Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

woman refused abortion - Mod Note in first post.

Options
1…1415171920…95

Comments

  • Options
    #482
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Is that a direct quote?

    Here's one I made up:
    "You don't qualify for an abortion under the legislation. We can offer a c-section or we can provide other prenatal care for you. Or you are free to leave"

    Whos to say the patient wasn't appealing though?

    That's an option under the legislation.

    Given the foetus was viable when it was delivered, for me the key thing not answered is how long did the entire process take.


  • Options
    #483
    strandroad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Is that a direct quote?

    Here's one I made up:
    "You don't qualify for an abortion under the legislation. We can offer a c-section or we can provide other prenatal care for you. Or you are free to leave"

    She did qualify, she was confirmed suicidal.
    If she was free to leave, why would they care about her eating or drinking?


  • Options
    #484
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Stheno wrote: »
    Or would it just be in the case of her being tied down? Not enough to restrict her movements/force her to be under the care of the HSE?
    I'm wouldn't be in favour of this woman being detained at all in any way.
    (I can't imagine why that would even be in question)


  • Options
    #485
    conorh91
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    mhge wrote: »
    If she was free to leave, why would they care about her eating or drinking?
    ?

    I don't understand this question.

    If a patient is a voluntary in-patient, you think a hospital is free to ignore any harm such patients may subsequently do to their bodies??

    The fact that there was an application made to feed this patient does not necessitate that the patient was herself appearing involuntarily. After all, she was seeking a medical procedure.


  • Options
    #486
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Phoebas wrote: »
    I'm wouldn't be in favour of this woman being detained at all in any way.
    (I can't imagine why that would even be in question)

    If shes underage, she could be in care.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #487
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    mhge wrote: »
    She did qualify, she was confirmed suicidal.
    That isn't an automatic qualification for an abortion.
    mhge wrote: »
    If she was free to leave, why would they care about her eating or drinking?
    She had placed herself under their care.


  • Options
    #488
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Nodin wrote: »
    If shes underage, she could be in care.
    If she was in prison she might be detained. If she was already detained under the mental Health Act she might be detained.

    Let's go speculation crazy ....


  • Options
    #489
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Phoebas wrote: »
    If she was in prison she might be detained. If she was already detained under the mental Health Act she might be detained.

    Let's go speculation crazy ....

    You posted

    "I'm wouldn't be in favour of this woman being detained at all in any way.
    (I can't imagine why that would even be in question) "

    to which I posted the perfectly possible scenario where she may have been underage and in care. It has happened before. While I realise the cracks appearing so blatantly in the 'pro make women do what you want' argument may make tempers run short, I still think it important to follow the ebb and flow of the discussion.


  • Options
    #490
    strandroad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    Phoebas wrote: »
    She had placed herself under their care.

    So she was not free to leave. She could have gone to eat or not as she pleases if she was.


  • Options
    #491
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Phoebas wrote: »

    She had placed herself under their care.

    What was that about speculation?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #492
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    mhge wrote: »
    So she was not free to leave. She could have gone to eat or not as she pleases if she was.
    There is no suggestion that she wasn't free to leave.
    That idea was simply someone's irresponsible speculation on this thread which seems to have grown 18 legs.


  • Options
    #493
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Phoebas wrote: »
    There is no suggestion that she wasn't free to leave.
    That idea was simply someone's irresponsible speculation on this thread which seems to have grown 18 legs.

    Legs that read "she had placed herself under their care"?


  • Options
    #494
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Nodin wrote: »
    What was that about speculation?
    She presented to the HSE seeking an abortion. That's what I mean by placing herself in their care.


  • Options
    #495
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Nodin wrote: »
    While I realise the cracks appearing so blatantly in the 'pro make women do what you want' argument may make tempers run short, I still think it important to follow the ebb and flow of the discussion.
    Not an argument I've ever made.


  • Options
    #496
    strandroad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    Phoebas wrote: »
    There is no suggestion that she wasn't free to leave.
    That idea was simply someone's irresponsible speculation on this thread which seems to have grown 18 legs.

    You suggest that she was free to leave...
    Phoebas wrote: »
    Is that a direct quote?

    Here's one I made up:
    "You don't qualify for an abortion under the legislation. We can offer a c-section or we can provide other prenatal care for you. Or you are free to leave"

    What do you think happened?

    " OK so I'm leaving. I'm suicidal you won't help"

    "OK bye".

    Of course she was not free to leave.


  • Options
    #497
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    mhge wrote: »
    What do you think happened?
    We know what happened - she has a c-section.
    mhge wrote: »
    Of course she was not free to leave.
    Well - as long as you've made your mind up, there's no need for actual facts.


  • Options
    #498
    takamichinoku
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭takamichinoku


    Mark Tighe @mktighe · 47m

    Mark Tighe @mktighe · 45m



    Are those viewable?


  • Options
    #499
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    At the risk of sounding like a broken record, what you seem to have missed is that a woman carrying a foetus which is at or past the stage of independant viability cannot elect to have an abortion. It's that simple.

