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
Comments
-
Trial by media... And the mob decides the doctors are at fault here?
What about personal integrity? Why is it ok to take the easy way out? Do we walk past drowning people because we might get wet if we save them? What about stepping up and taking the option that is harder on yourself, because sometimes that is the right thing to do?
This case is bizarre in the extreme, and verified facts are hard to come by. But if this woman could have waited from 25 to even 27 wks for this, it would have made a massive difference. 14 days to dramatically improve someone else's whole life.
But that's somehow unconscionable to hope for?0 -
Trial by media... And the mob decides the doctors are at fault here?
What about personal integrity? Why is it ok to take the easy way out? Do we walk past drowning people because we might get wet if we save them? What about stepping up and taking the option that is harder on yourself, because sometimes that is the right thing to do?
This case is bizarre in the extreme, and verified facts are hard to come by. But if this woman could have waited from 25 to even 27 wks for this, it would have made a massive difference. 14 days to dramatically improve someone else's whole life.
But that's somehow unconscionable to hope for?
Her life was at risk. If there was a physical risk to her health should she wait two more weeks? Should she have been forcibly restrained for two more weeks gestation? Does a pregnant rape victim have any responsibility for a foetus she never wanted in the first place?
Two weeks is a lifetime for someone who is suicidal.0 -
Trial by media... And the mob decides the doctors are at fault here?
What about personal integrity? Why is it ok to take the easy way out? Do we walk past drowning people because we might get wet if we save them? What about stepping up and taking the option that is harder on yourself, because sometimes that is the right thing to do?
This case is bizarre in the extreme, and verified facts are hard to come by. But if this woman could have waited from 25 to even 27 wks for this, it would have made a massive difference. 14 days to dramatically improve someone else's whole life.
But that's somehow unconscionable to hope for?
The allegation is that she presented at 8 weeks and - for reasons unknown - was made wait 16 weeks until the decision was made.
Full article here
https://twitter.com/Cwhyte1928/media0 -
Sierra Mountains wrote: »It's not about sleeping easy at night, it's about protecting a foetus that doesn't have a voice in the matter. It's about morality.
I consider it immoral that the person with a voice in the matter was completely ignored.
I consider it immoral that a pregnant woman who did not want to give birth to her rapists child was forced through the ordeal of having to appeal to her GP, appeal to two separate panels of medical experts, then was forced through the court system by the HSE in order to be forcefully hydrated so she could be forced to continue with the pregnancy.
I find it immoral that an obstetrician determined that the woman could at the earliest opportunity be coerced to undergo a cesarean section to deliver a child into the world that would likely never know it's mother as it was taken into the care of the same bastards HSE that forced her to go through with the pregnancy in the first place.
I find it immoral that the father of the child will also know of the child's existence and the day will come when the child learns of the circumstances of their conception.
I could give you an endless list, and that'd be only going on what we know so far through the tireless work of people that actually gave a shìt, because the people actually involved in the case don't seem to have done.If you think the mother was treated like an animal how do you think a foetus is treated when it's aborted?
With as much compassion and respect and dignity as is humanely possible to minimise the stress on the unborn child and the woman who is actually present and having to endure the procedure rather than risking the lives of both the unborn child and the woman in question should she choose to die by suicide rather than be forced to give birth when she does not want to give birth.
Like I said - could so, so easily have been avoided if anyone had given a damn about the woman and HER life, and what SHE wanted.0 -
The total hypocrisy of this is that Irish middle class women that aren't in the care of the state use UK (or other EU) services in their thousands every year.
As a culture that's allowed us to pretend that abortion is something that never happens here and we only impose our insane laws on people who can't afford to escape them or are in an unusual situation where they can't access the UK or other EU countries due to being in state care or being unable to obtain visas.
So, like the olden days when the middle classes turned their backs on the mostly working class women in Magdalene asylums, they're doing exactly the same now with this topic.
