Healthy baby aborted at 15 weeks

gctest50

gctest50 wrote: »

The 3rd is more accurate

Then why bother with the first two?

Padraig Mor

Deleted User wrote: »

3 tests were done. The first 2 indicated FFA so parents decided on an abortion. The 3rd test results came back after the abortion giving a different result to the first 2. If the 3rd result came back before the abortion, would they still have aborted or taken the risk that 2 out of 3 were wrong?

I'm not sure if that's entirely accurate. My recollection of previous articles is that the parents pushed to wait for the results of the third test but their concerns were poo pooed by the hospital and they were practically railroaded into an abortion.

When the results of the third test came back the hospital didn't even have the guts to tell the parents the child was healthy - they were simply given the results in an envelope and pushed out the door (presumably in the hope that they wouldn't cop on). It was only when the parents brought the results to an independent doctor did the truth emerge.

The hospital have serious questions to answer in all of this.

Hardcharger

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Odd use of "because" there as for me and many people I know we voted yes KNOWING that a case like this would likely happen.

So I am not sure the use of "because" is quite as honest as you might be pretending, especially when your further rhetoric is based on....



.... a complete misuse of terms in order to manufacture emotional rhetoric. You would do well to find out what the word "Murder" means and realise it does not actually apply here.



I think the word is simplistic, not simple. What you are espousing here is false, emotive, simplistic nonsense. Not at all "simple".



That is not the definition of "murder". The definition of murder is to "kill unlawfully". Abortion is legal. Therefore by definition it is not murder. Guess what? Water is wet, and married Bachelors do not exist either. Isn't language wonderful?



A toddler is a sentient human agent. So MY logic, rather than yours, would not allow for their termination on a whim. A fetus as 12 weeks however has all the sentience of a rock or a table leg. As such, aside from your emotive misuse of the word murder, I am not seeing a single argument from you as to why we might afford it moral or ethical concern.

As the rest of your post is merely a "godwin" I shall not reply to it unless you require it?



You cloak your desire to call people killers in compassion more like. As ALL the people I know of who are pro-choice.... myself included..... actively strive to construct a society where no abortions actually ever happen. Through contraception, education, and social welfare supports we strive to make sure abortion is a choice no woman has to make.

You might want to pretend we love the killing. The fact is however that when we promote a choice for abortion we do so DESPITE us not wanting people to actually have one.



Then I guess the fact that I CAN do so, is yours

The parents found out their child could have a fatal abnormality. Once that happened the child became merely a foetus and they decided to kill it.

Noe that they know there was nothing wrong with the baby they are suddenly boo hooing too late.

What else is a foetus except a human being?

You know I sm right and your conscience is eating at you.

People like you voted Hitler into power and murdered the Jews - ordinary people who masked their nihilistic hatred behind ideology.

You cannot escape youf guilt. You are a child killer. You and people like you who voted yes killed that child. You might as well have fed the baby alive to a hungry dog

You have crossed the line into depravity and evil

The way back?

Campaign to restore the right to life and oppose abortion

Plumbthedepths

Adonis Broad Maid wrote:

Exactly. One minutes pro abortionists are on about the calling of a 15 week old foetus as waste and the next they are saying it's ok to kill it and call it waste.(if it's disabled)

Making up stuff is very poor debate tbh.

Plumbthedepths

Hardcharger wrote:

People like you voted Hitler into power and murdered the Jews - ordinary people who masked their nihilistic hatred behind ideology.

Godwin , the got to of someone unable to debate honestly.

Padraig Mor

Padraig Mor wrote: »

I'm not sure if that's entirely accurate. My recollection of previous articles is that the parents pushed to wait for the results of the third test but their concerns were poo pooed by the hospital and they were practically railroaded into an abortion.

When the results of the third test came back the hospital didn't even have the guts to tell the parents the child was healthy - they were simply given the results in an envelope and pushed out the door (presumably in the hope that they wouldn't cop on). It was only when the parents brought the results to an independent doctor did the truth emerge.

