The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

pjohnson

erica74 wrote: »

Just passed an antichoice poster outside Kilmeaden in Waterford, anyone who knows the area will know of the very large posters (you could nearly call them billboards, they're HUGE) attached to a trailer near the roundabout, going on for the last 2-3 years now.
The one up now has a picture of a foetus with the words "11 weeks, one of us". It made me laugh. Do you antichoice people have any idea how stupid these posters are?
We are Borg, your biological distinctiveness will be added to our own, resistance is futile:pac: THAT IS LITERALLY WHAT YOU ANTICHOICE PEOPLE WANT:pac:

Only until they are born. Once they are born they dont care.

lazygal

B0jangles wrote: »

You know you could easily end all these misunderstandings if you'd just explain the basic timeline of what happened when.

Entirely your choice of course, but you did introduce your own experience as a justification for retaining the 8th. Personal experiences in which the 8th amendment can be 100% credited with a positive effect on a specific individual seem to be quite rare, so people are naturally interested in the specifics of how it helped you.

"extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" as they say

Here's my timeline.
Positive test at 3 three weeks.:D
First appointment with consultant at 9 weeks, all good, confirmed one viable foetus. Recommended harmony testing base on age and medical history. Bit of and
Harmony test at 13 weeks approx. Involved very, very detailed scans and bloods, which were sent to a UK lab for analysis. Again bit of and
Result arrived a week later and consultant called to discuss them. Possible FFA based on results. Recommended amniocentesis which is 100% conclusive so we would have all the information. Lot of :(:(
Amniocentesis at almost 17 weeks. Results processed in house, takes a few days. Consultant calls with results.
Then we decide how to proceed with the pregnancy.
Hope that's pretty clear. And nothing in the eighth amendment 'saved' anything.

gandalf

pjohnson wrote: »

Only until they are born. Once they are born they dont care.

Yep that's the forced birth brigade alright, love both me arse.

mackeminexile

RobertKK wrote: »

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

What a load of old cobblers.

You can say that, but you bring no evidence to back up your cobblers. Europe has low birth rates and abortion has a negative impact on European society.

Where is your evidence then?

Ave Sodalis

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If you bother to actually inform yourself insted of spouting crap and disputing/twisting everything I said.

Were you not twisting everything a few pages back? Bit hypocritical, no?

I have no idea why you think it's okay to be so condescending and sneery to people. Your story doesn't make any sense the way it is. Posters reading it over again is not going to change this. Posters are asking you to phrase it in a way that makes sense so we can understand where you are coming from. You phrased it badly so it doesn't make much sense regarding your claim about the 8th, nobody can see the link between, and speaking to people the way you are is uncalled for.

lazygal

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Were you not twisting everything a few pages back? Bit hypocritical, no?

I have no idea why you think it's okay to be so condescending and sneery to people. Your story doesn't make any sense the way it is. Posters reading it over again is not going to change this. Posters are asking you to phrase it in a way that makes sense so we can understand where you are coming from. You phrased it badly so it doesn't make much sense regarding your claim about the 8th, nobody can see the link between, and speaking to people the way you are is uncalled for.

Having gone through what this poster supposedly has recently enough, I can't understand the timeline of events at all, starting with why an anatomy scan at 12 weeks was clinically indicated and going right through to why a doctor in Crumlin got involved in the case. It doesn't tarry with any of the non invasive and invasive testing I and others have had during pregnancy.

NuMarvel

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Please go back and actually state at what point I said a Lab called me? Fetal Medicine consultants spoke with me after labs processed my CVS.

Some of your previous posts have suggested it was the lab that that contacted you, not doctors.

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

petalgumdrops wrote: »

January I think I actually spoke.privately to you about this in the pregnancy forum 2 years ago when it was diagnosed.

Intially something was detected as being not right at 12 week scan. High NT, shortening of nasal bone which they said could suggest DS.
CVS FISH result for 12, 18, 21 came back clear but was called in and told Trisomy (ill pm you the number as my case is only one of 11 so it will identify me) confirmed on CVS. So rare that they couldn't tell impact except it was very bad. Fetal medicine in london lab suggested termination. Geneticist in crumlin took on my case and for complete clarity an amino was done but as with how rare the case was I would have to wait weeks rather than the 10/12 days some people waited. Waiting period between results of CVS and Amnio was obviously horrific as I needed to ne at least 15/16 weeks for amnio.

You might remember talking to me before

However, we now have clarity that it was a doctor who contacted you. I'm still a little surprised that the doctors in the UK spoke to you directly rather than to your obstetrician here. But I'm finding the timeline a little hard to follow so you may have addressed that in other posts.

petalgumdrops

lazygal wrote: »

Can you provide a timeline of events in your pregnancy?
It's difficult to understand why you had a non routine anatomy scan at 12 weeks. And which tests you had which were sent to a lab in the UK which contacted you directly.
If this is your story you've chosen to share, why do you need to link to someone else's post? Why can't your own story be clarified?

Have you any idea of the process of ffa diagnosis? As stated numerous times at an early scan something not right detected, did as much of a anomaly scan as possible based on the fact I was only 12 weeks. (Hence why I said early) Heart and some internal organs not able to be assessed. (Would need to check them at 18+weeks)

Probability given based on above. CVS performed. Rare trisomy found. Contact with fetal medicine here and in England (neither country had every come across a full case Trisomy of my dianosis) genetic counselling with geneticist in Crumlin. Contact with FM and geneticist here suggested Amnio- England recommending termination based on fact I would have to undergo the type of termination dr. Mcpartland spoke of when heart is stopped prior to induction of delivery - if I waited on amino results. Lab had no direct contact with me.

Every individual case is different on diagnosis. How dare you suggest my story is not as is because it doesn't suit you. so please jog on and take your comments elsewhere.

lazygal

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Have you any idea of the process of ffa diagnosis? As stated numerous times at an early scan something not right detected, did as much of a anomaly scan as possible based on the fact I was only 12 weeks. (Hence why I said early) Heart and some internal organs not able to be assessed. (Would need to check them at 18+weeks)

Probability given based on above. CVS performed. Rare trisomy found. Contact with fetal medicine here and in England (neither country had every come across a full case Trisomy of my dianosis) genetic counselling with geneticist in Crumlin. Contact with FM and geneticist here suggested Amnio- England recommending termination based on fact I would have to undergo the type of termination dr. Mcpartland spoke of when heart is stopped prior to induction of delivery - if I waited on amino results. Lab had no direct contact with me.

Every individual case is different on diagnosis. How dare you suggest my story is not as is because it doesn't suit you. so please jog on and take your comments elsewhere.

Yes I do. I had an anatomy scan at 12 weeks in Holles Street not long ago. Very detailed, very lengthy. Then bloods for harmony testing, the results sent to my consultant who recommended amnio. All handled in Holles Street, no lab contacted me. You seemed to suggest a lab had a phone to contact you, not sure why you need to mention this at all if no one in the lab or anyone in the UK had direct contact with you.

Anyway, this is no way proves that the eighth amendment saved your baby. You, as I did, made decisions based on the information provided to us and personal circumstances. The eighth amendment only restricts the choices of those who want to travel but cannot do so.

amdublin

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Have you any idea of the process of ffa diagnosis? As stated numerous times at an early scan something not right detected, did as much of a anomaly scan as possible based on the fact I was only 12 weeks. (Hence why I said early) Heart and some internal organs not able to be assessed. (Would need to check them at 18+weeks)

Probability given based on above. CVS performed. Rare trisomy found. Contact with fetal medicine here and in England (neither country had every come across a full case Trisomy of my dianosis) genetic counselling with geneticist in Crumlin. Contact with FM and geneticist here suggested Amnio- England recommending termination based on fact I would have to undergo the type of termination dr. Mcpartland spoke of when heart is stopped prior to induction of delivery - if I waited on amino results. Lab had no direct contact with me.

Every individual case is different on diagnosis. How dare you suggest my story is not as is because it doesn't suit you. so please jog on and take your comments elsewhere.

Oh for God's sake just clarify willya!

You're the one who chose to post here about your personal experience which you believe is related to the 8th amendment rather than a personal choice you made. Now back that up with the full story please because at the moment your personal story is unclear and is making your argument weak, in fact non existent.

petalgumdrops

amdublin wrote: »

Oh for God's sake just clarify willya!

You're the one who chose to post here about your personal experience which you believe is related to the 8th amendment rather than a personal choice you made. Now back that up with the full story please because at the moment your personal story is unclear and is making your argument weak, in fact non existent.