You can rant and rave, preach and lecture but if it came to a serious situation where you or your daughter or sister needed have an abortion, you would at least have that option open by going on a short flight abroad. You reserve the most crewel treatment of the Irish state for a small minority who can't escape it.
The idea that there's no abortion in Ireland is total make belief, we just outsource it.0 -
Advertisement
-
http://humanrights.ie/constitution-of-ireland/suicide-and-the-protection-of-life-in-pregnancy-act-2013/
A far more reasoned, balanced piece0 -
Front page of tommorrows Irish times carries the 8 week allegation too.
http://cf.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/it13.jpg0 -
I could understand that if she presented at a late stage, but she didn't, and was essentially forced to wait until it was not viable to abort. She was literally forcefed and restrained so the baby could be delivered - people are missing the point that she was forced to go far beyond the stage that she raised a cause for concern so that they were at a stage where they couldn't really abort the baby...how horrible must it be for her and who knows how that child will turn out given such a birth?Penny Dreadful wrote: »Not if it was viable outside of the uterus. after 24 weeks the baby has a high chance of survival with medical intervention. Stops being a foetus then.
It's almost as absurd as someone complaining of a flu, and being forced to wait until after the flu to treat it, only to shrug your shoulders and act as if something was not seriously amiss.0 -
Her life was at risk. If there was a physical risk to her health should she wait two more weeks? Should she have been forcibly restrained for two more weeks gestation? Does a pregnant rape victim have any responsibility for a foetus she never wanted in the first place?
Two weeks is a lifetime for someone who is suicidal.
Do I have any responsibility for the stranger drowning in the river? Nope. Should I leave them there to drown because I didn't plan to take a swim today?
I know it's difficult. The ethics here are very tough, but I certainly prefer to see two people survive than none. At least she had the wherewithall to present for treatment, and it is to be lauded that this woman consented to the c-section at all. I applaud the actions of the doctors, who were in an awful position.
Even by the very simplistic moral code of "do no harm", there was no action for them to take here without someone being harmed.
I don't think it is overly dramatic to wonder if anything could have been done to enable the woman to stabilise during the pregnancy, even long enough to wait those extra days. Medication, support, anything. Restrained? No. Helped to not harm herself in any other way? If possible!
I hope she can recover now, and is getting what she needs. Somehow, I doubt she is getting anywhere near it.0 -
The total hypocrisy of this is that Irish middle class women that aren't in the care of the state use UK (or other EU) services in their thousands every year.
As a culture that's allowed us to pretend that abortion is something that never happens here and we only impose our insane laws on people who can't afford to escape them or are in an unusual situation where they can't access the UK or other EU countries due to being in state care or being unable to obtain visas.
So, like the olden days when the middle classes turned their backs on the mostly working class women in Magdalene asylums, they're doing exactly the same now with this topic.
You can rant and rave, preach and lecture but if it came to a serious situation where you or your daughter or sister needed have an abortion, you would at least have that option open by going on a short flight abroad. You reserve the most crewel treatment of the Irish state for a small minority who can't escape it.
The idea that there's no abortion in Ireland is total make belief, we just outsource it.
Exactly. Married, middle-class women who are established in their careers and have strong family support systems are probably the demographic who according to the pro-life brigade least "deserve" abortions, and that same brigade campaigns to maintain a situation where that demographic is the one that can most easily obtain abortions. Meanwhile, the very young, the very poor, those without family support, those who already have several children, those who've been raped etc have the most barriers in their way to accessing abortion services overseas. There's no common sense at play at all, it's all just emotional nonsense and religious guff. Fcuk em, idiots every one.0 -
Advertisement
-
I cannot imagine the scales of distress a person could have from carrying a rapist's child, or there being a human being on this planet that was the result of being raped. She's been quoted as describing it as the "devil", like, was assessed as being suicidal.Trial by media... And the mob decides the doctors are at fault here?
What about personal integrity? Why is it ok to take the easy way out? Do we walk past drowning people because we might get wet if we save them? What about stepping up and taking the option that is harder on yourself, because sometimes that is the right thing to do?
