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

Sanctity of Life (Abortion Megathread)

Options
1…1213151718…124

Comments

  • Options
    #422
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,388 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    Such as? I can't recall any woman dying in Ireland because they weren't allowed an abortion. Feel free to enlighten us.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar

    Now you're going to come back with all the top class information from this site http://savitatruth.com/ to disprove me.

    That site being typical of a pro-life website attempts to reference their point of....
    Dr. Savita Halappanavar and her 17 week-old unborn baby die at University Hospital Galway, from septicaemia (blood poisoning) following complications of a miscarriage. Very prominent Irish and Indian doctors publicly state that abortion has little or nothing to do with the case.

    ...with the following two links...

    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/republic-of-ireland/no-confusion-says-top-consultant-28922817.html

    Which at no point even mentions if an abortion would or would not have made a difference.

    http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/city-doctor-defends-irish-counterparts/article4100988.ece

    which includes the following paragraphs which I assume they are referencing.
    Gynaecologist Hema Divakar defended the Irish doctors for not aborting Savita’s foetus saying that under the circumstances, it may have been equally dangerous to have done the procedure.

    Two other doctors, however, said the doctors at University Hospital Galway in western Ireland had blundered in denying the 31-year-old’s plea to terminate her pregnancy two days before she developed complications resulting out of septicaemia.

    1 doctor backs up their point while two dismiss it.

    So one reference which is completely useless and one which contradicts their side of the story.


  • Options
    #423
    robdonn
    Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭robdonn


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    Such as? I can't recall any woman dying in Ireland because they weren't allowed an abortion. Feel free to enlighten us.

    From the final report about the death of Savita Halappanavar:
    Key Causal Factor 1:
    Inadequate assessment and monitoring that would have enabled the clinical team to recognise and respond to the signs that the patient’s condition was deteriorating due to infection associated with a failure to devise and follow a plan of care for this patient that was satisfactorily cognisant of the facts that:
    → the most likely cause of the patient’s inevitable miscarriage was infection and
    → the risk of infection and sepsis increased with time following admission and especially following the spontaneous rupture of the patient’s membranes.

    Key Causal Factor 2:
    Failure to offer all management options to a patient experiencing inevitable miscarriage of an early second trimester pregnancy where the risk to the mother increased with time from the time that membranes were ruptured.

    Key Causal Factor 3:
    Non adherence to clinical guidelines related to the prompt and effective management of sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock when it was diagnosed.


  • Options
    #424
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    robdonn wrote: »


    Oh, and Intact dilation and extraction is not the same as partial birth abortion, which is a political term not a medical one.

    List three clear differences, if you can. :)


  • Options
    #425
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,765 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    You're making my point for me.
    Two Sheds wrote: »
    Willful ignorance is from the same stable as a fondness for censorship.
    Two Sheds wrote: »
    The words are yours.

    MOD NOTE

    Please try to respond in a more meaningful way rather than as above, as they could be perceived as trolling.

    Thanks for your attention.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #426
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    robdonn wrote: »
    From the final report about the death of Savita Halappanavar:

    Three reports on Savita's death and not one cited the 8th Amendment as a reason, nor the lack of an abortion being carried out.

    But we're used to the abortion lobby hijacking Savita's death to promote their agenda.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #427
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    Such as? I can't recall any woman dying in Ireland because they weren't allowed an abortion. Feel free to enlighten us.

    I don't know if anyone will be able to prove with certainty that a woman has died as a direct result of not having an abortion however there are certainly cases where the delay or issues with travelling have had an impact on a woman's health that it might have led to her death. Take Michelle Harte, she had terminal cancer, was pregnant and was denied an abortion. She had the abortion in the UK and later died. Now can we say she would have lived had the abortion been carried out here when she asked? No but it might have given her some additional time with her family, it might have made her last few months a bit easier. I'm sure that the stress of taking her case and the subsequent travel to the UK didn't help her. The lack of compassion for women like her and their families is disgusting, because she wasn't clinging onto life she's basically told to get lost, not our problem, sort it out yourself.
    How many more Michelle Hartes are out there?

