woman refused abortion - Mod Note in first post.

RDM_83 again

hotmail.com wrote: »

What is a moderate in relation to this topic?

Thats a really good question, a good friend of mine would consider herself very pro-choice (C is if your reading this sorry :P ) yet when I talked to her about it in passing she considered 16 weeks as an acceptable cut off point, same as myself on here probably comes across very pro-life on these sorts of threads yet if I had a choice I would probably vote for a structure similar to that of Italy, Luxembourg or Germany.

Personally I think the presence of England (not the UK!) sort of messes with our view point in the ROI and not simply with the "exporting of pregnant woman" argument.
The UK actually has a fairly strict law interpreted extremely liberally, so the slippery slope propopents actually have a valid example right next door.
Here's a list of the conditions across Europe and as it can be seen the UK actually has some of the most liberal in application if not in letter.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6235557.stm

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Ralphdejones wrote: »

Sure, I should " Know my place " lol

Imagine someone had stood at that microphone today and said " I see black people have come out to support us today, but black people . .know your place, don't ever tell a white person anything "

Honestly, I think it would have been very confusing for everyone if that woman had said something like that. I'd rather imagine something else. Imagine a dog with a baby's head and a snake for a tail! Much more fun and about as relevant to the topic.

Ralphdejones

Gustavo CoolS Quote wrote: »

Honestly, I think it would have been very confusing for everyone if that woman had said something like that. I'd rather imagine something else. Imagine a dog with a baby's head and a snake for a tail! Much more fun and about as relevant to the topic.

Ah yes the evil child again that must be destroyed . . .

Kiwi in IE

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I think things would calm down pretty quick too.
In France I never heard of any anti abortion protests or anything, I guess there must be some at times but I just never heard of them growing up, so it mustn't be very frequent or serious.
But we did hear about anti abortion protests going on in America while I was growing up, some pro-life groups attacking/breaking into abortion clinics and the like.

Actually now you mention it, I also remember hearing on the news about American 'pro life' groups carrying on. Never remember any from home though. The only thing I do remember was a very odd man who used to stand alone outside the abortion clinic in my home town with placards and shout verbal abuse at women going into the clinic (generally threats of hell, muderer etc). He was charged with trespass several times and then eventually recieved a restraining order.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Thats a really good question, a good friend of mine would consider herself very pro-choice (C is if your reading this sorry :P ) yet when I talked to her about it in passing she considered 16 weeks as an acceptable cut off point, same as myself on here probably comes across very pro-life on these sorts of threads yet if I had a choice I would probably vote for a structure similar to that of Italy or Luxembourg.

Personally I think the presence of England (not the UK!) sort of messes with our view point in the ROI and not simply with the "exporting of pregnant woman" argument.
The UK actually has a fairly strict law interpreted extremely liberally, so the slippery slope propopents actually have a valid example right next door.
Here's a list of the conditions across Europe and as it can be seen the UK actually has some of the most liberal in application if not in letter.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6235557.stm

The problem with the eighth amendment is that it displaces all discussion around abortion onto a very limited focus on the circumstances of the pregnancy (i.e. if it's a danger to the mother's life) rather than what I'd imagine most people think is the relevant thing - how far into a pregnancy abortion is allowed.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Actually now you mention it, I also remember hearing on the news about American 'pro life' groups carrying on. Never remember any from home though. The only thing I do remember was a very odd man who used to stand alone outside the abortion clinic in my home town with placards and shout verbal abuse at women going into the clinic (generally threats of hell, muderer etc). He was charged with trespass several times and then eventually recieved a restraining order.

It was great craic altogether here in the 90s! I remember when I was about six or seven walking past a Youth Defence street stall outside the GPO, they love children so much that they had all their massive posters of late term surgical abortions placed exactly at child's eye level and were screaming and shouting and shoving leaflets in people's hands. They went for my mam because she had me and my sister with her, not great at taking no for an answer either. Perfect example of #lovethemboth, send a woman off with two bawling kids who had nightmares for weeks.

