To feel glad/relieved Ireland is voting through Abortion Bill(672 Posts)
Its only a bare minimum - in the case of a woman's life being threatened - but it is also a massive sea change, on this sensitive issue. The vote in the Lower House was 127:31.
(Mary Kenny wrote very interestingly in the Times about it - saying that although the Church has played a role, much of the opposition was to do with Ireland's fear of "depopulation". Partly because of Ireland's history - famine, mass emigration. But also due to a rural pro-natalist mindset. In agricultural communities another child is "another pair of hands". In cities, another child is "another mouth to feed".)
ot is only in hugely limited circumstances and it is disgraceful that a modern democracy has such draconian laws in place. it is a pity the EU didnt make abortion rights a condition of Ireland's entry.
It's a baby step forward but not even close to being enough.
I feel so much for the campaigners for Termination For Medical Reasons (TFMR) in particular. They are going to keep fighting. I think it will take another European court case to force the government's hand though.
One good thing is that FG hasn't actually suffered that much politically as a result of this though. The vast majority of people are behind them and I think they know that. The conservative pro-life movement just doesn't have the traction and power it used to and hopefully the politicians will bear that in mind in the future and not be such bloody cowards.
Mary Kenny might have a point if we were all still working the land. The position on abortion is vastly at odds with Ireland's historically poor record on abuse and mistreatment of children, especially poor and disabled ones. The media is incredibly biased (pro life voices always get to speak first and at length), and it is very difficult to be publicly pro choice.
The Bill is a ridiculous fudge, which gives something small with one hand and takes away with the other. The refusal to even consider fatal foetal abnormality is in humane (as in the D case), especially given the numbers of women aged 35+ travelling to UK for abortions. There for the grace of god...
I really don't think the bill is anything to celebrate.
The abortion bill doesn't go far enough, it's extremely limited.
I agree with everything ComposHat has said.
I live in Ireland, our abortion debate is an utter disgrace it has dragged on for decades.
ARealDame can you link Mary Kenny's article
I actively despise her!!!
It's not enough. I'm from Northern Ireland and some of the "anti" arguments that come out are just embarrassing.
It puts women in a terrible position.
They're happy to try and force a woman to give birth and be a mother but there's no mention of the father having any significant life changing responsibility forced on them in this way.
Sorry Highbrow, I have never managed to do links! Anyway, as its in The Times, which you have to pay for, I probably wouldn't be able to.
But it was an interesting article if you manage to see it, though very short.
I found that article interesting perhaps because I have some Irish relatives who are very "forward-looking" and modern on many sexual issues, and are not driven by religion either. However, they have very strong views on abortion, and Mary Kenny's article made this more understandable for me, because it gave it a wider historical context, so I found it really helpful.
Of course access to abortion will be extremely limited. Amazingly, it does not include for example cases of rape. However, it does allow abortion for those cases "where there is real and substantial risk to the life of the mother, including suicide".
p.s. I would like to point out there is no legal right to abortion in the UK either. It has to be approved by two medical doctors, who must agree that the woman is in such circumstances that she should be allowed to have one.
I think it is utterly pathetic, and the restrictions on things like obtaining an abortion in threatened suicide are designed to make it almost impossible. It's still going to keep a situation where thousands of desperate women have to travel abroad (if they are lucky enough to afford it) or risk buying abortion pills online.
A deeply misogynistic state imo.
And I think it is just a start, so for that reason I feel some sense of a positive development. I would have been interested to hear the debate that took place in Ireland leading up to it, Piano - though on the other hand, I get what you're saying ... it might have been hard to listen to ...
It's a start, admittedly a tiny one and a shamefully late one but a positive one nonetheless.
I must remember to pop over to the Irish Times website and see what Breda O'Brien's hellfire and brimstone reaction has been. I do have a little thrill knowing her and her Iona cronies must be crushed by this.
I definitely agree that Ireland's archaic abortion laws are something to be deeply ashamed of.
A deeply misogynistic state
I agree and one of the reasons I've never wanted to visit.
nice. Condemn an entire country because of the fucked up laws on one issue. I'm sure I could find plenty to despise in your laws (denying illness benefits to the terminally ill, for a start?)
That kind of attitude doesn't help anything, it makes you just like the other side.
'A deeply misogynistic state'
I agree too. I was born there and lived there until I was 20. The abortion laws are just one of the reasons I would never live there again. The Catholic Church still has a hold on many people's thinking - most people go to Catholic schools even if they don't go to church regularly. The Catholic Church's attitude to women makes my skin crawl. I'm hopeful that things can change over time - I understand that most Irish people are pro-choice. I agree that this bill goes nowhere near far enough.
My sister became pregnant when she was 21 and came to stay with me in the UK to have a termination. I absolutely dread to think of what would have happened if I hadn't been living here - I feel sick at the thought of her having to come over here by herself, with hardly any money, knowing no-one, like so many thousands of women have had to do before and since.
You also have to remember Ireland is a very new state. It id still less than hundred years since the war of indepenence. It is a small change but it is change.
It was only about 50 years ago that the US allowed black people to mix with white people. Do you refuse to go there too?
no because theose laws are not in place in the US anymore, I have consciously avoided travelling to US states where the death penalty is in operation.
I have no desire to visit a place where women are treated as second class citizens by the law. Maybe if more international pressure was bought onto the irish state then they'd be forced to reconsider once the tourist dollars started drying up?
What does being a'young country' have to do with anything? Why is that an excuse?
The nature of the debate, now and in the past, is very misogynistic.
The whole floodgates nonsense, openly discussing women faking suicidal ideation, the coroner taking pains to point out that Savita didn't really want an "abortion", I mean she wanted an abortion but she didn't "want" an abortion , the absence of any women who have terminated from the public debate (except for the TFMR women).... Misogyny is the only word for it.
Then we have the Dail which is 87% male and couldn't even stay sober for the debate.
I wonder how many TDs would actually be affected by this legislation, or any legislation? How many female TDs of childbearing age have we ever actually had?
Lots of people would boycott Israel, Apartheid South Africa etc too - it's not that unusual to take a moral stance against a state you disagree with. Taking a moral stance against a state for laws it had 50 years ago would be a bit odd.
Kobayashi - there's a difference between "the state" and the people of a country. Not sure what you mean by "just like the other side" though - other side of what?
You're making the place sound like Iran Compos. As far as I'm aware Ireland has held at least one referendum and it was the people not the church or Government who rejected any loosening of the laws around abortion. There are many many women who do not agree with abortion you know. It's not only ment.
Perhaps we have different views doing from the inside and the outside. From my perspective women's autonomy over their bodies isn't something I see as 'one law' it is a basic human right.
If the Irish state (whether backed by referendum or not) feel that they want to run a medieval theocracy I will exercise my right not to visit. Whilst not on a par with Iran, it is deeply deeply worrying that a country that presents itself as a modern democracy is acting on this manner.
Well, they have a constitution and the right to life is enshrined in it. They can't change it without a referendum and the majority of voters said 'No'. It's called democracy.
By the way I'm on the outside as well. But my DH is Irish so we visit there a lot.
It's bollocks, it's useless and it won't make an iota of difference.
The only thing that will happen is that vulnerable young girls will try to convince their doctors (and their parents ) that they are suicidal so they can get an abortion. I wouldn't be surprised if some of those actually commit suicide while trying to be convincing.
And it makes no difference to any pregnant woman who needs medical treatment. Doctors have always legally been able to treat a woman who needed it, even if that treatment caused the death of the foetus. Nothing changes there.
The problem in Ireland is that every vote on abortion is defeated by the extremists on either end. Any bill that is put to referendum will be rejected by 30% because it is too restrictive (want freely available abortion to 40 weeks) and 30% who think it is too liberal (don't want any abortion). The 40% in the middle who would vote for abortion will always lose.
the difference between the two is semantic and moot when you think its not worth visiting a country because of it. And please don't, because we'd rather you didn't come if your attitude is so dismissive.
There are a great number of us actively working for change, putting our time, money, effort and emotion into it. We are just as much "the state" as the govt is. And we don't need the patronising attitude from someone from the UK of all places, a place slowly dismantling the apparatus that once made it a democracy to look up to. Don't kid yourself you're any better than we are, you're just different.
Doing there have been 3 abortion referenda in the last 30 years.
The first one in 1983 changed the constitution to totally forbid abortion.
The next one in 1992 followed the X case and the more liberal side won - the right to travel, the right to information, and the suicide clause were all approved.
In 2002 there was another referendum on suicide and again it passed.
Polls consistently show support for a more liberal regime than currently exists.
But politicians remember abortion bring down Fitzgerald's govt in the 80s. They remember the controversy X caused. They are too cowardly to stand up to Iona and Youth Defence.
How is that framed in the constitution? Does it specifially mention the fetus as having a right? If so how are they amending the law now without another referendum?
I certainly wouldn't consider a fetus to be an independent life.
I agree that these laws don't go anywhere near far enough.
It would still be illegal for a woman carrying a foetus that has a fatal abnormality (i.e. would die immediately or shortly after birth) to have an abortion. If this abnormality was found on the 20 week scan the woman would then have to carry the child to term, knowing that the child would never survive, or she could travel to a different country for an abortion, with all the stress and cost involved in that. It is completely inhumane.
I am fully pro-choice and support abortion on demand, but I would have thought that fatal foetal abnormality would be the supported by most people and the laws would reflect that. Not this tiny little 'concession' that they have voted through.
I agree - a disgrace.
The strangle hold the RC Church has had on Ireland for so long has really warped Irish society and public affairs. It saddens me that this is still happening in the 21st century.
I love Ireland, I visit regularly, love my Irish friends and family, and would certainly never boycott the country because of this issue(although I am passionately pro-choice), but I find the state of affairs re: abortion in Ireland deeply depressing and disturbing.
What can be done, in practical terms? I would definitely support any action on this issue.
I don't agree with your comment about 'pro-natalist agricultural communities'
I live in rural west of ireland in a farming community. Most people I've spoken to are totally in support of this bill and do want a change in legislation. Even the pro-life people I've spoken to do not agree with protecting a baby if it kills the mother, they do no agree with a 13/14 year old child having a baby against her will, they do not agree that a rape victim should carry her rapists child.
Very few want a situation like in the US or Britain where abortion is a form of emergency contraception for many, however most do want some access to abortion. The suicide risk section has been retained which is brilliant as it makes the procedure available to all women in reality (which I'm sure was the intended purpose all along)
Having said that at least 35,000 people marched the other week against THIS bill. This incredibly restrictive bill that would horrify pretty much any other western democracy.
Those people exist, they are ordinary Irish people (admittedly on the old side and their buses and placards are bankrolled by Americans). They are part of the problem. They would have women die to preserve the illusion abortion doesn't happen here. That is misogyny.
Interestingly, every Irish woman of childbearing age (ie 45 or so and under) was too young to vote in the 1983 referendum that put this stupid clause into our Constitution.
That clause kills women, it turns a blind eye to their physical and mental health, it forces them to remain pregnant with babies doomed to painful deaths. And none of us had a say in it.
Compos, the wording was originally "The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right."
It has been changed a bit, but any change to make it more liberal and to allow abortion on demand would be defeated. Simply because there is a large proportion of the population who are older and entrenched in their views (and the emigration of a large number of younger people), a significant number of younger extreme anti-abortion people, and a significant number who would always want the wording to be even more liberal.
I honestly believe that it will be another 20 years before the population shift would allow an abortion amendment to pass.
Having said that, I think this one is ridiculous. Far too narrow, unnecessary and a sop to Europe. But it will make no difference whatsoever to anyone who wants to have an abortion - they will still have to travel.
It's not that straightforward though. I think a recent poll showed that over 60% of the voting population didn't agree with abortion simply when a woman felt it was in her best interests. Although I think the same poll did show a high percentage felt it should be allowed where the mother's life is at risk - which I think it is anyway??? Open to correction on that.
Women in Northern Ireland have to travel as well, don't forget. Part of the UK, Compos.
If they CAN travel
A Marie Stopes clinic opened in Belfast last year but its remit is very limited. Irish women can't use it I believe. They still have to go to Liverpool/Manchester/London etc.
20 years at least until there is abortion available to Irish women in Ireland. Don't forget divorce wasn't made legal in Ireland till 1994 (I think) and even then it was only voted in by the public by the skin of its teeth. Having said that you don't hear people seeking to have it banned again.
Yes, exactly HoldMe.
The alternative which I believe will become more common is ordering medical abortion pills on the internet. Which is equivalent to the old back-street abortions and just as dangerous.
doing... 'best interests' is a broad term open to interpretation. As I said, just based on my own conversations most people are against the casual use of abortions which is available in other countries. As am I. I'm not pro-life, I do feel abortion is necessary or preferable in some situations, but it horrifies me how casually it's thrown about as an option a lot of the time.
So does 'best interests' mean for the metal health and physical well being of the mother? Or does it mean 'it's a bit inconvenient to have a baby right now'.... because those two statements elicit very different responses from people who see abortion as a medical necessity (physical or mental health) rather than a procedure of convenience.
Exactly. A lot of women are not in a position to travel. They might be young, poor, living with parents or living with an abusive partner. They shouldn't have to seek medical help in another country just because their own country refuses to grant them rights over their own body.
How could anybody be happy with the status quo at the moment where the Irish government knows that women require this service, but is happy for another country to provide it just to preserve their own political skins?
I'm not on a uk is ace trip here NI is its own fucked up can of worms. Like Scotland it also has its own legal system.
