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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
But you had that choice. You weren't informed that this is being done despite the fact that a lower risk procedure exists.
It's really strange that you appear to think that an anecdote in which you made a choice like that can help justify the removal of the same choice from someone else.That's very interesting Jack, you feel you've the right to make those kind of decisions but you don't feel a woman should be afforded the same rights.
Bit of a contradiction No?
Great minds think alike
But seriously, it was as direct an answer as I could relate, to a very specific question -Bannasidhe wrote: »But it doesn't. What has actually happened is medical staff are so unclear about the law they wait until the balance of probability means the women is over 50% likely to die - would you like those odds if it was your life on the line?
And I said that I was the wrong person to ask that question, because I would take those odds, and it was an incredibly foolish thing to do, and as I said, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone else, so on that basis I would never think to encourage anyone else to do something so stupid.
Now, there's no possible way I could ever imagine myself as a pregnant woman, I couldn't even relate to my wife's experience of being pregnant because as someone else said different women experience pregnancy differently, and I can't imagine two pregnancies were ever the same for two different women. Long story short - pregnancy is a complex and completely different set of circumstances to refusing a blood transfusion, but they can overlap, as in this case -
Pregnant Jehovah's Witness' decision to refuse treatment 'harrowing' for hospital staff after mother and baby die
Obviously her principles were based upon her religious beliefs, which I would entirely respect, and even though I completely disagreed with the potential outcome of her decision on a personal level, I would still absolutely support her decision, and I would never support the Irish State interfering with her decision in order to vindicate and protect the right to life of the unborn, effectively riding roughshod over her human rights. I have a feeling based upon precedent set in numerous previous cases that they would do so in the interests of the unborn, and then expect that the woman should continue to raise that child according to her religious beliefs, knowing that the State could step in at any moment in the interests of protecting the child from it's mother and everything that child was raised to believe, such as in happened in this case -
Jehovah parents lose transfusion ruling
volchista I was aware that lower risk procedures exist, I had an autologous transfusion done when they put steel pins in, but when I asked about the availability of it, I was told they don't do that any more as it's too expensive. I later found out that some hospitals actually still do it, but I wasn't prepared to risk switching consultants and hospitals again at that stage.
Now, with all that said, my decisions that I made for myself in those circumstances, could in no way be related to a woman who would wish to terminate her pregnancy with the outcome that the foetus would cease to develop. I wouldn't want to deny her the opportunity to make that decision at an individual level, and I would do my utmost to support her if that's what she chose to do.
But, and this is where the contentious part arises - I would not, and could never support something like that being implemented as national public policy. I used to argue for every woman to have the right to terminate her pregnancy without restrictions on the basis that we have to trust women to be able to make decisions for themselves. I still do, at an individual level, trust women to make those sorts of decisions for themselves, but the evidence I've seen both historically and from other countries suggests that one group in society is disproportionately affected by abortion, and that is the group that would most wish that they didn't have to have abortions, and that they were in a position to raise a child, but unfortunately they feel that the support just isn't there for them, and in cases like this -
Fair play to this judge
Pregnant woman made homeless before Christmas
It would be nigh on impossible to convince them that they just might be wrong when all they can see in their immediate and long term future is a life of grinding poverty and misery for them and their child (or children, as the case may be). It's all too easy to convince them that it would be in theirs and their child's best interests (I don't ever use the term foetus or any other scientific and medical terminology because they look at me like I'm a cold, uncaring monster and shut down immediately, end of any hope of having a conversation, so I go with whatever term they use), if she were to terminate her pregnancy as soon as possible and I would support in whatever decision she makes for herself. I would hope that she would trust that I'm as good as my word, but I don't expect that she should, given that she doesn't know me.
The thing is that I feel that in repealing the 8th amendment, I personally don't see it as doing women any favours, I see it as allowing and encouraging the most impoverished women to remain poor, because with each generation there is the chance that their expectations increase when their parents are more involved, and this allows for opportunities for greater social mobility for their children, effectively lifting themselves out of poverty through better access to education and staying in education, just for starters, gaining secure employment and having more opportunities for employment, and better conditions of employment, in order that they may meet the higher expectations again of the next generation, and hopefully give back to those living in poverty in that generation, effectively breaking the cycle of poverty on a smaller scale, but effecting a larger scale shift in society as a whole.
That's why I would argue that broadening our laws with regard to abortion as a solution to any social issue just isn't the answer. At best it's only an immediate band-aid on a gaping wound, which never comes anywhere near addressing the underlying causes it's proponents claim it addresses (abortion only addresses the symptoms, it has never, and could never, address the cause).
Heh, speaking of band-aids, I was reminded recently of one of the effects of social mobility is that it gives.people the power to speak for themselves (round these parts those people would more affectionately be referred to as 'the facebook huns', for being ill-educated, etc) -
Is Band Aid's Do They Know It's Christmas? a problematic song?
There are some classic quotes in there which belie the propaganda perpetuated in the song by people who would want us to feel guilty for being as fortunate as we are, but when it was pointed out to him that his lyrics were a misleading representation of life in Africa, Bob Geldof, who had received numerous accolades for his efforts, had this to say on the matter -
Geldof previously replied to critics of the lyrics, telling them to f**k off. He told the Telegraph in 2014: "Please. It's a pop song. Relax."
Not quite the altruist he makes himself out to be then, rather like the upwardly mobile types who post selfies on their social media wearing the latest trendy repeal apparel and imagining what rebels they are for calling Leo a tosser -
Minister defends Varadkar after US band call him 'tosser' for not posing in front of repeal flag
I can think of many reasons to claim Leo is a tosser of the highest order (not least for his social welfare snitching scheme campaign), but on that occasion at least, it wasn't Leo who behaved like a complete tosser. It was the chap who let his ideology cloud his judgement.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement