The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

amcalester

Stab*City wrote: »

So why are they so? Everyone i talk to is trying to influence you to lean a certain way. And if you don't lean their way they look down on you.

So should i just not vote at all? I've read the website and lots of other stuff now but i still don't know which way to vote.

They are the Referendum Commission who are impartial and will only publish the facts related to the Referendum.

You're right that people are trying to influence others (myself included) but if you are genuinely undecided then read the link I provided and if you have questions you can ask away.

Ave Sodalis

RobertKK wrote: »

Which is not the truth.

How is it not the truth? You would want to have your head firmly buried in the sand not to see the effects of the 8th.

RobertKK

robarmstrong wrote: »

I am arguing for the case that women have access to safe and legal abortions full stop. My main two reasons to vote are women like my partner to have access to this at any cost or means necessary, and that if my daughter ever needs to have access to a safe and legal abortion I would much prefer her to have one here than in a different country where she won't receive an ounce of aftercare or support.

You've agreed with abortion in some circumstances, yet ultimately you're voting No because it doesn't suit you. Abortion doesn't suit me either, but it doesn't matter if it suits me or not, what matters is that there are women in Ireland who require access to safe and legal abortion in Ireland but are currently being denied this due to the ultra-restrictive requirements in place already.

Common sense would dictate that these women (women with uterine abnormalities do not fall under grounds for health risks to mother or baby) have that access. The 8th dictates that they do not.

I believe it is morally wrong to take the lives of unborn, simply because one can, and then dress it up as a human right and life as a choice.

A vote for yes is currently a vote to allow abortion for any reason under the sun up to 12 weeks, most of these abortions will be of healthy unborn lives by healthy women.

zedhead

RobertKK wrote: »

There are other stories out there where women were told their unborn wouldn't live and they did. If anyone and that includes us, aren't given a chance then what chance have we to prove others wrong with anything in this life?

But women will still have the choice to continue the pregnancy and take that chance. But for some women it is too hard. In all other medical treatment the patient is allowed to weigh up the pro's and con's of the advice given and get to choose what treatment they avail of/do not avail of.

Parents do this for their children all the time too - turning off life support for their children when doctors indicate hope is gone. Do you believe that right should be taken from them? Why is that different to a women choosing to terminate based on the risks presented to them?

RobertKK

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

How is it not the truth? You would want to have your head firmly buried in the sand not to see the effects of the 8th.

Yet many doctors, obstetricians and gynaecologists have come out in favour of the 8th and say the 8th never got in their way of providing healthcare to women.

robarmstrong

Stab*City wrote: »

So why are they so? Everyone i talk to is trying to influence you to lean a certain way. And if you don't lean their way they look down on you.

So should i just not vote at all? I've read the website and lots of other stuff now but i still don't know which way to vote.

Let me make it simple.

You are me, your partner has been medically diagnosed with uterine abnormalities. Her particular one is a heart-shaped uterus. Meaning that the uterus is of an abnormal shape, the detriments of this are that if a baby implants in certain areas (which is pretty much everywhere bar very few parts) it will grow until the amniotic sac ruptures due to the pressure of the uterine walls. It will rupture because that particular section of the uterus cannot support the volume and size of the amniotic sac.

You get sick and tired of watching her go through miscarriage after miscarriage. You wonder why she can't save herself the heartbreak and have access to a safe and legal abortion, providing her with the dignity to end the pregnancy on her terms and preventing the heartbreak of a miscarriage.

Do you:

a) vote to repeal as the 8th is currently far too strict with it's requirements for a safe and legal abortion as women with uterine abnormalities do not qualify with the current restrictrions

b) vote to retain, because you believe abortion is wrong.

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

I believe it is morally wrong to take the lives of unborn, simply because one can, and then dress it up as a human right and life as a choice.

A vote for yes is currently a vote to allow abortion for any reason under the sun up to 12 weeks, most of these abortions will be of healthy unborn lives by healthy women.

I believe it is morally wrong to force women into carrying a pregnancy to full-term, simply because one can, and then dress it up as an unborn's right to life.

RobertKK

zedhead wrote: »

But women will still have the choice to continue the pregnancy and take that chance. But for some women it is too hard. In all other medical treatment the patient is allowed to weigh up the pro's and con's of the advice given and get to choose what treatment they avail of/do not avail of.

Parents do this for their children all the time too - turning off life support for their children when doctors indicate hope is gone. Do you believe that right should be taken from them? Why is that different to a women choosing to terminate based on the risks presented to them?

My point really is, the outcome is inevitable if one goes the abortion route.

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

Name one woman who died from the 8th.

No report found the 8th was responsible for hospital mismanagement of sepsis in the case of Savita.
Hospital mismanagement that led to Savita's death led to the hospital paying her family compensation for not doing the job they were required to do.

Wrong.

Early in the process the miscarriage was deemed inevitable, and when Savita requested an abortion, she was denied one. Why was the sepsis there? Because it's a risk of miscarriage. Why was it mismanaged? Because of the 8th and the hospital staff's refusal to grant her an abortion.

If they granted her the abortion when she requested it (before the sepsis was an issue) she'd still be alive today.

EDIT: Not so fun fact, you know what one of the leading prevention methods is in the case of septic miscarriages?

Abortion.

Ave Sodalis

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes many doctors, obstetricians and gynaecologists have come out in favour of the 8th and say the 8th never got in their way of providing healthcare to women.

The Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecology has come out as pro-repeal. Individuals may have had different experiences but as a whole, the 8th has had an effect on their healthcare.

That is also completely disregarding all of the distress and discomfort travelling has, including passing the foetus in the toilet of an airplane, the later term abortions travelling causes, the FFA that have no choice but to continue, those that could afford to travel and have their baby shipped back in a courier box along with someone's new shoes, the shame and upset women are made to feel, the added distress to rape victims... shall I continue?

RobertKK

robarmstrong wrote: »

I believe it is morally wrong to force women into carrying a pregnancy to full-term, simply because one can, and then dress it up as an unborn's right to life.

Ok, we know where each now stands and we know that further discussion won't change opinion of either side.

zedhead

RobertKK wrote: »

My point really is, the outcome is inevitable if one goes the abortion route.

And what difference does that make? Why is it not up to the woman to make a decision with the doctors on the best course of action for their situation - as it would be in all other medical scenarios.

Zubeneschamali

RobertKK wrote: »

A vote for yes is currently a vote to allow abortion for any reason under the sun up to 12 weeks, most of these abortions will be of healthy unborn lives by healthy women.

Yes, we know.

85% of people surveyed in the Ipsos/MRBI poll knew that, 81% are extremely unlikely to change their minds (or absolutely will not), and the Yesses outnumber the Nos 2:1

So if that is all you've got, you've got nothing.

.......

This post has been deleted.

RobertKK

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

The Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecology has come out as pro-repeal. Individuals may have had different experiences but as a whole, the 8th has had an effect on their healthcare.

That is also completely disregarding all of the distress and discomfort travelling has, including passing the foetus in the toilet of an airplane, the later term abortions travelling causes, the FFA that have no choice but to continue, those that could afford to travel and have their baby shipped back in a courier box along with someone's new shoes, the shame and upset women are made to feel, the added distress to rape victims... shall I continue?

The former chairman of the the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecology came out in favour of retain.

RobertKK

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Find me a report where it says it, and not hearsay from abortion supporters.

Give me names of all these women the 8th specifically killed as stated by reports into their deaths.

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

The former chairman of the the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecology came out in favour of retain.

The Institute as a whole came out in favour of repeal.

RobertKK

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, we know.

85% of people surveyed in the Ipsos/MRBI poll knew that, 81% are extremely unlikely to change their minds (or absolutely will not), and the Yesses outnumber the Nos 2:1

So if that is all you've got, you've got nothing.

The poll last Sunday for 12 weeks:

43% support
37% against
20% don't know

Ave Sodalis

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Considering Robert tried telling us that the Miss P was nothing but a stunt, I don't think there's any point in trying to explain to him about Savita's death.

RobertKK

robarmstrong wrote: »

The Institute as a whole came out in favour of repeal.

But former people of it are against, who would have had more experience of the 8th.

Ave Sodalis

RobertKK wrote: »

But former people of it are against, who would have had more experience of the 8th.

Really? You're going to go down that line? Really?!

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

But former people of it are against, who would have had more experience of the 8th.

How would they have had more experience of the 8th?

Zubeneschamali

RobertKK wrote: »

The former chairman of the the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecology came out in favour of retain.

That's one ex-chairman for your side.

The Institute itself backs Repeal.

The current Chairman is Dr. Peter Boylan, you may have heard of him, he is the guy who said:

Savita Halappanavar "died as a consequence of the Eighth Amendment", according to the former Master of Holles Street Maternity Hospital.

Professor Peter Boylan was speaking before the Oireachtas committee on abortion, which last night voted to recommend not to retain the Eighth Amendment in full.

The Eighth Amendment has caused "grave harm to women, including death", Prof Boylan told committee members in the run-up to the vote.

RobertKK

robarmstrong wrote: »

How would they have had more experience of the 8th?

The 8th is law since 1983.

Stab*City

Stab*City wrote: »

But the mother gets a vote and the chance to lobby and change opinion the unborn does not.

I'm just really on the fence about this. I want someone to convince me but both sides are doing a bad job.

I'm not sure I understand? The mother gets the chance to lobby what?

RobertKK

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That's one ex-chairman for your side.

The Institute itself backs Repeal.

The current Chairman is Dr. Peter Boylan, you may have heard of him, he is the guy who said:

Savita Halappanavar "died as a consequence of the Eighth Amendment", according to the former Master of Holles Street Maternity Hospital.

Professor Peter Boylan was speaking before the Oireachtas committee on abortion, which last night voted to recommend not to retain the Eighth Amendment in full.

The Eighth Amendment has caused "grave harm to women, including death", Prof Boylan told committee members in the run-up to the vote.

That is not a report and we all know he is very pro-choice. He is not exactly a neutral in all of this.

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

The 8th is law since 1983.

And are you directly saying that there are no current members in the Institute voting to repeal would have the equal amount of experience?

Are you making assumptions again?

RobertKK

robarmstrong wrote: »

And are you directly saying that there are no current members in the Institute voting to repeal would have the equal amount of experience?

Are you making assumptions again?

Some are likely to be, a lot likely not to be.

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

Some are likely to be, a lot likely not to be.

So you're back to making assumptions again, gotcha.

pitifulgod

RobertKK wrote: »

To save the life of the mother.

How about drug trials for cancer? Should a woman be able to opt for an abortion to pursue treatment? It's illegal because of eighth at moment...