The NMH at St. Vincents

DS86DS

eviltwin wrote: »

Best medical decisions should be based on best practice and not on what the Bible says

Then go to the hospital based on a secular healthcare plan, and not the one based on what the bible says.

Nobody is been forced to attend the hospital run by a religious order.

DS86DS

Cake of Tremendous Power wrote: »

It's a hospital, not a corner shop. They're in short supply and they shouldn't be run by any group with an agenda outside of providing the best care possible for the citizens of Ireland.

If I am out in the middle of the Utah desert and get bitten by a poisonous snake......if my closest bet for a healthy recovery is to attend a Mormon hospital, then I will do just that.

In that instance I don't care about ideological differences, or if they base some of their practices on the writings of Joseph Smith.

I just want to get better, and if that means abiding by the rules in the Mormon run hospital, then so be it.

DS86DS

DS86DS wrote: »

If I am out in the middle of the Utah desert and get bitten by a poisonous snake......if my closest bet for a healthy recovery is to attend a Mormon hospital, then I will do just that.

In that instance I don't care about ideological differences, or if they base some of their practices on the writings of Joseph Smith.

I just want to get better, and if that means abiding by the rules in the Mormon run hospital, then so be it.

A hospital that was built for the taxpayers by the taxpayers should be completely free from the influence of any religious group regardless of whether their nuns or Mormons or anyone else with an agenda that can potentially influence policies, especially when they have an awful record of abusing their power in the past.

NuMarvel

DS86DS wrote: »

If I am out in the middle of the Utah desert and get bitten by a poisonous snake......if my closest bet for a healthy recovery is to attend a Mormon hospital, then I will do just that.

In that instance I don't care about ideological differences, or if they base some of their practices on the writings of Joseph Smith.

I just want to get better, and if that means abiding by the rules in the Mormon run hospital, then so be it.

And if their rules are that they may not treat snake bites, even though they are a publicly funded hospital, then what? Keep traveling until you find a hospital that will treat, and hope you don't pass out or die before then?

The concept is simple; the public has a right to expect that publicly funded hospitals offer services based on clinical need and appropriateness, not ethos or personal beliefs.

volchitsa

DS86DS wrote: »

If I am out in the middle of the Utah desert and get bitten by a poisonous snake......if my closest bet for a healthy recovery is to attend a Mormon hospital, then I will do just that.

In that instance I don't care about ideological differences, or if they base some of their practices on the writings of Joseph Smith.

I just want to get better, and if that means abiding by the rules in the Mormon run hospital, then so be it.

I don't know what Mormons do, but I know Jehovah's Winesses refuse all blood transfusions. Would you be happy to have your injuries treated by them after a road accident if you were in danger of bleeding out?

jimd2

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

troll

Unfortunately the truth hurts.:)

ted1

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

How do you define top hospital?

Is it still "top" if you're looking for a sterilisation or an abortion?

Is it funded by taxpayers but controlled by nuns or priests?

Those two procedures will be available, this has bring clarified.

, although my understanding is that a gp can administer the tablets for an abortion.

I don’t define top hospitals patients and the medical profession do. And Vincent’s is the top, much higher than state run hospitals.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

DS86DS wrote: »

Well why shouldn't they? This is a majority Roman Catholic country, and the religious orders have been running much of our healthcare system to a good standard when the state has been doing a terrible job.

Does it really matter who runs a hospital if you are been provided with good and professional healthcare that will heal the patient?

The solution is simple, if the concept is offensive to you, then use or go to another hospital.

It matters when their religious beliefs are deemed more important than my health. Do you know that the mater hospital won’t prescribe the pill to women? Do you honestly think the National maternity hospital - the biggest in the country - will perform abortions, advise mothers on contraception or sterilize women of children bearing age upon request? Like **** they will. There’s a reason why they’re fighting to rule the National maternity hospital. I think women suffered enough with anti natal care and post natal care at the hands of the nuns, thanks.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

And DS86DS, I’d like to add that I should be well within my rights to use that hospital as it’s government (Aka our tax monies) funded thus public owned, not church funded. Thank you. ��

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

The Catholic Church has no business in owning a hospital paid for by the state. Healthcare needs to be strictly secular in every way. Otherwise, why not hand the ownership over to whatever Muslim sect has the biggest presence in the country? Or the Church of Ireland?