However if you were pregnant and giving birth threatened ypur life or knew the fetus would be born dead or aby other circumstances of that ilk, would you rather be in Dublin or London (or almost any other modern European capital? )
doing... 'best interests' is a broad term open to interpretation. As I said, just based on my own conversations most people are against the casual use of abortions which is available in other countries.[Quote]
I agree. As I said,DH is Irish so we go there a lot. Even amongst his younger siblings and cousins there doesn't seem to be support for abortion on demand and a lot of them think it is far too freely available in the UK. I'm not talking about elderly women walking around in shawls, but young, uber modern, highly educated females.
I'm pro-choice, so I'd absolutely rather be in London. I just don't think that it's helpful to be so condescending about another country's laws on this issue, particularly when your own country (if you're in the UK) doesn't even extend the same rights to all its citizens.
Yes, I agree about many people in Ireland being very against the perceived casual use of abortion as a method of birth control in some countries.
I find it interesting that having had conversations over the years with my teenage children and their friends I have yet to meet one who thinks it would be ok to have an abortion if they (or their g/f) got pregnant. They are all very much against abortion. That's in theory of course. I have no idea how they would feel or what they would do if it actually happened.
Having said that, I think there would be a lot of support for abortion on demand up to a certain date, possibly three months or whenever it is possible to do non-surgical abortions, and I think this should be what the politicians work towards.
The anti-abortion-in-all-circumstances-because-it's-murder people are jumping on the fact that there is no time limit in the current legislation, so theoretically this is abortion up to term as long as you can prove you are suicidal .
Freely available abortion on demand up to term will never, imo, get through a referendum.
I sm not being condescending I am calling it what it is...state sanctioned misogyny
This perception about 'casual' abortion seems to me to be like the perceived benefit scrounging that goes on here in the UK. Some sections of the media have done a great job of digging up the most extreme cases and suggesting that this is the norm. Just as couples who have 11 children and live on benefits in a 10 bedroom house are not the norm, neither is it the norm for women to have a 'casual' attitude to a medical procedure which is still surrounded in shame in certain circles.
IME, the concern about 'casual' abortions is just a mask for concern about women having total control over their own bodies, and a difficulty acknowledging that an embryo is an embryo, not a baby, just as a fetus is a fetus, not a baby.
Maryz as far as I understand it women who do order such pills on the Internet will be subject to pretty stringent sentences. I live here and I don't feel that I live in a theocracy, it's not as blatant as that, much more subtle, a lot of it is unspoken. So when DP had odds of 1:11 for dd2 and abnormalities no one gave us any options. They said something vague about phone numbers, which was the advice. Luckily it came to nothing and we wouldn't have terminated anyway, but the prospect of sending DP to England, alone (we have an older child who was then only 2) to face such a thing just seemed cruel and in humane. Plus the fact that it would have been difficult to go public if that had been our decision.
At the end of the day women in this state do not have autonomy over their own bodies. That is shocking. There is a powerful legacy of deeply patriarchal rule and alienation of most people from political decision making processes. The pro life position for the most part is sincerely held and most people I know wouldn't object in extreme circumstances.
I personally am pro choice but anti abortion. I believe that it is up to an individual to make this most difficult of decisions, and that no person has the right to deny a woman an abortion.
Lotta and Private. Fortunately there is a voluntary group who (financially, practically and emotionally) can help Irish women who are forced to travel to Britain because their own government refuses to take proper care of half of the population by providing a safe, legal, accessible abortion service. https://www.abortionsupport.org.uk/
Unfortunately the Irish govt are not uniquely monstrous in imposing this burden on women- it's the same for UK women and girls if they live in Northern Ireland or the Isle of Man. No help there either.
The situation in Ireland, NI etc just means many women must get into debt, or have to wait to have a much later abortion than would otherwise be necessary, because of the necessity to save up for private abortion fees, accomodation and travel to Britain and costs while over here.
I can't believe the heartlessness of the situation when these hypocritical politicians know full well what goes on. Imagine the psychological burden of having to invent a plausible 'reason' for such a trip at short notice, find hundreds of pounds from somewhere, find childcare for your kids while away and then carry all that stigma and secrecy possibly completely on your own, for years on end.
Or the other 'option'- ordering pills off the Internet that is completely unregulated (and may not be what they say they are) and then either trying to treat yourself at home in secret without proper medical support, or going to the doctor pretending you're having a miscarriage and being terrified of them being able to tell what you have done.
It's horrific what women are put through in this day and age and this new law doesn't look like much of an improvement. I hope they follow up with something more wide ranging soon.
Agree that many young Irish people are opposed to unrestricted abortion, the notion that only "old" people feel this way I agree with you doing Ireland is a democracy remember?
It is still not socially acceptable to be pro-choice I think.
It is in certain circumstances but you need to be careful who you "come out" too, you might be judged or shamed.
A lot of young people might not express pro-choice views to older people, or to their families, because they don't know how they will be received.
What a woman does with the contents of her womb is HER business, not the government or any other small minded people. Children are born with awful disabilities who spend every waking moment in pain and die a few months old. Why would any parent want to put a child or themselves through that? If a women does not want to have a baby NO ONE should be able to force her. Thankfully I live in a country (UK) where we are not so barbaric. I lived in northern ireland when my husband was posted there in the army in the early 1990's and hated the bloody place... hated every minute of living there and wouldnt take my son out after 5pm. I could not get home fast enough and all the rest of the army wives felt just the same. Women are not given the same rights as men. This is the 21st Century !
Depends on the circles. I'm pro-choice, and most people I know well are too, though to differing levels (few to my extreme viewpoint). I think you'd be surprised how much its changed recently though, did you see how big the marches and vigils for Savita were?
Also great to see some of the nasty lying propaganda posters from YD et al being torn down and destroyed
though its a bitch getting black spray paint out of your hair
A lady at a toddler group I used to go to when DS2 was little had an termination at 28 weeks pregnant. It was only being in the womb that was keeping it alive They had picked up that it had only half of its brain developed, loads of other abnormalities and that it wouldnt survive when it was born. Her husband and her decided to terminate and the amount of small minded stick up there arses people who gave them a hard time was terrible. She had to travel to London from Hampshire and they injected something into the heart of the foetus to end its life. She still had to go through labour and give birth poor girl. It was badly deformed as she asked to hold it and she knew she had done the right thing. She had a healthy boy a year later thankfully. In Ireland they would have had to go through to the end and then wait for it to die when born.... not even worth thinking about.
Sadly I have another friend who decided to go ahead with her downs pregnancy which was advised against by the drs as he had so many things wrong with him. He lived for just over 3 months, was in pain, had to be fed through a tube, cried all the time. Worst 3 months of my friends life, her and her hubby were devastated to have to watch him suffer and basically wait for him to die. He had heart defects, split palate, stomach problems, bowel problems, his skin was scaly and red, infection after infection bless him. She said if she could go back she would have had an abortion as putting herself through that was a nightmare. She hardly got to hold him as he just screamed and cried. Never smiled or recognised them.
As most of you are residing in a country where abortion has been freely available for years,(I'm in Ireland),can you give me a rough idea of how many abortions you personally know of where the mother has been suicidal,or where either she or the unborn child were facing certain death if the pregnancy progressed?.Genuine curiosity...and I think that some people in my country look at countries like yours,with high abortion rates,with some incredulity.I believe there is a fear that if abortion on demand is introduced,it leads to people thinking 'ah feck contraception,sure if I get knocked up I will just abort'.
I personally believe it should be available at home for genuine medical/mental health reasons (and obviously rape)....but I don't want our society to change to one where the unborn foetus is considered as a disposable nuisance.
Because you know what happens?The women who pre-pregnancy were cavalier about getting an abortion if they had an unwanted pregnancy very often change their minds when they are actually pregnant.And continue with the pregnancy...even though their situation is every bit as unprepared for raising a child as it was beforehand.
You,in Britain (and I like you,this isn't a personal attack or attack on your country,just an observation!) have had full access to both contraception and unconditional abortion for years.And yet,you have a startingly high number of children born into poverty or families where only one parent is actually parenting that child.
Freely available abortion hasn't decreased the amount of children being born into a situation where at least one parent regrets them being born.And I think that's sad
of course it has decreased that number! There would obv be many many more unwanted children.
Do you think that all of Irelands children are wanted ones? They aren't. I find that much sadder. Every child should be a wanted child, and every mother should have made the free choice to become one.
Hi Hilda, have just been on another thread about this, so forgive me if you've already seen this! Just to say wedon't have unconditional abortion in the UK: the current legal grounds for abortion in the England, Wales and Scotland (but not in NI) are (s1 of the Abortion Act 1967 (amended):
" if two registered medical practitioners are of the opinion, formed in good faith:
(a) that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or
(b) that the termination of the pregnancy is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or
(c) that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated; or
(d) that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped."
So 2 "medical practitioners" have to be convinced of the above: which means referral is not automatic; in effect the "medical practitioners" have to give their consent to the procedure.
Secondly, your comment that "freely available abortion hasn't decreased the amount of children being born into a situation where at least one parent regrets them being born." Who ever said it would? There's no legislation that can make someone want a child if they don't want one, there never has been. If you are saying that it's easier for some parents to get out of the responsibilities of to their kids and the other parent if than before, then that's another thread - it's got nothing to do with abortion.
KobayashiMaru - quite!
Hilda you are writing as though the UK is an alien planet to us but the reality is approximately one in ten Irish pregnancies ends in an abortion in the UK. You know TONS of women who have had them - you just don't know you do.
Irish women have abortion on demand. It's very expensive and emotionally punishing but we have it. Whatever you're afraid of, it's here. The only Irish women forced to be pregnant are children, victims of domestic abuse, or very poor.
Onlikely, the conditions are however essentially abortion on demand up to 24 wks. Referral is essentially automatic to 24 wks
We just have a far worse version of abortion on demand than the UK does. Later, far costlier, and much much harder. But its not an argument that sways pro-lifers/anti-choicers because you get the impression they think you're only getting what you deserve if you make that choice.
but clause c) pretty much makes it a legal right as it is always more risky to the woman's life to continue a pregnancy than not.
The stance of anti choice campaigners in general and the Irosh state and the Catholic Church might not stick on the throat so much if they actually gave a shite about the scores of unwanted children born ratjer than tubthumping about embryoes.
Neither body has a grest record when it comes to caring for women or unwanted infants. but thst would require action and humanity rather than empty moralising
The point I am making though, a woman does not legally have the right to have an "abortion on demand" in the UK - she needs the consent of 2 other people. It's them that are allowed to interpret the law as they see fit, not her.
And regarding clause c), legally, it doesn't cover all pregnant women: only the those who have a pregnancy related condition or one made worse by pregnancy. The possibility of risk is not considered: the risk has to be actually real for that particular woman.
I'm with you ComposHat - every child has a right to be wanted.
In 1969 (the first full year records are available for legal abortions in England/Wales) there were 54,000 abortions carried out.By 2011,that figure had risen to 196,000 abortions.
I believe that quite a lot of people in my country (and this thread is about my country,and why the abortion issue is so on-going here) believe that the introduction of it leads to a de-sensitisation of it.We have seen it in your country.Some may believe that's a good thing,others don't.And,as we are living in a democracy,each persons opinion is counted as valid
My point about women who had decided,before getting pregnant,that they would abort if they found themselves pregnant,but then changing their mind once it's a reality has been conveniently overlooked.If abortion was not so freely available (and yes,I know the conditions attached....you all also know that it is relatively easy to get a doctor to sign those forms)....then the 'desensitisation' would not happen.People wanting to avoid having a baby would be a damn sight more careful with their contraception if they didn't have 'plan b' in the back of their minds.When 'disaster' hits...and no reliable contraception is used and a pregnancy results...then suddenly,abortion and it's grim reality doesn't actually seem so easy.And so,the pregnancy continues...and a baby is born into a situation that it otherwise wouldn't have been,if contraception was the only way to avoid it.
There is no easy answer to this if you are living in a country like mine.We have not had the 40-odd years of desensitisation.Abortion is not,to the average woman,considered to be a realistic plan B for unwanted pregnancies in this country,purely because we have not had it as part of our culture.It is part of yours,and has been for more than 40 years.
I may be coming across as a Holy Catholic Rosaries-on-my -ovaries lunatic here.Nothing could be further from the truth(on every level!!).I just honestly believe that easily accessible abortion actually doesn't help women,or children,as a group.I think the availability of it makes people (both men and women) believe that recklessness with contraception is fine,plan B (abortion) will sort it if needed.The reality...if you are faced with an unwanted pregnancy ..is very different.And far too often,a woman is left raising a child alone in quite dire circumstances.You only have to read the threads on here ...'we weren't planning a baby,but I couldn't get rid of it....no,we weren't being careful..'
I would be far,far happier if much more emphasis was put on avoiding unwanted pregnancies in the first place.I repeat my earlier view that if the physical/mental health of the mother/child is at risk,(or rape)then unfortunately yes,abortion is the regretable answer.Using it as a back up to contraception (and 32 per cent of women having an abortion are having their second abortion) just seems wrong to me.
Ok, 54k to 190k.
Hasn't the population increased by more than that, to scale?
Oh, and excuse me, but I'm an average Irish woman, please don't speak for me. Of course it was a realistic plan b for me. And has been, for several women I know, plan A.
It's just hidden. You're kidding yourself.
Ireland treats pregnant women like second class citizens. The public maternity system is a disgrace.
I lived & had my first child there, I had a lot of pregnancy complications, my mum begged me to move back to Scotland as she was terrified that the chance of life of the fetus would take precedence over mine.
Unfortunately that proved to be the case for Savita.
