

That doesn't explain why we culturally have determined age from birth for millenia; nations have risen and fallen and yet you're still a year old a year after you are born throughout that time. They really weren't thinking about abortion legislation, so, false on that. You're acting as if our invention for determining age directly resulted from a modern abortion issue. Laughable.

Two Sheds

sinead88 wrote: »

Again, if we provided safe, legal abortion here in Ireland, none of this would happen. People who can afford to, are going to go abroad anyways, regardless of our laws here in Ireland and of any advice they are given. Our laws needlessly endanger womens' lives.

That's what we call an excuse. There wasn't even a legal excuse to give women dangerous advice.

This issue fairly exposed the pro-choice fake concern for women. There wasn't a peep from them.

Two Sheds

Overheal wrote: »

That doesn't explain why we culturally have determined age from birth for millenia; nations have risen and fallen and yet you're still a year old a year after you are born throughout that time. They really weren't thinking about abortion legislation, so, false on that. You're acting as if our invention for determining age directly resulted from a modern abortion issue. Laughable.

I'm sure there's a degree of reasoning in there somewhere.

Overheal

Two Sheds wrote: »

The IFPA gave (and may still give) positively dangerous advice to women.
.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/revealed-the-abortion-advice-that-could-put-lives-at-risk-28824188.html

All that proves is the compassion and lengths those clinic workers go to, having to circumvent law (and risk their jobs and such) to do what they can to get women the best advice in spite of the law.

So the article never chooses to mention it (government sponsored rag?): can someone please tell me what happens when you go to a doctor in Ireland and tell them you're experience a post-abortion complication, as opposed to a miscarriage?

Overheal

Two Sheds wrote: »

I'm sure there's a degree of reasoning in there somewhere.

If you can't find it, I completely understand.

Overheal

otpmb wrote: »

Do you have a link for this?

Better, we have an entire search engine result feed showing predominately multiple links that only talk about how botched her care was:

https://www.bing.com/search?q=Savita+Halappanavar&PC=U316&FORM=CHROMN

And all I had to do was google her name.

enjoy

Two Sheds

Overheal wrote: »

If you can't find it, I completely understand.

I'm happy that you understand something.

otpmb

Overheal wrote: »

Better, we have an entire search engine result feed showing predominately multiple links that only talk about how botched her care was:

https://www.bing.com/search?q=Savita+Halappanavar&PC=U316&FORM=CHROMN

And all I had to do was google her name.

enjoy

Thanks, I did that and the key statement that seems to be "failure in basic care", as opposed to your statement which was "the two obstetricians involved in the investigation into her death both said that an abortion would have given her the best chance of surviving, better than even the best care for sepsis". Can you find me a link/source for that particular statement.

Overheal

That wasn't my statement, that was the statement of another user.

It seems clear from the news reports however that the investigation into her death (and by extension, the opinion of the investigators involved) points to malpractice.

inocybe

Two Sheds wrote: »

That's what we call an excuse. There wasn't even a legal excuse to give women dangerous advice.

This issue fairly exposed the pro-choice fake concern for women. There wasn't a peep from them.

Actually this action exposes the pro-lifer fake concern for women. So they went on false pretenses and secretly filmed crisis pregnancy counsellors because of their concern for the well-being of women with real crisis pregnancies? Not to try to stop any avenue for information on abortion to be provided.
Thanks to them we'll be back to chinese whispers and stickers in toilets.

otpmb

Overheal wrote: »

That wasn't my statement, that was the statement of another user.

It seems clear from the news reports however that the investigation into her death (and by extension, the opinion of the investigators involved) points to malpractice.

Oops, sorry when you replied I just assumed it was your statement, sure it seems clear to me she should've been given an abortion if she wanted one, especially as she was miscarrying anyways, but I really would like to find a source, preferably unbiased which openly says Savita Halappanarvar should've been given an abortion.

Overheal

otpmb wrote: »

Oops, sorry when you replied I just assumed it was your statement, sure it seems clear to me she should've been given an abortion if she wanted one, especially as she was miscarrying anyways, but I really would like to find a source, preferably unbiased which openly says Savita Halappanarvar should've been given an abortion.

Thats honestly a tall order, as looking at the reactions to the case its clear theres no standout conclusion that says she should have been given the abortion. However, there were several instances in her care where the only thing that appeared to hold doctors back from performing an abortion was the law in regard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar

otpmb

Overheal wrote: »

Thats honestly a tall order, as looking at the reactions to the case its clear theres no standout conclusion that says she should have been given the abortion. However, there were several instances in her care where the only thing that appeared to hold doctors back from performing an abortion was the law in regard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar

I know, I'll just hope the other poster returns and backs up their claim, okay so reading through wikipedia, it seems legislation as opposed to repeal of the 8th amendment is the problem here. Has this been addressed completely with the Protection to Life during pregnancy bill? What problems have not been addressed by the bill, feel free to rant a little . Currently reading the bill now so no need to send me a link, but it all seems a bit vague.

Everyone is free to rant about the bill.

Overheal

Once you start talking about Irish Law minutiae I zone out but I do hope other posters pick up that topic better than I can.

rainbow kirby

otpmb wrote: »

I know, I'll just hope the other poster returns and backs up their claim, okay so reading through wikipedia, it seems legislation as opposed to repeal of the 8th amendment is the problem here. Has this been addressed completely with the Protection to Life during pregnancy bill? What problems have not been addressed by the bill, feel free to rant a little . Currently reading the bill now so no need to send me a link, but it all seems a bit vague.

This bill pretty much retains the status quo while throwing in a 14 year prison sentence for women who manage to have an abortion in Ireland. Pretty much the definition of completely unfit for purpose.

otpmb

rainbow kirby wrote: »

This bill pretty much retains the status quo while throwing in a 14 year prison sentence for women who manage to have an abortion in Ireland. Pretty much the definition of completely unfit for purpose.

And the only way to change this is to appeal/abolish the 8th amendment?

rainbow kirby

Yep - the 8th amendment strongly limits what can be enacted via legislation.

otpmb

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Yep - the 8th amendment strongly limits what can be enacted via legislation.

And this could only realistically be changed by the election of a left wing government, who would then propose a referendum?