The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

sondagefaux

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If the constitution is changed to permit the Oireachtas to legislate for abortion in any manner it sees fit, what's to stop a future Oireachtas legislating for a ban on abortion in all circumstances?

Are you guaranteeing me that there will never be a majority of TDs and Senators in favour of a ban on abortion in all circumstances?

How could you possible guarantee that?

At a minimum, the proposed change to the constitution needs to contain language which says that no law which prohibits abortion outright can be passed, guarantees the right to abortion up to 12 weeks and guarantees the right to abortions after 12 weeks in stated circumstances.

If it doesn't, if it simply repeals the current provisions, and permits the Oireachtas to legislate as it sees fit, what's to stop a future Oireachtas from taking an ultra-conservative position?

How would that meet the remit that the constitutional convention has handed down?

I don't just want the current constitutional provisions repealed, I want them replaced with guarantees that there is a constitutional right to abortion up to 12 weeks, with a guaranteed right to abortion after 12 weeks in stated circumstances.

January

If they put 12 weeks in the constitution they won't be able to change that without another referendum though.

swampgas

sondagefaux wrote: »

If it doesn't, if it simply repeals the current provisions, and permits the Oireachtas to legislate as it sees fit, what's to stop a future Oireachtas from taking an ultra-conservative position?

Nothing - except that such an Oireachtas would have either have to be elected on such a platform (which is unlikely) or else risk losing the support of the electorate at the next election, also unlikely.

Are you worried about what the government might do, or what the electorate might pressure them to do?

Zubeneschamali

sondagefaux wrote: »

If the constitution is changed to permit the Oireachtas to legislate for abortion in any manner it sees fit, what's to stop a future Oireachtas legislating for a ban on abortion in all circumstances?

Nothing.

If you go and read the reports of the Citizens Assembly, the Oireachteas Committee and the statements by the Taoiseach and Minister for health, you will see that this is precisely what we will be voting on come the referendum.

Annasopra

sondagefaux wrote: »

Given that the wording hasn't been decided yet, and given that handing carte blanche to the Oireachtas to legislate as it sees fit could result in the Oireachtas banning abortion in all circumstances, I'd suggest that you might be misinformed.

The draft wording has been agreed. You dont actually seem to know what you are talking about.

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/draft-wording-for-abortion-law-is-agreed-by-cabinet-36626344.html

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/cabinet-to-consider-wording-of-abortion-referendum-this-morning-828872.html

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0220/942002-eighth-amendment/

Annasopra

sondagefaux wrote: »

If the constitution is changed to permit the Oireachtas to legislate for abortion in any manner it sees fit, what's to stop a future Oireachtas legislating for a ban on abortion in all circumstances?

Are you guaranteeing me that there will never be a majority of TDs and Senators in favour of a ban on abortion in all circumstances?

How could you possible guarantee that?

At a minimum, the proposed change to the constitution needs to contain language which says that no law which prohibits abortion outright can be passed, guarantees the right to abortion up to 12 weeks and guarantees the right to abortions after 12 weeks in stated circumstances.

If it doesn't, if it simply repeals the current provisions, and permits the Oireachtas to legislate as it sees fit, what's to stop a future Oireachtas from taking an ultra-conservative position?

How would that meet the remit that the constitutional convention has handed down?

I don't just want the current constitutional provisions repealed, I want them replaced with guarantees that there is a constitutional right to abortion up to 12 weeks, with a guaranteed right to abortion after 12 weeks in stated circumstances.

You seem to misunderstand. The Citizens assembly and oireachtas committee did not reccomend putting time limits in the constitution at all. They reccomended legislation.

JDD

No. The oireachtas have said they’ll bring in legislation to allow abortion up to 12 weeks. If, at some point in the future, we democratically elect an Uber-conservative party and they reverse the legislation so be it. That’s democracy. The constitution is not the right place to legislate for abortion.

Incidentally I think your fears are unfounded. No socially conservative party is going to materialize and get into power in the next twenty years, as they’d be so linked to the Catholic Church (whether they were or weren’t) and we are still a country trying to establish our independent character. By the time the next generation comes around, who may have forgotten the church scandals, abortion law will be well established and retraction is unlikely to find much support.