This abortion bill is barely an improvement.
You also have the likes of American funded Youth Defence spouting their vile poison. Targeting rape crisis centres with poster lorries parked outside ffs.
It's an utter embarrassment.
lots of people have very good experiences with the public maternity system. Lets not confuse the issue entirely.
What were the figures for illegal abortions before 1969 Hilda?
What were the figures who for children who got put into care, because their parent were unwilling or unable to bring them up, before 1969 and after?
What were the figures for children who were put up for adoption, because their parent were unwilling or unable to bring them up, before 1969 and after?
"The reality...if you are faced with an unwanted pregnancy ..is very different.And far too often,a woman is left raising a child alone in quite dire circumstances.You only have to read the threads on here ...'we weren't planning a baby,but I couldn't get rid of it....no,we weren't being careful.." also applies to a woman who can't access abortion if she wants one.
And I'll say it again, men leaving women in the lurch to look after the kids (because that's what you're talking about) has got nothing to do with a woman's right to choose to have an abortion or not.
Another vote for the public maternity service - my sister and many close friends have had nothing but good experiences. I don't think it's accurate to say it is a disgrace
Hilda can you clarify your point about women changing their minds about abortion once they are pregnant? I've read it a few times and still can't quite understand what you mean.
Yeah, I'm a bit confused about that remark about Irish maternity hospitals - in general, the results are comparable with any other country in the world and Holles St has an international reputation. German nurses I met when I was there said that they'd come to Ireland to work there because it's a real bonus on a maternity nurses CV.
No,.the population hasn't quadrupled in that time.
I'm not speaking for you,*KobayashiMaru*.Indeed,you can't speak for me either,so lets not get into a debate about who most fits the tag of 'average Irish woman'.And I'm not kidding myself.At the top of my head,I know 3 of my personal friends who have had abortions over the years.(one rape,one cancer patient and one failed contraception...if you want to know).There is quite possibly more people who have had them but not discussed it.On average,4000 Irish women have abortions in the UK per year.
I think I will refrain from posting on this thread again...because it's getting none of us no-where.l have no wish to fight with any woman about this.I wouldn't wish that choice upon any one of you.Equally,I wouldn't wish for a society where it becomes the 'norm' to be lax with contraception because there is a back up plan.
My opinion,my viewpoint.You are equally entitled to yours.
That's good Hilda, because I'm not living in a society where it is the 'norm' to be lax with contraception because abortion is the back up plan. I'd just like to live in a society where it's the woman's right to choose what happens to her body, not someone else's choice for her. And that's what I wish for women everywhere.
You are though. you decided to say what the "average Irish woman" thinks about abortion, I did not I only spoke for my own opinion.
You have no right to speak for the average Irish woman, only for yourself. You are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to present the opinions of the country at large, which is what you did.
In the most recent Irish Times Poll,*KobayashiMaru*,39 per cent felt that that abortion should be allowed if the woman 'deemed it to be in her best interest'61 per cent believed it should not.You may want to believe that everyone thinks the same as you,but that doesn't mean they do.
There was (rightly,in my opinion) a majority in favour of allowing abortion in cases of rape/incest...physical/mental health danger to mother...no chance of viable life for child etc.
Hilda, how on earth can you say that to the average woman in Ireland, abortion is not a realistic Plan B? How do you know that? For my peers and I, it was, back before steady partners and families. I know quite a few Irish women who have had abortions, but they certainly wouldn't make it widely known. Flights to the UK are not expensive, of course it's a realistic Plan B.
Hilda, is that 39 per cent of women, or of everyone, including men?
(oh and off-topic, but I would have to defend the Irish maternity system too, and Ireland does have a lower maternal maternity rate than the UK so it's not necessarily better to be pregnant in the UK - with an unwanted pregnancy, yes, obviously, otherwise not so much).
Hilda, what do you think about the entirely avoidable death of Savita Halappanavar? The fact that doctors left their patient to die because she was pregnant and miscarrying?
I don't think the moral high ground here belongs to the anti-choice brigade, tbh. I don't think it belongs to a pro-life movement that is associated with the Catholic church, an organisation that has tormented women and children on an industrial scale for generations in Ireland (and elsewhere, but Ireland has had a particularly close relationship between church and state, unusual in a Western democracy).
maternal mortality rate that should be of course!
The Irish time asked about 100 people. But you're missing my point. I didn't say you were wrong and I was right, I said neither of us can speak for the "average Irish woman", because neither of us can speak for anyone else. You, however, attempted to do so.
abortion on demand is a mark of a civilised state.
lots of countries in the world have a long way to go not just Ireland.
it's the case that when a country is dominated by religion then generally the rights of women and girls are treated with contempt.
that's all religions as all religions are deeply mysoginistic.
Apachepony....why were those women having abortions?
Was it because their foetus' had been diagnosed with a condition that meant life outside the womb was not viable,or horrendously painful?
Was it because they were geuinely suicidal,or at risk of death?
Was it because of rape/incest?
In all of these cases,I believe they absoluely made the right choice,and should have been allowed to do it in their own country.
Or was it because they were lax with contraception,because their plan B was to abort if they got pregnant?.If the answer is yes,then you just proved my point.
But why do you think it should be your opinion that makes any difference?
this is what bemuses me, "In case 1 I think its fine, in case 2 I think its terrible", ok, good for you, but what should your opinion have to do with it at all?
I really have to leave this thread now,not for any other reason other than I have to provide taxi service for one of my teenagers.
I don't want to fight with any of you,and I hope I have not personally offended any one of you.It's a horrible subject,it really is.And one I wish no-one ever had to address.
In the end,the majority will decide anyway.Good night ladies.
Hilda, where is your evidence that the availability of abortion somehow encourages a 'lax' approach to contraception? Do you have any proof that women in Ireland are more careful about contraception than in the UK?
Given that the Catholic church has been preaching against contraception for decades, it'd be remarkable if women in Ireland were using contraception more avidly than women in Britain, but I suppose that might be the case - do you have any proof?
Both my children born in the public system and even though on the second the cuts had hit in terms of conditions on the wards, care and treatment was excellent. No one batted an eyelid at us as a lesbian couple, on the contrary, and I was allowed to cut both girls' cords.
But the principle remains, women should have the right to make these decisions for themselves. I wouldn't want my daughters to have an abortion, but I wouldn't want them to have a child that they didn't want either.
Well, lets hope the majority gets it right soon, so.
11 Irish women a day travel to the UK for abortions.We have as many, to scale, as they do. The problem is just the same, apart from we ship ours overseas, and punish those that do it by making it so hard for them.
It's all so fucking pointless. And we've been campaigning the same shit for decades.
We keep voting for the wrong people though - the people wit a penis who don't really care because its easier. They won't have to face the decision themselves and pro choicers aren't going to be bombing them/driving them out of their homes, so it's a bit of a no brainer from their point of view.
Hilda Just in case you do pop back into this thread, here's something I posted on the other abortion thread. It's the NHS's statistics on contraceptive effectiveness rates and what they actually mean:
Male condoms: 98% effective if used correctly. This means that two women in 100 whose partners use a condom will get pregnant in a year
Female condoms: 95% effective if used correctly. Five women in 100 who use a female condom will get pregnant in a year.
Diaphragms: latex diaphragms are 92-96% effective if used correctly. Between four and eight women in 100 who use latex diaphragms with spermicide will get pregnant in a year.
Caps: latex caps are 92-96% effective if used correctly. Between four and eight women in 100 who use latex caps with spermicide will get pregnant in a year. Silicone caps are less effective.
Combined contraceptive pill: over 99% effective if taken correctly. Less than one woman in 100 will get pregnant in a year while taking the combined pill.
Progestogen-only pill: 99% effective if taken correctly. One woman in 100 will get pregnant in a year while taking the progestogen-only pill.
More here: www.nhs.uk/Conditions/contraception-guide/Pages/how-effective-contraception.aspx
That's a lot of unwanted pregnancies.
"Laxness" is a value judgement, by the way.
Every Irish woman gets consultant led care during pregnancy without cost.
I have a high risk of having a baby with spina bifida, I received extra scans to monitor my babies' spinal development. I also received extra scans due to low placentas. I received physio and back braces within a week of complaining of back pain.
Every complication in my pregnancies was thoroughly monitored and assessed, I saw consultants regularly and could visit my gp as often as I wanted.
My youngest was in special care, he received life saving treatment.
I attended more scans and appointments than my friends on ante natal threads here who were under NHS care.
Two of my children wouldn't be alive if it weren't for Irish maternity care.
I am an Irish woman and I am pro-choice, in the sense that if a woman wants an abortion she should have access to one, however I think the situation is slightly more complex than Ireland is Catholic and misogynistic.
I know of one woman who had an abortion. The reason she had one was because her parents told not to come home with a baby. They were old fashioned with notions of respectability and she was unmarried and not in a serious relationship. She suffered emotionally for may years afterwards. I do not think that she was exercising choice by having an abortion because it wasn't her who made the choice it was her parents. I think their is a paradox in which so-called respectable religious type families would prefer the daughters to have abortions rather than become young parents.
I do not live in the UK so I cant say what goes on there for certain and I'm sure I will be corrected, however I get the impression that in countries where abortion laws are extremely liberal such as the US and the UK, the societies in those countries have become desensitized to it. The stigma which was formerly attached to illegitimacy has become attached unplanned pregnancies. Hence the demontization of any parents in need of state assistance. I have come across US facebook pages called "I Hate Teen Moms, They Should all Abort etc" which turned my stomach.
In western cultures today it is only completely acceptable to become a mother if you have a partner who is completely self sufficient and able to support you or if you yourself are completely self sufficient. I think that this is also misogynistic. If a woman is forced to terminate a pregnancy for financial reasons I believe it is a failure of the state in which she lives. The idea that because child benefit is available hundreds of women will have loads of children on purpose to live off the state is equally as misogynistic as the "floodgates open" pro-life argument. Also if its career reasons surly more help for mothers to continue their career after children should be argued for rather than "they should have an abortion".
In India and China, millions of baby girls are aborted every day just because of the gender, to such an extent that there is a population imbalance where men greatly outnumber women, leading to increased trafficking in prostitution. The women are often forced to terminate their pregnancies and if they do choose to themselves on the basis of gender its surly not a free choice because of the society they live in. The suicide rate among Chinese women is at an extremely high rate and it is believed that this is a result of widespread abortion of females and the lack of value placed on them.
I know that Ireland has it faults but in Ireland being a mother is still valued. Child benefit is one of the highest rates in Europe so that mothers are not forced to go to work (obviously they have the choice to). I recently heard an elderly TD argue against proposed cuts to CB because it is often a SAHMs only access to money and would help them leave abusive relationships. Being anti-abortion is not always women. No father or mother are stigmatized for being on the dole in Ireland, the way they are in England and in Ireland single parents receive a special benefit so they can take time off to look after their children.
This post turned out to be longer that I expected. Sorry for the rambling, but what I am trying to say is that I think most Irish people are pro-choice but they don't think abortion is a good thing. I don't really like Hildas argument that abortion being available leads to more poor people having children and more single parents because i don't think their is anything wrong with poor people or single parents. Women should have a choice but ideally it should be only their choice and not influenced by society or culture which I think is kind of impossible. I don't mean to offend anyone, but I feel a bit bewildered by the subject because my nephew was born last year at twenty three weeks. He is doing really well after several months in NICU. It is kind of disturbing that he cold have been aborted (for non-medical reasons) because he could feel pain, he scrunched his face when having drips, injections etc.
Fuzzy where in Gods name do you live? There is a council estate near my mothers house. In it there are homes for single mothers. All, and I mean ALL the people in the town resent and despise them. The homes will encourage more "unwanted" children and loose sexual behaviour according to them. To them, these women should wear sack cloth and ashes. The same people think in a comparable manner about the pill, about abortion and (in general) about any woman who is not defined by her desire to marry and have children in wedlock. There is never ever a mention of the men and fathers of said children.
Our beloved island has an appalling history of abuse of women and children. This is a conversation about women. About women and ownership over their bodies. About women and their right to choose.
Scuse typos, cannot find glasses!
Fuzzy, you've very eloquently described a lot of my own sentiments.
I was a mother at 20. We needed state assistance to get by at times, as have most people I know.
There is no stigma of the dole or receiving benefits here. Everyone gets the help they need to survive and no-one disputes their right to do so.
We have a medical card and I receive the same level of treatment as a patient with insurance. My SN children receive OT, SALT, psyche, physio, paeds and CAMHS services and I haven't had to fight for any of them, they've been freely offered and resources given which I would have had to jump through hoops to get in England.
My dcs school fight for the SN kids. They support parents and children and go above and beyond to help my children work to the best of their ability. No-one begrudges my children their much needed resources, in fact every parent, whether they had SN kids or not, at our school was outraged when cuts meant we lost resource hours. Parents who had no personal reason to do so marched in Dublin to keep our resource hours and parents with no SN kids stood at the school gates for hours in -5 degrees raising awareness and getting petitions signed.
Not once have I been stigmatized for being a young mother. I've never heard a nasty word said about SN (ignorant maybe, but never resentful or unpleasant). From what I've read on English forums this is not the norm over there.
I don't know if this respect for children and families correlates to our abortion stance but I suspect it does in some way.
Bratingham... Where do you live
I've lived in cork, Dublin, Galway and the west and never experienced that. Dp grew up on a council estate, he's never experienced that.
I am reluctantly pro choice. In an ideal world there should be no need for abortions, but we don't live there so we do have need.
But I have sympathy with Hilda's view. I do think 'normalisation' in society is a real thing. It happens.
