The Dilemma of the Undecideds in the abortion referendum

blondeonblonde

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm sure it does - as does giving birth.

There's something horribly paternalistic about arguing that we should prevent people from having abortions in order to avoid the possibility that they'll regret them. And that's leaving aside the fact that we're not even talking about preventing abortions; we're talking about keeping them difficult, expensive and/or risky to access.

Excellent post, and this is the nub of the issue:


"we're not even talking about preventing abortions; we're talking about keeping them difficult, expensive and/or risky to access."

nw1dqsv7amx026

So irish Times poll was:-
44% yes 32% no 17% j undecided with a 2% error margin.
I would assume the undecideds are less likely to vote but if they do, they will mostly vote no.
The poll was taken before the Claire Byrne show so I'd assume that will have an influence.
I'd say a low turnout is better for yes??

SusieBlue

beeno67 wrote: »

If that is your sole motivation it makes no sense. Women don't die for the lack of an abortion.
If you have no other reason to vote yes then it makes no sense.

Women have died from lack of abortions.

Noo

beeno67 wrote: »

If that is your sole motivation it makes no sense. Women don't die for the lack of an abortion.
If you have no other reason to vote yes then it makes no sense.

What planet are you on?? Women absolutely do die for lack of an abortion! The refusal of medical care to pregnant women has cost many lives. Wow, just wow.

Martina1991

beeno67 wrote: »

If that is your sole motivation it makes no sense. Women don't die for the lack of an abortion.
If you have no other reason to vote yes then it makes no sense.

1. Savita.

2. Any woman with cancer who is denied treatment because of a foetal heartbeat.

eviltwin

beeno67 wrote: »

If that is your sole motivation it makes no sense. Women don't die for the lack of an abortion.
If you have no other reason to vote yes then it makes no sense.

Women die through lack of access to safe abortion. We are lucky we have the safety net of the UK and lack of enforcement of sanctions on the import of pills. All we need is to see a crack down on either and women are going to die.

beeno67

SusieBlue wrote: »

Women have died from lack of abortions.

In Ireland?
A lot of ****e spoken about this.
Doesn't actually happen.
Savita Halappanavar didn't die from lack of an abortion but from lack of antibiotics, as this article makes clear.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/victoria-white/savitas-death-is-not-about-abortion-it-is-about-medical-negligence-247993.html

beeno67

Martina1991 wrote: »

1. Savita.

2. Any woman with cancer who is denied treatment because of a foetal heartbeat.

Name one.
In Ireland pregnant women are treated with chemotherapy all the time in the full knowledge that it will kill the baby, foetus or whatever you wish to call it.

nw1dqsv7amx026

SusieBlue wrote: »

Women have died from lack of abortions.

Save to say neither of these two are undecided.

Anybody remember the numbers before the last referendum?
Was the result similar to what the polls predicted?

beeno67

Noo wrote: »

What planet are you on?? Women absolutely do die for lack of an abortion! The refusal of medical care to pregnant women has cost many lives. Wow, just wow.

OK. Educate me.

SusieBlue

beeno67 wrote: »

In Ireland?
A lot of ****e spoken about this.
Doesn't actually happen.
Savita Halappanavar didn't die from lack of an abortion but from lack of antibiotics, as this article makes clear.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/victoria-white/savitas-death-is-not-about-abortion-it-is-about-medical-negligence-247993.html

If Savita had been given an abortion when she requested one, she never would have developed sepsis and she wouldn’t have died.

Michelle Harte. Malek Thawley. Sheila Hodgers. (Though granted, she died while the last referendum was happening).

Then we have miss X. Miss P. How many more do we need? How many more women need to suffer?

SusieBlue

beeno67 wrote: »

Name one.
In Ireland pregnant women are treated with chemotherapy all the time in the full knowledge that it will kill the baby, foetus or whatever you wish to call it.

Incorrect.
I’m currently going through treatment to prevent cancer and have already been told that should I become pregnant, that treatment will stop until the cancer develops and becomes terminal, or until I give birth.

blondeonblonde

beeno67 wrote: »

In Ireland?
A lot of ****e spoken about this.
Doesn't actually happen.
Savita Halappanavar didn't die from lack of an abortion but from lack of antibiotics, as this article makes clear.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/victoria-white/savitas-death-is-not-about-abortion-it-is-about-medical-negligence-247993.html

Quote from Journal:
http://www.thejournal.ie/savita-halappanavar-parents-yes-vote-4023817-May2018/


The investigation found three key causal factors in Savita’s death, including:

-that there was inadequate assessment and monitoring of Savita, and that the clinical team failed to devise and follow a plan of care
-the failure to offer all management options to Savita
-a non-adherence to clinical guidelines related to the prompt and effective management of sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock when it was diagnosed

See point two - the failure to offer all management options to Savita - clearly abortion was one of those management options.

Are you happy to see a situation like this arise again?

Besides all that, danger of death should not be the criteria for an abortion proceeding. There are many cases of women whose essential healthcare needs were not met because of the 8th Amendment.

They may not have died as a result of their medical issues but they have had to endure serious trauma & near death conditions so that they only survived in spite of the 8th.

beeno67

SusieBlue wrote: »

If Savita had been given an abortion when she requested one, she never would have developed sepsis and she wouldn’t have died.

Michelle Harte. Malek Thawley. Sheila Hodgers. (Though granted, she died while the last referendum was happening).

Then we have miss X. Miss P. How many more do we need? How many more women need to suffer?

These women did not die from lack of an abortion. Malek Thawley had an ectopic for God's sake. She died from a total cock up. As did Savita.

Michelle Harte did not die for lack of an abortion but there is an argument that it would have been compassionate to allow her have an abortion.

nw1dqsv7amx026

SusieBlue wrote: »

Incorrect.
I’m currently going through treatment to prevent cancer and have already been told that should I become pregnant, that treatment will stop until the cancer develops and becomes terminal, or until I give birth.

Wouldn't have asked your business but since you did bring this up.
What type of cancer prevention treatment and how does it affect a pregnancy? I thought cancer prevention was normally surgery?

Did a doctor really say this?

Martina1991

beeno67 wrote: »

Name one.
In Ireland pregnant women are treated with chemotherapy all the time in the full knowledge that it will kill the baby, foetus or whatever you wish to call it.

1. Savita.

2. Source for pregnant women with cancer not being denied treatment?

beeno67

SusieBlue wrote: »

Incorrect.
I’m currently going through treatment to prevent cancer and have already been told that should I become pregnant, that treatment will stop until the cancer develops and becomes terminal, or until I give birth.

That is untrue.
A friend of mine developed malaria while pregnant. She was treated for thisknowing full well the treatment would cause an abortion. It was totally legal.

nw1dqsv7amx026

beeno67 wrote: »

That is untrue.
A friend of mine developed malaria while pregnant. She was treated for thisknowing full well the treatment would cause an abortion. It was totally legal.

Give her a chance to clarify.

listermint

beeno67 wrote: »

That is untrue.
A friend of mine developed malaria while pregnant. She was treated for thisknowing full well the treatment would cause an abortion. It was totally legal.

I literally can't believe anything you post.

Guff I would call it

SusieBlue

beeno67 wrote: »

These women did not die from lack of an abortion. Malek Thawley had an ectopic for God's sake. She died from a total cock up. As did Savita.

Michelle Harte did not die for lack of an abortion but there is an argument that it would have been compassionate to allow her have an abortion.

Ectopic pregnancies can be treated with a tablet that can induce miscarriage. She was refused this because the fetus had a heartbeat, and instead had to have surgery to remove one of her Fallopian tubes.
If she had been given that tablet instead of going through unnecessary surgery she wouldn’t have died.

The 8th had a hand in Savita’s death, it’s indesputible.
The chairsperson for the independent investigation into her death confirmed the same.
If she had been given an abortion she wouldn’t have developed sepsis and wouldn’t have died.

Compassionate? If Michelle had been given an immediate abortion without the stress and hassle of having to travel to a different country for healthcare she wouldn’t have gone so long without any treatment and would have lived much longer.
Her doctor confirmed the same.

You can deny it all you want but lack of abortion does kill and the 8th causes suffering and harm to the women every single day.

nw1dqsv7amx026

listermint wrote: »

I literally can't believe anything you post.

Guff I would call it

Any chance you could let SusieBlue answer since she brought it up?

Certainly this would influence my vote.

nw1dqsv7amx026

SusieBlue wrote: »

Ectopic pregnancies can be treated with a tablet that can induce miscarriage. She was refused this because the fetus had a heartbeat, and instead had to have surgery to remove one of her Fallopian tubes.
If she had been given that tablet instead of going through unnecessary surgery she wouldn’t have died.

The 8th had a hand in Savita’s death, it’s indesputible.
The chairsperson for the independent investigation into her death confirmed the same.
If she had been given an abortion she wouldn’t have developed sepsis and wouldn’t have died.

Compassionate? If she had been given an immediate abortion without the stress and hassle of having to travel to a different country for healthcare she wouldn’t have gone so long without any treatment and would have lived much longer.
Her doctor confirmed the same.

You can deny it all you want but lack of abortion does kill and the 8th causes suffering and harm to the women every single day.

You said that to you were told you would be refused cancer prevention treatment if you got pregnant.

Is this a fact?

beeno67

listermint wrote: »

I literally can't believe anything you post.

Guff I would call it

Why. You are unaware of the issues. I am not.
I know you think I must be anti abortion. I am not. However, people spouting facts like abortion is needed to save lives is equally as bull**** as saying 97% of Downs Syndrome babies are aborted.

There is a debate to be had but no one wants to do it. People get polarised with different views and refuse to even think someone else with a different view may have a valid point.

listermint

Jaylee Glamorous Sirloin wrote: »

Any chance you could let SusieBlue answer since she brought it up?

Certainly this would influence my vote.

How am I preventing her response?

nw1dqsv7amx026

listermint wrote: »

How am I preventing her response?

You're not.

She doesn't look like she will back her statement up.

SusieBlue???

SusieBlue

Jaylee Glamorous Sirloin wrote: »

Wouldn't have asked your business but since you did bring this up.
What type of cancer prevention treatment and how does it affect a pregnancy? I thought cancer prevention was normally surgery?

Did a doctor really say this?

I’m being treated for high genotyping cell changes in my cervix. If untreated, these will progress to cancer.
I’m being treated with laser therapies and because of the location of these cells, obviously any treatment while pregnant is out of the question.
I have to do a test before each appointment to prove I’m not pregnant.
I’ve already been told that if I become pregnant I will not be getting treatment until I am no longer so, whether that be via travelling to the UK for a termination, or giving birth in 9 months.
Either way I won’t be offered a termination in Ireland until the cancer is terminal.

Cervical cancer is the second biggest killer for women aged 25-39 in this country.
Especially considering the scandal that emerged over the last few weeks, I definitely feel I should have a choice in the matter.

I’m only 27. Hoping to get engaged this year, no living children though I did have a stillbirth a few years ago.
I would love another baby but not at the expense of developing cancer.
It should be a decision for myself and my boyfriend, not for society.

blondeonblonde

beeno67 wrote: »

That is untrue.
A friend of mine developed malaria while pregnant. She was treated for thisknowing full well the treatment would cause an abortion. It was totally legal.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/i-needed-surgery-but-because-i-was-pregnant-i-was-left-to-rot-1.3500349?mode=amp

Horrific story of yet another woman denied appropriate health care due to 8th amendment.

Only by pure chance is she still alive.

Many more unspoken stories like this out there.

nw1dqsv7amx026

SusieBlue wrote: »

I’m being treated for high genotyping cell changes in my cervix. If untreated, these will progress to cancer.
I’m being treated with laser therapies and because of the location of these cells, obviously any treatment while pregnant is out of the question.
I have to do a test before each appointment to prove I’m not pregnant.
I’ve already been told that if I become pregnant I will not be getting treatment until I am no longer so, whether that be via travelling to the UK for a termination, or giving birth in 9 months.
Either way I won’t be offered a termination in Ireland until the cancer is terminal.

Cervical cancer is the second biggest killer for women aged 25-39 in this country.
Especially considering the scandal that emerged over the last few weeks, I definitely feel I should have a choice in the matter.

I’m only 27. Hoping to get engaged this year, no living children though I did have a stillbirth a few years ago.
I would love another baby but not at the expense of developing cancer.
It should be a decision for myself and my boyfriend, not for society.

I think this is shocking and I hope your treatment goes well.

SusieBlue

Jaylee Glamorous Sirloin wrote: »

I think this is shocking and I hope your treatment goes well.

Thanks for your kind words.

blondeonblonde

SusieBlue wrote: »

I’m being treated for high genotyping cell changes in my cervix. If untreated, these will progress to cancer.
I’m being treated with laser therapies and because of the location of these cells, obviously any treatment while pregnant is out of the question.
I have to do a test before each appointment to prove I’m not pregnant.
I’ve already been told that if I become pregnant I will not be getting treatment until I am no longer so, whether that be via travelling to the UK for a termination, or giving birth in 9 months.
Either way I won’t be offered a termination in Ireland until the cancer is terminal.

Cervical cancer is the second biggest killer for women aged 25-39 in this country.
Especially considering the scandal that emerged over the last few weeks, I definitely feel I should have a choice in the matter.

I’m only 27. Hoping to get engaged this year, no living children though I did have a stillbirth a few years ago.
I would love another baby but not at the expense of developing cancer.
It should be a decision for myself and my boyfriend, not for society.

Thanks for posting your experience SusieBlue. I sincerely hope your treatment goes well. Best wishes.