The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

2wsxcde3

Call me Al wrote: »

Once a crime is reported it has to be investigated.
So no, it's not remotely the box-ticking exercise you are intent to portray it as.

All the woman has to do is file a report but state she does not want to take any further action. Just like a GP forms an opinion as to whether a woman should have an abortion, the local superintendent forms an opinion that there are no glaring inconsistencies in the womans story to suspect she is lying. The system would always lean towards giving the woman the benefit of the doubt.

This idea that a woman shouldn't have to file a report is nonsense. We're talking about a half hour discussion with a specially trained garda officer trained in counselling. It could actually be a helpful experience to the woman.

I trust women not to abuse the system. Though i'm still against abortion in cases of rape as the baby is innocent.

2wsxcde3

JDD wrote: »

To be honest, if I was in a situation where I couldn't travel to the UK, or couldn't order pills online, i.e. if I was an immigrant in a detention centre, in jail, or under the care of the HSE (being a ward of court or a minor in care) I wouldn't even think twice about going to Garda Super and saying I was raped. It would be p*ss easy to say I was raped and don't want to officially report it because, oh I dunno, I was drunk and I don't think I would get a conviction and I am already so traumatized a rape trial would send me over the edge. Job done.

When we say "trust women" we mean trust women not to use abortion as a contraceptive, that they are making a difficult (or sometimes not so difficult) choice that is the best interests of their health and their welfare. Not "trust women" to not abuse an abhorrent and judgemental process designed to find out whether they've been a "good girl" and haven't been engaging in consensual sex. In fact I'd "trust women" to absolutely abuse that system. I'd campaign for them to abuse. I'd run classes on how to abuse that system.

So you're saying other women are as dishonest as you?

kylith

Beethoven9th wrote: »

Doesnt the availability of emergency contraceptive pill, the Morning After Pill make some of this debate academic. ?

It’s not 100% effective, and has a window of only 72hours

Candamir

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

All the woman has to do is file a report but state she does not want to take any further action. Just like a GP forms an opinion as to whether a woman should have an abortion, the local superintendent forms an opinion that there are no glaring inconsistencies in the womans story to suspect she is lying. The system would always lean towards giving the woman the benefit of the doubt.

This idea that a woman shouldn't have to file a report is nonsense. We're talking about a half hour discussion with a specially trained garda officer trained in counselling. It could actually be a helpful experience to the woman.

I trust women not to abuse the system. Though i'm still against abortion in cases of rape as the baby is innocent.

Rape is a crime n this country. It’s not up to the victim to decide wether to ‘press charges’ or not. She is only a witness to the crime. It’s not up to her to ‘take further action’ or not. So your idea doesn’t really work. Not surprisingly.

January

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

All the woman has to do is file a report but state she does not want to take any further action. Just like a GP forms an opinion as to whether a woman should have an abortion, the local superintendent forms an opinion that there are no glaring inconsistencies in the womans story to suspect she is lying. The system would always lean towards giving the woman the benefit of the doubt.

This idea that a woman shouldn't have to file a report is nonsense. We're talking about a half hour discussion with a specially trained garda officer trained in counselling. It could actually be a helpful experience to the woman.

I trust women not to abuse the system. Though i'm still against abortion in cases of rape as the baby is innocent.

The idea that a woman should have to file a report is nonsense. Why should she have to tell anyone of her decision to abort her rapists baby? Why must she seek permission? What if the Garda doesn't believe her?

2wsxcde3

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

. We're talking about a half hour discussion with a specially trained garda officer trained in counselling. It could actually be a helpful experience to the woman..

So now you want Gardai trained in counselling deciding whether a woman has been raped or not?
Gardai have enough to be doing without another ridiculous waste of their time.

.......

This post has been deleted.

2wsxcde3

Candamir wrote: »

Rape is a crime n this country. It’s not up to the victim to decide wether to ‘press charges’ or not. She is only a witness to the crime. It’s not up to her to ‘take further action’ or not. So your idea doesn’t really work. Not surprisingly.