I do think the 'only in cases of rape or incest' proviso is inadequate and hypocritical. (for eg do you need a conviction before 12 wks? What if your rapist pleads not guilty? Providing you, and the guards are on the ball. ...within minutes of the crime... Daft) Not to mention the philosophical imoplications of The Sins Of The Father
I have sympathy with Hilda's view - on a societal level (not individual, before people start telling stories of their own family members) that it does benefit those who favour 'liberalisation' of sex etc. I may be an unusual feminist in that I don't particularly applaud that. The brunt, if any, of sex is carried by the woman and perhaps we would do better if society as a whole adopted the traditionally feminine view of sex, careful and potentially life changing, and society adapted to that view.
Life really is precious. I have a lot of sympathy with that view. We should be seeking to help people preserve it, and minimising the conditions in which people find it necessary. Otherwise you are just a misogynist arsehole.
I do know what Brathingham is talking about.
And I suspect she gets to the heart of the matter - it's class based.
Are you a scumbag/sham/knacker/scobie? Harrumph if so
Are you pretty much anybody else (leaving them damn forriners out of it for now) then you will almost get what you need - or at least there is the societal climate that says you you should get it.
Summer completely agree with you-I also have 2 dcs with SN and am in the west of Ireland and having lived in the UK previously I know also that my kids have got a much better deal here in Ireland and have received and are still receiving fantastic support in school -far better than they would have in the UK!
I must also say Bratingham that what you have described as regards the homes for single mothers is unheard of in the Ireland I know in this day and age.
I live in the inner city so maybe different attitudes exist than in more rural areas. I agree with the right to choose but I still don't think abortion is a good thing, if that makes sense. I don't agree with the pro-life stance in the sense that if abortion is illegal, it will prevent abortions from happening, because if a woman wants an abortion she should be able to have one safely, performed by a medical person. But I do think that people wouldn't need to have abortions as much if the reasons they needed abortions were removed. For example the Catholic Church doesn't believe rape victims should have access to abortions because the fetus is innocent etc., but you never hear them giving out about rape. I wonder why
In another thread about abortion a poster referring to pro lifers said what if their teenage daughter became pregnant, basically saying that if her/his own teenage daughter became pregnant they would be having an abortion, whether the hypothetical pregnant teen DD wanted one or not was irrelevant.
Imagine you are young and you have an unplanned pregnancy. If you live in a society where you will be made to feel ashamed for being a young parent, not self-sufficient or for being unmarried, I do think you would be more likely to have an abortion than if you live in a society where mothers and babies are cherished and children are seen as a gift and you will have access to state assistance and affordable childcare if you need to work/study. I am not arguing against bodily autonomy, I am just saying that society does impact on choices.
My cousin's baby had no brain, she had a termination (not in the UK so maybe not relevant). I know three other people who have had terminations for various reasons. None were 'oh in contraception fails I'll have an abortion'.
Out of those 196 000 how many are not British but have traveled here for abortion?
Do you consider the morning after pill abortion?
I attended schools run by the Sisters of Mercy and my mother is a member of SPUC. I find people who oppose abortion tend not to have thought about the realities, they just talk about the 'little babies'.
As for abortion in India, the imbalance isn't just due to abortion. New baby girls often have dry rice sprinkled in their throat. It swells and stops them breathing.
There is also a cultural issue, Indian women do not want to give their baby up for adoption, they consider it kinder to kill the child than give it to strangers.
Summer, Polly , I just saw you're posts now, I completely agree about SN. I remember the Special Olympics being held in Ireland. I was in primary school and our area was hosting Bangledesh. We learned all about Bangledesh, decorated the school in the Bangledeshi colors, the athletes came into to see our art and shook hands with all of us. It was a real celebration of people with SN, and I do think that is a correlation between that attitude and the anti-abortion stance of the state.
If the government were providing abortions on the grounds of disabled fetuses, I don't mean fatal abnormalities, I mean like Downes Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy) would the same attitude exist. Or would it be harsher, more disablist. And where does it stop, if the fetus is blind, deaf? Of course it is also the duty of the state to provide for parents of children with SN so that they and their children can have a good quality of life, I know Ireland is not absolutely perfect in doing this but it is a lot further on that other European countries.
sashh I disagree about India. I saw a documentary about it. Before sex-determination texts were available during ultrasounds there were some cases of infanticide but they were in a minority. Abortion is considered not as gruesome and ever since a couple could find out the sex during pregnancy, abortions of females have become widespread so much so that it has been made illegal to find out the sex of a fetus but doctors don't abide by this law and are often bribed by the husband. Also the government don't enforce it. Nobody has ever been prosecuted.
One woman in the documentary is bringing the first case against a doctor atm. She was pregnant with twins, and refused to go to the hospital to have the test done. Her husband and MIL locked her in a room for three days with no food or water, her MIL then gave her cake with eggs in, knowing she is allergic to eggs. She had to be brought to hospital then after a reaction and her husband asked the doctor to do the test. Twin girls. She refused an abortion. Her husband beat her and through her down the stairs. She fled to her family. They took her in. (It is seen as shameful if a marriage fails so women are often forced to stay so not to bring shame on their families) She had her twins prematurely but they survived and are beautiful girls.
The availability of sex-determination tests and abortion on the grounds of gender is the catalyst to the gendercide, but the attitude to women is the primary problem that needs to be changed. Daughters are seen as a burden because it is customary to provide a dowry for them. They're are loads of proverbs like "when a daughter is born a thief has come into the house." Girls are often not given enough to eat etc. In the same way that in the liberal west, the attitude to young parents, single parents, poor parents, basically anyone whose not married, in their thirties with a high flying career needs to be changed, rather than making abortion illegal. There is a big difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion.
Hilda, just to reply to you, I don't know some of the women intimately enough to know if they were "lax" with contraception. A couple were single mothers who knew enough to know they weren't going to do it again. One was raped, I paid for her flight to England. I agree though that an exception of abortion in the case of rape could not possibly work - would the woman have to prove it was rape? This she could not have done, and particularly in the time scales involved. One certainly wasn't "lax" in the belief that abortion was an option, as until she got pregnant she was anti-abortion and didn't believe it was an option at all (basically the opposite of your scenario of someone getting pregnant and being unable to go through with an abortion). She was tormented by years with thinking she had done something terrible yet knowing if she had the choice again she would do it again, she was glad she didn't have the baby. Gradually, through living life, seeing other loved ones have an abortion and hating the idea of them being judged and seeing what the reality of life with children was like, she came to peace with her abortion. That person was me. I am so glad I had an abortion when I was young and foolish, I would have been a terrible mother then.
It is very socially unacceptable in Ireland to admit to an abortion for contraceptive failure, and so I would imagine you know a lot more women who have had one but it is secret.
Do you know what this legislation says to me.... that I cannot be trusted to think for myself or make decisions for myself because I have a uterus. The pill has only been available here since 1980 (and even then it was subject to circumstances) and condoms sold to over 18s in 1986 iirc. Marital rape has only become illegal in the last 20 years. I think the ownership of women's bodies has gone on long enough.
Ireland respects single mothers?!
Aha. Ahahahahaha. Yeah, right.
Go on over to boards.ie and read a few threads about mickey money, family courts (sure wimmin have too many rights), lone parents, social welfare. There is a thread about pregnant teenagers doing FETAC courses at the top of After Hours right now. Go have a read and see what they think of mothers.
Or if you'd prefer The Journal, check out the charming comments about the scroungers who didn't get their welfare payments yesterday. Lots of 'hilarious' jokes about mickey money and council flats there.
Look, you are members of freaking Mumsnet. The women here are mostly in the baby-killing UK, yet to my eyes they seem to be exactly the same as in Ireland. Neither country values mothers and children as much as they should but neither is a child-hating dystopia either.
The abortion rate in Ireland is approximately one in ten pregnancies (or possibly higher). The abortion rate in the UK is two in ten. Please explain to me how this difference denotes a massive wave of baby hating? Because to me it is all explained by the way we restrict pregnant children, domestic violence victims, and the poor. All of whom, incidentally, are cared for at least as well if not better in the UK than in Ireland. But at least we stopped putting them in Magdalene laundries in 1996!
Do you live in the 1950's, Bratingham? I've never heard the like!
Ireland is little different in attitude to the UK. Single parenthood is entirely normal, divorce (or actually separation, even very long term) is all around us. Lots of parents are unmarried, even the middle class ones. nobody wears sack cloth and ashes.
Of course there are plenty of tossers that have a problem with all of the above, just the same way there are in the UK. But there is no talk of cutting off benefits after 2 children here, it wouldn't even get a listen. And it is true that benefits are easier to get and more generous for single parents and for unemployed parents in couples.
We have good, we have bad, just like you. Stop reducing us to stereotypes, it doesn't help the actual important issues at hand.
And honestly the Irish maternity system just doesn't compare to the NHS.
We lie about our maternal death rate ( www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=22248 ). Most regional hospitals offer ONE scan - the 18 weeks one, at 22 or 23 weeks, because they are so underfunded. Some women don't even get that. No dating scan. Midwife-led care is only available to a tiny minority. Homebirths to an even smaller number. I am with the NHS this pregnancy, the difference is night and day. Two scans, when they are supposed to be given. Free dental care. A TON of antenatal testing that I was never offered in Ireland (including, yes, a test for Downs and other fetal abnormalities). My hyperemesis was caught and diagnosed and medicated immediately - midwives couldn't believe the "care" I'd gotten for it in Ireland (told to suck it up it was only morning sickness and scolded for the weight I lost).
Ireland is not terrible, I'm not saying that, but lets not kid ourselves regarding the quality of care. It is old fashioned and underfunded. Even the dedicated maternity hospitals are ancient and unfit for purpose. I haven't even touched on the scandals - symphysiotomies, Michael Neary, the OLOL miscarriage misdiagnosis scandal - that was LAST YEAR!
And when the baby arrives we don't even have paternity leave.
Again, Ireland isn't terrible. But it is emphatically NOT looking after pregnant women as well as it should and the UK's maternity system is as good and sometimes better than it in pretty much every way.
Abortion availability does NOT mean maternity services suffer.
In fairness, I was at one of the main maternity hospitals rather than a regional one. Would have had 3 scans if no issues had arisen (early one offered because of previous miscarriage) as it was an issue did arise, was under 2 consultant's care and ended up having more scans than a frequent flyers bag. Certainly though the wards were v overcrowded!
That article is interesting HoldMeCloser, but even the wider criteria sets the Irish maternal mortality rate at 8.6 per 100,000, whereas the same criteria in the UK gives a maternal mortality rate of 11.39 per 100,000.
I disagree that the dedicated maternity hospitals are 'ancient and unfit for purpose' - the hospital my sister and close friends gave birth in was gleaming and new.
The regional hospitals might be a different matter, of course. Hope the rest of your pregnancy goes well.
But have you seen the reports of needless deaths and the horrors in nhs wards? Like they have any room to brag! Sure, some aspects are better, but its as hit and miss as here, and its also chronically understaffed and underfunded.
I've had 5 pregnancies at different Irish hospitals. I've been consultant led and in an MLU. Sure, the standard is often 1 scan (most people don't need a dating scan, since they know their dates, why waste the time and money?) but not once have I only ever had the one scan, I think I had 10 on one pregnancy due to need. If you need more, you get more, if you don't, you get the minimum. nothing wrong with that. I've seen some of the best and the worst there is to be had here. I've been left in a corridor in labour because there was no room, and I've had my own private suite including pool and much more, all in the public system.
You can't take your experience and say the UK is better. I can't take mine and say Ireland is. In reality they both have major problems but do a fantastic job for a huge number of women, and fuck up for another number.
But none of that is the point at hand here. Motherhood and pregnancy care should be divorced from abortion, not least because not every pregnant woman wants to be a mother. THATS the point here.
Agreed Koba, I'm just pointing out that the UK having abortion doesn't affect their maternity provision, and Ireland banning it doesn't mean they're taking proper care of women.
Unfortunately I also can't relate at all to the glowing account above of Ireland's special needs provision. My family members have had a constant battle for SNAs, assessments, and treatment. A good friend is an OT - the children who see her have been waiting four years. I don't believe Ireland takes any better care of special needs children than the UK does. Which is to say, neither do enough.
I was in Galway twice and Castlebar once. I had between 3 and 6 scans in each pregnancy. I was offered tests to test for foetal abnormalities and afaik they're standard for mothers over 35. I'm not saying maternity care is astounding over here, it could certainly be better, but some of what you've said holdme isn't my experience at all, and I have never heard of a mother having no scans at all, not since the 80's anyway. I strenuously disagree that maternity care here is 'awful' as the previous poster said. As with everything, what you get is very dependent on the hospital you attend... I've heard terrible things about certain hospitals, amazing things about others. But the basic care that every woman is entitled to for free is certainly better than most other countries.
As for boards.ie being a representative sample of the Irish population.... erm no . It's a site which is dominated by a select few extremist posters who all seem to have moderator privileges. The rest of the site is divided into arse lickers and non arse lickers and the non arse lickers generally get hounded off pretty quickly. The entire site is like AIBU on steroids.... would England like to be judged on the basis of AIBU alone? I doubt it as it doesn't exactly paint English opinions in a great light most days.
there's no need for lots of scans in a normally developing pregnancy. With dd2 where we had bad odds for downs, ruled out by cvs, they still gave us additional scans at 22 and 26 weeks just to be sure that everything was on track. Personally I'd ratherthat the resources are put where they are needed. I'm not saying its perfect either, but we were well treated both pregnancies. Never saw a doc with baby no. 1, only for cvs stuff with no. 2. Midwife led care with no.2, visits at home for 12 days...absolutely brilliant, ring them day or night.