    Professor I get it. A woman cannot have the dictionary definition of an elective abortion in Ireland -
    Abortion is against the law in Ireland unless the pregnancy endangers the life of the woman. If you decide to terminate your pregnancy, you will have to travel to another country to access safe and legal abortion services.

    Source: http://www.ifpa.ie/Pregnancy-Counselling/Abortion-Irish-Law

    What you don't seem to be getting is that medical professionals could put this woman who was at risk of suicide, through the ringer and delay until such a time as the unborn child she was carrying in her womb could become an indepedent viable entity, and as soon as that happened, they could whip it right out of there by cesarean section.

    There seems to have been no effort made to accommodate the woman's wish to end her pregnancy in the way she initially had requested, when it was perfectly legal to do so -
    It shall be lawful to carry out a medical procedure in respect of a pregnant woman in accordance with this section in the course of which, or as a result of which, an unborn human life is ended

    Source: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2013/en/act/pub/0035/print.html#sec4


  • Options
    #500
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Not an argument I've ever made.


    It amounts to the same thing at the end of the day.


  • Options
    #501
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    takamichinoku wrote: »
    Mark Tighe @mktighe · 47m

    Mark Tighe @mktighe · 45m



    Are those viewable?

    Indeed they are, Good Sir.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #502
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Nodin wrote: »
    It amounts to the same thing at the end of the day.
    Nodin,
    I challenge you to demonstrate where I made this 'pro make women do what you want' argument.

    Where did I say what I want women to do and where did I say I want to make them do what I want?


  • Options
    #503
    strandroad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Well - as long as you've made your mind up, there's no need for actual facts.

    There was a court order to control her and that's a fact.


  • Options
    #504
    conorh91
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    mhge wrote: »
    There was a court order to control her and that's a fact.
    There was a court order which sought to allow the hospital to take certain steps whilst this woman was under their care.

    If this woman had left the care of this hospital, and sought admission elsewhere, including a UK abortion clinic, there is no evidence to say the hospital could have had any say in that.


  • Options
    #505
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    mhge wrote: »
    There was a court order to control her and that's a fact.
    There was a court order about hydration, not about detention.


  • Options
    #506
    strandroad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    Phoebas wrote: »
    There was a court order about hydration, not about detention.

    It wouldn't be necessary if she was free to leave is the point.


  • Options
    #507
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    mhge wrote: »
    It wouldn't be necessary if she was free to leave is the point.
    There is no evidence that she wasn't free to leave at any point.

    When did this story jump the shark!!!


  • Options
    #508
    ProfessorPlum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,812 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    Professor I get it. A woman cannot have the dictionary definition of an elective abortion in Ireland -



    Source: http://www.ifpa.ie/Pregnancy-Counselling/Abortion-Irish-Law

    What you don't seem to be getting is that medical professionals could put this woman who was at risk of suicide, through the ringer and delay until such a time as the unborn child she was carrying in her womb could become an indepedent viable entity, and as soon as that happened, they could whip it right out of there by cesarean section.

    There seems to have been no effort made to accommodate the woman's wish to end her pregnancy in the way she initially had requested, when it was perfectly legal to do so -



    Source: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2013/en/act/pub/0035/print.html#sec4

    You seem to have a lot more confirmed details of this case than is in the public domain at present. Nowhere has it been confirmed that there was a delay in order to bring the pregnancy into the 'viable' range. The initial report (from RTE, from memory) that suggested there may have been a delay was revised to the original report as per the Independent - links posted by another poster here. I am loath to comment on an individual case, particularly as there are only very scant details, but your posts on your interpretation of the law on this issue upto this point have been wrong. Quoting the Irish Statue Book, or anywhere else does not make you right.

    If there was a delay, that maybe an entirely different issue. If, as has been reported, she presented somewhere between 23 and 25 weeks, one could argue that the foetus was viable throughout this timeframe, and so every effort needed to be made to deliver a live infant. If there was no immediate risk of self destruction (woman in a secure environment for example), then it could very well be argued that in order to balance the equal right to life of both woman and child, that a delay in order to give the foetus time to mature (along with meds that can be given prior to delivery to help mature the foetal respiratory system) was the right decision. Without knowing the exact details of this case however, it is purely speculation.


  • Options
    #509
    TomoBhoy
    Registered Users Posts: 179 ✭✭TomoBhoy


    It's absolutely unreal that she has been forced to go through what she had, first off she was raped, I don't blame her for wanting to end the pregnancy it's unreal why she was put through this.


  • Options
    #510
    conorh91
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    mhge wrote: »
    It wouldn't be necessary if she was free to leave is the point.
    Yes, it could.

    She was under the care of a hospital, seeking a medical procedure. As long as a patient remains under the care of a clinical team at a hospital, even voluntarily, the hospital has certain duties towards that patient, even if they go against his or her immediate wishes.

    The law on medical negligence is too well advanced for that not to have been a consideration.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #511
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/homeV2/article1447800.ece

    There is a paywall but what's there is shocking


Advertisement