This case is bizarre in the extreme, and verified facts are hard to come by. But if this woman could have waited from 25 to even 27 wks for this, it would have made a massive difference. 14 days to dramatically improve someone else's whole life.
But that's somehow unconscionable to hope for?
Certainly can't blame her for wanting to be rid of it as quick as possible. It's not her fault it happened, it's not her fault she had no options until it was deemed viable; she owed the foetus absolutely nothing.
...so yeah, I guess, in my world view, it's unconscionable to expect the woman to endure any more than she already had.0 -
I don't think we'll ever have all the facts.
The story in the Indo today muddies the waters further by saying she initially sought an abortion on the grounds that she felt she would be in mortal danger from someone she knew if they found out she was pregnant.
That would not legally fall under grounds for legal termination of pregnancy in Ireland. It would be disturbing to think that any woman would be under duress from someone to abort a baby for any reason though.
Then again maybe paranoia was a symptom of her mental turmoil and that made her feel that her life was under threat from somebody. I could imagine it might take a little time for medical professionals to tease out whether someone in that state wanted an abortion herself or was under fear of death and being forced to have one.
A dreadfully sad case whatever happened though, for the woman and the baby.0 -
I really hope boards.ie is no reflection on people in the real world.The cynic in me is wondering if something will now go wrong with her asylum claim as a result of this. Afterall, official Ireland does have form when it comes to exporting tricky social issues.
When right-wing Christian nuts lose the run of themselves, we can all recognize it. When liberals lose the run of themselves with baseless conspiracy theories like the above,we just nod solemnly, or dismiss it without a word.
A whole lot of cognitive dissonance is being allowed go unremarked here, and the above is just the latest in a long string of examples.
Here's another one: the claim, or implication, that the psychiatrist and the medical team are incompetent. Classic cognitive dissonance.
When psychiatrists and obstetricians were coming out in their droves supporting the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill's legislative embryology, we were all applauding them and remarking how far medicine in Ireland has progressed. Now that anyone dares make a clinical decision which is at odds with what liberalism dictates must be required (we're liberals; no medical training is needed), there is online hysteria at doctors apparently enforcing their personal moral views on imprisoned females.
These are just examples of the weak standard of debate that liberals are allowed get away with in this debate.
The sole reason I'm not pointing out conservative flaws of logic is because they are already well flagged, and quite rightly.
I can't explain why this is an online phenomenon. Everyone i've spoken to in real life seems to be very concerned for both mother and baby, and is sincerely hoping the doctors made the right calls for the right reasons.
I am not tarring all posters with this brush. There are a couple of posters in this thread (whom I won't name, but we all know who they are) who are happy to treat every new fact on its own merits, without prejudice, in a balanced way.
But unfortunately, the above problems pertain to the majority.0 -
I dunno, people were pleased to see something progressive happening after Savita Halappanavar's death but I don't remember anyone thinking it was much of an improvement at all. Are we supposed to sit in silence and pretend to be happy just because some sort of half-arsed attempt to avoid further scandals on that scale was made?When psychiatrists and obstetricians were coming out in their droves supporting the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill's legislative embryology, we were all applauding them and remarking how far medicine in Ireland has progressed.
I never get this mentality that you're supposed to be happy for some unspecified period of time when some sort of compromised response is made that meets some, but nowhere near all, of one's demands.0 -
I remember being really impressed at people like Dr Rhona Mahony and Dr Sam Coulter-Smyth speaking at the committee stage of the Bill, and the president of the Irish Medical Organisation (or was it the Council?). There was a lot of media coverage at the time, to the effect of "isn't it great to hear such progressive voices in the Irish medical profession today?".takamichinoku wrote: »I dunno, people were pleased to see something progressive happening after Savita Halappanavar's death but I don't remember anyone thinking it was much of an improvement at all.
And it was. It is.