Afaik it is only formalising something that was already in place. Abortuon has always been allowed if the woman's life is at risk (including suicide) but doctors were always a bit hazy about where the line was drawn. Now it's been formalised.
I agree with you on special needs provision, HoldMeCloser. And the cuts mean that provision for children with special needs in school is getting worse and worse.
More broadly, the 'lack of stigma' attached to those on benefits isn't so much the result of a wonderful, selfless, 'family first' attitude; rather it is the product of a very complicated relationship between the individual, state, and society.
"Ireland's maternal mortality is low, and maternal care is rated better than the UK in World Health Organisation's report" (Times, July 13th).
But puzzled why this has become the discussion, when related to original subject of women who want their pregnancy terminated.
Yes, skyler and holdmecloser, can't say I see this picture either. I have a friend with a 16 yo dd with SN and every step has been a monumental battle, even for a highly articulate woman who knows how to get things done and make people listen. Attitudes do seem quite positive, and some areas of schooling would be very inclusive (my dds school,, for example). The resources aren't there, and aren't prioritized.
thats not true bumbley, it was never really in place. Which is why women dying of cancer that was being speeded up by pregnancy were denied abortion, and why Savita died.
For me, ARealDame, it's just that Ireland has decent but not stellar care for pregnant women, decent but not stellar care for special needs children, decent but not stellar attitudes to single/teenage parents.
In this, it's pretty much the same as not just the UK but the rest of Western Europe. Behind in some respects but not third world. I've lived in France and the UK and Ireland doesn't have drastically different attitudes to either. There is far more the same than different.
With one huge exception - abortion. There we part ways with the rest of the developed world, from Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the rest of Europe. Our laws are on a par with developing countries. We are more restrictive than much of Africa, Asia, Latin America. Why?? It's not just Catholicism, that hasn't stopped Spain and Italy.
Other commenters have suggested that our opposition to abortion is keeping something special and particular in our culture. But I don't see any evidence of that in reality. We are the same, or sometimes a bit behind, most other Western countries in all of the measurements mentioned thus far.
Here's a map of abortion laws throughout the world.
We are in some shameful company.
I just don't see how having the same laws as the UK or New Zealand or Germany etc etc etc will harm us. At the moment we're on a par with Haiti.
Oops, I'll make it clickable!
I'll never get the hang of links
Kobaysha, yes, it was allowed in order to save the life of the mother. There was a case several years back that then expanded it to include risk of suicide. It is just being made more formal now. Savita's life was not at risk when she was requesting the abortion which was why it was not allowed.It is tragic that she contracted septiceamia after she miscarried.
Tell that to women who had to go to the UK for abortions while terminally ill.
Her life WAS at risk when she asked for a termination of an already non-viable pregnancy. The septicemia set in BEFORE the miscarriage was complete, that is why she died.
Well that's why it's being formalised Kobayashi - so that doctors are in no doubt about whether or not they can refer for an abortion.
Re Savita, There were failings in her care that led to her condition not being picked up quickly enough to allow for proper treatment.
how can something which was not available be formalised? You've been reading propaganda......
Some good posts from hilda earlier on the thread.
Just saw this. Seems like a complicated case, but a useful reminder of how the nonsense around exporting Ireland's abortion issue causes great difficulty and suffering.
Bumbleymummy - do you have any evidence which demonstrate that abortions in Ireland have been readily accessed by suicidal women (instead of simply pointing to the X Case judgement)?
In principle abortion to save the life of the mother, including risk of suicide, was permitted under the constitution following the Supreme Court judgement in the x case. However, successive governments failed to legislate and so the circumstances under which a termination could be carried out were unclear. I think in a different hospital with different doctors, savita's pregnancy might have been terminated earlier - but doctors would be in legally grey territory. I understand the new legislation gives more clarity though I haven't read it. It's the suicide bit that's controversial.
The map that TonyDanza linked to makes pretty sobering viewing.
apachepony I thought your post at 8.04 this morning was very honest and very moving.
What about the rights of the unborn child ?
it shouldn't have any rob. HTH.
it isn't a child. .. it is an embryo. it doesn't have an independent existence Using emotive and misleading language doesn't help the debate
Kobaysha, it was available - abirtions were carried out to save the life of the mother. There were just grey areas that meant that doctors worried about whether or not they were doing something illegal.
Really? Show me proof. Because I can show you proof of where they were not allowed, even though they should have been. There was no legislation, and drs do not readily put themselves in that position. Hospital ethics committees have turned down women who were dying. I can show proof of this. Can you?
Frequently a foetus Compos, not an embryo.
I hate that expression 'rights' when used in complex situations like abortion.
A woman has a right not to die of septicaemia.
She has the right not to be raped/abused.
She has the right to receive cancer treatment to save her life.
The loss of an otherwise viable foetus in those circumstances is regrettable but it does not have rights as such, without a living host it cannot survive. It does not have the right to end its mothers life. And in the case of rape should never have been created.
oops! lazy thinking/typing on my part!
eithet way until it cansustain life independently of the woman, it possesses no independent rights.
compos - eithet way until it cansustain life independently of the woman, it possesses no independent rights
And that's where it gets tricky. I don't think there are many who are pro choice who agree with full term abortions being freely available. Two of my children were born before 40 weeks. There were babies in scbu doing extremely well who'd been born at 28 and 32 weeks.
So where does the line get drawn?
When does the child within the womb deserve the chance to live and cease to be a bodily product of the mother?
24 weeks? when it has decent viability with assistance?
34 weeks when it can breathe independently?
20 weeks when it can feel pain? (that date is debatable, I'm just using it for illustrative purposes)
This is the aspect of the debate that causes issues in Ireland, very few people agree with the current situation where women are dying due to lack of abortion. However, if another referendum were held on the matter suggesting abortion be allowed til full term it would be voted against... I would lay money on it. So we have a situation where most people feel there should be some abortion, up to a certain point of pregnancy but no-one can agree on the details. So it never goes anywhere and we're left in the same stupid situation as before.
I agree with up to term freely available, personally. I think women can self regulate and don't need laws to draw a line in the sand. I appreciate my stance is not popular, however I don't see why we can't copy one of the more restrictive EU countries (to keep the moderates happy), like Italy, also a very catholic country.
'I agree with up to term freely available, personally'
Same here. Anything less is the thin end of the wedge. As long as that foetus is living inside a woman's body, she gets to decide what happens - not allowing her this choice means she is viewed as lesser than a man in the eyes of the law and that's not something I can tolerate.
I also work with young children and their parents and I see how much effort and sacrifice and commitment it takes to do a good job of raising a child. Just as every child should be a wanted child, every parent should be fully committed to being a parent and should be ready for the challenge. I can't see what purpose is being served by forcing terrified or angry or resentful women into becoming somebody's mother.
Kobay, what part of my posts aren't you understanding? Technically technically it was allowed under those circumstances but the the lack of legislation made it difficult for doctors. Now the legislation will be in place.
Most people draw their 'pro-choice' line a bit sooner than full term but technically if you are supporting abortion from the pro-choice position then you should accept that it is a woman's right to chose right up to the point when she gives birth. Thankfully we live in a civilised society where people who apply those beliefs can be convicted of murder.
Wrt 'surviving independently' - what about babies/children/adults with severe disabilities that mean that they can't survive independently. Do they not have a life?
Canada has no limits on abortion and it is a lovely, civilised, first world country with excellent rights for women and universal free health care. It's not paradise but the fact it leaves abortion entirely up to women and their doctors has not led to societal collapse.
Having said that I would be happy with abortion up to 12 weeks for everybody, and in cases of serious risk to maternal and foetal health thereafter.
What I think will happen - first we will get TFMR. That will take another court case, a long battle, more couples forced to air their stories in the newspapers or the Oireachtas (while Ronan Mullen sneers at them ). But it will happen. Maybe two, three more years. No more than five. TFMR actually has more support than abortion for suicidal ideation.
TFMR might require overturning Article 40.3.3. Selfishly, I almost hope it does, because I think a campaign to remove it from the Constitution to allow for TFMR would almost certainly pass. But that is selfish - TFMR women deserve abortion regardless of whether everybody else can get it too.
So after TFMR, we are back to teenage rape victims in care, and women like Savita whose health but not life is compromised. One of them will die. Maybe more than one. And there will be protests and marches and vigils and gradually public opinion will force a referendum. How gradually? Ten years? Less? It depends on who is in the Dail. They have all learned that SPUC and Iona and Youth Defense are losing power, though. That's great.
So you think Canadians are all baby murderers then bumbley?
Nope. Not all Canadians are having late term abortions for non-medical reasons are they?
Thankfully we live in a civilised society where people who apply those beliefs can be convicted of murder.
I think you might need to check your facts there bumbley
True skyler, it depends on where you are. Sadly we aren't as civilised as I hoped. Some doctors carrying out late term abortions have been convicted of murder.
Some might consider it a mark of civilisation that a society grant all its citizens the right to bodily integrity. Guess you don't, though.
Most people draw their 'pro-choice' line a bit sooner than full term but technically if you are supporting abortion from the pro-choice position then you should accept that it is a woman's right to chose right up to the point when she gives birth. Thankfully we live in a civilised society where people who apply those beliefs can be convicted of murder.
The bolded is the case in Canada. It is legal to have a late term abortion for non-medical reasons. Of course almost nobody does. But it is legal.
So are they uncivilised murderers?
I also don't believe that terms are necessary. Women will have abortions as soon as they possibly can, if they don't want to be pregnant. Stands to reason. This is an issue because anti abortion people want to increase the time and difficulty involved in getting an abortion and decrease the term during which a woman can have one thereby decreasing a woman's chance of having her medical needs seen to.
Because they're dishonest, disingenuous fuds, frankly. They think women are incapable of making these decisions.
The foetus has a body too. I don't think think it is civilised to grant someone the authority over another person's life/body.
Holdme, they obviously wouldn't be tried and convicted for murder there because it isn't illegal. I still don't agree with it though and I don't think the majority of people would either.
'I don't think think it is civilised to grant someone the authority over another person's life/body.'
The Irish state currently has authority over the bodies of its female citizens of child bearing age.
The foetus isn't a person. It's a foetus.
No, the child inside the woman has rights too according to their law.
When does it become a person skyler?
Good point Apocalypse. The overwhelming majority of women who need an abortion get it under 12 weeks. The few women who need abortions later often need them because they are very young and didn't realise they were pregnant, or because they have just escaped an abusive relationship.
Here's a source for that by the way.
Women who need abortions after 12 weeks are very young, poor, from communities without access to abortion clinics, rape and abuse victims, have just lost their jobs... it's heartbreaking.
Really skyler? So a foetus in distress at 38 weeks - life worth saving but an unwanted 38 week old foetus - not worth it? Even though it can survive outside the woman and she's going to have to give birth one way or another? She still has the right to chose to end that life? Do you really believe that or are you just trying to make a point?
In reality, the women who need it most.
Her body, her choice. It's not for me, or you, or anyone else to dictate to her what she can or can't do with her body.
'More likely' is not the same as all
It's not just her body you're talking about though.
Don't try to tell me a 38 week old foetus doesn't have body.
Well as you can see from the name I am from Northern Ireland. We have to travel to England or somewhere too. It's not right under some circumstances, however I am only 30, so not old and I am very happy that its not available here like in England or some other parts of the UK. Most women here and certainly all of my friends and family feel the same, and I would vote to make some changes like maternal risk or rape cases, but other than that, I am happy it is not like England for many reasons.
To the poster who would not visit Ireland for this reason, I want to let you know I can totally understand where you are coming from, because there are some countries I steer clear of too. England being one of them.
Anti choice activists like to focus on the theoretical case of a 38 week foetus rather than the vast majority of real cases, which involve abortions before 12 weeks and where those few after 20 weeks are overwhelmingly due to foetal abnormalities not picked up until later scans.
You're wrong again, bumbley. Even in places where abortion is not allowed, or allowed up to a certain point, you cannot be convicted of murder, because even when a foetus is given rights, it rarely, if ever, is given the status of personhood.
In UK law, murder is against " a reasonable creature in rerum natura", which means that against a person who has been born and is completely separate from the mother, ie the umbilical cord has been cut and an independent breath has been taken. Only then is it legally a person, before that it legally is not and there can be no murder.
Geographical proximity to a country that offers safe, legal abortion allows Norhern Ireland and the Republic to take a 'moral' stance without any of the usual consequences.
I think that any woman who wants an abortion at 38 weeks will have a pretty good reason. I don't think there should be an upper limit, and I agree with the self-regulating point made upthread.
Nornironmum looks like Haiti and the like will be your holiday destinations then...
Twirly, if that post was directed at me, I'm not focussing on anything. We were discussing abortion to term which is why I am talking about 38 week old foetuses.
Right skyler, because women always have a 'pretty good' reason for doing something. I'm sure the women who have killed their young babies/children had perfectly good reasons for doing so
Norniron, most people I know from NI feel the same way too.
Did it being illegal stop them from killing their children, bumbley? So what does the law matter?
That's a false comparison, bumbley. Women who kill their babies and young children are committing murder. As we've established, women who have late abortions are not committing murder.
Nope it didn't but at least they could be convicted for it. If you think that way then maybe we shouldn't have laws for anything - some people will break them anyway.
Most people have a conscience, and use that. Do you need a law to tell you not to kill your children? Would you do it if there wasn't one?