Bannasidhe

I find these arguments in favour of the status quo because a future government could do *insert scenario here* perplexing.

I could understand it if the status quo was 'ok'. But it isn't. For either side.

The 8th is not 'protecting the unborn' - it has led to the legalisation of abortion in certain limited circumstances in Ireland and wholesale exported the problem for foreign solutions. It has impacted on the provision of healthcare for women in ways the original framers hadn't considered. It has lead to death. It has led to forced feeding. It has lead to a brain dead women being kept artificially alive against the expressed wishes of her family. What's next? Someone being jailed for possession of an abortion pill? No government wants that. It will be a PR disaster of X proportions. The alternative is to simply not enforce the law. Think about that. A situation where a government quietly decides to simply ignore a law because they fear a backlash. It's GUBU territory. I honestly do not believe this is what the pro-life movement wanted or expected, but this is what happened and could continue to happen. Placing them very much in the position of being seen as 'women murderers'.

I remember when it first came in. Back when expensive flights made the old coach/ferry trip to the UK the only affordable option - and still women travelled. When it was possible to censor information - and they did censor. This was circumvented by a network of people in the UK ringing phone boxes at all hours of the day and night to supply some terrified woman with the information denied her They did prevent travel when they could as the X Case demonstrated to a horrified population. The right to travel was voted in by the electorate. Censorship of information was stopped by the will of the people. The X Referendum showed that there were circumstances when the Irish people did not believe a fetus had equal right to life as the woman or girl carrying it. The anger over Savita Halappanavar's unnecessary death forced the government to finally legislate for X . Personally, I think it is absolutely outrageous and an insult to both the electorate and the democratic process that successive government ignored the result of a referendum for so long but that is by the by.

The reality is the advent of cheap flights and abortion pills available on-line has rendered it an unworkable anachronism, information can be got on-line using a mobile phone. it's about as enforceable as that nonsense in the Constitution about recognising women's work in the home (less pension turned out to be the reward).

Voting to retain the 8th is a vote to keep the 'Irish solution' that isn't a solution at all. It's a fudge and a dodge. The longer it remains the more unworkable it becomes and the further and further it strays from the original intention. The longer it's there the more the pro-life movement will be seen as not pro-life but anti-women because women are speaking out They are detailing how the 8th has affected them. Forced them to travel. Forced them to carry a fetus to term knowing there will never be a living child. Forced them into unnecessary surgical procedures. Forced them to forgo vital medical treatment. Men are speaking out about the horror of watching their wives/ girlfriends/ daughters/ sisters going through State sponsored physical and mental torture and being helpless to do anything about it.

The 1980s are gone. We are no longer cowed by the Roman Catholic Church. We can no longer be kept uninformed. We can no longer be kept 'at home'. We can no longer be kept compliant by the threat of the Laundries. We can no longer be silenced. It's a different Ireland and we need a Constitution fit for purpose. The 8th will be repealed - it's just a question of when.

If you want really want to prevent abortions campaign for free contraception. Demand proper sex education. Work to eliminate some of the 'reasons' like poverty, lack of affordable childcare, housing shortages, maternity pay linked to working income, paid parental leave for partners etc. Make it easier for women to have their children. Support mothers in their daily needs. Be pro- life not fixated on being pro-birth. There will still be abortions but many of the reasons women feel they have no other option will be eliminated and choosing to have a child would no longer be a crises for many.

sondagefaux

swampgas wrote: »

Nothing - except that such an Oireachtas would have either have to be elected on such a platform (which is unlikely) or else risk losing the support of the electorate at the next election, also unlikely.

Are you worried about what the government might do, or what the electorate might pressure them to do?

Why would it have to be elected on such a platform?

People vote for parties for multiple reasons in general elections.

There's no way for certain that you can know what a future Oireachtas, if it has carte blanche to legislate on abortion, will do.