The hospital have serious questions to answer in all of this.

They regret aborting what they now know was a healthy baby. If they knew the results of the 3rd test beforehand, would they have continued with the pregnancy? After all, 2 out of 3 tests could be considered conclusive.

I’m just playing Devils Advocate here. I firmly believe in the right of a woman to be able to access safe abortion.

nozzferrahhtoo

Hardcharger wrote: »

The parents found out their child could have a fatal abnormality. Once that happened the child became merely a foetus and they decided to kill it.

I do not think it BECAME merely a fetus at that point. It was always merely a fetus. And the defect they were led to believe it possessed meant that it still being merely a fetus meant they had options. Unless you have direct information from the people in question I think the idea it was not a fetus one moment, and it was the next, is one you are inventing on their behalf for your own agenda.

Hardcharger wrote: »

What else is a foetus except a human being?

The problem we have is that the word "human" has meanings in many areas of discourse. It has one meaning in biology. It has another meaning in philosophy. I do not think ANYONE.... least of all me..... is suggesting that it was not human biologically.

However abortion is a moral and ethical issue. Not a biology issue. So it is the meaning of the word "Human" in moral philosophy we need to be concerned with here. Not biology. And there is NOTHING about a 12 week old fetus I can find..... nor have you moved to show any..... that grounds moral and ethical concern at that level.

Your ENTIRE rhetoric in fact, and that of pretty much every anti choice user of this forum since the referendum was announced........ appears to be based on conflating the diverse meanings of "Human" into one single meaning.

Hardcharger wrote: »

You know I sm right and your conscience is eating at you.

No reason why it would be or should be, so you are straw manning me here only. I have ZERO moral or ethical concern for non-sentient entities. My conscience for a 12 week old fetus is at EXACTLY the same level as my conscience for a rock or a table leg.

Hardcharger wrote: »

People like you voted Hitler into power and murdered the Jews

More strawman and Godwin here. My ENTIRE world view is based on the well being of sentient agents. Therefore nothing in my world view can even remotely be mangled into the contrived murder of any individual or group.

So basically my logic here is so insurmountable for you, that you have to erect a strawman that is not even remotely similar to me to burn down instead. Bully for you I guess but at least you are not alone. It is pretty much what every other anti choice poster on the forum had to do with me too.

Padraig Mor

Deleted User wrote: »

They regret aborting what they now know was a healthy baby. If they knew the results of the 3rd test beforehand, would they have continued with the pregnancy? After all, 2 out of 3 tests could be considered conclusive.

I’m just playing Devils Advocate here. I firmly believe in the right of a woman to be able to access safe abortion.

My understanding is that the third test was the 'definitive' one - but the hospital just didn't care.

ohnonotgmail

Hardcharger wrote: »

If you can't refute my logic that's not my problem. That's yours. You support murdering innocent babies. It's evil and wrong and you know it but you don't care..

why dont you try post some and we'll give it a go refuting it. Beware of false premises.

Padraig Mor

Padraig Mor wrote: »

My understanding is that the third test was the 'definitive' one - but the hospital just didn't care.

So, what were the other 2 tests?

.......

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Unfortunately Jaster is correct, we had laws that would have saved this child. I voted to allow abortion despite some reservations, but this certainly rocks my belief I did the right thing.

No we did not.

We had laws that would have made the parents travel for the abortion.

Igotadose

Padraig Mor wrote: »

My understanding is that the third test was the 'definitive' one - but the hospital just didn't care.

Your understanding is really, your opinion. No one knows the details. Not you, not Peadar Toibin, not anyone on boards. At the end of the day, the parents made the decision they made.

If there is an investigation and the results are published, then the public will learn. Until then, 'the hospital didn't care' is just an opinion not based on any facts.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

So, what were the other 2 tests?

The first 2 tests are indicative but not definitive. I have no opinion on who decided not to wait for the results of the third test. I dont have the information to know either way and i suspect nobody else here does either.

uptherebels

Padraig Mor wrote: »

My understanding is that the third test was the 'definitive' one - but the hospital just didn't care.