Hati? No I'm off to Spain in a few days!
I would never judge a country on the views of some people, or indeed it's history, but some of you are.
I am a modern woman from Northern Ireland, whist I agree that changes need to be made, I don't understand why it's any one else's business but our own country people's. it's a democracy, that's the point. It is not up to anyone who does not reside here, either in the North or the South to judge it or get involved. I think England has more than enough of its own problems to worry about right now, try sorting them out first!
I think focusing on a hypothetical 38 week abortion (something that basically never happens even where it is legal) is tremendously disingenuous when you consider the reality is, for example, the 90 women who became pregnant as a result of rape in Ireland last year.
The 90 that we know about. Obviously many more women will not even have been able to contact a Rape Crisis Centre.
So why do you steer clear of England then Nornironmum if you'd 'never' judge a country on the views of some people?
Spain has even more liberal laws on abortion than Great Britain, Nornironmum
And that's a ridiculous attitude, Nornironmum - so nobody outside of South Africa ought to have judged apartheid? Or nobody outside of the United States ought to have held opinions about racial segregation?
I thought I had made that clear in my post? Maybe not, because many many, though not all, of the people in England love to get involved in the business of other countries. Whist forgetting that maybe if they looked closer to home and sorted out the issues their own county are having,(and let's be honest they are plenty) we could all get on with our own lives.
Abortion is available in Northern Ireland as of last October thanks to Marie Stopes.
Norn do you judge honour killings? Girls being punished for being raped? Forced marriage?
Well, given that the southern and northern Irish states export their women seeking abortion primarily to England, I think it's fair enough for English people to take an interest in abortion provision in NI and ROI.
I'm not sure why you're making digs at English people, I think pretty much everyone on this thread is Irish/living in Ireland/married to an Irish person, etc.
And people in the UK have every right to have an interest in the Irish abortion legislation given that they very kindly provide us with facilities for procedures we need.
Where would the ~1400 couples every year diagnosed with a fatal fetal abnormality who wish to terminate go without the UK?
Ironic LOL at northern Ireland being fine and dandy and "England" should mind its own business. If there was anywhere in the world that statement was so ridiculous......
Skyler - I was talking about your argument that women have 'reasons' for having a late term abortion as if having 'reasons' for doing something makes it ok.
I think some of the remarks have been bigoted to a degree though, and suggest that outside of making cracks, little genuine interest is taken.
Kobay - then why have any laws at all? Would you be happy leaving everything up to people's conscience?
Oh, I didn't know the English tax payer paid for this? Well that's fair enough if it costs the Englsih people money, though somehow I don't think this is the case.
If you read my posts again you will see that I am not saying sbortion is wrong, in some cases and yes changes do need to be made. But I am very happy that's it's not available the way it is in England and most of my friends who live here feel the same and the difference is they actually LIVE here.
Abortion is not legal in Northern Ireland! Maybe one day, but not now.
HoldMe, it makes perfect sense to be talking about a 38 week old foetus when you are discussing abortions to term.
Well, bumbley whatever a woman's reasons are for what she wants to do with her own body, they are all right with me. You disagree with that. That's your right. But I don't think it's right that your moral outlook should restrict other women's choices.
Also HoldMe, Marie stopes are still bound by the legislation within NI.
Nornironmum: abortion is legal in Northern Ireland, up to 9 weeks. Marie Stopes opened a clinic in Belfast last year.
On some matters, yes I would. This is one of them. We don't laws for every single thing.
From the make stoops website
Medical abortion service for Irish and Northern Irish women
As part of our commitment to helping Irish and Northern Irish women, all women travelling from Ireland and Northern Ireland to one of our centres in Great Britain can access a medical abortion service which can be completed within a day if you are between six and nine weeks pregnant. This is for the fee of 420.
You can also visit our new centre in Belfast. The consultation fee is £80 and the medical procedure fee is £350.
If' you're travelling to one of our centres in Great Britain, appointments will be in the morning, in order to complete the treatment in one day. You need to arrive at the clinic by 10am so that the first tablet can be given no later than 10.30am. The second set of tablets will be given to you six hours after the first.
While we understand that you may want to get home quickly following the treatment, we advise that you stay overnight locally with friends or family if possible. This is because you may begin to experience cramps and bleeding soon after taking the second medication and you may prefer not to be travelling at this time.
We will give you comprehensive information about what to expect following the treatment and how to manage symptoms you may experience. We will also provide you with sanitary protection and medication to relieve pain and sickness.
To find out if you are able to have this treatment, you will need to have a scan to confirm how many weeks you are pregnant. Scans can be carried out at Reproductive Choices in Dublin, Marie Stopes Belfast centre or in a centre in the UK. It is important that you are aware that if you choose to have the scan at the centre and the pregnancy is found to be over nine weeks you will not be able to have this medical treatment and will be offered a surgical abortion.
If you are travelling to the UK for medical or surgical treatment please do not eat on the day of travel and only drink water in case an anaesthetic is required.
For further information on accessing this new service please call 0845 300 8090 (callers from Northern Ireland) or 00 44 845 300 8090 (callers from Ireland).
Norn you and most of your friends should have no authority over another womans uterus. If YOU dont want an abortion,then dont have one.
Most procedures are paid for privately but some are done on the NHS, so yes, they are paying for them. They are also providing services like the incredible service offered at Liverpool Women's to women terminating for medical reasons.
Abortion IS LEGAL in Northern Ireland. Have a read of this. Abortions are taking place in Northern Ireland right now.
And of course, you and all your friends and family DO have abortions available to you just as freely as they are in England. Because you can travel, whenever you want. So once again any talk of a special culture or attitude to unwanted pregnancy is just talk. You HAVE abortion. Most people can get an abortion when they want one. There is nothing special about Ireland, North or south, other than we like to punish children, abuse victims, and the very poor.
You're way behind the times norniron, there have been totally legal abortions, up to 9 weeks, in the marie stopes BELFAST clinic for a year.
And your province costs the english taxpayer for this, and many other things. But thats beside the point.
Is it really so contraversial an opinion to think that the only person who should control whether human beings can come out of her body is the person whose body it is? It seems so patently obvious to me that I struggle to understand how anyone can think otherwise. I know they do, but I don't get it.
I think women can self regulate and don't need laws to draw a line in the sand
So surely we don't need laws regarding murder, theft etc either? As obviously we're all so reasonable.
Laws aren't there to restrict the ones who think logically and have good moral compasses, they're on place as there will always be individuals who dp not have the same morals as the rest of society. Each society draws up its laws based on the ethics upheld by the majority.
Most of us couldn't conceive of terminating at 39 weeks because we've changed our mind and decided we don't want the healthy baby growing within us. So theres an assumption that only non viable babies will be terminated at this stage. But that is simply not the case.
But why are you so determined to discuss abortions to term, bumbley, when they effect almost nobody, and there are thousands of Irish women with serious medical need because their babies are dying inside them who could do with your support and attention instead?
(the info you have given is for those after 9 weeks)
HoldMe, yes, but still under the current legislation.
"Abortions can be carried out only to preserve the life of the mother or if continuing the pregnancy would have other serious, permanent physical or mental health effects.
There is strict assessment regarding any impact on mental well-being and the woman must consult with two clinicians."
"So surely we don't need laws regarding murder, theft etc either? As obviously we're all so reasonable."
I'm afraid that doesn't follow, at all. We're talking only about bodily integrity, not the rights of other citizens.
Every year, there are 90 women (at least) pregnant by rape.
1800 women are told they have a fatal fetal abnormality.
ZERO women in the UK and Ireland have late term abortions for non-medical reasons.
So why the hell do you care so much about a hypothetical situation that never arises even in the few countries it is legal, let alone OUR countries, where it ISN'T and there is no suggestion it will be?
Where is your fucking compassion?
Really making diggs? One poster said she would never visit Ireland because if this. I have read many view here on Ireland and Northern Ireland, so I am allowed my own. Of course we are not fine and dandy here, but then again is England perfect right now? I think not. Now I won't be getting into any arguments here and won't be posting on this matter again because the simple fact is the vast majority of people here do not want abortion legalised apart from in some circumstances. It does not make us backward as many people on this thread have stated, it may not be the views on the women there, but it certainly does not make us less civilised than England, it just happens to be something the majority of people here don't want. Right or wrong, it its not your concern.
It IS our concern. Don't be ridiculous. Don't be such a nimby.
Don't worry, Nornironmum, you and all your friends and family can still have any abortion you need.
Thanks to "England".
HoldMe, because skyler and others were talking about supporting the rights of a mother to terminate a pregnancy to term - did you not read the thread before asking me why I was discussing it?
"ZERO women in the UK and Ireland have late term abortions for non-medical reasons."
Because they aren't legal.
If you think thats the only reason, you have a very low opinion of women, and obviously of yourself.
As Northern Ireland is a constituent part of the United Kingdom, the abortion rights of Northern Irish women is the concern of their fellow citizens, even if they are (<horror>) English.
So a woman who is being abused by her partner should have the right to murder him as he's a threat to her bodily integrity?
A child beaten by their parent?
A death caused in self defence is never murder?
It does hold... a baby which could be removed alive and put up for adoption with no greater risk to the mother at that stage of pregnancy is instead injected into the heart with a lethal dose of medication to kill it. The mother then gives birth to this dead infant. Her body has been through an entire pregnancy and now the birth, her physical health is exactly as it would have been if the baby were alive. Instead of giving the living child away after the birth a decision has been made to end its perfectly viable life.
But as Holdme has pointed out, this is all tangential to the main debate, my apologies as it was me who mentioned the full term issue first. I simply wanted to point out that there is a spectrum of opinion on this issue which is further complicating the matter.
Skyler never mentioned it until you did! SummerRain was the first person to bring up late term abortions.
They are irrelevant. Nobody is proposing them.
Totally agree with those saying that the rest of the UK have been desensitised to abortion.
Summer, I'm not going to engage with such silly, derailing, arguments. none of those are remotely analagous, they are merely inflaming.
Why the rest of the UK? The vast majority of women in Northern Ireland and Ireland have as much access to abortion as an English woman does.
Irish women have abortions all the time. About three every day. One in ten Irish pregnancies ends in abortion. How have English people been 'densensitised' but not Irish people?
Fab tonydanza, the marvelous England to the rescue again! What would the rest of the world do without you sorting out all of its problems?
I am not getting into a debate here, and I am not saying abortion is right or wrong. I am simply saying why not try sorting out the many issues in England right now and stop passing judgement on other counties views and laws.
As a matter of interest, bumbley, less than 1% of abortions in Canada take place after 20 weeks, according to the Canadian statistics agency.
Kobay, I think youve missed the point. How do you expect them to have one here if its not legal?
I repeat, NornIronMum: As Northern Ireland is a constituent part of the United Kingdom, the abortion rights of Northern Irish women is the concern of their fellow citizens, even if they are (<horror>) English.
Fab tonydanza, the marvelous England to the rescue again! What would the rest of the world do without you sorting out all of its problems?
I am not English, you loon, I'm Irish!
And I pass judgement over all of our nasty, woman-punishing laws I like.
Marie stops I'm belfast only preform abortions up to nine weeks within our current laws In Northern Ireland
Our provision of early medical abortion will be the same service that is currently available from the NHS in Northern Ireland, available only within the current legal framework: that is, if a womans life is at immediate risk or there is a risk of real and serious long term or permanent damage to her physical or mental health, she may have an abortion in Northern Ireland.
HoldMe, does that mean you don't support abortion to term in principle? Earlier posters did mention them before I did and skyler agreed.
Skyler, that's still 650+ abortions.
Lol ok tonydanza, you can pass judgement all you like!
I am not saying it's right or wrong, but the majority of women here, are happy with the current laws. This is what we voted for. So wether anyone outside Northen Ireland or the Republc believes its wrong or not, this is a democracy and what the majority of the people want.
650+ for after 20 weeks. It's unclear how many of those are at or after 38 weeks. What the Canadian statistics show is that a properly liberalised system of abortion access for women (which is not regulated by law) results in the vast, vast, vast majority of abortions being performed long before 20 weeks - which proves Apocalypse's point that most women who want an abortion want it as quickly as possible.
Technically skyler, you'd be interested in how many we're over 24 weeks (because that's the current law in the UK)
I am not getting drawn into the term debate, it is derailing and taking attention away from the point of the thread which is IRELAND'S abortion laws.
It's irrelevant, they don't happen even where they are legal.
Norn in Ireland opinion poll after opinion poll shows people believe our Article 40.3.3 is outdated. They want change but our politicians are too afraid of ultraconservative vested interests to bring it about. It has taken 20 years and two referenda for "democracy" to help Irish women.
Canada has a lower abortion rate than the UK anyway. Also, I guess we differ in that even one full term abortion for non-medical reasons is too many afaiac.
That's fine HoldMe. I think you probably draw your line earlier than full term anyway which does introduce some interesting ideas into the debate (which is why it is relevant) but you don't have to get involved if you don't want to.
Kobayashu, but those arguments are exactly the sort of mental imagery that the pro-life movement use. And once those images have been put into people's heads, who are already unsettled by the concept of abortion in any instance, they can sway decision makers and voters to keep abortion illegal. Which is exactly what is happening over here.
It's why this legislation is incomplete, because the government knew that trying for the referendum again would fail as there is no universally agreeable gestation at which termination is always morally acceptable.
Late term abortions in the US are classed as anything after 20 week. So non viable foetus' are being ranked alongside full term pregnancies for those statistics. And when the debate gets going that 1.5% figure will be pulled out and the pro-life movement will fail to mention it's counted from 20 weeks, they will suggest 1.5% of abortions in america are performed on full or near term infants who could otherwise survive. And the public will be horrified, vote no and we're back to where we started.