Seriously? So only people who have the means to travel are affected by the 8th. THE 8th is only about terminations? Funny I see women referencing episomities/ breaking of waters/unwanted interventions/forced HCG tests as a detrimental affect of the 8th? - are you saying this isn't so? That these have nothing to do with the 8th? So basically then we can assume this is healthcare.

Just because I didn't travel doesn't mean I could have. Just because my baby was born healthy doesn't mean that the 8th doesn't affect me.

Giving equal right to life to both myself and my son means he is here. If you bothered to read anything of the continuation of my pregnancy then you would see that.

pjohnson

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Seriously? So only people who have the means to travel are affected by the 8th. THE 8th is only about terminations? Funny I.see the

So we are back to you somehow couldn't travel because of the 8th as how your baby was saved again are we?

lazygal

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Seriously? So only people who have the means to travel are affected by the 8th. THE 8th is only about terminations? Funny I.see the

How exactly did the eighth save your baby or mine? We both made choices based on what we wanted to do.

lazygal

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Giving equal right to life to both myself and my son means he is here. If you bothered to read anything of the continuation of my pregnancy then you would see that.

Are you suggesting the only reason you continued the pregnancy is because of the eighth amendment? Would you have had an abortion if that option was available to you?

amdublin

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Seriously? So only people who have the means to travel are affected by the 8th. THE 8th is only about terminations? Funny I.see the

You may have quoted the wrong post?

Otherwise I'm even more confused!

groovyg

amdublin wrote: »

Oh for God's sake just clarify willya!

You're the one who chose to post here about your personal experience which you believe is related to the 8th amendment rather than a personal choice you made. Now back that up with the full story please because at the moment your personal story is unclear and is making your argument weak, in fact non existent.

Isn’t that the point of it ...confuse and defect. I’ve seen similar stories from the likes of Jennifer Murnane O Connor.


On the life institute website she said she had a premie baby at 22 weeks gestation weighing 3 Ib and survived 30 years ago. She told the Seanad in March it was 20 weeks, then the following day she said it was 26 weeks.

That’s quiet a difference!
https://mobile.twitter.com/newsworthy_ie/status/978760062939402240

https://mobile.twitter.com/newsworthy_ie/status/979003505334738960

I mean come on what parent doesn’t remember the day their first born child was born. I remember where I grew up there were lots of couples who got married and baby arrived 5-6mths after the wedding...none of them were premature babies . I’m wondering if that’s what happened to her and she is just very confused:rolleyes:

lazygal

There's a few of the 'eighth amendment saved my baby' stories doing the rounds, ALL of which have an element of confusion and at their basis show that the pregnant woman made an active choice to remain pregnant and give birth.

pjohnson

lazygal wrote: »

There's a few of the 'eighth amendment saved my baby' stories doing the rounds, ALL of which have an element of confusion and at their basis show that the pregnant woman made an active choice to remain pregnant and give birth.

Thats whats been happening last two days imo. When answers are so muddled it really does make things seem made up.

lazygal

pjohnson wrote: »

Thats whats been happening last two days imo. When answers are so muddled it really does make things seem made up.

Like I said, I've been through similar recently and based on real life conversations and chats on message boards with others in the same boat the whole story is confusing to the point of it being hard to understand at all, based on what has been my experience and that of others in the Irish maternity system.

amdublin

amdublin wrote: »

You may have quoted the wrong post?

Otherwise I'm even more confused!

Best of luck to you on this, aparently as a man I can't question the poster, who seems to be saying that they would have had an abortion given the news they received if they were in England, was then very unhappy with the medical care they received in Ireland, but thankfully as their son was born healthy the 8th saved them. All while ignoring that other women don't have as happy an outcome as they thankfully did, and that due to the 8th they will receive similar medical care and that a persons beliefs have nothing to do with deciding if they will have an abortion or not. Also seems to ignore the fact as stated by other posters that even with repeal is successful women who don't believe in abortionn will continue to try to carry to term and receive the same level of medical care, while those that don't will be able to access services in Ireland, while also ignoring the fact that there are other reasons than FFA for women wishing to access abortion services.

pitifulgod

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe the shadowbanning on twitter of pro-lives of the mother and unborn baby accounts is helping to block out people seeing the illegal activity.
There is evidence of twitter helping the repeal side.
Just as the government is with Leo Varadkar telling people to fund the yes side, organisations who get tax payers money openly supporting the yes side. Inclusion Ireland who get near all their money from taxpayers were the latest who want to exclude the unborn life.

