8th Amendment

pmasterson95

I do think a true tv debate where these "pro-life" eejits cant hide or duck and dive would be hilarious. They struggle so horribly to defend what they spew.

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

So, would you allow Downs Syndrome babies to be aborted if the mother requested it, at any time during the pregnancy

I would allow the woman to abort for any reason she wishes up to viability.

What relevance is that with regards to the post you quoted?

volchitsa

pmasterson95 wrote: »

I do think a true tv debate where these "pro-life" eejits cant hide or duck and dive would be hilarious. They struggle so horribly to defend what they spew.

Yes, remember Peter Mathews, on V Browne after Savita Halappanavar, iirc, admitting (how could he not?) that he would ensure his own daughter had a choice that he would prevent others having, via the law on FFA etc - and when pushed by VB came out with "Well we all have to die some time, and men used to die in the mines you know!" :eek:

Bring it on!!

Black Menorca

Godge wrote: »

Up to 22 weeks, yes. See below.

And beyond 22 weeks? Would you deny the woman her request?

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

I would allow the woman to abort for any reason she wishes up to viability.

What relevance is that with regards to the post you quoted?

You would condone killing the baby at 34 weeks gestation and then delivering her dead body?

ProfessorPlum

Black Menorca wrote: »

You would condone killing the baby at 34 weeks gestation and then delivering her dead body?

Seriously, for the sake of decent debate and all of our sanity would you for gods sake go off and inform yourself before spouting nonsence.

That is not at all what s/he said, and if you had any clue what you were talking about, you'd know that.

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

You would condone killing the baby at 34 weeks gestation and then delivering her dead body?

Is there anywhere in the world this is legal?

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

Is there anywhere in the world this is legal?

So if a mother sought to have her Downs Syndrome baby aborted, intentionally killed at the hands of an abortionist at 34 weeks, you would deny her request?

lazygal

Black Menorca wrote: »

So if a mother sought to have her Downs Syndrome baby aborted, intentionally killed at the hands of an abortionist at 34 weeks, you would deny her request?

What are you on about? A viable foetus at 34 weeks would be delivered alive. My first child was delivered at 39 weeks, as per notes the decision was made to terminate the pregnancy because of potential danger to health and life. She wasn't killed at the hands of an abortionist, she was delivered by my consultant. Why do you think abortion=intentionally killed? Don't answer, all prolifers are absolutely obsessed with later term abortions/terminations/killing the disabled babies/abortionists/the abortion industry.
You do know because of the eighth amendment abortion in Ireland is available throughout pregnancy, even after a due date, because of the constitutional position? Or does a woman magically not have a threat to her life because of pregnancy after a certain point?

Black Menorca

lazygal wrote: »

What are you on about? A viable foetus at 34 weeks would be delivered alive. My first child was delivered at 39 weeks, as per notes the decision was made to terminate the pregnancy because of potential danger to health and life. She wasn't killed at the hands of an abortionist, she was delivered by my consultant. Why do you think abortion=intentionally killed? Don't answer, all prolifers are absolutely obsessed with later term abortions/terminations/killing the disabled babies/abortionists/the abortion industry.
You do know because of the eighth amendment abortion in Ireland is available throughout pregnancy, even after a due date, because of the constitutional position? Or does a woman magically not have a threat to her life because of pregnancy after a certain point?

But if you had your way and a woman turned up at a Marie Stopes outfit, cash in had, directly requesting her DS baby to be eliminated, would you deny her?

ProfessorPlum

Black Menorca wrote: »

But if you had your way and a woman turned up at a Marie Stopes outfit, cash in had, directly requesting her DS baby to be eliminated, would you deny her?

What is your obsession with killing viable babies?

You seem to be the only one suggesting it. Are you in favour?

FFS

lazygal

Black Menorca wrote: »

But if you had your way and a woman turned up at a Marie Stopes outfit, cash in had, directly requesting her DS baby to be eliminated, would you deny her?

Can you point me to which Marie Stopes clinics offer the termination of pregnancy at 34 weeks gestation? Why do you use the term 'eliminated' when I expressly said in Ireland, which has no Marie Stopes clinics offering any abortion services, babies are delivered before 40 weeks gestation and aren't eliminated?
Anyway Down's syndrome can be detected way before 34 weeks anyway. You can get bloods done in a new test in the first trimester. If a woman had an abortion at 12 weeks because she didn't want to remain pregnant because the diagnosis was markers for Down's is that different to turning up at your hypothetical Marie Stopes clinic at 34 weeks, cash in hand, wanting to have an abortion on request?

lazygal

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

What is your obsession with killing viable babies?