One of the tests has a 0.15% chance of a false positive. Doctors make decisions based on tests with worse odds than that all the time, but hey the hospital not caring sounds better.

volchitsa

....... wrote: »

No we did not.

We had laws that would have made the parents travel for the abortion.

And left them with very few rights if the same situation had arisen - can you imagine a couple who had travelled to the UK complaining about a misdiagnosis to the papers never mind the Dáil only a couple of years ago?

I wonder how much sympathy and interest would they have got from Peadar Toibin back then?

nozzferrahhtoo

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

This is the problem with debate on abortion, wild language and claims and a failure to see the point of view of anyone else. You’re as much of a flute as those doing the whooping in the black repeal jumpers.

I think the problem for me is that I DO see the point of view of the other side. Quite well and quite clearly. I just also very clearly see what is wrong with that point of view.

Nor am I 100% immune to that point of view either. When I see medical images of a fetus, with its tiny little toes and fingers, I am not immune to the emotion that I have evolved over 1000s of years to feel. I feel the same things as they do when they see the fetus.

I just am capable of understanding the root of that emotion, and see why it is philosophically irrelevant in relation to abortion. I see it in a way users such as the user obsessed with the fetus having a tongue that moves, can not.

But from the outside I imagine me understanding and rejecting a point of view, and me not seeing the point of view, of others must look like the same thing quite often?

Hardcharger

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I think the problem for me is that I DO see the point of view of the other side. Quite well and quite clearly. I just also very clearly see what is wrong with that point of view.

Nor am I 100% immune to that point of view either. When I see medical images of a fetus, with its tiny little toes and fingers, I am not immune to the emotion that I have evolved over 1000s of years to feel. I feel the same things as they do when they see the fetus.

I just am capable of understanding the root of that emotion, and see why it is philosophically irrelevant in relation to abortion. I see it in a way users such as the user obsessed with the fetus having a tongue that moves, can not.

But from the outside I imagine me understanding and rejecting a point of view, and me not seeing the point of view, of others must look like the same thing quite often?

You are a psychopath. You can see the foetus is human. A life and you don't care. You want to kill it anyway.

SS guards could see the men women and children euphemistically called "cargo" they marched off the cattle cars were humans like them. Indeed ocassionally a pretty blonde girl was spared and used as a plaything before they tired of her and sent her to the gas chambers. Mengele kept an human zoo - dwarves, giants, twins, deformed etc who would experiment on and dissect alive and kill as he saw fit.

Why did they do this? To be like God who has power over life and death. God is a champ. He drops a roof on a church full of groveling worshippers now and then. Typhus and swans both come from the same place.

So you see babies as disposable. Like crisp packets or old stereos. You don't care about their humanity just like the SS made leather out of the skins of their victims soap out of their fat socks out of their hair and tried to make their bones into commerical fertilizer. They did eveything except eat the Jews.

This same evil detached empathy free attitude is evident in your posts.

You are a sick evil disgusting human being

Call me Al

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

The first 2 tests are indicative but not definitive. I have no opinion on who decided not to wait for the results of the third test. I dont have the information to know either way and i suspect nobody else here does either.

You're correct, we have the couple's media-reported version of the facts. That's it.

When this news broke the master of one of the maternity hospitals (Rotunda maybe but I can't remember exactly ) was interviewed by morning radio. He was asked about the process in his hospital in these circumstances. He said the couple are counseled to always wait until the final definitive test results are ready to review before making any decisions.
He said tests 1&2 are almost always accurate but he has on the very rare occasion seen the 3rd result come back clear despite 1&2 showing Edward's syndrome.
I wonder why the hospital bothered with 3rd definitive test when the medical team weren't inclined to wait for the results in the first place.

Was there a delay with the results or something?

.......

Hardcharger wrote: »

You are a psychopath. You can see the foetus is human. A life and you don't care. You want to kill it anyway.