It can be legislated for. New legislation happens every day.

Now the veil is falling. Pro-choicers see rape victims as a tool to get something that they themselves want - abortion on demand. They dont want any system designed specifically for rape victims, a system that would actually help them where they could talk to a trained female garda in counseling.

Call me Al

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

All the woman has to do is file a report but state she does not want to take any further action. Just like a GP forms an opinion as to whether a woman should have an abortion, the local superintendent forms an opinion that there are no glaring inconsistencies in the womans story to suspect she is lying. The system would always lean towards giving the woman the benefit of the doubt.

This idea that a woman shouldn't have to file a report is nonsense. We're talking about a half hour discussion with a specially trained garda officer trained in counselling. It could actually be a helpful experience to the woman.

I trust women not to abuse the system. Though i'm still against abortion in cases of rape as the baby is innocent.

So what's the point then if it is just a box ticking process? Why put a woman through that? To see if she'd have the nerve to lie to a garda? Is it to try and filter out the liars, or just those who are weak, because the latter is what a law like that would do.
Do you envisage she has to make a full statement of the circumstances or say the line and that's it?
Eta I wonder does any man have to jump through hoops like those proposed here to access medical care deemed standard care in the rest of the developed world.

2wsxcde3

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

All the woman has to do is file a report but state she does not want to take any further action. Just like a GP forms an opinion as to whether a woman should have an abortion, the local superintendent forms an opinion that there are no glaring inconsistencies in the womans story to suspect she is lying.

Wasting more police time, why report a crime & then say you won't assist the Investigation?
Why should a superintendent decide if someone is lying? & how exactly would he be qualified to do that?
& why can't the doctor & the woman just do this themselves, no need to involve Gardai at all

kylith

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

It can be legislated for. New legislation happens every day.

Now the veil is falling. Pro-choicers see rape victims as a tool to get something that they themselves want - abortion on demand. They dont want any system designed specifically for rape victims, a system that would actually help them where they could talk to a trained female garda in counseling.

We just realise that there is no way to allow abortion in cases of raw without it either being traumatic for raped women or functionally no different to abortion in request.

January

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

It can be legislated for. New legislation happens every day.

Now the veil is falling. Pro-choicers see rape victims as a tool to get something that they themselves want - abortion on demand. They dont want any system designed specifically for rape victims, a system that would actually help them where they could talk to a trained female garda in counseling.

No, we see rape victims as just that, victims who shouldn't have to jump through hoops to make a decision about their own body, same as any woman shouldn't. Some women do not want to talk about their rape to anyone and they shouldn't be forced to, to obtain an abortion.

You're being absolutely ridiculous.

2wsxcde3

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You mean the scene they made up to sell the movie? Seems like some people will believe anything they see in a Hollywood movie:

The film employs artistic license with the real life events. Sister Hildegard McNulty, the principal antagonist in the film, is depicted as having met with journalist Sixsmith after he started working on the story. In reality, McNulty died in 1995, and Sixsmith only began his investigation in 2004. The final scene in which a wheelchair-bound McNulty chastises Philomena for carnality is also artistic license.
(Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philomena_(film) )

Mr. CooL ICE

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

It can be legislated for. New legislation happens every day.

Now the veil is falling. Pro-choicers see rape victims as a tool to get something that they themselves want - abortion on demand. They dont want any system designed specifically for rape victims, a system that would actually help them where they could talk to a trained female garda in counseling.

No veils falling here. The entire pro-choice argument is to give women the choice to end their pregnancies. Nobody has said otherwise.

Candamir

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

It can be legislated for. New legislation happens every day.

Now the veil is falling. Pro-choicers see rape victims as a tool to get something that they themselves want - abortion on demand. They dont want any system designed specifically for rape victims, a system that would actually help them where they could talk to a trained female garda in counseling.