The Catholic Church has a terrible record with regard to health and education since the foundation of the state. They need to step away from both.

i thought this was over with. are they still to own the new hospital? ffs

Mrsmum

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

The Catholic Church has no business in owning a hospital paid for by the state. Healthcare needs to be strictly secular in every way. Otherwise, why not hand the ownership over to whatever Muslim sect has the biggest presence in the country? Or the Church of Ireland?

The Catholic Church has a terrible record with regard to health and education since the foundation of the state. They need to step away from both.

Just for balance, regarding education, thousands. myself included, got a fabulous education from the nuns. They were highly progressive with the facilities and highly ambitious for our further education and careers. Just saying.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Mrsmum wrote: »

[/B]

Just for balance, regarding education, thousands. myself included, got a fabulous education from the nuns. They were highly progressive with the facilities and highly ambitious for our further education and careers. Just saying.

A nun in the late 70s knocked an unmarried pregnant student (16/17 years old) down the stairs of the local catholic secondary school, she lost the baby. That is well known in my town.

conorhal

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Apologies for late notice, crazy busy week. Non-professional protesters have to fit in jobs and looking after kids around their activism


#MakeNMHOurs march tomorrow, Sat 8th 2pm at Dublin Spire

There is no way we will accept a €350m public hospital going under the control of a "trust" like the nuns and "brothers" used to secure their assets while insulating themselves from the consequences of their abuses.

Public hospital - public ownership. No more handing over public assets to unaccountable "trusts".

No promises as to "ethos" can be believed, and no ownership of a hospital built from the ground up by taxpayers other than by taxpayers is acceptable.

If we want to ensure that the new maternity hospital fully respects the reproductive rights of women - we have to make this happen. The government are happy to hand it over to nuns, who claim they have "stepped back" from healthcare but they still own the site, the government will not own the hospital it pays to build(!!) and the Vatican (through the articles of association of the charitable trust of the nuns) effectively owns the site and claim to control what can happen on that site.

No more.

It stops. Now.

Nope, it only starts now. Unless you've failed to notice that government policy over the past two decades has largely been to divest itself of control, and thus responsibility, for providing public services, be that making sure your water is fit to drink or child protection is effective.
They are doggedly determined to have responsibility for little more then collecting your cash and then quickly handing it off to a variety of quangos, NGO's and trusts that they can then blame for any failings in the provision of those services because they are a step removed from any scandal, and that suits our politicians just fine.

Hotblack Desiato

DS86DS wrote: »

Then go to the hospital based on a secular healthcare plan, and not the one based on what the bible says.

Nobody is been forced to attend the hospital run by a religious order.

In Ireland they are

and our taxes should not fund religious dogma, the constitution says so

Hotblack Desiato

jimd2 wrote: »

Unfortunately the truth hurts.:)

Maybe your life revolves around the pub mate, mine doesn't.

I'm not organising the event. If you're happy to have nuns controlling healthcare funded by taxpayers, then don't go.

Hotblack Desiato

volchitsa wrote: »

I don't know what Mormons do, but I know Jehovah's Winesses refuse all blood transfusions. Would you be happy to have your injuries treated by them after a road accident if you were in danger of bleeding out?

Of course not. If it doesn't involve uteruses then religion needs to be kept out of the equation... :rolleyes:

gctest50

Mrsmum wrote: »

[/B]

Just for balance, regarding education, thousands. myself included, got a fabulous education from the nuns. They were highly progressive with the facilities and highly ambitious for our further education and careers. Just saying.

What was that other crowd again that used to dress in black and tell people what to do ?

I'd reckon they gave a fabulous education too


ah yeah

Hotblack Desiato

ted1 wrote: »

Those two procedures will be available, this has bring clarified.

, although my understanding is that a gp can administer the tablets for an abortion.

I don’t define top hospitals patients and the medical profession do. And Vincent’s is the top, much higher than state run hospitals.

The recent history of religious orders in Ireland, putting protecting their assets above anything else including vulnerable people and kids, tells you everything you need to know.