SS guards could see the men women and children euphemistically called "cargo" they marched off the cattle cars were humans like them. Indeed ocassionally a pretty blonde girl was spared and used as a plaything before they tired of her and sent her to the gas chambers. Mengele kept an human zoo - dwarves, giants, twins, deformed etc who would experiment on and dissect alive and kill as he saw fit.

Why did they do this? To be like God who has power over life and death. God is a champ. He drops a roof on a church full of groveling worshippers now and then. Typhus and swans both come from the same place.

So you see babies as disposable. Like crisp packets or old stereos. You don't care about their humanity just like the SS made leather out of the skins of their victims soap out of their fat socks out of their hair and tried to make their bones into commerical fertilizer. They did eveything except eat the Jews.

This same evil detached empathy free attitude is evident in your posts.

You are a sick evil disgusting human being

Well there's someone who didnt understand the point being made to them in the slightest.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Hardcharger wrote: »

The parents found out their child could have a fatal abnormality. Once that happened the child became merely a foetus and they decided to kill it.

Noe that they know there was nothing wrong with the baby they are suddenly boo hooing too late.

What else is a foetus except a human being?

You know I sm right and your conscience is eating at you.

People like you voted Hitler into power and murdered the Jews - ordinary people who masked their nihilistic hatred behind ideology.

You cannot escape youf guilt. You are a child killer. You and people like you who voted yes killed that child. You might as well have fed the baby alive to a hungry dog

You have crossed the line into depravity and evil

The way back?

Campaign to restore the right to life and oppose abortion

Get on that, so. There is nothing stopping you.

nozzferrahhtoo

Hardcharger wrote: »

You are a psychopath. You can see the foetus is human. A life and you don't care. You want to kill it anyway.

I think we can do without the personal insults here.

"The standard definition of psyhopath is: A person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse."

There is no coherent basis to couch empathy with in relation to a non-sentient entity. Therefore Psychopathy simply is not applicable as a term here. You are misusing language.

Further you are also lying and outright ignoring things I am saying to pedal this. I do not "want" to kill anything. I very clearly said that the ideal I work towards is a society where zero abortions actually happen. How is that WANTING to kill anything?

You are not engaging honestly with this conversation here or showing a modicum of good faith within it.

Hardcharger wrote: »

So you see babies as disposable. Like crisp packets or old stereos. You don't care about their humanity

I care about the "Humanity" of anything which qualifies for that term. I do not think mere biological taxonomy is enough to qualify for that term. Which is all the fetus has.

BABIES however, do. Which is why your straw man statements about my attitude to babies is simply fallacious and dishonest.

shesty

Call me Al wrote: »

You're correct, we have the couple's media-reported version of the facts. That's it.

When this news broke the master of one of the maternity hospitals (Rotunda maybe but I can't remember exactly ) was interviewed by morning radio. He was asked about the process in his hospital in these circumstances. He said the couple are counseled to always wait until the final definitive test results are ready to review before making any decisions.
He said tests 1&2 are almost always accurate but he has on the very rare occasion seen the 3rd result come back clear despite 1&2 showing Edward's syndrome.
I wonder why the hospital bothered with 3rd definitive test when the medical team weren't inclined to wait for the results in the first place.

Was there a delay with the results or something?

The key thing as far as I remember him saying, was that there is a test and ultrasound first ....and if the test is showing a "negative" result but the ultrasound is clear, then the next set of test results are needed as confirmation.In this case, I think I read that this was the situation-clear ultrasound and a negative test result.After that, it APPEARS to be the hospital that were in the wrong, for apparently dismissing the need to wait for second test results.But hopefully the review that is to take place will give them the full story.

And to another poster....what happens if you also consider the mother to be a person???

Gimme A Pound

Oh look, Hardcharger, the poster who spews intense hatred of women is suddenly "caring" (including about unborn girls - but he made it clear he has contempt for females) on this topic. So astounding and unpredictable.

Why don't you think for yourself instead of being a slave to whatever boxes you feel you must tick, no matter how much they contradict your other views?

Oh and he pretends to care about the gays too I see.