Piliger

Gustavo CoolS Quote wrote: »

The problem with the eighth amendment is that it displaces all discussion around abortion onto a very limited focus on the circumstances of the pregnancy (i.e. if it's a danger to the mother's life) rather than what I'd imagine most people think is the relevant thing - how far into a pregnancy abortion is allowed.

Most people who do believe in choice, that is. Yes I agree on the whole with what you say.

I have complete respect for people who think that abortion is wrong in any circumstance. I do. if they chose to reject abortion after their rape, or when they are told they have a severely handicapped baby. That is their personal choice and I would never countenance pressuring them or pushing them into changing their mind.

What I have no respect for is their demand that their morality is forced on everyone else.

For those of us that do not get sucked into the inane idea that a group of two, three or four cells equals a human life, we then have to struggle with our own personal and emotional concept of when along the pregnancy term does this fetus transition into an entity that gains some rights separate from the host mother. I have struggled with this all of my adult life and am in my 50s now.

I myself have always felt and continue to feel that the laws in England are pretty much spot on, in an area that is horrendously difficult to legislate. We in Ireland have absolutely nothing to fear from echoing those English laws, and it's about time we wrenched the reigns of power away from those backward religious moralists.

takamichinoku

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Actually now you mention it, I also remember hearing on the news about American 'pro life' groups carrying on. Never remember any from home though. The only thing I do remember was a very odd man who used to stand alone outside the abortion clinic in my home town with placards and shout verbal abuse at women going into the clinic (generally threats of hell, muderer etc). He was charged with trespass several times and then eventually recieved a restraining order.

Somewhat related to this, I do wonder exactly how much of Ireland's pro-life side's visible support is driven by US funding, it's obviously a fair bit but just how much. Considering it's such a small first-world country, I'd imagine it'd be quite beneficial and well within their means to absolutely drown the place with negative PR against abortions. It definitely clouds my view of what the general public opinion is because I've no clue what to make of those big strongly funded marches and things they do have.
If/when the eighth is removed, I wouldn't be that surprised if groups like Youth Defence damn near vanished overnight.

Mountainsandh

The bbc link is great, thanks.
It's interesting to compare it with the rates by countries or region, I was just looking at this link below and thought I'd share.

The most liberal are not necessarily the countries where rates are higher it seems.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/mapeuropeabrate.html

There are so many cultural and demographic factors, that the uptake or lack thereof varies widely.
For example I was just reading on the WHO site that despite liberal laws in Italy, physicians/doctors often refuse to perform abortion, and are entitled to, so it could be difficult to avail of.
I know in France that a comparatively large proportion of abortions are foreign women whose husbands are strongly opposed to contraception, my interpretation is that the women have secret abortions if they think they can't cope with a larger family.

I think it is good to have a pretty liberal system. Pro life groups are free to continue their campaigns and can no doubt convince some women to continue pregnancies with civilized appeals, and the uptake in Ireland may not be as tragic as the anti abortion groups might expect even once abortion on request is legalized.

phobia2011

Can someone tell me the status of the baby?

Akrasia

Ralphdejones wrote: »

Ah yes the evil child again that must be destroyed . . .

Before 8 weeks, not evil, not even a foetus, It's still considered an embryo
At 8 weeks, not evil, and not a child - no brain, no awareness of anything around it.
At 16 weeks, not evil, not a child, no brain, no awareness of anything around it.
At 20 weeks, not evil, Brain is starting to develop, from here on in consciousness starts to slowly emerge and the case against abortion from 20 weeks and up becomes stronger - BUT in a situation where the pregnancy is a risk to the life of the mother, the mothers life still ought to take priority


The people on here who are concerned about the welfare of children should SUPPORT early access to abortion because the earlier the pregnancy is aborted, the less harm there is to either the mother, or the 'potential child'.

Talking about 'potential children' Until the actual child exists, why give preferential treatment to one 'potential child' over all the other potential children that could possibly exist in any future scenario?

It is extremely likely that the poor girl at the centre of this story will have her recovery from her rape delayed and she may suffer long term psychological consequences from having to deliver a baby against her will.

