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…4546485051…95

Comments

  • Options
    #1412
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    _Whimsical_ wrote: »
    This is so true.
    The discussion of this case has become very much about a rightfully tragic victim and then one inconvenient life that should have been disposed of earlier. The coldness here to the child that IS born in this case is absolutely chilling.

    Who is being cold to the child? I think its appalling that a child was born so early, and faces lifelong problems, not to mention being in a questionable legal state as if the mother is not Irish and the child is the care of the state there are serious issues of citizenship and adoption rights. The woman had she been in another country could have had a minimally invasive abortion at the eight week stage and wouldn't have been a vessel for months and had to to endure abdominal surgery. Incidentally, she may have been a child herself while this was going on.


    I think the only coldness here is the insistence that a woman's right to bodily integrity can be coldly tossed aside from the moment a zygote takes up residence in her uterus. I have been pregnant twice out of choice and I was happy to give up my bodily integrity during pregnancy and two c sections. If I had been raped and no longer wanted to remain pregnant I don't see why I should be forced to give up my bodily integrity.


  • Options
    #1413
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The child is alive and well, I don't see how if it was now dead it would be a solution

    Should all miscarriages be recognized by the state? How come if the born is the same as the unborn child we only issue death certs for stillbirths after 24 weeks gestation and don't pay child benefit from conception?


  • Options
    #1414
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    lazygal wrote: »
    Should all miscarriages be recognized by the state? How come if the born is the same as the unborn child we only issue death certs for stillbirths after 24 weeks gestation and don't pay child benefit from conception?

    The child is alive, how would it being dead be a solution ?


  • Options
    #1415
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The child is alive, how would it now being dead instead be a solution ?

    Why do you keep asking that question? If the woman had been allowed to kill her unborn baby/murder her unborn baby/insert other pro life phrase here at eight weeks gestation she wouldn't have had to endure pregnancy and abdominal surgery, alongside a hunger strike, grilling by a medical panel and the prospect of forced hydration.

    A tablet based murder of the unborn/abortion at eight weeks would be a much kinder and more humane way to treat a distressed woman who does not want to remain pregnant and does not cause long term issues for future pregnancies and deliveries the way a c section does.


  • Options
    #1416
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The child is alive and well, I don't see how if it was now dead it would be a solution

    it may be alive, but there is no guarantee that it is well. In fact there's an 80% chance that it has serious health problems/disabilities through being delivered at the cusp of viability. It will most likely spend its entire life in the care of the HSE.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1417
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,424 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The child is alive and well, I don't see how if it was now dead it would be a solution

    The child is alive, but 80% of babies born at 25 weeks suffer at least some life long impairments and a depressingly high number of babies will suffer profound impairments which could lead to early death and no hope of living a normal independent life.

    I really really hope that this baby is one of the lucky ones and develops normally, but the odds are against him/her


  • Options
    #1418
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    lazygal wrote: »
    Why do you keep asking that question?

    Because it has not been adequtely answered.
    lazygal wrote: »
    A tablet based murder of the unborn/abortion at eight weeks would be a much kinder and more humane way to treat a distressed woman who does not want to remain pregnant and does not cause long term issues for future pregnancies and deliveries the way a c section does.

    Well at least you're being honest. Neither the woman or the child has done anything wrong in this case. I don't believe that killing her innocent child in this case, or pitting one against the other, to supposidly make her feel better is being kind to either of them.


  • Options
    #1419
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    I'm waiting for the hoards to descend and offer to adopt the child seeing as adoption is the 'solution' for a woman with an unwanted pregnancy according to many pro lifers.

    Form an orderly queue folks. A child requiring 24 hour care for many months and which may develop long terms health problem, and is currently the subject of a HSE care order, needs a loving home.


  • Options
    #1420
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Ralphdejones wrote: »

    Well at least you're being honest. Neither the woman or the child has done anything wrong in this case. I don't believe that killing her innocent child in this case, or pitting one against the other, to supposidly make her feel better is being kind to either of them.

    Is forcing a born child to remain pregnant a kind solution? What do you think a woman with an unwanted pregnancy should do?


  • Options
    #1421
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    lazygal wrote: »
    I'm waiting for the hoards to descend and offer to adopt the child seeing as adoption is the 'solution' for a woman with an unwanted pregnancy according to many pro lifers.

    Form an orderly queue folks. A child requiring 24 hour care for many months and which may develop long terms health problem, and is currently the subject of a HSE care order, needs a loving home.

    As there is extremly long que of people wishing to adopt in this country, including people who are happy to adopt a child with any special needs, I don't imagine it will be a problem.
    And I don't see how a dead child would be solution.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1422
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The child is alive and well, I don't see how if it was now dead it would be a solution
    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The child is alive, how would it being dead be a solution ?


    Repeatedly oneself ad nauseum does not make the point you are making any more logical or reasonable. Neither does it assist in judging the quality of the argument.

    There are numerous diversionary questions like that that can be posed. None of them add anything to the argument either way. Here are a couple from the other perspective.

    If the woman commits suicide because of what she went through, is that a solution?

    If a woman dies from complications because of a refusal to perform an abortion, is that a solution? (Think of Savita)

    It does not seem possible for the pro-life side to enter into a reasoned debate for any length of time before they play the "baby" or "child" card at the expense of the woman.


  • Options
    #1423
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    As there is extremly long que of people wishing to adopt in this country, including people who are happy to adopt a child with any special needs, I don't imagine it will be a problem.
    And I don't see how a dead child would be solution.