The far right and far left are two sides of the same coin.

SusieBlue

Hardcharger wrote: »

You are a psychopath. You can see the foetus is human. A life and you don't care. You want to kill it anyway.

SS guards could see the men women and children euphemistically called "cargo" they marched off the cattle cars were humans like them. Indeed ocassionally a pretty blonde girl was spared and used as a plaything before they tired of her and sent her to the gas chambers. Mengele kept an human zoo - dwarves, giants, twins, deformed etc who would experiment on and dissect alive and kill as he saw fit.

Why did they do this? To be like God who has power over life and death. God is a champ. He drops a roof on a church full of groveling worshippers now and then. Typhus and swans both come from the same place.

So you see babies as disposable. Like crisp packets or old stereos. You don't care about their humanity just like the SS made leather out of the skins of their victims soap out of their fat socks out of their hair and tried to make their bones into commerical fertilizer. They did eveything except eat the Jews.

This same evil detached empathy free attitude is evident in your posts.

You are a sick evil disgusting human being

You sound a bit hysterical and triggered.
You won't get anyone to listen to your viewpoint or respect your opinion if you are being needlessly hostile, aggressive, and name calling.

Attitudes like yours are exactly why you lost the referendum. You only have yourself to blame here.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

This is a sad case, but mistakes will happen. This should not cause a rollback of the previous draconian laws concerning abortion.

suicide_circus

its upsetting for this couple but you cant avoid collateral damage no matter what the rules. you cant make an omelette...

FutureGuy

Hardcharger wrote: »

If you can't refute my logic that's not my problem. That's yours. You support murdering innocent babies. It's evil and wrong and you know it but you don't care..

Logic? Where?

.......

Amirah Elegant Minus wrote: »

This is a sad case, but mistakes will happen. This should not cause a rollback of the previous draconian laws concerning abortion.

The previous laws would not have prevented this.

They would simply have forced the couple to travel for the abortion.

There is NOTHING that the previous laws would have prevented in terms of abortions, the whole point was that they were happening ANYWAY but either by people taking medical and legal risks ordering pills online or by facing the cost and trauma of travelling for an abortion.

The referendum has changed nothing except to make abortions safer and decriminalised for the women who seek them.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

....... wrote: »

The previous laws would not have prevented this.

They would simply have forced the couple to travel for the abortion.

There is NOTHING that the previous laws would have prevented in terms of abortions, the whole point was that they were happening ANYWAY but either by people taking medical and legal risks ordering pills online or by facing the cost and trauma of travelling for an abortion.

The referendum has changed nothing except to make abortions safer and decriminalised for the women who seek them.

Exactly, that's why I said that there should be no going back. These things will happen and the media will report on every single case like this (That they can), because it feeds the agenda of the right to life side.

Igotadose

Amirah Elegant Minus wrote: »

Exactly, that's why I said that there should be no going back. These things will happen and the media will report on every single case like this (That they can), because it feeds the agenda of the right to life side.

This case makes the news because 1) not a whole heck of a lot goes on that the RTE deem newsworthy 2) Anti-choice want to cast shade on every single aspect of abortion worldwide and in Ireland.

SexBobomb

suicide_circus wrote: »

its upsetting for this couple but you cant avoid collateral damage no matter what the rules. you cant make an omelette...

Jesus, thats a grim summation of this situation. :eek:
If I had heard this during the campaign I would have voted differently.

.......

SexBobomb wrote: »

Jesus, thats a grim summation of this situation. :eek:
If I had heard this during the campaign I would have voted differently.

How could you not have realised that this was already happening and would continue to happen?

Nothing has changed except the location of abortions.

nozzferrahhtoo

SexBobomb wrote: »

Jesus, thats a grim summation of this situation. :eek:
If I had heard this during the campaign I would have voted differently.

Grim but true to a degree, and to be expected.

If people are making abortion decisions based on the results of medical tests, then statistically we WILL have cases of people getting erroneous test results and making the wrong decisions.