The only way to be certain that the general public get to decide on abortion is to insert clauses into the proposed amendment to the effect that abortion cannot be made illegal up to 12 weeks and to specify the reasons why it remains legal after 12 weeks.

sondagefaux

JDD wrote: »

No. The oireachtas have said they’ll bring in legislation to allow abortion up to 12 weeks. If, at some point in the future, we democratically elect an Uber-conservative party and they reverse the legislation so be it. That’s democracy. The constitution is not the right place to legislate for abortion.

Incidentally I think your fears are unfounded. No socially conservative party is going to materialize and get into power in the next twenty years, as they’d be so linked to the Catholic Church (whether they were or weren’t) and we are still a country trying to establish our independent character. By the time the next generation comes around, who may have forgotten the church scandals, abortion law will be well established and retraction is unlikely to find much support.

Well now that someone on boards has said so, I'm completely reassured... :rolleyes:

Zubeneschamali

sondagefaux wrote: »

The only way to be certain that the general public get to decide on abortion is to insert clauses into the proposed amendment to the effect that abortion cannot be made illegal up to 12 weeks and to specify the reasons why it remains legal after 12 weeks.

One more time- not happening, not even on the table.

Sofiztikated

sondagefaux wrote: »

Why would it have to be elected on such a platform?

People vote for parties for multiple reasons in general elections.

There's no way for certain that you can know what a future Oireachtas, if it has carte blanche to legislate on abortion, will do.

The only way to be certain that the general public get to decide on abortion is to insert clauses into the proposed amendment to the effect that abortion cannot be made illegal up to 12 weeks and to specify the reasons why it remains legal after 12 weeks.

That goes for anything, not just abortion. You can't put clauses nonsense in the constitution based on what you think might happen. We've seen the result of that already.

Edward M

Bannasidhe, your last post, probably one of the best I've read on here.

Sofiztikated

sondagefaux wrote: »

Well now that someone on boards has said so, I'm completely reassured... :rolleyes:

You don't have to be completely reassured.

If a socially conservative party materialises, and gains enough support to have major representation, and propose change in legislation, then so be it. If that's the will of the people, then who are we to stand in the way of that democracy.

I doubt it will happen. The same way no parties have stood on a "Repeal Divorce" platform. The same way no parties have stood on a "Repeal SSM" platform. The same way no parties have stood on a "Give up work when you get married" platform.

amdublin

Thanks Bannashidhe

A long post so too long for quoting.

For me it describes perfectly where we are. Things have to change.

And re. pro birth v pro life as you have decribed it.
I am proud to stand and say I am pro life. And pro choice. And I want the 8th repealed.

Repeal the 8th.

applehunter

I'm pro choice.

Vote No

Save the 8th

amdublin

applehunter wrote: »

I'm pro choice.

Vote No

Save the 8th

Pro choice for what exactly?

The current choice for Irish women to have abortions as long as they go abroad for it?

kylith

applehunter wrote: »

I'm pro choice.

Vote No

Save the 8th

How is that pro-choice?

Loafing Oaf

kylith wrote: »

How is that pro-choice?

I think he/she is mocking amdublin for saying he/she is pro-life and favours repeal of the 8th.

Bannasidhe

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I think he/she is mocking amdublin for saying he/she is pro-life and favours repeal of the 8th.

Indeed. Those who have no actual rebuttal are forced to resort to mocking.

rainbow kirby

It's possible to be personally pro-life and favour repealing the 8th based on its impact on maternity care in continued pregnancy. It's not just abortion.

Zubeneschamali

rainbow kirby wrote: »

It's possible to be personally pro-life and favour repealing the 8th based on its impact on maternity care in continued pregnancy. It's not just abortion.

That was the position of the Church of Ireland back in 83 - anti abortion and anti 8th.

Bannasidhe

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That was the position of the Church of Ireland back in 83 - anti abortion and anti 8th.

My recollection was that the RCC had an objection to FG changing the wording not the principle of the 8th.

I can't access the State Papers for 1983 at home but these articles seem to support my recollection.