Nobody knows the future, but potentially, there could have been healthy and wanted babies forced out of existence by the catholic insistence that access to abortion is restricted so much as to render it inaccessable to many vulnerable people. It often seems as though restricting abortion is some kind of punishment handed out by the church to women who are 'immoral' enough to have a crisis pregnancy. Forcing women to 'live with the consequences of their actions' as another way to enforce 'purity' and 'chastity'.

When you put the restrictions on abortion alongside the policy of forcing unwed mothers into penal servitude in catholic run institutions, it looks a lot like they are sacrificing these women to serve as an example to other women of what would happen if they didn't behave the way the RC church told them to behave

swampgas

phobia2011 wrote: »

Can someone tell me the status of the baby?

From a legal perspective ?

Well now that it's "born" rather than "unborn", it seems the state isn't quite so bothered. I gather it won't get Irish citizenship for example (correct me if I'm wrong here) ...

lazygal

The solution on the pro life side to every crisis pregnancy is the same. Remain pregnant. They can mention counseling, support, 'perinatal hospices' (that worked out well for us, didn't it, in Tuam and other places), but the solution remains the same. Stay pregnant, regardless of any and all other considerations. Never mind that you've been raped, or are a victim of incest, or used three forms of contraception and the morning after pill, or will have your health suffer, or that you've five children already and can't afford another one, or that you're married so in Ireland you cannot place your children for adoption or that you've a child with complex needs already and can't face another one, or that you never wanted children at all. Never mind any of the extenuating circumstances, you must stay pregnant, even if your life is at risk by suicide (we'll just force you to gestate the foetus until we say so). Stay pregnant. That's the solution to every single crisis pregnancy ever.
Which says to me that this isn't about protecting life or anything close to it. If that was the case the pro life side would be up in arms about the natural abortions happening every day, and manning the airports demanding that the right to travel to kill the unborn be immediately repealed, or protesting outside IVF clinics about frozen unborn children not getting a chance at life. No, this is about control. Control over women, and control over who can access abortion, which is people with money and the means to travel. Any other woman can stay pregnant, regardless of the circumstances. Can any pro life person tell me why they don't want the right for women to travel to kill the unborn which supposedly has constitutional protection in Ireland repealed?

kylith

swampgas wrote: »

From a legal perspective ?

Well now that it's "born" rather than "unborn", it seems the state isn't quite so bothered. I gather it won't get Irish citizenship for example (correct me if I'm wrong here) ...

How can it not be granted citizenship? What are they going to do? Deport it?

phobia2011

kylith wrote: »

How can it not be granted citizenship? What are they going to do? Deport it?

So the baby is alive and well?

I imagine under the care of the state now?

swampgas

kylith wrote: »

How can it not be granted citizenship?

There was an earlier post (which I cannot find) stating that recent legislation denied citizenship to the children born to recent immigrants or asylum seekers. I'm not sure how it affects this situation exactly, TBH.

What are they going to do? Deport it?

Maybe they can send it to England and let them deal with it ? :-/

.

lazygal

phobia2011 wrote: »

So the baby is alive and well?

I imagine under the care of the state now?

It is alive. How well it is after being delivered by an elective c section at 25 weeks gestation is debatable. I'd imagine its under the care of the HSE.

Calina

kylith wrote: »

How can it not be granted citizenship? What are they going to do? Deport it?

27th amendment of the Constitution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-seventh_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

provided that children born on the island of Ireland to parents who were both non-nationals would no longer have a constitutional right to citizenship of the Republic of Ireland

Based on available information, unless the child's father is Irish, is the case here.

However, citizenship and residency are two different things.

Grayson

Calina wrote: »

27th amendment of the Constitution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-seventh_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland



Based on available information, unless the child's father is Irish, is the case here.

However, citizenship and residency are two different things.

It's weird. It means a citizen of a foreign country is currently in the care of the HSE. Are they allowed foster out the baby? Can the baby be adopted here? Or does the baby have to be deported?