Well this is getting quite ridiculous! So murderers should only be procescuted if their victim wants to press charges..... no...wait. That won’t work either

For the record, I think that the solution that the citizens assembly and the oireachtas committee came up with works pretty well tbh. I’d go with that.
And no. I don’t want a system designed for rape victims. I’d like one that works for everyone.

Eponymous

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

No ones suggesting they have to go to trial. Simply file a report at a garda station that they have been raped and would like an abortion. The women need take no further action beyond that.

But obviously pro-choicers don't trust women enough to tell the truth.

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

All the woman has to do is file a report but state she does not want to take any further action. Just like a GP forms an opinion as to whether a woman should have an abortion, the local superintendent forms an opinion that there are no glaring inconsistencies in the womans story to suspect she is lying. The system would always lean towards giving the woman the benefit of the doubt.

This idea that a woman shouldn't have to file a report is nonsense. We're talking about a half hour discussion with a specially trained garda officer trained in counselling. It could actually be a helpful experience to the woman.

I trust women not to abuse the system. Though i'm still against abortion in cases of rape as the baby is innocent.

Indeed...

If you're truly giving women the "benefit of the doubt", it should be sufficient for a women to go to their GP, who is better qualified to make a clinical decision as well as, if necessary, refer for counselling with someone who didn't just take a two day course in Templemore.

2wsxcde3

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

where they could talk to a trained female garda in counseling.

Why would it be a female Garda?
And so you not think Gardai have enough to do?
This is one of the most ridiculous arguments I have heard yet.
Just more shaming women...

.......

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

You mean the scene they made up to sell the movie? Seems like some people will believe anything they see in a Hollywood movie:

The film employs artistic license with the real life events. Sister Hildegard McNulty, the principal antagonist in the film, is depicted as having met with journalist Sixsmith after he started working on the story. In reality, McNulty died in 1995, and Sixsmith only began his investigation in 2004. The final scene in which a wheelchair-bound McNulty chastises Philomena for carnality is also artistic license.
(Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philomena_(film) )

we have had slut shaming on this thread. In 2018. There may have been dramatic licence involved but you are naive if you think such things did not happen.

.......

This post has been deleted.

2wsxcde3

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Lol. Next you'll be saying how terrible Father Jack was for his drinking and shouting.

eviltwin

With all due respect to the gardai they aren't trained to counsel rape victims. It's not their job. I used to work in a domestic violence service, rape was a common experience of the women I dealt with. Some ended up pregnant as a result. They would have a hard time proving they were raped, not all victims are able to go to the gardai and if we make that a condition it's not going to help anyone.

SusieBlue

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

It can be legislated for. New legislation happens every day.

Now the veil is falling. Pro-choicers see rape victims as a tool to get something that they themselves want - abortion on demand. They dont want any system designed specifically for rape victims, a system that would actually help them where they could talk to a trained female garda in counseling.

You’re actually totally delusional.

As I said to you on another thread, it’s as if you are throwing as much sh*t at the wall as possible and hoping something will stick.

JDD

So you're saying other women are as dishonest as you?

Eh. Yes?

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking.

Do I think a person, who thinks a particular law is an overwhelming affront to how a civilized society should work, should break that law, while acknowledging the consequences? Yes. Of course. Wouldn't you?

I'd be the first one in line breaking that law - and I wouldn't lose a moment's sleep over it. I've mentioned my reasons for seeking a termination in a previous post should I get pregnant again. As I said, if I couldn't travel or procure the online pill, I would have absolutely zero moral qualms in reporting a fake rape to Gardaí. It'd be a terrible waste of taxpayers money in investigating a fake rape, but honestly that's not really my fault, it's the fault of people advocating for such a ridiculous system. I can't imagine that if they came to the conclusion I made a fake report, the DPP would be that bothered in pursuing a case against me, taking a mother from her three kids where a good chunk, if not the majority of the country, would agree with my reasoning. They have limited resources and easier cases to take.