We need the discussion of early term abortions to be completely isolated from the larger debate of female choice if Ireland is to have any hope of bringing in a change in legislation. Because it is exactly that confusion which is holding a lot of people back from agreeing with the notion of legalising abortion.
Yes the change that has been voted for as in legal in certain circumstances, which I believe is right, and the vast majority of people on this island do too, but only certain circumstances, right or wrong it's the view the majority of people here have.
I completely agree with it and think they are going the right away about it.
Abortion shouldn't be just allowed because you don't fancy having the child. If your child is going to be born with such a serious disability they wont have quality of life you should be given the choice whether to terminate and if your own life is put in danger by having the baby, you should be given an abortion.
Otherwise, it's just used as a contraceptive.
Which is ridiculous, costs money on the NHS for that persons choice of not using contraception [usually, although of course sometimes the odd slip up happens. If you know you are very fertile though it's best to take 2 or 3 forms of contraceptive, just in case].
I wont complain to others who have one though and these are my opinions and I know they aren't shared by everyone. If someone I knew had one I'd be disappointed in them, but I wouldn't cut them out of my life.
It's not a "vast majority". It's 46% vs 39%.
That's just opinion polls though. Nobody has been allowed vote on this since 1983. I wasn't even born then. But Article 40.3.3 could kill or maim me anyway.
I don't think any voter in Northern Ireland has ever been consulted on abortion. The legislation governing abortion dates from 1861 and 1945.
Regardless of whether it's the view of the majority, other people - even foreigners - have the right to hold opinions about it and campaign for change, and support those who already are campaigning for change in NI and ROI. They even have the right to judge a society that preserves those laws. You didn't answer any of the points put to you about judging other situations (apartheid, honour killings, forced marriage), I notice. That really is a ridiculous position to take.
Skyler white you are sounding ridiculous. Of course honor killings etc are wrong. Are they legal? The difference here is abortion expect in circumstances is not.
You can't force everyone in every country to share the same opinions as you do, just because you think they are right!
I don't understand why it's any one else's business but our own country people's. it's a democracy, that's the point. It is not up to anyone who does not reside here, either in the North or the South to judge it or get involved. I think England has more than enough of its own problems to worry about right now, try sorting them out first!
The point of putting these other situations to you was to clarify if you thought it was all right to judge them or get involved in campaigns to reverse them. It's not about forcing other people to share the same opinions, it's about responding to your attitude of 'you're not from here, so it's none of your business'.
Summer rain you must be living in a different ireland to me and I'm currently pregnant and under the care of the one of the leading maternity hospitals in the country public so called consultant lead care. I m lucky I'm still pregnant due to the abysmal level of care I care I have received and the saddest thing is that I m only one of many....I was actually admitted in the hospital when it was matched on by so called pro life campaigners the other weekend..with plac cards of foetuses and came into the hospital and were harrassesing patients and visitors.
Neither is Ireland a family friendly country that legislates as such.
The legislation is a joke the bare minimum to stop the fines from Europe for contined breaches of human rights. And The debating of It was embarressing and Depressing. To think those idiots are entrusted with this countries future.
Democracy shouldn't be at the cost of basic human rights and control over my body Is that in my opinion. I don't understand why my next door neighbours believe on abortion should impact on me. I think the fact that women have to travel for medical abortions is one of the saddest things occurring in this state at present. But it's kinda of like the laundries etc exporting abortion suits the government. When you think of it and the fact the republic is still relatively new it has a shocking history in regards treatment of women and children with support from the government. This is now different to me.
No skyler it was responding to the posters saying Ireland was not as civilised as England because you can't get an abortion here, or the poster who would not travel here because of it.
Right or wrong, many people here feel abortion apart from I'm certain circumstances is wrong and are happy it's not legal here, it does not make England a superior country because you can have an abortion there If you choose.
English people (and Americans, French, German, anyone actually) are allowed to have opinions on and judge NI and ROI for their failure to provide proper access to abortion. You seem to be denying that.
And it does make England (or Britain, more accurately) a superior country for women's rights.
But Norn, you can have an abortion if you're from NI or Ireland too. You just have to travel for it.
Is the culture really that different? The only people actually affected by these laws are pregnant children, women in abusive relationships, and women who are very very poor.
Everybody else has the right to an abortion, they have to pay through the nose and they often end up going without proper medical aftercare, but they can choose it if they want.
So what are we going for here? Should the hundreds of thousands of women who have chosen abortion be put in prison? Most of them were abortions for social reasons after all.
We are going for abortion that is legal under certain cirmstuances as has been voted in. That's it, if there is further change we will see how it goes and what the people want!
Lol yes Britian is far superior ( it's this view that makes me never want to travel there)
Maybe it's mad.
The scandals really shock me. Forced adoptions, symphysiotomies, I can't get my head around it honestly. Some shameful things have happened. And we say they won't happen again... But we just passed a law to send women who import abortion pills to 14 years in prison. Somebody is going to be convicted of that. It will be another scandal. Probably some frightened kid, like most of the previous cases.
Or maybe somebody will die because they didn't get medical care after a UK abortion, or because they bought they bought pills online from a dodgy website and were too afraid to go to their doctor when it went wrong because they would be sent to prison.
They will die and we will have a vigil
I'm Irish, by the way, Norn. That means I'm allowed to have an opinion on this, according to you .
"A baby which could be removed alive and put up for adoption with no greater risk to the mother at that stage of pregnancy is instead injected into the heart with a lethal dose of medication to kill it. The mother then gives birth to this dead infant. Her body has been through an entire pregnancy and now the birth, her physical health is exactly as it would have been if the baby were alive. Instead of giving the living child away after the birth a decision has been made to end its perfectly viable life." Are you talking about a full term abortion SummerRain?
I know a big deal is made about the advances in medical science which means that babies born at the same age that late abortions are still allowable, but many of those babies have severe health problems. Delivering them at that stage instead of terminating would just mean many more disabled babies in the care system. My aunt has spina bifida and grew up in care, she was never adopted. There aren't that many people clamouring to adopt a baby with disabilities.
And the overwhelming amount of late term abortions are already because a severe disability has been discovered.
NornIronMum I'm in NI and most women I know do not support the lack of abortion service, the very restrictive time frame Marie Stopes operates under. I've 3 kids - I didn't realise I was pregnant until 6-7 weeks. Should I have wanted or been considering an abortion I'd be so tight for time - maybe I'd make a snap decision, I'd have to get the money, what if I didn't want my partner to know?
I have 3 beautiful daughters, and every day I hope that they will be afforded the same rights and choices as women in other parts of the UK. That's all I want - equal rights to procure a service.
Suppose it depends on who you know wiggles. I have to agree with NornIron as far as the opinion of my NI friends go.
I was shocked when someone I know who is from Ireland and has been brought up and attended things where there's a pro life message, he believed that abortions are carried out with salt on end of something and is used to burn the baby to death. Was even shown a video of a baby in the womb trying to move away from it. I understand if he feels strongly about pro life but I was shocked that he didn't know the facts. How can you decide your views on something if your force fed misleading information
Youth Defence and their ilk are scary, dangerous people
Wiggle that's what you want and that's fine, and I can totally see your point of view. Again I am not judging the right to abortion/ I am not pro life/ pro choice, though I do admit I would be more pro life than pro choice.
Most people here know that changes have to be made to allow it in certain circumstances and I agree with this too.
But look at any option poll, the belfast telegraph did one, the Irish news? Funny this is one issue both sides of our community mostly agree on. The majority of people here are happy with our abortion laws and do not want them to be freely available like in the rest of the UK.
Maybe we are not as liberal here? I don't know? But I for one am glad of it and it certainly does not make our country less civilized than England, nor does in make English women any more, or less superior than us, or in fact any other country in the world that does not have the same views/laws/opinions as those as the English people
Actually, NornIronmum, the Bel Tel poll showed that only 26.9% of those surveyed were happy with the status quo. So I'm not see where you're getting 'the majority of people are happy with our abortion laws' from. You're rather arrogantly presuming to speak on behalf of most people.
And yes, Northern Ireland is strikingly less liberal than the rest of the UK, and the rest of Western Europe actually (much like ROI). That's why it took a European Court ruling in 1993, for instance, for homosexuality to be decriminalised. Another shameful episode.
One wonders why you use English instead of British, Nornironmum? Your last sentence makes it sound like you think of abortion rights as some English affectation. But actually, it is NI and indeed ROI who are out of step with the rest of the world on the issue, not just England. To the great disadvantage of those women residents who are forced to travel in order to exercise dominion of their own bodies. I put one up a while back- DH is from NI so we have lots of family and friends there- and though she was more fortunate than many to have loved ones to stay with, it made the whole experience colossally more difficult and expensive than it needed to be.
Anyway, it's true enough that one of the sadly few things a majority on both sides of the divide agree on is that it is preferable for NI to be able to continue exporting its sexual hypocrisy. In this regard, NI certainly is inferior to England, Britain and many other countries in the world- and there are plenty of places with superior abortion rights and provision to England, come to that. And NI is able to continue being inferior in the main because close proximity to Britain allows it. If cheap flights and ferries ended tomorrow, NI society would have to address the consequences of its restrictive laws. At the moment, you are protected from this and some amongst you (a few of my own relatives included) are able to continue indulging yourselves in the pretence that you don't need proper legal abortion.
Oh, I'm of Irish descent too btw.
Oh, and a big kiss to everyone working for safe, legal abortion on both sides of the border. You are all heroes.
Yes skyler white, shameful indeed.
But let's have a look at England shall we? Any shameful episodes in this county's history? We may not be liberal here, fair enough I agree, and you are wrong to say that I am assuming to speak for most people, and actually the opinion in the belfast telegraph was that of the law, before the special conditions came out. Now that they are there, the majority are happy with it. The politicians we have here, we voted for ourselves and continue to do so, every person in Northern Ireland is not going to agree with every law or change that has been passed, you only have to look at the weekends violence to see that. But most people here, are happy that abortion is not available in the same way it is in the rest of the UK, not every one is going to agree on everything? Just because you think it's right does not make me wrong for thinking that it is wrong
Here is the latest poll in belgast telegraph. Saying 45 percent want the law to change, meaning as I have stated repeatedly here again and again that the majority of people here are happy with the current law.
More than one in four people in Northern Ireland support a womans right to choose on abortion, an exclusive Belfast Telegraph poll has revealed.
'The opinion in the Belfast Telegraph was that of the law before the special conditions came out'.
What point are you trying to make? I'm sorry, i cant understand this at all. What special conditions under the law? Like I said earlier, abortion in NI is governed under legislation from 1861 and 1945. Nothing has been passed since then.
You're coming across as slightly dementedly anti-English, do you realise this?
See to me, it doesn't matter whether people view abortion as right or wrong - the fact is that NI is in the UK but I do not have the same rights over my body as a fellow UK citizen - that is ridiculous, unfair and very very wrong.
Read the article properly. It states that 26.9% were happy with the current abortion laws, including the 'don't knows'.
Fine wiggle, but it's not just about you is it? It's about what the majority want.
Exactly wigglesrock. It bears comparison to the several decades during which many NI Catholics were denied the voting rights they were entitled to under law as British citizens. NI women are effectively second class within the UK in this respect, behind women living in Britain. NI for better or for worse is part of the UK and therefore people NI must enjoy the same basic rights as the rest of us.
it seems you aren't in the majority though, norniron. So if you are happy to go along with the majority, you're happy to change the law to be more liberal, aren't you?
Except it shpukdnt be about what the majority want, abortion is a personal choice, women have the right to bodily autonomy, its a basic human right!
If you dotn want an abortion don't have one, no-ome will force you to have one but stop dictating what other women can do.
Irelands abortion laws are a joke, and they dot prevent abortion, they just make it more difficult for those that need.
Religion and politics have NO place in a woman's uterous, it is for her and her alone to decide.
And yes I will campaign against and support others campaigning against misogynistic abortion laws anywhere in the world, because I support womems rights to bodily autonomy.
You choose to see it as a country where women are worse off. I see it as a country where a foetus is better off and I don't think that's a bad thing.
Skyler white, I am perfectly capable of thank you very much, we do have education here also now, it's amazing we can all read now.
Here is the full article
The results suggest the public here is sharply divided over the issue. Another 26% believe that the laws should be toughened so that terminations are only available when a mother would die if the pregnancy was to continue.
The poll provides a fascinating insight into views on one of the most controversial subjects in our society, brought into the spotlight recently by the Marie Stopes clinic in Belfast and the death of Savita Halappanavar in the Republic.
Currently, the law states terminations can be performed only under certain conditions: if the pregnancy involves a greater risk to the physical or mental health of the woman, or her existing children, than having a termination.
All Executive parties except Alliance, which allows a free vote on the issue, have policies strongly against changing the laws.
But the poll results show that the political establishment does not reflect the range of opinion among voters and potential voters.
The findings come from a major survey commissioned by the Belfast Telegraph and carried out by LucidTalk, members of the British Polling Council (BPC).
A weighted sample of 1,130 adults was surveyed between November 6 and 23; 90% were questioned by telephone and the rest interviewed face to face.p
They were asked: Free abortion is currently allowed in Northern Ireland where there is the likelihood of serious and long-term danger to a prospective mothers mental or physical wellbeing if her pregnancy continues. Which, if any, of these statements do you agree with?
The first of four options was: Abortion should be available to any woman who chooses it after being counselled on alternatives.