You seem to be the only one suggesting it. Are you in favour?

FFS

Also obsessed with Marie Stopes. Did you know the CEO earns 500k a year or something. :rolleyes:

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

But if you had your way and a woman turned up at a Marie Stopes outfit, cash in had, directly requesting her DS baby to be eliminated, would you deny her?

After 24 weeks, in the UK, allow abortions are required to be carried out in an NHS hospital. So the scenario you put forward is illegal.

And the number of cases of DS related abortions in the UK is 0.22% of all abortions. Would it not be more germaine to the discussion to examine the majority of abortions rather a sliver of them?

Black Menorca

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

What is your obsession with killing viable babies?

You seem to be the only one suggesting it. Are you in favour?

FFS

Still no direct answer. Why, I wonder.

Black Menorca

lazygal wrote: »

Can you point me to which Marie Stopes clinics offer the termination of pregnancy at 34 weeks gestation? Why do you use the term 'eliminated' when I expressly said in Ireland, which has no Marie Stopes clinics offering any abortion services, babies are delivered before 40 weeks gestation and aren't eliminated?
Anyway Down's syndrome can be detected way before 34 weeks anyway. You can get bloods done in a new test in the first trimester. If a woman had an abortion at 12 weeks because she didn't want to remain pregnant because the diagnosis was markers for Down's is that different to turning up at your hypothetical Marie Stopes clinic at 34 weeks, cash in hand, wanting to have an abortion on request?

So is that a no? You would deny her wish?

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

After 24 weeks, in the UK, allow abortions are required to be carried out in an NHS hospital. So the scenario you put forward is illegal.

And the number of cases of DS related abortions in the UK is 0.22% of all abortions. Would it not be more germaine to the discussion to examine the majority of abortions rather a sliver of them?

So, you support the illegality of providing an abortion of a viable DS baby at 34 weeks gestation and denying an adult woman her direct request?

lazygal

Black Menorca wrote: »

So is that a no? You would deny her wish?

Her wish is illegal. I suspect you are focused on late term abortion for a reason-and that is because you see a difference between abortion at six weeks, abortion at 20 weeks and abortion at 34 weeks. Like most people.

Would you like to comment on the vast majority of abortions that take place before 12 weeks in a legal setting, such as Marie Stopes clinic (I hear the CEO makes 500k a year!!)?

ProfessorPlum

Black Menorca wrote: »

Still no direct answer. Why, I wonder.

Did you ask me a question?

When, I wonder?

Maybe you would get better answers if you had better questions. Or any question at all.

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

So, you support the illegality of providing an abortion of a viable DS baby at 34 weeks gestation and denying an adult woman her direct request?

it's illegal for Marie Stopes to perform abortions beyond 24 weeks.

Carrying out an abortion at 34 weeks does not mean the foetus/child will die as it developed enough to survive outside the womb. I would support the woman terminating the pregnancy. The child will be able to survive a delivery at that stage.

Black Menorca

lazygal wrote: »

Her wish is illegal. I suspect you are focused on late term abortion for a reason-and that is because you see a difference between abortion at six weeks, abortion at 20 weeks and abortion at 34 weeks. Like most people.

Would you like to comment on the vast majority of abortions that take place before 12 weeks in a legal setting, such as Marie Stopes clinic (I hear the CEO makes 500k a year!!)?

Still refusing to answer. Speaks volumes.

Do you view such illegality as a denial of a woman's bodily integrity? If not, why not.

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

it's illegal for Marie Stopes to perform abortions beyond 24 weeks.

Carrying out an abortion at 34 weeks does not mean the foetus/child will die as it developed enough to survive outside the womb. I would support the woman terminating the pregnancy. The child will be able to survive a delivery at that stage.

If the mother asks for the baby to be intentionally killed in the womb at 34 weeks, it is denied in many countries. Do you view this as acceptable?

Penny Tration

Black Menorca wrote: »

Still refusing to answer. Speaks volumes.

Do you view such illegality as a denial of a woman's bodily integrity? If not, why not.

You should try to actually read the posts.

After 24 weeks - it is done for medical purposes. Rarely. Very bloody rarely.

As to your hypothetical 34 week old foetus that has never fcuking happened - it would be aborted. Alive. Because it's completely viable.