The Catholic hierarchy supported the original wording, while many of the other churches in the land disagreed for various reasons.

http://www.thejournal.ie/abortion-referendum-1983-what-happened-1225430-Dec2013/

when a Catholic-run school in Co Mayo bombarded its local TD Enda Kenny with letters from pupils demanding a “pro-life” referendum – even though the students were too young to vote themselves. The wording on each letter was so similar it had all the hallmarks of a homework exercise.

This was, of course, part of a bigger show of strength by the Irish church. The “pro-life” amendment campaign was largely driven by lay Catholics, but would not have got off the ground without the hierarchy’s approval.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/church-fatally-overplayed-hand-in-1983-abortion-poll-1.5458

Priests and Nuns were actively visiting schools spreading anti-abortion scare tactics. There was an unholy (pun intended) at my non-denominational school when this happened at an outside Retreat for RCC students as our principle had previously refused permission for them to speak to students.

I do recall that many Protestant churches were against the 8th - but the RCC was fully supportive of having a clause in the Constitution banning abortion.

Loafing Oaf

sondagefaux wrote: »

There's no way for certain that you can know what a future Oireachtas, if it has carte blanche to legislate on abortion, will do.

And there's no way of knowing that a future government won't make female genital mutilation mandatory. But call me Mr. Complacent, I'm satisfied we don't need an article in the constitution specifically ruling that out...

Annasopra

JDD wrote: »

No. The oireachtas have said they’ll bring in legislation to allow abortion up to 12 weeks.

No

The citizens assembly and oireachtas committee reccomended the Oireachtas should do this. The cabinet with 1 or 2 exceptions agreed. If repeal happens the Oireachtas will then debate the proposed legislation. The 12 week legislation is not guaranteed to be voted by the Oireachtas. All the Left (labour, pbp, soc dems, greens, independents 4 change). It is not yet supported by SF but probably will be. FF and FG have free votes.

Annasopra

sondagefaux wrote: »

Why would it have to be elected on such a platform?

People vote for parties for multiple reasons in general elections.

There's no way for certain that you can know what a future Oireachtas, if it has carte blanche to legislate on abortion, will do.

The only way to be certain that the general public get to decide on abortion is to insert clauses into the proposed amendment to the effect that abortion cannot be made illegal up to 12 weeks and to specify the reasons why it remains legal after 12 weeks.

The citizens assembly and oireachtas committee reccomended against this. The cabinet accepted most of the reccomendations of both. Therefore this is an irrelevant debate. The proposed constitutional change will not include specific time limits.

sondagefaux

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

And there's no way of knowing that a future government won't make female genital mutilation mandatory. But call me Mr. Complacent, I'm satisfied we don't need an article in the constitution specifically ruling that out...

The Supreme Court held decades ago that the Constitution guarantees a right to bodily integrity.

In addition, the Courts have interpreted the Constitution as including
certain other human rights. These are referred to as unenumerated
rights (not explicitly set out in the Constitution but recognised by the
Courts), and include:

• Right to bodily integrity;
• Right to freedom from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment;
• Right to work and earn a livelihood; and
• Right to privacy.

https://www.ihrec.ie/download/pdf/ihrec_human_rights_explained.pdf

Here's a summary of the case (Ryan v Attorney General) which decided that the Constitution contained an unenumerated right to bodily integrity:

http://lenus.ie/hse/bitstream/10147/237766/1/FlourideSupplementArt7.pdf

Annasopra

sondagefaux wrote: »

The Supreme Court held decades ago that the Constitution guarantees a right to bodily integrity.

https://www.ihrec.ie/download/pdf/ihrec_human_rights_explained.pdf

Here's a summary of the case (Ryan v Attorney General) which decided that the Constitution contained an unenumerated right to bodily integrity:

http://lenus.ie/hse/bitstream/10147/237766/1/FlourideSupplementArt7.pdf

Yeah ok but still. This is all irrelevant. The referendum is NOT going to be placing any time limits in the constitution.

Ismisejack

Well in the unfortunate scenario the 8th is repealed, what protection is there for the unborn I ask??

nozzferrahhtoo

Charmeleon wrote: »

Just catching up to lol at this post. I can actually feel the fundamentalism.