But when it suits us, these professionals loss their veneer of progressively, and liberals imply the medics in question were being morally dogmatic, or incompetent on the basis of alleged religious outlook, when they make a decision we don't like.
I'm not clear on what you're referring to hereAre we supposed to sit in silence and pretend to be happy just because some sort of half-arsed attempt to avoid further scandals on that scale was made?
The decision of the medical team, or the Bill itself?0 -
takamichinoku wrote: »I dunno, people were pleased to see something progressive happening after Savita Halappanavar's death but I don't remember anyone thinking it was much of an improvement at all. Are we supposed to sit in silence and pretend to be happy just because some sort of half-arsed attempt to avoid further scandals on that scale was made?
I never get this mentality that you're supposed to be happy for some unspecified period of time when some sort of compromised response is made that meets some, but nowhere near all, of one's demands.
Savita's death also didn't get the due consideration and reflective response it deserved either in the media or among the general public. She died due to inadequate medical care,her life could have been saved and action taken much earlier if her vital signs and lab results were properly monitored. Instead the obs and blood test results lay unread for vital hours. Yet the entire response of the media was to turn the case into a political football and get a circus going on the abortion issue.
And yes the abortion issue needed to be addressed by us as a country but to have put that woman and her husband at the center of it was unfair. It ended with her getting no justice for the negligent treatment she received in hospital and her husband leaving the country to escape the abuse he suffered.0 -
It's a shame you downplay it to 'liberals v conservatives' though...it's awfully telling when you can't see that everyone has their own views and not just trying to one up each other.I am not tarring all posters with this brush. There are a couple of posters in this thread (whom I won't name, but we all know who they are) who are happy to treat every new fact on its own merits, without prejudice, in a balanced way.
But unfortunately, the above problems pertain to the majority.0 -
takamichinoku wrote: »...so yeah, I guess, in my world view, it's unconscionable to expect the woman to endure any more than she already had.
All I would hope she would "endure" is some real treatment for her mental health problems. Where is she now, pregnancy over, job done, super-happy fun time for all? Or in almost exactly the same situation, with another traumatic ordeal tacked on, still probably without treatment.
Who cares though, right? I mean, here is a salacious backstory that can be embellished with all sorts of lavish details about unidentified rapists and the devil. That's the stuff we thrive on.0 -
I really hope boards.ie is no reflection on people in the real world.
When right-wing Christian nuts lose the run of themselves, we can all recognize it. When liberals lose the run of themselves with baseless conspiracy theories like the above,we just nod solemnly, or dismiss it without a word.
A whole lot of cognitive dissonance is being allowed go unremarked here, and the above is just the latest in a long string of examples.
Here's another one: the claim, or implication, that the psychiatrist and the medical team are incompetent. Classic cognitive dissonance.
When psychiatrists and obstetricians were coming out in their droves supporting the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill's legislative embryology, we were all applauding them and remarking how far medicine in Ireland has progressed. Now that anyone dares make a clinical decision which is at odds with what liberalism dictates must be required (we're liberals; no medical training is needed), there is online hysteria at doctors apparently enforcing their personal moral views on imprisoned females.
These are just examples of the weak standard of debate that liberals are allowed get away with in this debate.
The sole reason I'm not pointing out conservative flaws of logic is because they are already well flagged, and quite rightly.
I can't explain why this is an online phenomenon. Everyone i've spoken to in real life seems to be very concerned for both mother and baby, and is sincerely hoping the doctors made the right calls for the right reasons.
I am not tarring all posters with this brush. There are a couple of posters in this thread (whom I won't name, but we all know who they are) who are happy to treat every new fact on its own merits, without prejudice, in a balanced way.
But unfortunately, the above problems pertain to the majority.
Classic 1950s Soviet approach to quashing a debate:
Accuse people who don't agree with you of suffering from some kind of a mental disorder "Classic cognitive dissonance" etc.0 -
Classic 1950s Soviet approach to quashing a debate:
Accuse people who don't agree with you of suffering from some kind of a mental disorder "Classic cognitive dissonance" etc.