NO woman will wait til 34 weeks then decide to have an abortion.

All you're doing here is presenting absolutely ridiculous scenarios so that when people respond, you can say "lol but you said you value bodily integrity, you're a liar."

We see your agenda. Now please move on and speak about things that have a distinct possibility of happening.

lazygal

Black Menorca wrote: »

Still refusing to answer. Speaks volumes.

Do you view such illegality as a denial of a woman's bodily integrity? If not, why not.

The woman wouldn't go to Marie Stopes in Ireland. There is no Marie Stopes clinic in Ireland.
And yes, it is a violation of bodily integrity to force a woman to remain pregnant against her wishes, at any stage of pregnancy. At 34 weeks any woman should be able to abort a pregnancy. Just not 'at the hands of an abortionist', but in a hospital, where the baby can receive the necessary care on delivery..
Still no answer on the large number of abortions that take place before 34 weeks. Speaks volumes.

Penny Tration

Black Menorca wrote: »

If the mother asks for the baby to be intentionally killed in the womb at 34 weeks, it is denied in many countries. Do you view this as acceptable?

sw already very clearly stated that he agrees with abortion, up to the point where the foetus is viable.

Black Menorca

Jenny Thalia wrote: »

You should try to actually read the posts.

After 24 weeks - it is done for medical purposes. Rarely. Very bloody rarely.

As to your hypothetical 34 week old foetus that has never fcuking happened - it would be aborted. Alive. Because it's completely viable.

NO woman will wait til 34 weeks then decide to have an abortion.

All you're doing here is presenting absolutely ridiculous scenarios so that when people respond, you can say "lol but you said you value bodily integrity, you're a liar."

We see your agenda. Now please move on and speak about things that have a distinct possibility of happening.

No one ifs forcing you to answer. It's ok.

Black Menorca

Jenny Thalia wrote: »

sw already very clearly stated that he agrees with abortion, up to the point where the foetus is viable.

And if the woman seeks her baby to be killed in the womb before delivery? Is refusal a denial of her bodily integrity?

conorh91

K-9 wrote: »

On the suicide thing, I just can't see how you can make a mother go the full term and give birth. Seriously conorh91, would you be comfortable with forcibly detaining a pregnant woman in a higher security psychiatric ward like that?

There are plenty of clinical practices that occur in hospital settings which I'd find uncomfortable and harrowing. I'm not necessarily saying there should never be abortions in Irish hospitals, even in cases of suicidal intent. I have a fairly open mind on that, but at the moment I am concerned both about a lack of evidence, and the personal testimony of women who have regretted their decision to have an abortion, which in some cases they probably had no capacity to make.

For example, I find it incredible that there is an Irishwoman only 7 years older than myself, who was taken to England by a social worker for an abortion she now regrets, and apparently spends every day grieving for. That woman, of course, is Miss C, who rarely gets a mention despite the trauma she apparently endures on a daily basis.

I'm not trying to goad people into accepting my concerns lest they be daubed as sexist or fundamentalist, which unfortunately is what I see on this thread. I'm just asking people not to jump to conclusions, and to recognize the sincere concerns many ordinary, well-meaning, non-sexist irish people have about suicide, capacity and abortion.

SW wrote: »

Worth noting that all the doctors, with the exception of Dr King, are signatories of the Dublin Declaration and firmly in the pro-life camp.

It's certainly worth mentioning, but I can understand their specific interest in responding to Amnsety, since they have been more vocal than other obstetricians, and are therefore in greater danger of having their reputations tarnished. For all we know, the more reticent obstetricians and gynecologists may be in agreement with them, because it's difficult to know what to make of the latter cohort's failure to either agree or to contradict.

Black Menorca wrote: »

It seems Rhona has so much time to advocate for a change to the Constitutional situation, one may wonder about her dedication to keeping her hospital clean and sterile.

Although we share similar concerns about abortion, I have to say I find your comments about Dr Mahony inappropriate. Why are you referring to her by her first name, and harping back to how clean and untidy her hospital is?

If I didn't give people the benefit of the doubt, I'd say there's a whiff of sexism off it.

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

If the mother asks for the baby to be intentionally killed in the womb at 34 weeks, it is denied in many countries. Do you view this as acceptable?

My understanding is that the child would have to be delivered then killed to accomdate the woman. This is infanticide. It has a 98% chance of survival at that stage.