Fundamentalists do not tend to engage in open and honest debate and discourse. Which I was doing. You..... not so much. So I suggest perhaps the use of a mirror before you fling labels around that you do not seem to even understand the meaning of. Because the reason you can "feel" it, is it is in YOU.

You will find actually addressing my points a little more challenging than merely dodging them, ignoring them, and laughing at them though.

As another user already said....

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Indeed. Those who have no actual rebuttal are forced to resort to mocking.

Zubeneschamali

Ismisejack wrote: »

Well in the unfortunate scenario the 8th is repealed, what protection is there for the unborn I ask?

No protection up to 12 weeks, then abortion only for medically necessary cases after that.

Annasopra

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No protection up to 12 weeks, then abortion only for medically necessary cases after that.

That is a proposal. It is not guatanteed to pass the Oireachtas.

Zubeneschamali

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

That is a proposal. It is not guatanteed to pass the Oireachtas.

It'd be a brave gang of TDs who would reject it if the Referendum passes with that as the proposed framework.

And we don't have gangs of brave TDs.

Annasopra

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It'd be a brave gang of TDs who would reject it if the Referendum passes with that as the proposed framework.

And we don't have gangs of brave TDs.

It depends really. I think if the referendum passed 52/48 they are given some ammunition. Whereas 65/35 less so. There might just be enough FF/FG and Indo TDs to reject it. A number of TDs in FG and FF have already said they will support the referendum but not the 12 week legislation. They also 2 Ministers and 2 Junior Ministers amongst that rank.

Loafing Oaf

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

There might just be enough FF/FG and Indo TDs to reject it.

Yes if nearly every FG TD who has yet to declare their position votes against the legislation. And we saw what happened when FG TDs' feet were held to the fire over POLDPA. It will be a different kind of pressure this time, they won't be threatened with expulsion of the party, but when faced with the prospect of an ongoing crisis over the issue I'm sure the majority of them will be trooping into the Ta lobby...

Zubeneschamali

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Ywhen faced with the prospect of an ongoing crisis over the issue I'm sure the majority of them will be trooping into the Ta lobby...

The Referendum will provide the cover these wobbly TDs will need to pass the legislation.

The last thing they will want is to shoot down the 12 week legislation to be asked "So... what do you want to pass in the place of the PLDPA?", because then they will own it, whatever it is. Will Coveney really want to own Simon Coveney's 10 Week Abortion Act?

Loafing Oaf

I'm sure the vast majority of FG TDs who have yet to declare their position on abortion have no firm convictions on abortion and just want the whole thing to go away. I'm also confident they're very much open to convincing that the best way to do that, based on the experience of other countries and Ireland's own experience of once-contentious social issues, is to pass 'liberal abortion' legislation...

amdublin

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No protection up to 12 weeks, then abortion only for medically necessary cases after that.

Which, correct me if wrong, is the same as the moment. Just the location will change: from where ever currently (e.g. the UK) to Ireland .

Call me Al

Ismisejack wrote: »

Well in the unfortunate scenario the 8th is repealed, what protection is there for the unborn I ask??

Why? Are you concerned that there will compulsory abortion for all or something? I'm not trying to be facetious but there was no abortion prior to 1982.
It's the addition of such a preposterous Article into our constitution that has left us in the situation we are in.

NuMarvel

Ismisejack wrote: »

Well in the unfortunate scenario the 8th is repealed, what protection is there for the unborn I ask??

There will be whatever protection are set out in legislation, which is good enough for most other countries and was good enough for us up to 1983.

The question isn't what protections will there be, but where should these protections be set out. And as we can see from the last 35 years, that place isn't the constitution.

Loafing Oaf

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Will Coveney really want to own Simon Coveney's 10 Week Abortion Act?

Has Coveney actually definitively said he is opposed to the 12-week proposal? Or is he engaged in an even more elaborate and drawn-out version of Leo's wrestling bout with his conscience?

Edward M

The verdict due this morning on this case, rte showing it live I see. If this verdict doesent overturn the high courts decision then its back to the drawing board, referendum will likely be postponed.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0307/945560-supreme-court-rights-of-unborn/

nice_guy80

the inward looking opinions of those on here arguing against the repeal, is quite ridiculous

Peregrinus

amdublin wrote: »

Which, correct me if wrong, is the same as the moment. Just the location will change: from where ever currently (e.g. the UK) to Ireland .

Not quite. In Great Britain there is (in effect) abortion on demand up to 24 weeks. So, assuming the proposed Irish legislation is passed, the position will be:

Up to 12 weeks pregnant: abortion freely available in Ireland
12-24 weeks: abortion freely available in practice in GB. The woman will have to find two doctors willing to certify that continuing the pregnancy presents a greater threat to her health than terminating it, but she will have no difficulty finding doctors willing to certify this.
Above 24 weeks: Abortion only available in very restricted circumstances either here or in GB. The circumstances in which it will be permitted may differ slightly as between the Republic and GB. In practice very few women seek abortions after 24 weeks and, of those who do, nearly all have pressing (and distressing) medical reasons for doing so.

volchitsa

Abortion will of course continue to be available up to 24 weeks in the UK, but I think two things may change the ease of availability to Irish women in the future:

One is that currently because of the ban on abortion, Irish women are sometimes given cheaper (subsidized) rates. It's hard to see why that should continue if Ireland has similar abortion legislation to the rest of Europe, so in practice, abortion post 12 weeks would likely bemore expensive and complicated than at the moment. (Personally I'm okay with that, as the vast majority of abortions are carried out before that date anyway).

The other is unrelated to our legislation, and that is the UK leaving the EU. There are so many ways that will affect us that it would be unwise to assume that healthcare isn't one of them. In fact I think it is bound to be. And if Ireland has some level of abortion available, UK charities are not going to prioritize Irish women who just didn't get their act together in Ireland. Which is fair enough.

nozzferrahhtoo

volchitsa wrote: »

(Personally I'm okay with that, as the vast majority of abortions are carried out before that date anyway).

True. But I also suspect you mean the cost of the abortion ITSELF will be more expensive (potentially). But not the cost of the whole abortion experience when you factor in time off work, flights, accommodation (especially if the woman can not or does not wish to travel alone which doubles these expenses) and more?

Is it safe to suspect that many women would gladly pay more for the abortion itself, given the associated reduction in associated costs, mere convenience, and dealing with side effects medically or financially?

volchitsa

Well I was thinking about the implied claim that even if we bring in abortion up to 12 weeks, many women will just go to the UK anyway after 12 weeks just because they can wait until later that way. Or that there would be pressure to align the Irish system with the UK because of those extra weeks.

IMO that is not the issue, but what might happen is that women won't feel safe using the Irish system (confidentiality and the risk of crazies turning up outside your house). I think I would need to be desperate before I'd risk it myself. But some women are desperate of course.

So yeah, I wasnt talking about costs in money terms, but more whether women might continue using the UK healthcare system even after abortion is legalized in Ireland. I think it will be more difficult, expensive and complicated for them to do so, but that some women will still prefer the anonymity and lack of judgmentalism of the UK, especially in the earaly months and maybe years, if problems arise in Ireland.

Whether that option will continue to be available to them in the longer term is another question, as I said.

Loafing Oaf

volchitsa wrote: »

IMO that is not the issue, but what might happen is that women won't feel safe using the Irish system (confidentiality and the risk of crazies turning up outside your house).

Don't see why this would happen with a GP-led service. How would anyone else find out why you are going to the doctor, any more than with any medical issue?

seamus

The Supreme Court has struck down the High Court's ruling:

The unborn does not have inherent constitutional rights outside the right to life in the 8th amendment.

The judges' decision was unanimous.

*Phew*!

Call me Al

Can someone enlighten me... what other constitutional rights could a foetus have had, beyond the right to life of the woman? Iona requested to have a voice heard in this case. What were they arguing for?
Eta question answered after a little bit of research.