Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

7aubzxk43m2sni

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Yeah we got a significant handful of people who said they were ok with abortion for rape, but not for many other reasons.

Two things struck me about those people.

1) Not one of them could describe how such a system would, or even could, work in practice. Well actually ONE tried and his proposal was..... horrific..... based around the concept of a woman having to prove herself to a panel.

2) Not one of them could explain why, if the fetus has a right to l ife, it should lose that right due to a crime committed by someone who was not it, on someone who was not it. Nor could they name any other situation where a fundamental right of X was forfeit because of an action Y did to Z.

So it came across to me as one of those "virtue signalling" things to me, where the anti abortion speakers were trying to make it look like they were tolerant and considerate.... by acknowledging abortion as the right thing to do ONLY in situations and cases where it would be entirely unworkable to actually do it.

That way they can look less hard line than they are, by giving ground to scenarios that would never become a reality anyway. Because "against all abortions except those that could not happen anyway" is functionally the same as, but sounds better than "against all abortion ever".

That's a very valid point. I agree that there's no solution to such a system in practice.

At the same time I don't think the level of thought went to it to arrive at "against all abortions except those that could not happen anyway".

soap1978

SusieBlue wrote: »

Someone can talk about their struggles parenting their children with additional needs without it automatically meaning they would rather not have them or would rather abort them. Talk about jumping the gun.
The ironic thing is this very topic came up when discussion started about how little people understand the difficulties for families who have children with disabilities.
You clearly do not understand.

Also, do you have any knowledge at all about how adoption works in this country?

i have 3 kids,2 with autism,one severe but i love every min with them,so clearly i do understand,but i dont go around telling everyone how hard it is.

SusieBlue

soap1978 wrote: »

i have 3 kids,2 with autism,one severe but i love every min with them,so clearly i do understand,but i dont go around telling everyone how hard it is.

Good for you. That doesn't mean someone else can't share their own personal experience with the matter. You don't have a monopoly on how other people deal with things.

spookwoman

soap1978 wrote: »

i have 3 kids,2 with autism,one severe but i love every min with them,so clearly i do understand,but i dont go around telling everyone how hard it is.

This isn't 1950's Ireland where you keep your disabled child locked behind closed doors and don't speak of it for fear of shaming the family.

ELM327

soap1978 wrote: »

i have 3 kids,2 with autism,one severe but i love every min with them,so clearly i do understand,but i dont go around telling everyone how hard it is.

This is the other problem I find.
It is difficult.

It's okay for it to be difficult, it's ok to resent the behaviour but love your child.


I resent my own behaviours at times but there's fk all I can do about it! I manage and mitigate as best I can - after years of therapy - but sometimes it's not enough. The best I can do as an adult is to quickly walk away and get myself into a situation where I cannot damage myself or others to unleash.


If I did have an autistic child that was more or differently affected than myself I would probably hate the behaviours but I would cry with empathy afterwards because I know how it feels and how overpowering simple emotions can be. If I had the option as a female I'd think long and hard about a termination.

soap1978

spookwoman wrote: »

This isn't 1950's Ireland where you keep your disabled child locked behind closed doors and don't speak of it for fear of shaming the family.

no its not,but i dont make a big deal of it,life is great for them,my 7 year old dosent care about havent autism and i havent told him either,my older child struggles but i enjoy him and he loves life.
in the future maybe they will be able to tell if a child has autism in the womb and what a horrible future it will be.

Cupcake_Crisis

bubblypop wrote: »

why does this amuse you?
I was a yes voter & an unplanned pregnancy myself. My mother made the choice to go through with the pregnancy.
My friends daughter was unplanned, in fact my friend travelled to England but changed her mind. Her daughter was a yes voter.
I don't understand why you find that amusing?

I was also an unplanned pregnancy. My mam was told not to get excited about having more children after complications with my brother. 6 years later she went to the doctor with a kidney infection and hey ho, there I was. I find her particular situation amusing because I bet she wishes I was a kidney infection at times, and it’s given me a morbid fear of kidney infections.

My point is that not all unplanned pregnancy’s are crisis pregnancy’s. My mams wasn’t, and mine wasn’t. There’s a very big difference between unplanned and unwanted.

ELM327

eviltwin wrote: »

You don't know until a few years down the line if a child has ASD, it's not something that can be tested for during pregnancy and its not apparent at birth.

I would imagine the chances of another child being on the spectrum is high so my husband and I agree that if we are unlucky enough to have another pregnancy we will not keep it.

It's coming in - tests for Autism in utero
https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/may/01/prenatal-scrrening-test-autism-ethical-implications

eviltwin

soap1978 wrote: »

i have 3 kids,2 with autism,one severe but i love every min with them,so clearly i do understand,but i dont go around telling everyone how hard it is.

I love my kids too so let's not play that game. Funny I'd have thought someone with direct experience would be a bit more empathetic to other people who are faced with the possibility of having a child with a special need. It's not a bad thing to say it's not for you and make decisions on that basis.

soap1978

eviltwin wrote: »

I love my kids too so let's not play that game. Funny I'd have thought someone with direct experience would be a bit more empathetic to other people who are faced with the possibility of having a child with a special need. It's not a bad thing to say it's not for you and make decisions on that basis.

its a bad thing for the child

SusieBlue

soap1978 wrote: »

no its not,but i dont make a big deal of it,life is great for them,my 7 year old dosent care about havent autism and i havent told him either,my older child struggles but i enjoy him and he loves life.
in the future maybe they will be able to tell if a child has autism in the womb and what a horrible future it will be.

My brother is also autistic, he's mostly non verbal, has the hobbies and interests of a 6 year old despite almost being an adult, is sporadically incontinent, has no independence and relies on my mam for everything.
He also loves life and we love having him in ours.
He is a joy to have around and we are blessed to have him but other children (and adults) like him are not so lucky, they don't have parents willing or able to make the sacrifices my parents made for my brother.

There is nothing wrong with recognising the sacrifices and struggles that go hand and hand with having a child with special needs or a disability.
It would be dishonest to say its easy because it isn't, for a lot of people. And there is nothing wrong with that.

eviltwin

soap1978 wrote: »

its a bad thing for the child

The child in this case is yet to be born. People choosing a different path is not an judgement of our choice or our children. It's not about us and what we feel.

ELM327

soap1978 wrote: »

its a bad thing for the child

As an autistic adult who was formerly an autistic child.... please elaborate on what would be bad for "the child".
As I was a "the child" from your analogy I can then see if it is bad or not.


EDIT: If you're referring to a foetus then that has no sentience and cannot recognise good from bad. If I was aborted as a foetus I wouldn't know the difference, I did not posess sentience or the ability to "know".

soap1978

SusieBlue wrote: »

My brother is also autistic, he's mostly non verbal, has the hobbies and interests of a 6 year old despite almost being an adult, is sporadically incontinent, has no independence and relies on my mam for everything.
He also loves life and we love having him in ours.
He is a joy to have around and we are blessed to have him but other children (and adults) like him are not so lucky, they don't have parents willing or able to make the sacrifices my parents made for my brother.

There is nothing wrong with recognising the sacrifices and struggles that go hand and hand with having a child with special needs or a disability.
It would be dishonest to say its easy because it isn't, for a lot of people. And there is nothing wrong with that.

no one said it was easy,but i find it hard that in the future there maybe no kids with disabilities like the way iceland is going.

ELM327

soap1978 wrote: »

no one said it was easy,but i find it hard that in the future there maybe no kids with disabilities like the way iceland is going.

As someone who has one of these disabilities.... I do not object to eradication of disabilities by proactive termination.

soap1978

ELM327 wrote: »

As someone who has one of these disabilities.... I do not object to eradication of disabilities by proactive termination.

id hate to see it,eradication of kids with disabilities,but u have ur opinion and i have my.Hopefully it all works out.

eviltwin

soap1978 wrote: »

no its not,but i dont make a big deal of it,life is great for them,my 7 year old dosent care about havent autism and i havent told him either,my older child struggles but i enjoy him and he loves life.
in the future maybe they will be able to tell if a child has autism in the womb and what a horrible future it will be.

I'm a glass half full person who prefers to focus on the can rather than the can't in life. I'm confident my kids will find their path in life despite their issues.

At the same time, it would be wrong to ignore the impact the condition has. Elm has described its impact on his life, my son struggles with even the most basic self care and probably always will, he has mild Tourettes which will be more embarrassing for him as he gets older, my daughter has extreme OCD currently managed by medication but on a bad day can severely impact her life.

This is the reality of their condition. We have accommodated ASD pretty well and day to day it's not something we consciously think about but life is far from normal. I'm not going to lie about it or gloss over it, it is what it is.

SusieBlue

soap1978 wrote: »

no one said it was easy,but i find it hard that in the future there maybe no kids with disabilities like the way iceland is going.

I know you love your kids, and you wouldn't change them for the world. And that's fair enough.

But disabilities can be life limiting, impact health, restrict opportunities and independence, hinder education and career prospects, and most of all, can cause pain and suffering.
That is not something anyone wishes for their child in early pregnancy.
Nobody hopes their baby will be born with Trisomy 13, or brain damage, or even severe autism.

I'm not suggesting babies with these conditions should be aborted without question.
I'm not even actually advocating that abortion should be considered an option in these cases.
But if medical advances and genetic testing brought us to a scenario where disabilities were eradicated (NOT abortion), would that not be a wonderful thing?
If there was no longer such a thing as Downs Syndrome, if it was eliminated from existence, do you think we'd have upset parents devastated their was no longer a chance their child might be born with DS?

Overheal

soap1978 wrote: »

id hate to see it,eradication of kids with disabilities

What about the eradication of disabilities? This seems to be a perspective issue.

Wrongway1985

Mavis Warm Stranger wrote: »

With regards to those who "want to control pregnant women", I think you'll find that a huge number of no voters would agree with termination in a hard case such as rape.

The exit polls out there don't line up with that statement.

Going from the RTE one...

As you mention rape we'll go with that - just 18% of No voters strongly agreed when posed the question should abortion be made available if pregnancy is the result of incest or rape? whereas 23% strongly disagreed that it should be,clearly favouring a rapists baby be brought to term than the woman affected :eek: .


https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/2018/05/rte-exit-poll-final-11pm.pdf

soap1978

soap1978 wrote: »

no its not,but i dont make a big deal of it,life is great for them,my 7 year old dosent care about havent autism and i havent told him either,my older child struggles but i enjoy him and he loves life.
in the future maybe they will be able to tell if a child has autism in the womb and what a horrible future it will be.

I'm assuming that you expect everyone to abort in such a situation, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

To sort of turn your question to the other poster on its head, if you had the test available before your two children were born, or available for any future children you may have would you or your partner had/have an abortion?

I assume some people will decide to have an abortion when such a test becomes available for their own personal reasons and some people will decide not to for their own personal reasons, as with any other reason that a woman or couple decide to have an abortion or not.

.......

This post has been deleted.

spookwoman

soap1978 wrote: »

no its not,but i dont make a big deal of it,life is great for them,my 7 year old dosent care about havent autism and i havent told him either,my older child struggles but i enjoy him and he loves life.
in the future maybe they will be able to tell if a child has autism in the womb and what a horrible future it will be.

That's great for you but that is YOU. I'm also taking you at your word that life is great. But not everyone is capable or has the strength to raise these children. Not all of these children have a great life.
In fact it's damn right selfish and arrogant to even think just because you may have a great life with yours that everyone else does, and hell if they don't then they are not allowed to say anything.
I truly wonder if you have to to deal with one like the poster said that's an adult that could throw a person across a room would you be so blase about it.

retro:electro

soap1978 wrote: »

id hate to see it,eradication of kids with disabilities,but u have ur opinion and i have my.Hopefully it all works out.

I’m sorry but I would not want a child with a disability. If there is any way to eradicate disabilities we should be embracing it with open arms (testing etc, not abortion) why on earth would you want to inflict such an uncomfortable life on both the child and the parent caring for it? You speak about how your autistic children have enriched your life and that’s fantastic for you, the testing would make no difference to your life in that respect, or to those who want to continue with the pregnancy knowing what the future entails. It simply gives people the full picture so they can make an informed decision.
Having spent the later years of my 20’s taking care of my terminally ill mother, the last thing I want to do is have a disabled child on my hands. It should be my choice, not yours. And I dgaf what you think about that.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Will anti abortion medical professionals be obliged to carry out abortions? i presume it won't be expected of them.

I'd imagine it's a type of procedure that no doctor will relish doing. I mean think about it? It could really fcuk a person up over time.

.......

This post has been deleted.

ELM327

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Will anti abortion medical professionals be obliged to carry out abortions? i presume it won't be expected of them.

I'd imagine it's a type of procedure that no doctor will relish doing. I mean think about it? It could really fcuk a person up over time.

Considering its only supplying 1 oral and 7 vaginal pills it's not as gruesome as you seem to think.


The opt out clause must include referral to a doctor prepared to provide the requested healthcare.

kunst nugget

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Will anti abortion medical professionals be obliged to carry out abortions? i presume it won't be expected of them.

I'd imagine it's a type of procedure that no doctor will relish doing. I mean think about it? It could really fcuk a person up over time.

How could they force a medical professional to get involved with abortions, that would be absurd. The problem is the people that don't even want to refer you on to someone that will help you - that's another nonsense.

SusieBlue

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Will anti abortion medical professionals be obliged to carry out abortions? i presume it won't be expected of them.

I'd imagine it's a type of procedure that no doctor will relish doing. I mean think about it? It could really fcuk a person up over time.

GP's who don't wish to prescribe abortion pills can object due to conscientious reasons, but legally they must refer the patient to another doctor who will provide the service.

Late term terminations for FFA and health issues for the mother are not abortions, the woman is induced and gives birth to the baby via cesarean section or labour.

DEFTLEFTHAND

It might be a specialised clinic deal, like in other countries

Staffed by medical personnel who exclusively deal in abortion.

SusieBlue

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

It might be a specialised clinic deal, like in other countries

Staffed by medical personnel who exclusively deal in abortion.

We have no reason to believe it won't be a GP lead service as promised in the proposal.
Circa 4k abortions occur annually, not much of a market there for a specialised clinic.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Could a private healthcare business possibly become involved?

The Legend Of Kira

Billy86 wrote: »

They want to achieve a lasting wedge issue to build a far right political platform on, and they've got Cambridge Analytica employees on board to help them.

I,ve said in the past I strongly disagreed with stunts they pulled going outside maternity hospitals with their banner displays. Its a bit of a stretch to use labels such as " far right " to describe them, after all they are a single issue group .

spookwoman

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Will anti abortion medical professionals be obliged to carry out abortions? i presume it won't be expected of them.

I'd imagine it's a type of procedure that no doctor will relish doing. I mean think about it? It could really fcuk a person up over time.

They can object due to conscientious reasons but must refer to another doctor.
If an emergency I'd say there would be a clause say woman rushed in a+e needs one there and then, there's not enough time for another doc or none about.Then the life of patient would be put first.

I'm just thinking out loud on a hypothetical situation

.......

This post has been deleted.

captbarnacles

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Will anti abortion medical professionals be obliged to carry out abortions? i presume it won't be expected of them.

I'd imagine it's a type of procedure that no doctor will relish doing. I mean think about it? It could really fcuk a person up over time.

I think you underestimate what maternity staff see and deal with everyday.

DEFTLEFTHAND

captbarnacles wrote: »

I think you underestimate what maternity staff see and deal with everyday.

I know but this is very different really isn't it.

DEFTLEFTHAND

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I know but this is very different really isn't it.

Not really.

Frank Bullitt

The highlight of the whole campaign. This was when Sky couldn't get anyone from the NO side, so this is what they had to settle on. She is absolutely out of her mind.

Incredible.

.......

This post has been deleted.

DEFTLEFTHAND

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

With the intent of saving a life not taking one. I don't mean to be blunt but that's the stark reality in the majority of cases where the mum's life isn't in danger.

I'd just worry that some could struggle with the burden, it's something that could get in on a person's psyche. I hope counselling is made available to all involved.

Cupcake_Crisis

Gintonious wrote: »

The highlight of the whole campaign. This was when Sky couldn't get anyone from the NO side, so this is what they had to settle on. She is absolutely out of her mind.

Incredible.

That was PAINFUL to watch.

.......

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

Gintonious wrote: »

The highlight of the whole campaign. This was when Sky couldn't get anyone from the NO side, so this is what they had to settle on. She is absolutely out of her mind.

Incredible.

I lasted a minute. god she was terrible.

Fighting Tao

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I'd just worry that some could struggle with the burden, it's something that could get in on a person's psyche. I hope counselling is made available to all involved.

The four questions to prevent worry:


1) Is it true?
You can only answer this with a YES or a NO. Okay, now let's move on to the next question.

2) Can you absolutely know that's it's true?
Okay, this is where it gets a little bit harder...Can you absolutely (that means 100%) know that it's true ? Again, this is a yes or no.

3) How do you react, what happens, when you believe that thought?
I don't feel good about myself.
I have feelings of anger, hatred and self-pity.
I'm envious of my co-worker and wish bad things would happen to him.
I feel worried about my own job security.
I'm constantly stressed.
As you can see, that one simple thought causes a lot of damage and brings you to a variety of low places every time you believe it.

4) Who would you be without that thought?
Who would you be without that worry, anger, stress and self-pity? Who would you be without this nagging negative thought hanging around your mind all day and zapping your energy? Who would you be without this thing that you worry about before you go to sleep and that is keeping you from sleeping? Who would you be without that thought?

I would feel lighter and freer.
I would have more peace in my life, more strength, more calmness.
My relationships would be better.
I could live more in the moment.
I could be more present at work and actually do a better job.
When you go through this exercise, you can truly look at the issues that are bothering you and realize that not only are they not doing you any good but they are actually hurting you.

Once you get to that point, you can look at where you can take action and where you just need to let go...

VinLieger

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

That was PAINFUL to watch.

Her clueless expressions when he starts to string more complex thoughts and ideas together were hilarious to watch

Fighting Tao

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I lasted a minute. god she was terrible.

I laughed the way Kay Burly basically introduced her as a nut job. CEO of a Trump fansite!

Water John

Slightly unfortunate, turn of phrase by Kay Burly, in her intro, saying the debate was, reaching its climax.

Cupcake_Crisis

VinLieger wrote: »

Her clueless expressions when he starts to string more complex thoughts and ideas together were hilarious to watch

Tbf, I’ve always found Colm to be excellent in debates. I wouldn’t want to go up against him and I’m a master-debater.

DEFTLEFTHAND

I wasn't a 'No' voter btw.