The NMH at St. Vincents

lawred2

pilly wrote: »

Does anyone on here genuinely think that when abortion is passed in Ireland that the members of the order who will have a majority on the board are going to be okay with that?

I listened to Rhona Mahoney on RTE this morning and she came across as very arrogant and someone who just wants this hospital built at any cost, in fact she as much as said that it HAS to be built.

I actually don't agree that celibate people (women or men), have any role to play in a maternity/gynaecology hospital, makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

There was a lot to be said for the nuns back in the day running general hospitals as they certainly knew how to run a tight ship but there has never and will never be a case for them having any hand, act or part in maternity/gynaecology hospitals. NEVER.

Was with you until the celibacy bit.

Glenster

The Nuns have earned a 300m transfer from the taxpayer.

They deserve it. For all their hard work.

pilly

osarusan wrote: »

Celibate people?

Surely it's the religious bent behind the celibacy that is the issue?

Plenty of involuntary celibates around the place!

I couldn't care less if they are celibate or not. I couldn't even care less if they are religious or not. All I care is that there is no religious influence on the running of the hospital.

In a way yes it's about the religion but I'm not a catholic hater so I was looking at it from a more practical view.

Yes there are plenty of involuntary celibates around the place, they usually aren't people who've never had a relationship in their lives.

What I'm trying to say is I've never seen how anyone who has never had a sexual relationship can advice on matters relating to birth, reproduction etc.

I've the same view on these so called marriage preparation courses.

I'm not prepared to say it's all about the catholic church because I don't believe that, I believe it's about the people in it not having enough life experience to be involved in certain issues.

spakman

spakman wrote: »

The state should have offered them a fair price for the land (preferably minus the sum outstanding to the redress scheme) and if that was refused, then CPO.

It would be more expensive but it would be 100% state owned, and we wouldn't be beholdened to a 3rd party for a vital piece of national healthcare infrastructure.

kylith wrote: »

As taxpayers we were possibly getting the land for free, but then we were effectively setting fire to at least €150m, many times the cost of the land, by gifting the finished hospital to SVHG. As well as footing the bill for the running of the hospital in perpetuity.

If the religious orders want to impose their ethos on a hospital they can build, staff, and maintain it themselves.

Hospitals and schools should be secular and owned by the state, not handed over to private groups with their own interests.

Agreed. There are acres and acres of land around St Vincent's which are not zoned for housing and could be easily subject to a CPO (golf course vs. vital maternity hospital anyone?) not to mention the site itself.

So yes, the short term loss is completely outstripped by the long-term savings ... short sighted government budgeting strikes again.

And you can forget about any offset of the cost of the land against the redress scheme since, in their wisdom, the Department of Education agreed to pay the church's legal costs for the Ryan Commission which was equivalent to the €3m which remained to be paid.

http://www.thejournal.ie/national-maternity-hospital-independence-3357876-Apr2017/

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/any-attempt-to-change-maternity-hospital-deal-will-scupper-it-1.3058698

lawred2 wrote: »

[Kearns and Mahony] have come across as being naive and easily fooled at best or bought and sold and not to be trusted at worst.

Agreed again. There are several issues at stake (cost, ethos and location). Mahony was interviewed on the radio this morning and while she insisted the new hospital would not have a catholic ethos, she has no interest in addressing in the other issues.

In the meantime, the Bishop of Elphin is quoted as saying that "any healthcare organisation bearing the name Catholic… has a special responsibility to Catholic teachings…" ... so there's that.

And finally, as nice as it is for Kearns to try to reassure us that the will hospital will operate in accordance with the law of the land, the law of OUR land allows a religious, educational or medical institution which is under the direction or control of a body established for religious purposes to discriminate against people they feel will not maintain the religious ethos of the institution.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/new-national-maternity-hospital-will-not-be-run-by-nuns-1.3061103

Misguided1

pilly wrote: »

What I'm trying to say is I've never seen how anyone who has never had a sexual relationship can advice on matters relating to birth, reproduction etc.

So by the same logic anyone who has not given birth, reproduced etc. can't advise on these matters either and should work in in a maternity hospital. A 13 year old can have a sexual relationship. It doesn't qualify them to advise on birth and reproduction and ultimately work in a maternity hospital.

Don't get me wrong, the nun's owning the hospital thing is absolutely nuts but this particular argument is equally nuts.

Boggy Turf

rainbow kirby wrote: »

So wrong on so many levels. The RCC in general, and nuns who were involved in the ill-treatment of the women and children of this country in particular, shouldn't be allowed within a million miles of the maternity services.