As an added bones, if a systemic abuse of the system turned it into an absurdity and it was repealed, I would have contributed to saving a traumatized rape victim from being forced to relive their ordeal with a stranger against their will. A win all round. I would sleep very easy.

2wsxcde3

eviltwin wrote: »

I used to work in a domestic violence service, rape was a common experience of the women I dealt with. Some ended up pregnant as a result.

Wouldn't abortion on demand in this country only facilitate abusive men forcing the woman to have an abortion against their will?

.......

This post has been deleted.

Eponymous

eviltwin wrote: »

With all due respect to the gardai they aren't trained to counsel rape victims. It's not their job. I used to work in a domestic violence service, rape was a common experience of the women I dealt with. Some ended up pregnant as a result. They would have a hard time proving they were raped, not all victims are able to go to the gardai and if we make that a condition it's not going to help anyone.

Assuming of course that the poster actually wants to help anyone.

NuMarvel

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

Wouldn't abortion on demand in this country only facilitate abusive men forcing the woman to have an abortion against their will?

I haven't heard of this being the case in other jurisdictions that allow abortion on request, which is unsurprising because the point is that it is the woman who makes the choice, not anyone else.

.......

This post has been deleted.

eviltwin

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

Wouldn't abortion on demand in this country only facilitate abusive men forcing the woman to have an abortion against their will?

They do that anyway.

2wsxcde3

JDD wrote: »

I'd be the first one in line breaking that law - and I wouldn't lose a moment's sleep over it.

So you'd lie to gardai? I don't know how pro-choice people can even talk to each other if they happy admit they would lie about being raped.

Zubeneschamali

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That is, of course, the point.

Neyite

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

Bury them in the angels plot. Some hospitals in Ireland have one and offer parents to bury their miscarried baby there, or the parents can take the baby home. Its open to the parents.

Give me the name of ONE hospital that offers this for miscarriages at 8 weeks gestation. Just one.

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

... flush their remains down the toilet into raw sewerage. I don't think that's a good idea. It lowers human dignity.

Explain to me how a woman who miscarries in the first trimester disposes of the week-long bleeding, clots and foetal tissue, given that hospitals send them to miscarry at home. I'm very interested. Is there a miscarriage receptacle? Please explain to me how over the course of a week of bleeding a woman can prevent that pregnancy being dripped down the toilet every time she pees or poos. How does a woman stop it mingling with the raw waste coming out of her body at the same time?

If the local hospital have a policy to not even give you an appointment until your bleeding is finished, what or how does a woman deal with the remains ethically?

Captain Obvious wrote: »

I wonder how distressing it is to people who have had miscarriages to hear their loss dismissed as "just a bunch of cells".

I can tell you if you like. I had very little distress compared to some of the other stuff people have come out with. What was distressing was that the early pregnancy care I should have received was not offered to me due to the impact the 8th has on maternity policy.

I am angry. Angry that I could have gotten treatment that is available to women in other countries that could have potentially saved even one of my lost pregnancies and given me another child. I am angry that they make women have three miscarriages in a row before they even put her on a year long waiting list for investigations. I'm angry that they don't test foetal tissue so parents can know if there is a reason for miscarriage. I'm angry because the 8th directly affected MY family, my losses, all of which were much wanted pregnancies because of hospital policy based on the 8th.

JDD

Wouldn't abortion on demand in this country only facilitate abusive men forcing the woman to have an abortion against their will?

Em. You can buy pills on the internet. It's the first choice that comes up on google. WAY easier to order the pills and watch your partner take them, then march them to clinic and wait in a waiting room hoping she doesn't report you to the doctor.

So yes, it would happen anyway.

Next.

.......

This post has been deleted.

2wsxcde3

Neyite wrote: »

I can tell you if you like. I had very little distress compared to some of the other stuff people have come out with. What was distressing was that the early pregnancy care I should have received was not offered to me due to the impact the 8th has on maternity policy.

I am angry. Angry that I could have gotten treatment that is available to women in other countries that could have potentially saved even one of my lost pregnancies and given me another child. I am angry that they make women have three miscarriages in a row before they even put her on a year long waiting list for investigations. I'm angry that they don't test foetal tissue so parents can know if there is a reason for miscarriage. I'm angry because the 8th directly affected MY family, my losses, all of which were much wanted pregnancies because of hospital policy based on the 8th.

How would the 8th amendment cause a woman to potentially lose a pregnancy?

kylith

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

So you'd lie to gardai? I don't know how pro-choice people can even talk to each other if they happy admit they would lie about being raped.

So, you don't think a woman would lie to the police, but you do think that women would not bother with contraception if they could 'just' get an abortion?

Captain Obvious

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

All the woman has to do is file a report but state she does not want to take any further action. .

Gardaí are supposed to take a report of a crime and then ignore it?

JDD

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

So you'd lie to gardai? I don't know how pro-choice people can even talk to each other if they happy admit they would lie about being raped.

Again. Yes. This argument is absurd.

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't relish the thought. I've never knowingly broken the law before. Well, that's not true, I've jaywalked, I drank before I was 18, I smoked a spliff once when I was in college. Actually, come to think of it, I think I did lie to a garda once outside the Zoo Bar circa 1992 when he asked me had I been drinking. But you know, I've never broken the law to any serious extent.

But if the choice was between continuing with a pregnancy that could have serious consequences for my health, and going in to tick a box with Garda Super, then jesus, of course I would. It would be horrendous to think that it would contribute towards real rape victims not being believed, but to be honest I think every Garda Super would expect 99% of the people coming in to them for this type of report might be lying. And again I don't think any Garda Super would decide that the immigrant sitting across the table, or the ward of court (usually a minor, sometimes someone with mental health issues) was lying and couldn't have an abortion. It would be box ticking - exactly the same as the UK law which allows for abortion in medical cases with the consent of your GP.

And it would be immigrants and wards of court going through this process. Everyone else would just go to the UK or order the pill.

JDD

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Indeed. An Irish solution to an Irish problem. Make them report it to the Gardaí to placate the conservatives who only want good girls to have abortions, but in reality let everyone have one.

Neyite

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

How would the 8th amendment cause a woman to potentially lose a pregnancy?

Because there are a range of early pregnancy treatments for women who have a history of miscarriage that can help prevent them from miscarrying should they get pregnant again. They don't get prescribed in many Irish hospitals because maternity policy of that hospital takes the 8th into consideration.

Now that I've nicely answered your question, would you please answer the ones I asked you?

2wsxcde3

JDD wrote: »

Make them report it to the Gardaí to placate the conservatives who only want good girls to have abortions, but in reality let everyone have one.

Being pro-life is not about judging "good girls" from "bad girls". That's an idea that exists in many pro-choicers head because they feel they are "judged" if they have an abortion. Being pro-life is motivated by wanting to protect the unborn child who has no voice. And protecting women who are tricked into thinking abortion is a good thing ...only to find out the true horrors of it once the abortion has actually taken place.

No one is judging women who've had abortions. That's an idea pro-choicers need to get out of their head, really for their own good as its not nice (or good) to feel judged by anyone.

drkpower

JDD wrote: »

Indeed. An Irish solution to an Irish problem. Make them report it to the Gardaí to placate the conservatives who only want good girls to have abortions, but in reality let everyone have one.

Funnily/sadly enough, its not just an Irish solution.

There are a bunch of jurisdictions through Europe who require a report to the police (or some judicial authority) to permit abortion under the rape ground. And a bunch of others who require notification of rape to a doctor/2 doctors.

It's a fundamentally dishonest approach given that neither the police/judicial authority/doctor are under an obligation (AFAIK) to actually validate the report in any way whatsoever. One would imagine it simply encourages false reporting on the one hand, and failure to report in respect of those who are most vulnerable and who couldn't bear the thought of having to tell anyone about it.