It's not an insult or a mental disorder, just a state of holding contradictory views or feelings on a subject. It's something we all experience in response to different circumstances. It's fair comment in this context too.0 -
Advertisement
-
I remember being really impressed at people like Dr Rhona Mahony and Dr Sam Coulter-Smyth speaking at the committee stage of the Bill, and the president of the Irish Medical Organisation (or was it the Council?). There was a lot of media coverage at the time, to the effect of "isn't it great to hear such progressive voices in the Irish medical profession today?".
I really don't know where you get that notion from.
From my perspective, the aftermath was deeply inadequate and insufficient, and I don't know anyone who applauded "progressive voices".
At all at all.0 -
Classic 1950s Soviet approach to quashing a debate:
Accuse people who don't agree with you of suffering from some kind of a mental disorder "Classic cognitive dissonance" etc.
Cognitive dissonance isn't a medical disorder; it's a rational flaw that an online contributor can legitimately assert, purely from observing the reasoning underpinning the contributions of other users.
Making accusations of Soviet-era attempts to quash debate, on the other hand...0 -
conorh91: Comparatively great? I'm sure some people were happy, you'll take what you can get, like. It was hardly the most progressive bill in the world though.
Referring to the response to the bill itself, I'd imagine most of the posters here who are unhappy with what appears to have gone down felt that there still needed to be pretty huge steps made, I definitely remember a lot of negativity along the lines of "this is the government trying to ignore the issue as best as they can".
There's this expectation you sometimes see in all paths of life from a party who makes the tiniest of compromises that it's to shut up the voices of dissent and I never get it at all. Have seen it tossed out in this thread and numerous other places of "you got what you wanted last year, and now you want more?!" That's what I was on about there. I'm not sure if I'm making any sense here, I think I am, maybe I'm not, who knows
_Whimsical_: Definitely not advocating for any further details from this case to emerge if they are being kept quiet to protect the woman. Unfortunately it seems like media-driven scandals are the only times the government will dare go near the matter.
pwurple: I clearly set myself in direct opposition to what you were advocating there. My opinions presumably completely contrast with yours, so yeah. Nothing to add beyond what I already said.0 -
Smacks more of McCarthism to me0
-
_Whimsical_ wrote: »Savita's death also didn't get the due consideration and reflective response it deserved either in the media or among the general public. She died due to inadequate medical care,her life could have been saved and action taken much earlier if her vital signs and lab results were properly monitored. Instead the obs and blood test results lay unread for vital hours. Yet the entire response of the media was to turn the case into a political football and get a circus going on the abortion issue.
And yes the abortion issue needed to be addressed by us as a country but to have put that woman and her husband at the center of it was unfair. It ended with her getting no justice for the negligent treatment she received in hospital and her husband leaving the country to escape the abuse he suffered.
If no faces are put on those poor women it just gets swept under the carpet. Remember the taxi woman. It suits the government to keep them anonymous, hence current pleas for privacy from Varadkar and Fitzgerald. She had no privacy when she was ordered to carry her rapist's child and force hydrated, as they very well knew, and now they are suddenly so caring and concerned.
I am not calling to have the victims named of course, it's entirely up to them and their families. But Mr Halappanavar's decision to go public with his wife's story did more to progress the (woefully inadequate anyway) legislation than what numerous governments did over 20 years.0 -
-
Cognitive dissonance isn't a medical disorder; it's a rational flaw that an online contributor can legitimately assert, purely from observing the reasoning underpinning the contributions of other users.
Making accusations of Soviet-era attempts to quash debate, on the other hand...
Yeah, right whatever. Read back on my points if you like. I'm too tired and frankly frustrated to even bother responding.
Ireland most certainly suffers from a major historic problem of driving social policy based on some abstract, dogmatic notion about how things are in some magical idealised world where nothing ever goes wrong and it's all cumley maidens (who never get pregnant outside marriage and where there are no rapists) dancing at the crossroads.
