You can go ahead and delete this nonsense and think before you post about me again in future.
Methinks bullbars may have some jesuitical training.....
My OH returned from Ireland yesterday, very depressing, relations mentioning that 'Savita's husband is in it for the money.' I suspect if Savita's husband were Irish we wouldn't be hearing this.
It is not an issue for women, it is a decision for society to make. At present that answer is no, but exceptions for medical reasons can be made.Women need it to be a yes or no answer.
Correct. I don’t know the details that case therefore it is not a yes/no answer.You will not answer my question because I think I have not answered your two questions above, is that correct? .
You’ve used that case, and others, as an argument to permit abortion but can’t give simple details on the case, why would you do that indeed.But you've posted two questions that cannot be answered. Why would you do that?
It is relevant. That case is what started this debate and is what some in the pre-choice groups have latched on to as a case for permitting abortion without knowing the details.The first question is about Savita in Galway. It's not actually relevant whether her life was in jeopardy due to the pregnancy, even if the medical finding now are that she would have died from an infection anyway is not the point.
If the pregnancy is not a risk to her life then she cannot have a termination. How is this still confusing to you?What is important is that any women in Ireland, whose pregnancy may or may not be causing her a risk to her life,.., does not know if she can get a termination.
..does not know who will decide, who can decide, does not know if the doctor deciding will not ever decide in her favour because of his own moral code or because he's afraid firstly of the law and secondly of the medical council guidelines....
Is this a fact or just your “medical” opinion.And it's nearly impossible to be 100% accurate that it is a risk to her life in certain circumstances, even a minute risk of less than 1%.
Correct, she cannot act outside the law off her own bat. Emotion and rationality do not good bedfellows make.Furthermore the woman has no say whatsoever in the termination decision, she has a say over not terminating but has no say whatsoever about what she considers best for herself.
What on earth do you mean by “where do you measure 'risk to life.”The expert groups report never mentions a woman's choice for termination. It doesn't exist in any circumstances in Ireland unless her life is at risk but in some cases not even then because where do you measure 'risk to life.'
Could you rephrase this as it makes no sense.Put it another way. If in all the births in Ireland in the last 10 years that only one woman was at that risk, how would you put that into law. Who would I as another human being be allowed to judge that because that risk is so low that it is statistically non existant. Indeed why should I as a woman who may be at risk ever have to run that risk. And why on earth should other people actually make that decision for me.
It’s not a cop out, I’m looking for further detail on cases you’ve thrown up as clear reasons we should permit terminations in Ireland, yet you can’t answer basic details on them so I can make an informed answer on the case YOU demanded (twice) and answer on.For your second question what are you referring to? And then I'll try and answer that. Knowing that I cannot answer either question fully, because maybe no one can actually. But if that means you won't answer my question I find that a cop out from you if you don't mind me saying so.
Even apart from the fact that her life was in jeopardy, which in itself is reason enough for termination, Savita's cervix, according to her husband, was completely dilated and the pregnancy was not viable, therefore a termination should have been undertaken immediately instead of allowing her to suffer awaiting a spontaneous abortion.Women need it to be a yes or no answer.
The first question is about Savita in Galway. It's not actually relevant whether her life was in jeopardy due to the pregnancy, even if the medical finding now are that she would have died from an infection anyway is not the point.
Couldn't agree more.What is important is that any women in Ireland, whose pregnancy may or may not be causing her a risk to her life, and it's nearly impossible to be 100% accurate that it is a risk to her life in certain circumstances, even a minute risk of less than 1%, does not know if she can get a termination, does not know who will decide, who can decide, does not know if the doctor deciding will not ever decide in her favour because of his own moral code or because he's afraid firstly of the law and secondly of the medical council guidelines. Furthermore the woman has no say whatsoever in the termination decision, she has a say over not terminating but has no say whatsoever about what she considers best for herself. The expert groups report never mentions a woman's choice for termination. It doesn't exist in any circumstances in Ireland unless her life is at risk but in some cases not even then because where do you measure 'risk to life.'
Put it another way. If in all the births in Ireland in the last 10 years that only one woman was at that risk, how would you put that into law. Who would I as another human being be allowed to judge that because that risk is so low that it is statistically non existant. Indeed why should I as a woman who may be at risk ever have to run that risk. And why on earth should other people actually make that decision for me.
It is an issue for women and it's not for society to decide where the pregnancy is not viable or the mother's life is at risk.It is not an issue for women, it is a decision for society to make.
It is an issue for women and it's not for society to decide where the pregnancy is not viable or the mother's life is at risk.
They should - but it should be proportionate to the time and pain that a man has creating a child compared to the amount of time and pain a woman goes through.
This is according to what you have heard through the media what her husbands opininion is. You or I do not know this.Even apart from the fact that her life was in jeopardy, which in itself is reason enough for termination, Savita's cervix, according to her husband, was completely dilated and the pregnancy was not viable, therefore a termination should have been undertaken immediately instead of allowing her to suffer awaiting a spontaneous abortion.
That is not the issue I would like to see debated/voted on by society. The issue that soceity, I think, should have a say on is pro-life V pro choice.It is an issue for women and it's not for society to decide where the pregnancy is not viable or the mother's life is at risk.
Completely agree on that Bronte, some sinister groups are coming to the fore again with ads in the papers, cold calls, billboard posters and so on. The WIKI page on Youth Defence doesn't paint a very favourable picture of the founders (brother of one of the founders was in a Republican paramilitary group). Also another member (presumably daughter of the founders) Íde Nic Mhathúna is a member of Coir. I would also be interested in who funds both these organisations. Interesting article [broken link removed] on the Nic Mhathúna clan.
I have discussed the Savita case with quite a range of people so far and I haven't heard anyone saying or implying anything bad about Praveen or his motives.
It is not an issue for women, it is a decision for society to make.
.
Currently the Irish people value the life of the unborn,
. The issue that soceity, I think, should have a say on is pro-life V pro choice.
Can that be applied to child support after the fact also?
This information came from the interview with Praveen broadcast on 14th November on RTE's Primetime during which he states, that the medical staff confirmed she was miscarrying 17 weeks into her pregnancy, her cervix was completely dilated, thus making the pregnancy unviable.This is according to what you have heard through the media what her husbands opininion is. You or I do not know this.
If the pregnancy is not a risk to her life then she cannot have a termination. How is this still confusing to you?
If it is a risk a termination may be permitted.
What on earth do you mean by “where do you measure 'risk to life.”
.
Can that be applied to child support after the fact also?
What an utterly ridiculous statement.
Mr Man asks whether men should have any say on this topic.
They should - but it should be proportionate to the time and pain that a man has creating a child compared to the amount of time and pain a woman goes through.
Why. If the male populace have no say in the life of the child why should they be compelled to make an input after.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?