2wsxcde3

Neyite wrote: »

Because there are a range of early pregnancy treatments for women who have a history of miscarriage that can help prevent them from miscarrying should they get pregnant again. They don't get prescribed in many Irish hospitals because maternity policy of that hospital takes the 8th into consideration.

I don't understand this. What kind of early pregnancy treatments are you taking about? The 8th is designed to protect the unborn. Do the treatments you talk about result in damaging or killing the unborn?

In response to your earlier questions, i posted a situation of a woman who buried her 4 week miscarriage, gave the baby a name and lit a candle for them.

January

I've been judged by many anti-choice people for having an abortion. I've even had them ask me what type of contraception I was on and told I must have been using it incorrectly if I got pregnant while using it. I've had a friend who is 'pro-life' tell me that I should keep my legs closed if I don't want to have any more children. I've had people on this thread question my decision.

People who have abortions are judged whether you believe they are or not.

Call me Al

drkpower wrote: »

Funnily/sadly enough, its not just an Irish solution.

There are a bunch of jurisdictions through Europe who require a report to the police (or some judicial authority) to permit abortion under the rape ground. And a bunch of others who require notification of rape to a doctor/2 doctors.

It's a fundamentally dishonest approach given that neither the police/judicial authority/doctor are under an obligation (AFAIK) to actually validate the report in any way whatsoever. One would imagine it simply encourages false reporting on the one hand, and failure to report in respect of those who are most vulnerable and who couldn't bear the thought of having to tell anyone about it.

Do these jurisdictions permit any abortions other than for rape? No questions asked type if situations similar to the UK?

Eta https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_law

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_law

.......

This post has been deleted.

amdublin

This whole rape committee thing is not sitting at all with me
Why in God's name would we want to sit in judgement and decide if a woman was actually raped or not? And why would we want to put so much blockers in front of a woman who is seeking an abortion.

In any circumstance, rape or not, it should be nobody but the woman's decision whether to have an abortion or not.
And yes I mean that, I don't care if someone had sex (god forbid!!!) and their contraceptive failed. Whatever! I really could care less about someone's bedroom activities, leave them be and let them get on with their life. Who the heck am I to dictate: No you must carry that baby. And then either keep it. Or give it up for adoption. Oh go on, If you insist on having an abortion you can have one, But not here. Oh no, on with ya and across to the uk to do the dirty deed.

Why would we want to do that to our daughters, our sister's, our wives, our partners, our friends, our neighbours? Why??

2wsxcde3

January wrote: »

I've been judged by many anti-choice people for having an abortion. I've even had them ask me what type of contraception I was on and told I must have been using it incorrectly if I got pregnant while using it. I've had a friend who is 'pro-life' tell me that I should keep my legs closed if I don't want to have any more children. I've had people on this thread question my decision.

People who have abortions are judged whether you believe they are or not.

I think some of the dialogue can be easily misinterpreted as being judgmental on the woman, when in reality its not meant to be. The anger is towards the fact that an unborn has died, rather than anger towards the woman. If the woman has had an abortion, its kind of a done deal at that stage. No point in being angry at her.

Statements like "you should have kept your legs closed" are fueled by anger at the fact an unborn child has died, not towards the woman. Its the same with statements like "abortion is murder". You'd be surprised how little anger there is towards the actual woman in the mind of the pro-lifer. I don't feel anger towards women who've had an abortion (or am judging them), though i'd imagine from my statements on here people probably thought i did.

January

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

I think some of the dialogue can be easily misinterpreted as being judgmental on the woman, when in reality its not meant to be. The anger is towards the fact that an unborn has died, rather than anger towards the woman. If the woman has had an abortion, its kind of a done deal at that stage. No point in being angry at her.

Statements like "you should have kept your legs closed" are fueled by anger at the fact an unborn child has died, not towards the woman. Its the same with statements like "abortion is murder". You'd be surprised how little anger there is towards the actual woman in the mind of the pro-lifer.

The anger was definitely directed at me in this case. Women are judged for having abortions, you're being told this by a woman who has been judged for having an abortion.