The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

volchitsa

pjohnson wrote: »

petalgumdrops wrote: »

In ireland they wouldnt do that but if you read my experience. In London where abortion is more prominent I was told in my circumstance to abort. That I could try again,.why continue to wait on an amnio to confirm.the same as a CVS. My point is medical professionals have an impact on our decision making. Both doctors in England encouraged termination and didn't consider the other options. Crumlin didnt mention termination once. This has an.impact whether you choose to believe that or not. Influences are everywhere.

So you did travel now?

My (very unclear) understanding is that having got this terrible diagnosis, petalgumdrops contacted English hospitals who assumed, naturally, that she had thought this through and wasn't happy with the Irish option of staying pregnant.
Seems rather unfair to assume they would have said the same thing to an English patient who was discovering the diagnosis for the first time.

pjohnson

volchitsa wrote: »

My (very unclear) understanding is that having got this terrible diagnosis, petalgumdrops contacted English hospitals who assumed, naturally, that she had thought this through and wasn't happy with the Irish option of staying pregnant.
Seems rather unfair to assume they would have said the same thing to an English patient who was discovering the diagnosis for the first time.

It doesn't make sense and will change later.

volchitsa

Also, we don't know how sure the diagnosis was, nor whether the London hospital had all the information, since she hadn't (I think) gone to see them, so they wouldn't, I assume, have had all her medical information.

petalgumdrops

pjohnson wrote: »

So you did travel now?

Please go back and read my story John. My lab results were done in England. They have phones they can contact me without me physically being there. My story was clinically interesting based on its rarity

volchitsa

Yes,I think we're getting a rewritten version of events.

petalgumdrops

volchitsa wrote: »

Yes,I think we're getting a rewritten version of events.

Your thoughts thankfully are the least of my concerns. Read the story before you comment or remain blissfully ignorant. Won't change my personal circumstance

volchitsa

Any chance you could link to it please? It all seems most unclear. I'm not disbelieving the basic issue, but I'm unclear about how sure this diagnosis was and how up speed London were on the situation. After all, you say it was rare and in the end the baby was ok. So who got it wrong? The whole diagnosis was wrong? Three hospitals apparently? And yet they were all sure enough that the vbaby couldnt survive - even Crumlin? Or did Crumlin? How could that happen?

Or did Crumlin have information the London ones didnt have?

volchitsa

petalgumdrops wrote: »

volchitsa wrote: »

Yes,I think we're getting a rewritten version of events.

Your thoughts thankfully are the least of my concerns. Read the story before you comment or remain blissfully ignorant. Won't change my personal circumstance

As I said, I don't know where your story is, except the very unclear bits and pieces you've told us here today. I really don't see how the 8th came into it. If you could link to the actual story, perhaps it would make more sense.

volchitsa

petalgumdrops wrote: »

volchitsa wrote: »

Yes,I think we're getting a rewritten version of events.

Your thoughts thankfully are the least of my concerns. Read the story before you comment or remain blissfully ignorant. Won't change my personal circumstance

As I said, I don't know where your story is, except the very unclear bits and pieces you've told us here today. I really don't see how the 8th came into it. If you could link to the actual story, perhaps it would make more sense.

Sofiztikated

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Please go back and read my story John. My lab results were done in England. They have phones they can contact me without me physically being there. My story was clinically interesting based on its rarity

You never mentioned anything about having any tests done in England.

You said you had them done, but not where.

pjohnson

volchitsa wrote: »

Yes,I think we're getting a rewritten version of events.

I think the fact is they believe the 8th "Saves Lives" so are trying to make it fit.

horseburger

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

That person providing the care can be anyone who (obviously subject to approval) volunteers to. In the case of a pregnancy there can be no transfer of responsibility, it the unborn are entirely dependent on a specific person, its a massively invasive undertaking to force on someone who does not want it

Yes but if the argument is on the contention that the unborn are burdensome, are born children not also burdensome, in terms of the way raising children affects the daily routine and financial circumstances of the people who care for them?

ohnonotgmail

volchitsa wrote: »

Yes,I think we're getting a rewritten version of events.

i doubt it will be the last version we get.