Nothing positive for women can come from this.

+1000

Why haven't the nuns paid their redress costs?? I mean they got a very very generous deal from FF at the time.

VinLieger

pilly wrote: »

What I'm trying to say is I've never seen how anyone who has never had a sexual relationship can advice on matters relating to birth, reproduction etc.

Yeah that makes no sense..... i think your confusing the reasoning that a priest bizarrely has to give couples marriage courses before a couple can get married in a church.

boombang

I was listening to Dr Mahony on Morning Ireland today, I thought she really sounded like a politician. She didn't want to answer questions directly and was borderline aggressive in her tone. One thing that really struck me with the language used was that services would be offered without any distinction between groups (I can't find the quote now unfortunately). It struck me that's it's not about difference between groups of different faith, but more that no limit should be placed on services due to faith of those involved in management.

Later statements seem to assert that there would be no religious control. However, I would like to see this formalised into a written charter. there could yet be backsliding on commitments in the future.

gctest50

boombang wrote: »

.... One thing that really struck me with the language used was that services would be offered without any distinction between groups .........

That's not the problem though

It'll be like bringing your car to a mechanic who services Audi,BMW,Toyota.....anything really.

But he won't use synthetic oil because it's not natural

Then your car dies

Glenster

Misguided1 wrote: »

So by the same logic anyone who has not given birth, reproduced etc. can't advise on these matters either and should work in in a maternity hospital. A 13 year old can have a sexual relationship. It doesn't qualify them to advise on birth and reproduction and ultimately work in a maternity hospital.

Don't get me wrong, the nun's owning the hospital thing is absolutely nuts but this particular argument is equally nuts.

Its different.

I'd take driving advice from a mechanic, even if he didn't drive himself, because he knows how a car works.

I wouldn't take driving advice of just some guy who'd never driven just because he'd been given training by a bunch of other guys who've never driven.

particularly if he believed that driving was ineffably and inextricably linked to an imagined god. And that god had decreed a bunch of ancillary rules to driving 5000 years ago, before cars even existed.

lawred2

Even if clinical independence is actually delivered upon - the issue of a publicly funded hospital being handed to a private voluntary hospital group remains..

groovyg

Broadsheet did a piece on the agreement earlier
How Deal Leaves Doors Open For Church Control
Interesting read

lawred2

groovyg wrote: »

Broadsheet did a piece on the agreement earlier
How Deal Leaves Doors Open For Church Control
Interesting read

good grief..

this agreement has more holes than a sieve

Is this the best our highly paid civil servants could come up with?

jmayo

boombang wrote: »

I was listening to Dr Mahony on Morning Ireland today, I thought she really sounded like a politician.

She didn't get to where she is just on pure ability without playing some politics.

Where did that privately funded ?45k top up to her ?236,000 salary come from again ?

Maybe it is time that is cleared up ?

boombang

gctest50 wrote: »

That's not the problem though

It'll be like bringing your car to a mechanic who services Audi,BMW,Toyota.....anything really.

But he won't use synthetic oil because it's not natural

Then your car dies

Exactly, that was the point I was trying to make. I didn't see why they made the point that they would treat all women equally. That should be taken for granted. It's more that they need to guarantee to treat them adequately is at issue.

The statement about equal treatment smacked of obfuscation.

groovyg

lawred2 wrote: »

good grief..

this agreement has more holes than a sieve

yeah that triple lock term which was bandied about alot last week doesn't seem so secure. Lots of people have triple lock systems on their front and back doors but doesn't stop the burglar from getting in.

pilly

Misguided1 wrote: »

So by the same logic anyone who has not given birth, reproduced etc. can't advise on these matters either and should work in in a maternity hospital. A 13 year old can have a sexual relationship. It doesn't qualify them to advise on birth and reproduction and ultimately work in a maternity hospital.

Don't get me wrong, the nun's owning the hospital thing is absolutely nuts but this particular argument is equally nuts.

Ah people are just deliberately misconstruing what I'm trying to say now and maybe I'm not saying it right.

Does someone who has no real life experience sound better?

All I'm trying to do it explain how someone can disagree with this whole thing without being a hater of the whole church.

Your analogy of a 13 year old is just silly because a 13 year old wouldn't be on the board of any hospital.

Parchment

I think its a fair argument - its like priest preaching from the pulpit about how to have a happy marriage. They have no clue.

Nuns have no clue about many of the situations that will bring a woman to a maternity hospital as they dont have sex or romantic/intimate relationships. A doctor who is celibate and has never had a relationship can advise a woman....as they are a qualified doctor.

