But that's what's at the crux of the whole debate
Is anyone here aware that abortion is one of the most traumatic experiences a woman can have, regardless of the origin of pregnanncy? It is also one of the most life-changing decisions one can make and can have enormous psychological and emotional consequences. I have learned this from a crisis pregnancy counsellor who guided me towards decision not to have an abortion. Still, many women use their right to travel and go through with it for reasons known only to them. In any case, I feel very strongly about this issue and don't think that anyone has the right to judge those who chose abortion as a last resort.
There are valid points and arguments on both sides of the debate. As somebody in favour of making abortion legal and widely available I can not speak for a rape victim, a pregnant mother whose joy was shattered by finding out that her baby hasn't a hope of surviving, a sixteen year old with great plans and positive pregnancy test or a frazzled mother of five who just can't go through it again. If we remove ourselves from the whole LIFE vs DEATH debate and take abortion for what it really is - a simple and reasonably safe medical procedure with an outcome, we may be able to look at pros and cons of it in a different light.
We need to know the extent of the 'problem'. Do we need to educate, lower the cost of contraceptives,... We also need to ensure that those who chose an abortion are given proper medical care and emotional support. Does any 'pro-lifer' want their 16 year old daughter secretly and off her own bat flying to some filthy back street abroad for an abortion???
In my opinion, there should be a requirement for a certain amount of counselling to take place prior to the procedure and it should be cost-prohibitive in terms of it being understood as a form of contraception. That would to a point contribute that even an accidental pregnancy is taken with gravity and carefully considered before any kind of decision is made or forced on an individual.
Interesting post Yachtie, not many will talk from experience. Then there is the wide public most of whom never did anything for any lady with an unwanted pregnancy other than gossip, point the finger, judge, criticize, condemn, etc.
Your post would be paramount to my suggestion for the referendum to be confined to women only.
Interesting post Yachtie, not many will talk from experience. Then there is the wide public most of whom never did anything for any lady with an unwanted pregnancy other than gossip, point the finger, judge, criticize, condemn, etc.
Your post would be paramount to my suggestion for the referendum to be confined to women only.
Sadly it's not unrealistic. Of course many people will rally around and help but many will gossip and judge and look down their noses.This is always the cheap lazy argument that some pro choice people fall back on. Just because someone is anti abortion does not mean they go around condemning people with an unwanted pregnancy and refusing to give them any assistance or help. What a victorian unrealistic view of life.
Sadly it's not unrealistic. Of course many people will rally around and help but many will gossip and judge and look down their noses.
To an extent, I am bemused by the debates of right and wrong, when does life start, who has what rights etc. – as if it makes any difference to the overall outcome. The reality is that we effectively have the same abortion laws as our near neighbour, the UK, but women have to travel to avail themselves of the service. What would change if we actually allowed abortion in this country? Would there be more or fewer abortions? More or fewer unwanted pregnancies?
I personally think there would be very little change in the number of abortions for Irish women – and I think many of the on-demand type abortions would still be carried out in the UK for privacy reasons as you can be sure that any clinic/establishment brave enough to offer abortions here would be targeted with permanent protests right outside their door. The big difference I would see would be more humane treatment of women having abortions for reasons of foetus viability or for their own medical treatment – they won’t be forced to skulk out of the country to abort a perhaps much-wanted pregnancy.
So to the NIMBY posters – what will be achieved by keeping abortion out of Ireland (other than the obvious ‘keeping abortion out of Ireland’...)? Will pregnancies be saved that otherwise wouldn’t? Do you think there will be many more abortions overall and if so from what source? Does campaigning against abortion in Ireland achieve anything practical (abortions prevented) or is it very much a not in my back yard thing?
Every necessary medical treatment/procedure is afforded to pregnant women in Ireland, and sometimes this leads to the loss of the unborn. Such treatments/procedures are not abortion.
The reality is that we effectively have the same abortion laws as our near neighbour, the UK,
Nothing that has been reported suggests, to me anyhow, that legislation reflecting the X case judgement would have made any difference in this unfortunate case.Surely after the disgraceful treatment of Savita Halappanavar in Galway it is now time to legislate for the X case.
Nothing that has been reported suggests, to me anyhow, that legislation reflecting the X case judgement would have made any difference in this unfortunate case.
Surely after the disgraceful treatment of Savita Halappanavar in Galway it is now time to legislate for the X case.
http://www.independent.ie/national-...d-after-hospital-denied-abortion-3293842.html
Would the consultant in this case have had to refer this issue to an ethics committee? It seems to me that in this instance the well being of a foetus that would not survive outside the womb in any event was given priority over a normally healthy woman, this on every possible level is wrong.
The Core Vision of GUH was not met here.
Core Value
"The patient is our core reason for being"
The only patient GUH had was the mother.
Of course, that would make eminent sense. No surprise, though, to see the usual suspects straight out exploiting this sad case to push their abortion agenda, via our malleable liberal media.Should we not wait for all the facts to be disclosed before concluding that the poor woman in this tragic case was treated disgracefully. The hospital has an awful lot of questions to answer but they should be allowed answer them first.
If that is true, then any legislation should go as far beyond the X case as is necessary to ensure this doesn’t happen again. I think there would be a much higher acceptance of legislation (and/or a further referendum if needed) following this case.Nothing that has been reported suggests, to me anyhow, that legislation reflecting the X case judgement would have made any difference in this unfortunate case.
The unfortunate aspect of this case is that there was a risk to the mother but it wasn’t substantial enough to warrant an earlier removal of the dying foetus – and I’m sure the doctors followed the medical guidelines and the law. Lots of women go through miscarriages every year and the management is often as reported here – wait for the foetus to die and then remove the uterus contents if necessary. Leaving the uterus open to infection for days increases the risk but in reality it is a very small risk to the mother’s life. In my view, once the foetus is no longer viable, the mother’s life, health and mental well-being should assume absolute 100% priority – even a 1 in a million chance of something bad happening should take precedence over a soon-to-die foetus....abortion is permitted in Ireland under the Constitution in circumstances where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother. ..
In my view, once the foetus is no longer viable, the mother’s life, health and mental well-being should assume absolute 100% priority – even a 1 in a million chance of something bad happening should take precedence over a soon-to-die foetus.]
I think both courts refer to 'real and substantial risk to the life' only. In this case there was no real and substantial risk (there was a real but small risk) so as michaelm points, legislating per the X case may not do enough. As I said above, I would like to see an extension to 100% absolute priority of the mother's life, health and mental well-being when the foetus is no longer viable - so no risk, no matter how small, is acceptable.That might be your view, and the view of the Supreme Court, and the EU Human Rights Court, but it is not legislated for.
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?