How many cases have occurred though? Is it enough to warrant it being pushed to the front of the discussion regarding abortion? Surely the other 99.78% (DS abortions account for 0.22% of UK abortions, though we don't know if any are at the 34 week stage) of abortions are more relevant?

lazygal

Black Menorca wrote: »

And if the woman seeks her baby to be killed in the womb before delivery? Is refusal a denial of her bodily integrity?

How would it be a denial of her bodily integrity? If the baby is delivered the mother has no obligations to it whatsoever. Miss Y never had any interest in the baby she delivered.

Anyway, could you tell us which Marie Stopes clinics, in Ireland or elsewhere, agree to stop the foetus' heartbeat at 34 weeks and have it delivered by an abortionist?

Delirium

conorh91 wrote: »

It's certainly worth mentioning, but I can understand their specific interest in responding to Amnsety, since they have been more vocal than other obstetricians, and are therefore in greater danger of having their reputations tarnished. For all we know, the more reticent obstetricians and gynecologists may be in agreement with them, because it's difficult to know what to make of the latter cohort's failure to either agree or to contradict.

All we know is that a group of pro-life doctors objected to Amnestys report.

As I said before, it would have more interesting if a non partisan group of doctors had signed the objection.

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

My understanding is that the child would have to be delivered then killed to accomdate the woman. This is infanticide. It has a 98% chance of survival at that stage.

How many cases have occurred though? Is it enough to warrant it being pushed to the front of the discussion regarding abortion? Surely the other 99.78% (DS abortions account for 0.22% of UK abortions, though we don't know if any are at the 34 week stage) of abortions are more relevant?

You'd like to deflect on to other scenarios for sure. I don't blame you.

Partial birth abortions. you know the ones. Where the baby's body is delivered apart from the head and the brain is suctioned out and the skull collapses.

2,000 such procedures happen in America each year.

Do you believe denying such a procedure is disrespecting the woman's wishes?

Black Menorca

lazygal wrote: »

How would it be a denial of her bodily integrity? If the baby is delivered the mother has no obligations to it whatsoever. Miss Y never had any interest in the baby she delivered.

Anyway, could you tell us which Marie Stopes clinics, in Ireland or elsewhere, agree to stop the foetus' heartbeat at 34 weeks and have it delivered by an abortionist?

This is my hypothetical, that the abortion lobby here have been dancing around for three or four pages now.

Very interesting to observe, my little experiment.

Black Menorca

conorh91 wrote: »

The
Although we share similar concerns about abortion, I have to say I find your comments about Dr Mahony inappropriate. Why are you referring to her by her first name, and harping back to how clean and untidy her hospital is?

If I didn't give people the benefit of the doubt, I'd say there's a whiff of sexism off it.

Rhona should focus on day to day fundamentals, instead of shilling for repealing the 8th.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/1212/666412-holles-street-rotunda/

oscarBravo

Black Menorca wrote: »

Very interesting to observe, my little experiment.

I'm sure it's utterly fascinating to exactly one participant in the thread.

To the rest of us, it's an exercise in watching you dishonestly pretend not to know the answers to your rather silly questions.

Black Menorca

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm sure it's utterly fascinating to exactly one participant in the thread.

To the rest of us, it's an exercise in watching you dishonestly pretend not to know the answers to your rather silly questions.

But of course.

conorh91

SW wrote: »

As I said before, it would have more interesting if a non partisan group of doctors had signed the objection.

Well I was more interested by this part of your statement: You are...

...skeptical of their claims since there aren't both pro-life and pro-choice (to avoid bias from one side or the other) doctors signing the letter.

Firstly, we don't know that these doctors are pro-life. It is possible to reject a clinical reason for abortion whilst advancing an ethical basis for abortion (in fact, would not most pro-choice people reject a reliance on clinical approaches?)

Secondly, I don't see how you can be skeptical without knowing whether the remaining members of their faculty agree or disagree with them. They are silent. No agreement, and no contradiction.

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

You'd like to deflect on to other scenarios for sure. I don't blame you.

somewhat amusing comment considering we're discussing abortions that are purely hypothetical so far.

Partial birth abortions. you know the ones. Where the baby's body is delivered apart from the head and the brain is suctioned out and the skull collapses.

2,000 such procedures happen in America each year.

Do you believe denying such a procedure is disrespecting the woman's wishes?

Do you have a link to show that 2,000 late term abortions happen at 34 weeks each year in the US? All the stats I can find group all late terms as >20, >21 or >24.

pmasterson95

Black Menorca wrote: »

Still no direct answer. Why, I wonder.