Misguided1

Parchment wrote: »

I think its a fair argument - its like priest preaching from the pulpit about how to have a happy marriage. They have no clue.

Nuns have no clue about many of the situations that will bring a woman to a maternity hospital as they dont have sex or romantic/intimate relationships. A doctor who is celibate and has never had a relationship can advise a woman....as they are a qualified doctor.

There is an underlying assumption that priests and nuns have always been celibate. Many are not/were not so I just don't see that as a strong argument against them owning the maternity hospital.

Their treatment of women/mothers/babies in the past is enough to make the whole idea an absolute travesty.

pilly

Misguided1 wrote: »

There is an underlying assumption that priests and nuns have always been celibate. Many are not/were not so I just don't see that as a strong argument against them owning the maternity hospital.

Their treatment of women/mothers/babies in the past is enough to make the whole idea an absolute travesty.

Now you're going into different territory altogether when you talk about the ones that aren't celibate.

Parchment

Misguided1 wrote: »

There is an underlying assumption that priests and nuns have always been celibate. Many are not/were not so I just don't see that as a strong argument against them owning the maternity hospital.

Their treatment of women/mothers/babies in the past is enough to make the whole idea an absolute travesty.

I would say a very small % went from "normal" life to becoming a nun/priest. Anyway im not using it as the argument against them owning a maternity hospital - i think its part of numerous reasons why they should not.

I totally agree with you that they should not be allow next or near the hospital.

VinLieger

Parchment wrote: »

I think its a fair argument - its like priest preaching from the pulpit about how to have a happy marriage. They have no clue.

Nuns have no clue about many of the situations that will bring a woman to a maternity hospital as they dont have sex or romantic/intimate relationships. A doctor who is celibate and has never had a relationship can advise a woman....as they are a qualified doctor.

The argument that cus they haven't experienced sex or ever given birth is completely stupid as it discounts any medical training they have had and conversely means that anyone who has given birth but lacks any medical training is using your argument therefore more qualified to treat pregnant women????

Are you aware that the nuns who work in hospitals have had medical training?

Parchment

VinLieger wrote: »

The argument that cus they haven't experienced sex or ever given birth is completely stupid as it discounts any medical training they have had and conversely means that anyone who has given birth but lacks any medical training is using your argument therefore more qualified to treat pregnant women????

Are you aware that the nuns who work in hospitals have had medical training?

So they are doctors not nuns?

VinLieger

Parchment wrote: »

So they are doctors not nuns?

Have you ever heard of nurses and midwives?

Parchment

VinLieger wrote: »

Have you ever heard of nurses and midwives?

I have indeed but in 10 years of working in a large regional hospital i have never heard of or encountered a nun working in any medical capacity. I'm sure this was far more common 40 years ago but now not so much.

If nuns own and run this hospital - its going to be with a religious bias.

Mrs OBumble

Parchment wrote: »

So they are doctors not nuns?

Some nuns are also doctors.

Some nuns are also nurses, midwives, adminostrators, cleaners etc.

Just cos someone is a nun doesn't mean they cannot work in a regular job.

Mrs OBumble

Parchment wrote: »

I would say a very small % went from "normal" life to becoming a nun/priest. .

Where do you think they came from - Mars?

Parchment

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Some nuns are also doctors.

Some nuns are also nurses, midwives, adminostrators, cleaners etc.

Just cos someone is a nun doesn't mean they cannot work in a regular job.

They generally don't though do they? Im 33 and there was one old nun who subbed for teachers if they were out sick in my convent school. That was it.

Like i said - it was more common for them to have jobs before but now there are hardly any nuns working in an external capacity.

I was speaking about nuns running and owning the hospital - they, as a group have a religious bias that a group of investors etc will not have. If a bunch of Mormons ran/owned a hospital they would also have a bias. Hospitals in Ireland need to be secular - especially maternity hospitals.

VinLieger

Parchment wrote: »

I have indeed but in 10 years of working in a large regional hospital i have never heard of or encountered a nun working in any medical capacity. I'm sure this was far more common 40 years ago but now not so much.

If nuns own and run this hospital - its going to be with a religious bias.

I agree nuns should not be in control of the hospital however completely discounting them if they have medical training as being able to treat patients is just petty to say the least.

And yes there are still nuns who actively work in the medical profession

Parchment

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Where do you think they came from - Mars?

Most people entered the orders/seminary at a young age. I know its far more common for people to leave at an older age.

A friends mother was a nun for 4 years upon leaving school but then left the order and became a mother/wife. Going the opposite way is far less common.