I have seen plenty of pictures on twitter, but I follow numerous accounts which are shadow banned.

Twitter have officially denied that. The application they are using to claim the shadowban shows a couple of pro choice people who are apparently shadow banned including the woman who exposed the fake nurse that the pro life campaign has... :P Anyone from a technical background has concluded the "shadow ban" is a technical glitch more than anything else.

Also please use legitimate news sources in relation to that Garda investigation. The Liberal has clearly made it up. It hasn't shown up in any other publication and traditionally the liberal plagiarises their news ergo just made it up in this scenario.

lazygal

lazygal wrote: »

Like I said, I've been through similar recently and based on real life conversations and chats on message boards with others in the same boat the whole story is confusing to the point of it being hard to understand at all, based on what has been my experience and that of others in the Irish maternity system.

Someone will probably be along soon to say the reason for your experiences are because your pro choice.

Hannibal_Smith

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Seriously? So only people who have the means to travel are affected by the 8th. THE 8th is only about terminations? Funny I see women referencing episomities/ breaking of waters/unwanted interventions/forced HCG tests as a detrimental affect of the 8th? - are you saying this isn't so? That these have nothing to do with the 8th? So basically then we can assume this is healthcare.

Just because I didn't travel doesn't mean I could have. Just because my baby was born healthy doesn't mean that the 8th doesn't affect me.

Giving equal right to life to both myself and my son means he is here. If you bothered to read anything of the continuation of my pregnancy then you would see that.

Can I ask (without being told to re-read because there is a lot to filter through).

There was a fatal foetal abnormality found, so you were told your son wouldn't survive after birth? Your son was 5 weeks early, so the people in England suggested a termination, but you decided against it and for your child to be delivered early?

Your son is delivered 5 weeks early and thankfully is healthy.

The 8th saved his life. This comes across as, if the 8th had not existed, you would have followed the advice and had an abortion at 35 weeks?

pjohnson

lazygal wrote: »

Like I said, I've been through similar recently and based on real life conversations and chats on message boards with others in the same boat the whole story is confusing to the point of it being hard to understand at all, based on what has been my experience and that of others in the Irish maternity system.

You also managed to coherently lay out the timeline without randomly tying it to an unrelated factor.

lazygal

DubInMeath wrote: »

Someone will probably be along soon to say the reason for your experiences are because your pro choice.

I don't doubt it.

smokingman

So according to the love both crowd, rapists are the good guys and it's women that should be punished because....er...
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/abortion-referendum/victims-of-rape-and-incest-should-carry-babies-to-full-term-say-campaigners-1.3444429?mode=amp

Sofiztikated

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Can I ask (without being told to re-read because there is a lot to filter through).

There was a fatal foetal abnormality found, so you were told your son wouldn't survive after birth? Your son was 5 weeks early, so the people in England suggested a termination, but you decided against it and for your child to be delivered early?

Your son is delivered 5 weeks early and thankfully is healthy.

The 8th saved his life. This comes across as, if the 8th had not existed, you would have followed the advice and had an abortion at 35 weeks?

I think the timeline was much earlier than that.

But I think it's more like "Tests showed one outcome. Recommendations based on statistical evidence pointed towards termination. Further tests confirmed prognosis. Continued with pregnancy, because termination unavailable here. Prognosis was wrong, child healthy. "

lazygal

Doctors in Ireland cannot recommend termination-it is illegal to do so. They can mention it as an option but that is all. And they cannot refer any patient to a UK hospital for termination.

pitifulgod

pitifulgod wrote: »

Also please use legitimate news sources in relation to that Garda investigation. The Liberal has clearly made it up. It hasn't shown up in any other publication and traditionally the liberal plagiarises their news ergo just made it up in this scenario.

Bit hard to do when they don't exist, best to fall back to a site that suits the persons agenda/beliefs even if know to publish made up stories and plagiarise others.

Hannibal_Smith

lazygal wrote: »

Doctors in Ireland cannot recommend termination-it is illegal to do so. They can mention it as an option but that is all. And they cannot refer any patient to a UK hospital for termination.

How come the tests can't be done here? Why do they have to be sent to a UK lab? That's pretty poor maternity care that we have to send results abroad isn't it?