This is simply the world of medicine and not abortion. Across the medical world we base decisions on tests that have a likelihood of giving false results. People get treatments for conditions they do not actually have. People miss treatments for conditions it turns out they do have.

It is sad. It is not ideal. But it is alas the reality. Abortion is no different. If it was not made clear to you during the campaign then you have my apology on behalf of everyone, including myself, who failed you in this regard. But it really should not have swung your vote even if we had.

SusieBlue

SexBobomb wrote: »

Jesus, thats a grim summation of this situation. :eek:
If I had heard this during the campaign I would have voted differently.

Really?
Thousands of women suffered pain, trauma and some even died because of the 8th. Those women were alive with families and friends who loved them and a life to live.

Men lost wives, children lost mothers, parents lost daughters, because of those laws. Real families facing real consequences.

Those in favour of keeping the 8th were happy to offer these women and families up as collateral damage in order to be able to proudly declare Ireland was an abortion free country (even though it wasn't and 10k of them were happening annually).

Abortion isn't ideal but sometimes necessary. Women needlessly dying and suffering is unacceptable. I know which is the lesser evil and which has more negative effects on the people of this country.

nozzferrahhtoo

SusieBlue wrote: »

I know which is the lesser evil and which has more negative effects on the people of this country.

But are you sure you are counting ALL the negative effects? Remember allowing working class women to abort unwanted pregnancies is preventing them from bothering to better themselves socio-economically. As is social welfare and single parent allowance.

Apparently.

You see only middle aged middle and upper class white men know what is best for working class women. And Unwanted pregnancy is a REAL motivator doncha know :rolleyes::eek:

/Irony/Sarcasm

SexBobomb

SusieBlue wrote: »

Really?
Thousands of women suffered pain, trauma and some even died because of the 8th. Those women were alive with families and friends who loved them and a life to live.

Men lost wives, children lost mothers, parents lost daughters, because of those laws. Real families facing real consequences.

Those in favour of keeping the 8th were happy to offer these women and families up as collateral damage in order to be able to proudly declare Ireland was an abortion free country (even though it wasn't and 10k of them were happening annually).

Abortion isn't ideal but sometimes necessary. Women needlessly dying and suffering is unacceptable. I know which is the lesser evil and which has more negative effects on the people of this country.

Ah ya but hey gotta break a few eggs ya know..

My issue is the callousness toward the errors made

gctest50

SexBobomb wrote: »

,...........

My issue is the callousness toward the errors made

What do you want ? whimpering ?

SexBobomb

gctest50 wrote: »

What do you want ? whimpering ?

No just feeling a bit disappointed with the response, voted in the belief I'd be helping people, I think everyone did but then when I read, well gotta break a few eggs, not very compassionate, I had a reaction to it. Im human

ohnonotgmail

SexBobomb wrote: »

No just feeling a bit disappointed with the response, voted in the belief I'd be helping people, I think everyone did but then when I read, well gotta break a few eggs, not very compassionate, I had a reaction to it. Im human

It was one response by one poster. I think you're overreacting.

SusieBlue

SexBobomb wrote: »

Ah ya but hey gotta break a few eggs ya know..

My issue is the callousness toward the errors made

Medical errors are par for the course. Its unfortunate and regrettable but it wouldn't make me reassess my decision to support the Yes vote and its not a good enough reason to take the choice away from other people.

As an aside I find it very interesting that you take issue with this but haven't mentioned the callousness and indifference shown towards the women effected by our draconian laws when the 8th was still in place.
That's why we changed the law and that's why we have made abortion safe and legal.
Try to focus on that instead of overreacting to one comment.

SexBobomb

SusieBlue wrote: »

I find it very interesting that you take issue with this but haven't mentioned the callousness and indifference shown towards the women effected by our draconian laws when the 8th was still in place.
That's why we changed the law and that's why we have made abortion safe and legal.
Try to focus on that instead of overreacting to one comment.

Im talking about the topic and reacting to others comments being made, I don't think I should have to start every comment outlining the history of the topic and everything Im for and against so I can have an opinion.
I was on the fence and voted to repeal but I want it to be safe but given the recent stories coming out, I question our health services ability.

I'll decide what I choose to focus on thanks, without your permission.

.......

SexBobomb wrote: »

Im talking about the topic and reacting to others comments being made, I don't think I should have to start every comment outlining the history of the topic and everything Im for and against so I can have an opinion.
I was on the fence and voted to repeal but I want it to be safe but given the recent stories coming out, I question our health services ability.

I'll decide what I choose to focus on thanks, without your permission.

Again, what happened is nothing to do with our health service since repeal.

Prior to repeal this couple would have gone to the UK for an abortion.

Im curious to understand why you refuse to see this?

uptherebels

SexBobomb wrote: »

Im talking about the topic and reacting to others comments being made, I don't think I should have to start every comment outlining the history of the topic and everything Im for and against so I can have an opinion.
I was on the fence and voted to repeal but I want it to be safe but given the recent stories coming out, I question our health services ability.

I'll decide what I choose to focus on thanks, without your permission.

Can't stop misdiagnosis regardless of our laws

SexBobomb

....... wrote: »

Again, what happened is nothing to do with our health service since repeal.

Prior to repeal this couple would have gone to the UK for an abortion.

Im curious to understand why you refuse to see this?

I understood that the couple only sought an abortion due to the child being mis-diagnosed with a fatal foetal abnormality.

.......

SexBobomb wrote: »

I understood that the couple only sought an abortion due to the child being mis-diagnosed with a fatal foetal abnormality.

Indeed.

This would have equally been the case pre-repeal.

Except they would have sought the abortion in the UK.

Do you understand this? Repeal has absolutely zero impact in this case.

SexBobomb

....... wrote: »

Indeed.

This would have equally been the case pre-repeal.

Except they would have sought the abortion in the UK.

Do you understand this? Repeal has absolutely zero impact in this case.

Yes I understand this. I'm upset that our health service failed these people with such tragic results, Do you understand this ?
Just because mis-diagnosis happens doesn't mean I should just shut up on a message board. Do you understand this?

gctest50

SexBobomb wrote: »

I understood that the couple only sought an abortion due to the child being mis-diagnosed with a fatal foetal abnormality.

Not really misdiagnosed though, Test #1 and Test #2 are a bit limited in accuracy sometimes

Test#3 two weeks later is as near 100% as you'd get

They didn't wait the two weeks for Test #3

Why did they not wait ? Time pressure maybe ?

Late geriatric pregnancy c/w baby rabies ?

ohnonotgmail

SexBobomb wrote: »

Yes I understand this. I'm upset that our health service failed these people with such tragic results, Do you understand this ?
Just because mis-diagnosis happens doesn't mean I should just shut up on a message board. Do you understand this?

you are putting it forward as a failing brought about as a result of the decision to repeal. Whether we voted to repeal or not this would still have happened and the couple would have been in a worse position that they were as they would have had to travel for their abortion.

.......

SexBobomb wrote: »

Yes I understand this. I'm upset that our health service failed these people with such tragic results, Do you understand this ?
Just because mis-diagnosis happens doesn't mean I should just shut up on a message board. Do you understand this?

Do you? So why would you have voted differently? Why would voting differently even be a consideration in this case?

SexBobomb wrote: »

If I had heard this during the campaign I would have voted differently.

Our health service was failing FAR more people pre-repeal. It was failing thousands and thousands of women annually who wanted abortion services. They would have been worse off pre-repeal.

SusieBlue

SexBobomb wrote: »

Im talking about the topic and reacting to others comments being made, I don't think I should have to start every comment outlining the history of the topic and everything Im for and against so I can have an opinion.
I was on the fence and voted to repeal but I want it to be safe but given the recent stories coming out, I question our health services ability.

I'll decide what I choose to focus on thanks, without your permission.

The history is very relevant, because you are implying something like this wasn't possible pre-repeal and that simply isn't true.
It would have happened, just not here. They would have had the added trauma of having to travel to the UK.