AtomicHorror

horseburger wrote: »

Yes but if the argument is on the contention that the unborn are burdensome, are born children not also burdensome, in terms of the way raising children affects the daily routine and financial circumstances of the people who care for them?

In the case of the born, the burden can be transferred to another party without physical obstacles or risk. It is not necessary to kill the child to remove that burden.

A foetus cannot be transferred. If the technology to do this were to exist, it would bring with it a risk to the health and life of donor and recipient.

Sofiztikated

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i doubt it will be the last version we get.

For the most part, I think it's true.

I just think, as it's an emotive topic for her, she's assuming we know her whole story, when she's only given us bits.

volchitsa

I think the main part, the diagnosis, is true, but for whatever reason there are significant points that are not exactly as one would gather from reading the snippets given here. The poster is entitled to tell people only the bits she feels comfortable with, of course, but not to extrapolate from those to say that anyone else would react the same way she did.

lazygal

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Please go back and read my story John. My lab results were done in England. They have phones they can contact me without me physically being there. My story was clinically interesting based on its rarity

Why would Crumlim deal with a child that isn't born? I've had prenatal testing where the lab results were processed in the UK then sent to my maternity hospital. Then amniocentesis was the recommended course of action. Termination wouldn't be mentioned until all tests, including scans over many days, had been completed. Did you have maternity care here or in the UK?
The eighth amendment only hindered my maternity care. It in no way benefited me or my children.

petalgumdrops

Mods definitely have allowed their own agendas cloud their moderation of this thread. How many times have people questioned the authenticity of my ffa diagnosis, the procedure and process I went through. The doctors who reviewed my case. How is this supporting to women. To question or dispute that I received a ffa and how my pregnancy panned out. The refusal to acknowledge or accept any other point of view is disgusting. Because I went on to have a healthy baby I'm somehow not in any way allowed to have an opinion. Every procedure questioned, suggested ill change my story, that I did actually travel that I'm a liar.

If a lady who terminated for a ffa was questioned and pushed on why she didn't wait for an amino or why she didn't get a second opinion the posters would be banned.

Absolutely disgusting. I hope the undecided/ unregistered voters look at this and realise the hypocrisy of the supporting and trusting women mantra is only when it suits a narrative.

Will remove and unfolloe this thread now.

gctest50

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Your thoughts thankfully are the least of my concerns. Read the story before you comment or remain blissfully ignorant. Won't change my personal circumstance

petalgumdrops wrote: »

........

Won't change my personal circumstance

You've had your go on the Maternity/Medical-Merry-go-round here

Thankfully you and your little baby got off it all in one piece, healthy and happy

What about all the others today, tomorrow ?

Should their options be limited because you had a really rare healthcare near-miss ?

petalgumdrops wrote: »

....

So rare that they couldn't tell impact except it was very bad.

.

petalgumdrops

lazygal wrote: »

Why would Crumlim deal with a child that isn't born? I've had prenatal testing where the lab results were processed in the UK then sent to my maternity hospital. Then amniocentesis was the recommended course of action. Termination wouldn't be mentioned until all tests, including scans over many days, had been completed. Did you have maternity care here or in the UK?
The eighth amendment only hindered my maternity care. It in no way benefited me or my children.

If a diagnosis of ffa is given referral to a medical geneticist is procedure. For my case at least.
Do you want to dispute that?

kylith

I think I got it. PGD got a horrible diagnosis. Some bloods were sent to England who said on the basis of those results they would recommend abortion. A doctor in Crumlin said ‘hang on a bit; we’ll do an amnio’, at which point the diagnosis was overturned (hoorah!). Not that it actually mattered either way because PGD wouldn’t have been travelling even if the original diagnosis held. Therefore the 8th saved her baby because she wouldn’t have bothered with the amnio if she’d had the means to travel.

ETA: if it weren’t for the 8th she’d have refused the early induction necessary to save the baby.