You lot dont like answering. Whats that about glass houses and stones?

ProfessorPlum

Black Menorca wrote: »

Rhona should focus on day to day fundamentals, instead of shilling for repealing the 8th.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/1212/666412-holles-street-rotunda/

Similar issues at the Rotunda. What's your opinion of 'Sam'?

pmasterson95

Black Menorca wrote: »

Still refusing to answer. Speaks volumes.

Do you view such illegality as a denial of a woman's bodily integrity? If not, why not.

You love getting answers but not giving. Says a lot.

pmasterson95

Menorca how on earth can you harp about bodily integrity when 24 hours you advocated 24 hour monitoring to ensure the baby is born regardless off the mothers wishes.

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

somewhat amusing comment considering we're discussing abortions that are purely hypothetical so far.


Do you have a link to show that 2,000 late term abortions happen at 34 weeks each year in the US? All the stats I can find group all late terms as >20, >21 or >24.

Still deflecting I see. I never said all 2,000 occur at 34 weeks. Google is your friend. But it does happen.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2003/10/did_i_violate_the_partialbirth_abortion_ban.html

Now are you ready to answer this time? If not just say so.

PopePalpatine

conorh91 wrote: »

Well I was more interested by this part of your statement: You are...

...skeptical of their claims since there aren't both pro-life and pro-choice (to avoid bias from one side or the other) doctors signing the letter.

Firstly, we don't know that these doctors are pro-life. It is possible to reject a clinical reason for abortion whilst advancing an ethical basis for abortion (in fact, would not most pro-choice people reject a reliance on clinical approaches?)

Secondly, I don't see how you can be skeptical without knowing whether the remaining members of their faculty agree or disagree with them. They are silent. No agreement, and no contradiction.

All but one of the signatories were also signatories to the Youth Defence-organised "Dublin Declaration". I think that's reason enough to believe they're anti-choice.

Black Menorca

DP

Black Menorca

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Similar issues at the Rotunda.

Indeed.

Delirium

conorh91 wrote: »

Well I was more interested by this part of your statement: You are...

...skeptical of their claims since there aren't both pro-life and pro-choice (to avoid bias from one side or the other) doctors signing the letter.

Firstly, we don't know that these doctors are pro-life. It is possible to reject a clinical reason for abortion whilst advancing an ethical basis for abortion (in fact, would not most pro-choice people reject a reliance on clinical approaches?)

All doctors aside from one are signatories of the Dublin Declaration. Any information I can find on doctors that signed the declaration indicate a group of doctors that align with conservative Christian groups and/or pro-life groups.

Secondly, I don't see how you can be skeptical without knowing whether the remaining members of their faculty agree or disagree with them. They are silent. No agreement, and no contradiction.

How can I be skeptical about the opinion of the Irish medical community with only a handful of pro-lfe doctors speaking against Amnesty? It's because only one side of the abortion debate has made their opinion known. I'm therefore skeptical that it is representative of the entire/majority of medical community.

pmasterson95

Black Menorca wrote: »

DP

Debt Protection?

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

Still deflecting I see. I never said all 2,000 occur at 34 weeks. Google is your friend. But it does happen.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2003/10/did_i_violate_the_partialbirth_abortion_ban.html

Now are you ready to answer this time? If not just say so.

any chance you could cease with the frequent shifting of the goalposts?

we were discussing abortion at 34 weeks. I gave my opinion as a follow up asked how numerous were the instances of abortion at 34 weeks.

You subsequently mentioned partial birth abortions and that 2,000 happen yearly in the US. It now seems that you're expanding the discussion to abortions >20 weeks rather than the original 34. I can only surmise that you, much like myself, were unable to find any stats on abortions at 34 weeks.

Anywho, to answer for about the 5th or 6th time in 24 hours, I support free access to abortion (regardless of reason) until the foetus is viable.

conorh91

PopePalpatine wrote: »

All but one of the signatories were also signatories to the Youth Defence-organised "Dublin Declaration". I think that's reason enough to believe they're anti-choice.

Youth Defence did not organize the symposium that led to the Dublin declaration.

Even if that were true, it would not detract from the clinical opinions of accredited experts. Many well-respected experts address civic society groups, trade unions, and political parties; even to make critical observations.

SW wrote: »

Any information I can find on doctors that signed the declaration indicate a group of doctors that align with conservative Christian groups and/or pro-life groups.

Would you mind sharing that information here, please?