    And lets not forget it was recently disclosed that over 20 abortions have been carried out here under the Protection of Life legislation. Given the hoops that have to be jumped through to get an abortion here in the first place I think we can assume that had it not been an option some of those women may have died.


  • Options
    #428
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    idk it seems more like an argument of "what killed the guy, the huge hole in his aorta, the bullet, the gun, or the guy firing it?" similarly it could be debated ad infinitum whether it was the lack of an abortion that killed her or the infection.


  • Options
    #429
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,388 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    Three reports on Savita's death and not one cited the 8th Amendment as a reason, nor the lack of an abortion being carried out.

    But we're used to the abortion lobby hijacking Savita's death to promote their agenda.

    The question posed wasn't "has the 8th amendment caused any deaths" it was "has a woman not recieving an abortion casused any deaths".

    As has been clearly shown the answer to the actual question posed was, yes. That woman died as a direct result of not being able to gain access to an abortion.

    Now if you wanted to bring the 8th amendment into it, as you must because you mentioned it, the reason the doctors didn't give the woman the treatment she needed could be very logically extrapolated to the point where you could blame the 8th amendment.

    the 8th amendment says...
    The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.

    So the doctors were uncertain as to their position directly because of the vagaries in this amendment.


  • Options
    #430
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    Jayop wrote: »
    The question posed wasn't "has the 8th amendment caused any deaths" it was "has a woman not recieving an abortion casused any deaths".

    As has been clearly shown the answer to the actual question posed was, yes. That woman died as a direct result of not being able to gain access to an abortion.

    Now if you wanted to bring the 8th amendment into it, as you must because you mentioned it, the reason the doctors didn't give the woman the treatment she needed could be very logically extrapolated to the point where you could blame the 8th amendment.

    the 8th amendment says...



    So the doctors were uncertain as to their position directly because of the vagaries in this amendment.

    The 8th is clear as crystal, as are the Medical Council Guidelines.

    The lack of an abortion did not cause Savita's death, or maybe you have evidence the three investigations missed?


  • Options
    #431
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,388 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    The 8th is clear as crystal, as are the Medical Council Guidelines.

    The lack of an abortion did not cause Savita's death, or maybe you have evidence the three investigations missed?

    Her death was caused by Septic Shock but could have been prevented by an abortion.

    Failure to offer all management options to a patient experiencing inevitable miscarriage of an early second trimester pregnancy where the risk to the mother increased with time from the time that membranes were ruptured.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #432
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,388 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    Also, the 8th is anything but clear. Probably the reason why there's been 4 referendum since then to try to clear it up.


  • Options
    #433
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    The 8th is clear as crystal, as are the Medical Council Guidelines.

    The lack of an abortion did not cause Savita's death, or maybe you have evidence the three investigations missed?

    Clear you say? So why that circus last christmas with a brain dead woman on life support rotting in her hospital bed because she just happened to be pregnant?


  • Options
    #434
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    The 8th is clear as crystal, as are the Medical Council Guidelines.
    Dr Sam Coulter-Smith, a consultant in obstetrics and gynaecology and a university master in the Rotunda Hospital, one of the biggest maternity hospitals in Ireland, said: "This case probably does not have a lot to do with abortion laws."[43] He added that it would be preferable to introduce legislation to bring in clarity, saying, "We really do need legislation in this area, otherwise we're going to be at risk of doctors working outside the law, and that's not appropriate."[44]

    Dr Rhona Mahony, the Master of the National Maternity Hospital, said: "It is very disappointing that, 20 years after the 'X-Case', we don't have legislation" and that women "need to know that they are going to get the appropriate health care that they need" while doctors "need to know that they are also protected in their ability to do their job."[45]
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar#Reaction


  • Options
    #435
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    Jayop wrote: »
    Her death was caused by Septic Shock but could have been prevented by an abortion.

    Failure to offer all management options to a patient experiencing inevitable miscarriage of an early second trimester pregnancy where the risk to the mother increased with time from the time that membranes were ruptured.

    Where, in the three reports was an abortion referred to as the correct response to Savita's condition?


  • Options
    #436
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    Overheal wrote: »
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar#Reaction

    Sam and Rhona are vocal advocates for a liberalisation of our very restrictive abortion laws.

    Some would suggest if Rhona focused more on keeping her hospital clean, she's be doing a greater service to the women and babies under her care.

    http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/health/staffs-bad-hygiene-in-holles-st-a-danger-to-newborns-29854277.html

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/rotunda-and-holles-st-hospitals-criticised-over-cleanliness-1.2035597


  • Options
    #437
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    Where, in the three reports was an abortion referred to as the correct response to Savita's condition?

    She did ask for an abortion. Is that irrelevant? Should her request for an abortion have been acceded to?


  • Options
    #438
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    lazygal wrote: »
    She did ask for an abortion. Is that irrelevant? Should her request for an abortion have been acceded to?

    Of course not.

    Where, in the three reports was an abortion referred to as the correct response to Savita's condition?


  • Options
    #439
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    Of course not.

    Where, in the three reports was an abortion referred to as the correct response to Savita's condition?

    What way should a miscarriage at 18 weeks gestation be treated? Just waiting to see what'll happen? Why would the correct response be denying a woman an abortion when she's requested one? Should she have travelled elsewhere for an abortion instead?


  • Options
    #440
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    lazygal wrote: »
    What way should a miscarriage at 18 weeks gestation be treated? Just waiting to see what'll happen? Why would the correct response be denying a woman an abortion when she's requested one? Should she have travelled elsewhere for an abortion instead?

    The law. X Case legislation clearly states the intentional taking of unborn life is a crime.


  • Options
    #441
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,388 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    So they were right to deny her the abortion and let God decide?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #442
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    The law. X Case legislation clearly states the intentional taking of unborn life is a crime.

    No, the intentional taking of unborn life when a woman's life is at risk is constitutionally protected. When is a risk to life diagnosed?


  • Options
    #443
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    The law. X Case legislation clearly states the intentional taking of unborn life is a crime.

    The law resulted in 2 deaths. Yay?


  • Options
    #444
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    Jayop wrote: »
    So they were right to deny her the abortion
    Yes.
    three reports and not one agrees with your view.


  • Options
    #445
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    lazygal wrote: »
    No, the intentional taking of unborn life when a woman's life is at risk is constitutionally protected. When is a risk to life diagnosed?

    By the medical team on hand, I'd have thought.


  • Options
    #446
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,388 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    Yes.
    three reports and not one agrees with your view.

    The part I quoted and bolded did.


  • Options
    #447
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    Overheal wrote: »
    The law resulted in 2 deaths. Yay?

    You celebrate death?


  • Options
    #448
    Black Menorca
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    Jayop wrote: »
    The part I quoted and bolded did.

    Absolutely not.


  • Options
    #449
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    By the medical team on hand, I'd have thought.

    So a medical team can decide when it's ok to directly target the unborn. Should the team in the Savita case have directly targeted the unborn?


  • Options
    #450
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    You celebrate death?

    Do you think the consequent amendments allowing the unborn to be taken elsewhere to be killed are a success? Should they be repealed?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #451
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Black Menorca wrote: »
    Of course not.

    Where, in the three reports was an abortion referred to as the correct response to Savita's condition?

    Letting a woman bleed out her unborn child is a more dignified way of doing things is it? In this case the miscarriage was already underway, it couldn't be prevented, no harm in speeding up the process with some intervention, better for the health of the woman and better for her mental and emotional health too.


Advertisement