Yeah?

pjohnson

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Mods definitely have allowed their own agendas cloud their moderation of this thread. How many times have people questioned the authenticity of my ffa diagnosis, the procedure and process I went through. The doctors who reviewed my case. How is this supporting to women. To question or dispute that I received a ffa and how my pregnancy panned out. The refusal to acknowledge or accept any other point of view is disgusting. Because I went on to have a healthy baby I'm someone not in any way allowed to have an opinion. Every procedure questioned, suggested ill change my story, that I did actually travel that I'm a liar.

If a lady who terminated for a ffa was questioned and pushed on why she didn't wait for an amino or why she didn't get a second opinion the posters would be banned.

Absolutely disgusting. I hope the undecided/ unregistered voters look at this and realise the hypocrisy of the supporting and trusting women mantra is only when it suits a narrative.

Will remove and unfolloe this thread now.

People we asking how the 8th saved your baby which was your claim. The answers as to how caused great consternation. And there is still no actual link how.

lazygal

Your story is unclear. If you laid out the sequence of events, starting with the tests you initially had, subsequent tests and so on you'd clear up most of the confusion. You're not the only person who's deal with or is dealing with a Ffa diagnosis or possibility thereof.
Amniocentesis is 100% conclusive. That's why it's recommended as a diagnostic test for certain women.

lazygal

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If a diagnosis of ffa is given referral to a medical geneticist is procedure. For my case at least.
Do you want to dispute that?

No. I've done the same. Had harmony test, results came from UK lab slowing high risk for a FFA, amniocentesis recommended. All care provided by the maternity hospital. No reference to how the eighth could save my baby.

petalgumdrops

lazygal wrote: »

No. I've done the same. Had harmony test, results came from UK lab slowing high risk for a FFA, amniocentesis recommended. All care provided by the maternity hospital. No reference to how the eighth could save my baby.

Harmony test is not diagnostic. This is fact it is screening tool where odds are given. This can also be done via ultrasound where a ratio is given based on a number of factors, age, presence of a nasal bone, length of femur, stomach and head circumference. Amnio is the only conclusive diagnostic test.

lazygal

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Harmony test is not diagnostic. This is fact it is screening tool where odds are given. This can also be done via ultrasound where a ratio is given based on a number of factors, age, presence of a nasal bone, length of femur, stomach and head circumference. Amnio is the only conclusive diagnostic test.

That's what I said. No recommendations to terminate happen after harmony results. You're offered CVS or amniocentesis which is diagnostic and 100% conclusive.
How does the eighth save babies when I decided whether to travel based on tests I chose to have?

volchitsa

The poster mentioned mosaic as the reason why her results were mistaken : a link aboout CVS says this
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Be aware that if you have CVS, there's a 1 to 2 percent chance of getting an unclear result. This is called a confined placental mosaicism, in which some of the cell lines cultured from the placenta contain abnormal chromosomes and some are normal. If your CVS detects a mosaicism, you'll have to have amniocentesis and possibly other testing to determine whether your baby is affected.[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]SO this is a known risk of getting mistaken results from CVS which requires an amniocentesis to eliminate this possibility.[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I don't believe a UK hospital would not warn a family of that?[/font]

lazygal

volchitsa wrote: »

The poster mentioned mosaic as the reason why her results were mistaken : a link aboout CVS says this
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Be aware that if you have CVS, there's a 1 to 2 percent chance of getting an unclear result. This is called a confined placental mosaicism, in which some of the cell lines cultured from the placenta contain abnormal chromosomes and some are normal. If your CVS detects a mosaicism, you'll have to have amniocentesis and possibly other testing to determine whether your baby is affected.[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]SO this is a known risk of getting mistaken results from CVS which requires an amniocentesis to eliminate this possibility.[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I don't believe a UK hospital would not warn a family of that?[/font]

Irish hospitals too. These are classed as invasive tests which can cause miscarriage. All of the tests side effects and accuracy are well laid out before you decide on whether to have them. They're mentally difficult to do as well. No one would have them done lightly.

volchitsa

I posted here but now I can't see my post?

BabysCoffee

I would never have thought that a London lab would ring a patient and tell them to terminate their pregnancy.

Thank God we have the 8th if this the carry on of London hospital labs.