It's all about money and power with that lot, including setting up fake "trusts" to shield their assets from victims and the state

You can't trust a "trust", and lying for Jesus is called "mental reservation".

gctest50

Can't trust nuns :

this one all happy getting an autograph :

Mad_maxx

Cake of Tremendous Power wrote: »

A hospital that was built for the taxpayers by the taxpayers should be completely free from the influence of any religious group regardless of whether their nuns or Mormons or anyone else with an agenda that can potentially influence policies, especially when they have an awful record of abusing their power in the past.

Does that principal extend to secular group's who have a lobbying agenda?

markodaly

eviltwin wrote: »

Best medical decisions should be based on best practice and not on what the Bible says

Well that is a stupid Trump like argument as teaching hospitals under the control of religious orders did not reference the bible to find out how to fix a broken leg.

uptherebels

DS86DS wrote: »

Then go to the hospital based on a secular healthcare plan, and not the one based on what the bible says.

Nobody is been forced to attend the hospital run by a religious order.

Why doesn't that religious order, build,staff and fund a religious hospital of their own? 1. it's patrons/patients would be limited and wouldn't be able to be self sufficient.
2. Money only flows one way in the church .
3. They wouldn't be able to force their beliefs on others.

You realise you want people to not go to state funded hospitals? The hospitals that are there for the whole population, not just for the pushing of a church agenda.

uptherebels

markodaly wrote: »

Well that is a stupid Trump like argument as teaching hospitals under the control of religious orders did not reference the bible to find out how to fix a broken leg.

Nice attempt to deflect. There isn't much religious interpretation on fixing a leg as there is no agenda they can push.
Misunderstanding the problem and deflection....that you Don?

markodaly

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

The Catholic Church has a terrible record with regard to health and education since the foundation of the state. They need to step away from both.

Quite a claim since the only people providing both for until about the 1950's was the church.

Did you know the Dept. of Social welfare did not even exist until the 1940's? Guess who was stepping into the breach, warts and all. People urgently need a history lesson.

I think your post should be say "The Catholic Church Irish State has a terrible record with regard to health and education since the foundation of the state. They need to step away from both."

markodaly

uptherebels wrote: »

Nice attempt to deflect. There isn't much religious interpretation on fixing a leg as there is no agenda they can push.
Misunderstanding the problem and deflection....that you Don?

It is not I who puts forward the argument that the bible is actually referenced as a medical manual. Run along now.

Coillte_Bhoy

markodaly wrote: »

Quite a claim since the only people providing both for until about the 1950's was the church.

Did you know the Dept. of Social welfare did not even exist until the 1940's? Guess who was stepping into the breach, warts and all. People urgently need a history lesson.

I think your post should be say "The Catholic Church Irish State has a terrible record with regard to health and education since the foundation of the state. They need to step away from both."

You seem to be suggesting that there was no state system of social welfare prior to the Dept being established. Obviously thats completely untrue.

gctest50

markodaly wrote: »

Quite a claim since the only people providing both for until about the 1950's was the church.

Did you know the Dept. of Social welfare did not even exist until the 1940's? Guess who was stepping into the breach, warts and all. People urgently need a history lesson.

.......

Done that way on purpose by DeValera and his paedo buddy Fr John Charles McQuaid

eviltwin

markodaly wrote: »

Well that is a stupid Trump like argument as teaching hospitals under the control of religious orders did not reference the bible to find out how to fix a broken leg.

We are talking about a Maternity And Womens hospital, I think my point is obvious enough :rolleyes:

conorhal

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

You seem to be suggesting that there was no state system of social welfare prior to the Dept being established. Obviously thats completely untrue.

It's as close to true as can be. My father grew up on a remote rural farm that still had a couple stone huts with earth floors (akin to what you'd see on Skellig Micheal) at the end of the field when I was a child. I couldn't grasp as a child that people LIVED in these tiny huts huddled around an open fire, like they were medieval serfs (they were still occupied up until the 30s). You couldn't grasp the level of poverty that existed and there was nothing for these folks.

As for what state supports there were. My great-grandmother was born in a tenement on Holles St. In her declining years she came to live with my gran (in the 60's) and she would often seek reassurance from my mother that she'd 'never let them pack her old grandma off to the union' or poorhouse where the destitute ended up in Victorian conditions. She had grown up in extreme poverty and like most that did at the time, lived in terror of the 'union' and the fate of those unfortunates that ended up there.
So even what welfare there was available, people didn't want to avail of unless utterly destitute.