    The foster care system is full of children who aren't being adopted. Where's the outcry about the born children not being adopted? A dead child is not the same as an eight week old foetus. In fact, I find it repulsive that you'd thing a dead eight week old foetus is in the same category as a dead child.


  • Options
    #1424
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    lazygal wrote: »
    The foster care system is full of children who aren't being adopted. Where's the outcry about the born children not being adopted? A dead child is not the same as an eight week old foetus. In fact, I find it repulsive that you'd thing a dead eight week old foetus is in the same category as a dead child.

    A foster child rightly cannot be adopted without their parents consent, it's certainly not because of a lack of people willing to adopt them.
    Do you find the child who is now alive repuslive as well ?


  • Options
    #1425
    AlexisM
    Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭AlexisM


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The child is alive and well, I don't see how if it was now dead it would be a solution
    A child wouldn't be 'now dead' - it would never have been.


  • Options
    #1426
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    AlexisM wrote: »
    A child wouldn't be 'now dead' - it would never have been.

    How would there be a child now, if it never had been ?


  • Options
    #1427
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    A foster child rightly cannot be adopted without their parents consent, it's certainly not because of a lack of people willing to adopt them.
    Do you find the child who is now alive repuslive as well ?

    No, I don't find any child repulsive. I find it repulsive that a born child would be forced to gestate her rapist's baby though.


  • Options
    #1428
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    How would there be a child now, if it never had been ?

    If it had been aborted at eight weeks we wouldn't be talking about this case. There'd be no child because the pregnancy would have been terminated at a very early stage.


    There are thousands of women who travel from Ireland to kill their unborn children abroad or import abortion pills every single year. Do you think we should restrain pregnant women from traveling abroad to murder the unborn? Do you think we should ban IVF as it can result in the destruction of embryos?


  • Options
    #1429
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    lazygal wrote: »
    No, I don't find any child repulsive. I find it repulsive that a born child would be forced to gestate her rapist's baby though.

    Again your back to blaming the child and finding them repulsive for something they didn't do.
    Neither the child or the woman did anything wrong.


  • Options
    #1430
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Again your back to blaming the child and finding them repulsive for something they didn't do.
    Neither the child or the woman did anything wrong.

    And yet you want the woman to suffer.


  • Options
    #1431
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Again your back to blaming the child and finding them repulsive for something they didn't do.
    Neither the child or the woman did anything wrong.

    How have I blamed the child? Have I said the child did anything wrong?

    What I find repulsive is the fact that in Ireland we force children who are pregnant as a result of rape to remain pregnant. We force women with a diagnosis of fatal foetal abnormalities to remain pregnant. And we rely on a nicely liberal abortion regime to take care of the thousands of women who can travel to for abortion to mop up our mess.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1432
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    And yet you want the woman to suffer.

    No I don't see why her or the child should be made to suffer an abortion.
    Neiher of them did anything wrong.


  • Options
    #1433
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    lazygal wrote: »
    How have I blamed the child? Have I said the child did anything wrong?

    So why should the child have been killed ?


  • Options
    #1434
    rainbow kirby
    Registered Users Posts: 26,928 ✭✭✭✭rainbow kirby


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    As there is extremly long que of people wishing to adopt in this country, including people who are happy to adopt a child with any special needs, I don't imagine it will be a problem.
    "But people want to adopt..." is not a reason to deny women their full reproductive rights - women are not brood mares (and I suspect that mares get better treatment during pregnancy than women in Ireland tbh).

    Nobody's desire to adopt outweighs another person's desire to not be pregnant.


  • Options
    #1435
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    No I don't see why her or the child should be made to suffer an abortion.
    Neiher of them did anything wrong.
    The woman wanted to 'suffer' an abortion. The 'suffering' she had to endure was the refusal of the abortion.


  • Options
    #1436
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    So why should the child have been killed ?

    Because the woman did not wish to remain pregnant and her life was at risk. She withdrew consent to keep the foetus in her womb.

    If you don't donate a kidney to someone who needs one, are you killing them?

    Why is there no obligation on women or men to give up their bodily integrity to make sure someone else can stay alive?


  • Options
    #1437
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    rainbow kirby wrote: »
    "But people want to adopt..." is not a reason to deny women their full reproductive rights - women are not brood mares (and I suspect that mares get better treatment during pregnancy than women in Ireland tbh).

    Nobody's desire to adopt outweighs another person's desire to not be pregnant.

    Correct, and you don't have to kill a child to avoid raising it.


  • Options
    #1438
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    As there is extremly long que of people wishing to adopt in this country, including people who are happy to adopt a child with any special needs, I don't imagine it will be a problem.
    And I don't see how a dead child would be solution.



    There are a lot of women and men out there who do find abortion a solution, adoption is great if you don't want a child, not so much if you don't want to remain pregnant.


  • Options
    #1439
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Correct, and you don't have to kill a child to avoid raising it.

    So your solution to women with unwanted pregnancies is…….to remain pregnant?


  • Options
    #1440
    Penny Tration
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,687 ✭✭✭✭Penny Tration


    Mad isn't it, how the two posters that are the most prolific in damning people who support abortion, are men, who will never have to go through pregnancy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1441
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    So why should the child have been killed ?
    There are competing rights at play here - someone has to lose out.
    The only question is where to strike a balance, but you seem not to see that any balance needs to be struck.


Advertisement