Calina

Grayson wrote: »

It's weird. It means a citizen of a foreign country is currently in the care of the HSE. Are they allowed foster out the baby? Can the baby be adopted here? Or does the baby have to be deported?

I suspect there are lots of nuances about this child's situation which will need to play out over time. I can't answer these questions and I'm not an expert in citizenship law.

Riskymove

Calina wrote: »

I suspect there are lots of nuances about this child's situation which will need to play out over time. I can't answer these questions and I'm not an expert in citizenship law.

just because the child is not a citizen does not mean it wouldn't be given the care it requires

I don't believe citizenship is a requirement for being in state care

Akrasia

lazygal wrote: »

Can any pro life person tell me why they don't want the right for women to travel to kill the unborn which supposedly has constitutional protection in Ireland repealed?

If the pro-life side had their way, they would prevent travel for abortion

Mountainsandh

I think one article I read said it was awaiting fostering, not sure it was a reliable read though.

lazygal

Akrasia wrote: »

If the pro-life side had their way, they would prevent travel for abortion

I haven't heard a clamour to repeal the right to travel to kill the unborn from any pro-life groups.

kylith

Calina wrote: »

27th amendment of the Constitution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-seventh_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland



Based on available information, unless the child's father is Irish, is the case here.

However, citizenship and residency are two different things.

I remember that, it was to stop people coming here, having a baby, and thus being exempt from deportation because the child had an automatic right to be here. How it would pertain to a child that the state insisted was born here though, I don't know.

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I think one article I read said it was awaiting fostering, not sure it was a reliable read though.

Presumably members of the anti-choice side are lining up to foster it.

lazygal

Youth Defence has taken the liberty of naming the baby Hope.

Akrasia

lazygal wrote: »

I haven't heard a clamour to repeal the right to travel to kill the unborn from any pro-life groups.

That's because they're picking their battles

They know that they're outnumbered and would definitely lose a referendum to remove the right to travel (as they already have, twice) so they're focusing their attention on maintaining the restrictions that are already in place.

When there was talk of abortion clinics opening up in Northern ireland, the irish catholic lobby were up in arms because the trip to belfast is much easier and more affordable than a trip to liverpool. This shows that they are opposed to women travelling for abortions just as much as they are opposed to abortions here in ireland.

I wonder how influential the irish catholics were in maintaining the restrictive' 'legal framework' for abortions in Northern ireland (only in the case of an immediate risk to the life of the mother or risk of long term physical or mental trauma, and only up to 9 weeks gestation)

shruikan2553

lazygal wrote: »

Youth Defence has taken the liberty of naming the baby Hope.

And it is fighting for life supposedly. One minute its being reported the baby is doing and all of a sudden she is suffering. Nothing makes those people happy.

mrsbyrne

swampgas wrote: »

There was an earlier post (which I cannot find) stating that recent legislation denied citizenship to the children born to recent immigrants or asylum seekers. I'm not sure how it affects this situation exactly, TBH.



Maybe they can send it to England and let them deal with it ? :-/

.

Whst are talking about ? The baby is in a NICU unit receiving the best of care? Where did you think it was?!

MrPudding

Akrasia wrote: »

That's because they're picking their battles

They know that they're outnumbered and would definitely lose a referendum to remove the right to travel (as they already have, twice) so they're focusing their attention on maintaining the restrictions that are already in place.

When there was talk of abortion clinics opening up in Northern ireland, the irish catholic lobby were up in arms because the trip to belfast is much easier and more affordable than a trip to liverpool. This shows that they are opposed to women travelling for abortions just as much as they are opposed to abortions here in ireland.

I wonder how influential the irish catholics were in maintaining the restrictive' 'legal framework' for abortions in Northern ireland (only in the case of an immediate risk to the life of the mother or risk of long term physical or mental trauma, and only up to 9 weeks gestation)

I don't think the catholics can take all the credit for the state of things up north. The DUP are pretty hot on controlling women's reproductive right too. If only the two sides would work as closely in other areas.

MrP