For decades it basically locked up any women who didn't fit that lovely girl model. Nowadays it's locked into some kind of a weird combination of a dogmatic view that every pregnancy must go to full term regardless of risk (even the recent modifications to legislation are about the tiniest compromise possible) and most definitely a strong element of 'sex = dirty' stuck in the system somewhere.
We've moved on a lot, but our legislators are firmly stuck in that mode of thinking. I'm not sure that the population necessarily agrees with them though, social attitudes to all of these things have changed extremely dramatically since the 1983.
It's like comparing the UK in 2014 and the UK in 1953 to be honest. That's how big a change happened in Ireland. It's almost like we had a compressed later half of the 20th century run from about 1990-2000.
For an Irish person from 2014, Ireland in 1983 would be a different planet. Where as the US or the UK in the 1980s would be quite recognisable.0 -
Yeah I'm not talking about the aftermath; I'm talking about the (largely positive) contributions of the masters of the maternity hospitals and other medical professionals to the PLP Bill, as it then was, and how their coolheaded, professional contributions were generally welcomed at the time.Mountainsandh wrote: »From my perspective, the aftermath was deeply inadequate and insufficient, and I don't know anyone who applauded "progressive voices".
At all at all.
In other words, I'm suggesting that we have seen a new side to Irish medical practitioners. It is probably safe to assume there are very few dogmatic catholic doctors practicing at specialist registration level or above in Ireland.
As I said above, it isn't that people were necessarily celebrating the Bill/Act itself, it was the medical world's (broad) support for *any* legislation that would protect women, which people saw as a welcome departure from the old, paternalistic decisions which may have featured in previous generations of medical practice.takamichinoku wrote: »conorh91: Comparatively great? I'm sure some people were happy, you'll take what you can get, like. It was hardly the most progressive bill in the world though.
What I'm saying is that we should have some confidence in a profession which showed broad support for the Act. There are people here rounding on the competence of the medics in question, and throwing words like incompetence around, and that seems to be without foundation, and it further seems irrational.
And unfortunately, that kind of thing tends to get accepted or ignored, simply because the person perpetuating it happens to stand on the same side of the fence as us.
It shouldn't go on.0 -
_Whimsical_ wrote: »It ended with her getting no justice for the negligent treatment she received in hospital
Oh come now.... have you not heard... Ireland is the land of Zero Accountability.... Patients die... and Doctors will never have to answer to a judge. In fact doctors usually are free to continue on practising medicine in other areas.
Ever hear of a Irish medical professional testifying against another Irish medical professional..... well you never have and you never will. The wagons get circled and they close ranks.
Had Savita Halapanaver gone into hospital with a sore toe... she still would have died such was the incompetence at work there. When a doctor fails to
1) Consult with doctors on the opposite shift (ie.nightshift)
2) Fails to read the patients notes (left by nightshift)
3) Eventually on reading the notes where there are flashing red lights with alarming details of serious infection.... the day shift doctor still does NOTHING.
4) Where junior medical staff ASSUME senior medical staff are reading the notes, but they ain't.
5) At the inquest.... there was no compulsion of staff to turn up and testify... so two of them did just that.... did not bother to turn up.
It is deemed a 'medical misadventure'..... you know.... something like making a wrong turn when you are driving your car to the cinema...or ordering a 1/4 pounder instead of a Big Mac.... you know.....that kind of mistake.
I wish I had a job where I could earn over 100K and not have to care if I got my decisions wrong or if I did not have to make any decision.... just sit back and leave nature take it's course.
After all.... it's all an adventure....or if the patient dies....it's a misadventure.0 -
Advertisement
-
You're living in a dreamworld, or you haven't read the Act, or both.Nowadays it's locked into some kind of a weird combination of a dogmatic view that every pregnancy must go to full term regardless of risk (even the recent modifications to legislation are about the tiniest compromise possible) and most definitely a strong element of 'sex = dirty' stuck in the system somewhere.0
Advertisement