This is marginally more liberal than the situation which applies in the rest of the UK, where the approval of two doctors is required.
The results showed that 25.9% agreed with this proposition. The proportion agreeing was roughly the same across the two main religious groups (28.3% of Protestants and 27.8% of Catholics).
It is always a bad thing when a fetus takes precedent over the woman who is carrying it, its a very slippery slope to give the unborn rights over a woman's body.
then ergo you think a foetus is more important than a woman.
Which, for me personally, means your opinion is not one I will listen to.
Nornironmum you think the status quo is acceptable because a majority support it. They don't, but let's say they did. Not so long ago, a majority in NI voted for a political situation that violated the basic rights of a minority. Was that ok?
So in this article it says 29 percent agreed that
The first of four options was: Abortion should be available to any woman who chooses it after being counselled on alternatives.
26 percent said there should be none at all and the laws toughened. And the others to keep it as it is.
Now you do the math here, that Is one in four who want change, as is the headline of the article!
Hardly a majority is it?
Not takes precedent/is more important. Just that it is respected as another life/potential life.
25.9% agreed with the proposition, not 29%
No chunderalla. Of course not, many things were wrong, but we wanted a democracy and this is what happens. Majority rule.
But to afford it respect you have it over rule the rights of the woman carrying it, that is wrong!
Politics and majority rule has no place in the issue of abortion and a woman's right to bodily autonomy, it is a basic human right.
I know you don't agree with me mad but it is your opinion that it is wrong.
From the same article in case of any confusion
More than one in four people in Northern Ireland support a womans right to choose on abortion, an exclusive Belfast Telegraph poll has revealed.
One in 4, so again MOST people do not support a woman's right to choose!!
Er, you do the maths. You've omitted the 18% who wish abortion to be available in cases of rape or incest - which is a liberalisation of the current position. It's 26.9% who wish the law to remain as it is. I'm not sure why you can't grasp this - it's clear as day here
Er no its the human right convention that its wrong as well.
You have the right to your bodily autonomy so choose not to have an abortion, no one has the right to dictate to other women what they do.
Norniron first of all, democracy doesn't simply equate to majority rule. There have to be safeguards for basic rights too. If this weren't the case, then the Orange period would also have been democratic in that the majority voted for it. But it sounds like you don't think that was a democracy? And additionally, since you say you don't agree with majority rule and never mind the rights of the minority when it comes to voting, why do you agree with it when it comes to women who want abortions? That's very inconsistent. Either you think democracy requires safeguards for rights or you don't. Either you think the majority should get their way regardless of what it does to the minority, or you don't.
And 26.5 want the law tightened!
Ok, so some of you are of the opinion that abortion is wrong or on demand is wrong, whatever. But what no-one ever answers is this: Why do you think that your opinion has any place in my uterus?
Look I have said all along that right to choose is not what most people want here:
I have proved my point, I have shown facts, I think I have made it clear that MOST people here do not want abortion other than special circumstances to be legalized here.
To those of you who still want to argue against the simple facts, fine go ahead. Again I am not saying abortion is right or wrong, simply that most people in this county want the law to stay as it is.
What is the point of a democracy if it does not go on majority vote?
I am not anti English btw, I am anti people forcing their options on others and stating they are superior and more civilized because most people here, do not have the same opinions that you do.
The irony of NornIronMum giving out about people ''forcing their options on others"!
norn, why should it go to a democratic vote though? I refer to my post above.
Koba, every law starts out as someone's opinion.
Anti people forcing their opinion... Get happy to force people to continue a pregnancy they dont want... Bit contradictory.
misogynistic abortion laws 5mad? you must know that many Irish women support the right to life of the unborn?
That doesn;t answer me, bumbley.
Nornironmum you certainly sounded anti-English, whilst simultaneously England fixated, in some of your posts. Anyway, you ask what's the point in a democracy if it doesn't go by majority vote. I assume then that you think it was fine and dandy for many Catholics to be disenfranchised in local elections in NI for decades, because the majority wanted it? But basically, democracy isn't just majority vote carries the day. That, for example, would allow 10% of the population to be killed or enslaved or have all their property confiscated if the other 90% want it. I assume you know democracies wouldn't allow this? So you need, and most democracies have, various basic rights for all citizens that are enshrined in law and can't be overruled even if the majority want it.
I personally know many Irish women that don't.
And women can be mysoginistic being female doesn't preclude that.
Well why stop at your uterus? Why should anyone's opinion dictate how you should behave in any situation? That's what laws do.
Irish Anglophobia often co-exists with Anglocentrism, Chunderella.
Laws dictate what we do to others, and not, generally what we do to ourselves. How would you feel if there was a law against you cutting your hair, or having plastic surgery, or getting contraception, or against you having a baby when you wanted one? Would you say, oh its the law, fair enough?
Still not answering though, just obfuscating with some straw men.
Skyler, please explain in detail how in anyway I am forcing my opinion on anyone? Have I said its right? Wrong? Have I said you must do as I say?
Have I said I think I am superior to you because I don't believe in it?
Have I said I am, and my county is more civilized because its not legal here?
I have simply stated the facts, it is not what most people here want! That is the truth of the matter, what I believe does not come in to it, nor what you believe so pease have respect, I think that is what is lacking here, respect for other people's options, other people's countries and views and cultures.
Laws dictate social convention and regulate behavior that may harm others. Me having an abortion does not harm you.
A fetus is not a person, it is not recognized aa such and cannot ave rights over a living woman.
Also, if the majority was all that ever mattered, we'd still have legal slavery. You'd be fine with that though, because its the law, right?
clearly many women support the right to choose abortion, the fact that you know some is not particularly relevant. those women who do not support abortion rights are misogynists? o.k.. ..
How can we respect the opinions of those who control our bodies and think themselves morally right to do so? And how can we respect yours, when you agree with them?
This misguided notion that all opinions should be respected is patent nonsense. Your opinion is detrimental to my life. Don't you get that?
If they want to impose their forced birth agenda on other women then yes they are mysoginists, if they say I won't have abortion but respect other women's right to choose what is right for them, fine.
clearly many women support the right to choose abortion, the fact that you know some is not particularly relevant, however those women who do not support abortion rights are misogynists? !
still no answer. It's funny that, there never is. Wonder if they haven't got one?
Well the anti English pro slavery iterate, uncivilised little me, is finished here.
Not an argument anyone is going to win, I simply told the facts, the option of the majority here, and also my opinion.
You may think I am wrong, that's fine, I think you are wrong, but I do respect your views.
It's wrong to not at least have respect for the views of others, which I have shown all along and many of you have not. In my opinion it's respect that makes a person civilized.
That should read illiterate ( it's the iPhone) not me being stupid! Though that is also a matter of opinion
You are entitled to your views. I just don't think your or anyone else's opinions should affect what any other woman can do with her own body.
So you can't answer me then? Shocker.
"It's wrong not to respect the opinions of others" Seriously? Have you thought that through at all. Do you respect the opinions of racists, of homophobes, of Robert Mugabe? Do you respect opinions that make you angry? Of course we don't have to respect everyone's opinion of something, that would be ridiculous.
I respect your right to have an opinion, of course. I do not respect your opinion. Why should I, when it is the opposite of my own? How could I, and have any moral conscience at all?
Norn you look after your uterus and i'll look after mine. Just keep your opinions and democracy out of it.
I'm not giving you the answer you want Koba, that doesn't mean I'm not answering you. The point is that in Ireland, the foetus is considered a person so having an abortion is doing something to them.
5madthings, you deciding to kill your husband doesn't harm me either.
No but it would harm him and my children, family friends etc.
Me terminating a pregnancy wouldn't and in fact could be in their best interests.
You are either being obtuse or stupid if you do not see the difference between a person and a fetus.
It isn't legally considered a person though, the law is the same as the UK, in fact. So no, you're still not really answering me at all.
would you consider it stupid to consider a 24 weeker a person 5mad? if not then how about@ 20 weeks?
Tbh I can't respect the opinion of anyone who thinks that a woman's rights trump that of the foetus up until they have given birth. I personally think it's taking your political views to extremes and throwing common sense out the window to not consider the foetus a person with a life of its own even if it is fully developed and perfectly capable of surviving outside of the mother. Some of you genuinely believe that should be the case to fulfil your 'pro-choice' ideals. I can't take you seriously if you actually believe that.
could be in their best interests? So do you think we should put disabled people out of their misery then? Make the decision about whether their life is worth living or not?
It's right to life is acknowledged Koba.
'however those women who do not support abortion rights are misogynists? !' Well, yes, Farewell, I believe that they are. Women can be misogynists too, you know. In fact, much as the plural of anecdote is not data, let me tell you about the two anti choice / pro forced birth women that I know. One believes that abortion is always murder, that it is not a feminist issue. She also regularly says that she hopes her son is gay (even though he would be condemned by the church to which she subscribes for it), as she would hate for another woman to ever take her son away from her. Clearly she is a misogynist, otherwise why would she fear other women so much, or believe that they were only waiting to take her son away from her.
The other is heavily involved with the Iona Institute. Given that they are a deeply misogynistic organisation, I dare say that anyone involved with them must also be a misogynist. Why on earth would anyone align themselves with David Quinn and his ilk if they didn't have utter contempt for women?
As I said, the plural of anecdote is not data, but my personal experience of anti-choice / pro forced birth-ers is that they are inherently misogynistic.
Anti-choice/ pro forced birthers perhaps I should start referring to pro-choicers as Anti-foetus/pro-abortionists ...
I think 5madthings is referring to the best interests of her husband, friends as the children she possibly already has, bumbley.
I've stayed away from this thread since yesterday but I'm going to dive in anyway.
Bumbleymummy I have to correct you (I am an Irish woman living in Ireland) A foetus is not considered viable until 24 weeks in both the UK and Ireland.
I had a late miscarriage at 20 weeks. I was not entitled to obtain a birth or death cert. This will only happen from 24 weeks onwards.
I am pro abortion in all cases. I would have had a termination with my late miscarriage however Irish law wouldnt allow it. I knew my baby was in pain and had no hope of survival. Yet I had to wait for the baby to die naturally but in pain
I hope there will be another referendum in my life time, for my daughters sake.
Ireland needs to be brought into the modern world kicking and screaming it seems...
Indeed I was Skyler but if I found out a fetus I was carrying had a condition that was incompatible with life I would consider it in their best interests as well tbh.
Yes I support abortion to term partly because I believe current abortion laws in the UK are disabilist, it is wrong to discriminate between the disabled and those who are not. I also fundamentally believe in a woman's right to bodily autonomy. We cannot give rights to a fetus over and above the woman carrying that fetus.
Do I find late term abortion unpalatable? Hell yes but I also believe its not something any woman would do lightly, the laws in Canada show this to be true, women don't need laws to regulate abortion, they will do that themselves unless of course you think women are callous, heartless people who abort for fun?
Fair enough skyler. I think we'd be getting into very dodgy territory if we start thinking about whether or not ending the life of the disabled person would be in the best interests of those around them...
Lucy sorry to hear of your experience
of course not all pro life/pro forced birth women are members of the Iona institute nor do they wish that their sons are gay so as to ensure a woman won't steal them away. your personal experience of pro life women is of course just that. there are posters on the pro abortion side of the debate who see women with an opposing view as misogynistic or who are in favour of abortion on demand and at term. then there are many more who do do hold extreme views and who don't wish to see women attack each other.
Lucy, I'm not sure where you're correcting me. I am we'll aware that the foetus is not considered viable until 24 weeks. (Although, as someone pointed out earlier, babies born earlier have survived) Sorry for your loss.
I am ashamed to be Irish when it comes to our backwards woman hating laws
Lucy is correcting you because you said that in Ireland a foetus is considered a person.
I don't expect you to respect my opinion, you'd have to be quite mad to since it opposes your own.
Irish law does not recognise a foetus as a person. The fact that it then gives it a right to life does not match its own laws. The fact that it gives it more rights than me, a real, legal, person is just bizarre.
I support the right of all women to be in charge of their own bodies. I support yours to not have an abortion, I don't think I should have any say in what you do with your body. You seem to think you have the right to control mine. Do you see why I don't think the two opinions are in in any way balanced, and yours so unfair?
5mad, I think it's ridiculous that you think that still applies when the foetus is perfectly capable of surviving outside the woman. I'm not sure why you don't think a woman would be capable of having a late term abortion considering that some of them seem to have no problem with killing their new borns and disposing of them in waste bins etc.
I have real problems with abortion to term. I can't get my head around it being ok to abort a foetus at 39+6, but not ok to kill a baby at 40+1.
And I think, in Ireland anyway, abortion to term is never going to be acceptable by the vast majority of the population. Whereas abortion to 12 or even 16 weeks would be. So in order to help the vast majority of women who find themselves unexpectedly (and unhappily) pregnant, surely that's where the politicians should start?
Me too, Lucy . I'm sorry that the awful law in Ireland made a painful situation even more traumatic for you.
I used the word 'person' in response to one of K's posts. I have already said that its right to life is acknowledged.(regardless of whether you want to consider it a person or not)
It doesn't have more of a right to life than you. It has the same right to life unless it is putting your life at risk.
5mad, my post should have said wouldnt be capable of having a late term abortion....
Maryz, I personally really struggle with it too. I support it, but I don't like it. But for me its the only moral position that makes sense.
(that doesn't mean its the legal position I actually argue and campaign for, since it would never happen, its an ideal, but not a realistic one). It seems to work for Canada though, a place we could do worse than emulate, imo.
5mad didn't say that women weren't capable of having late term abortions, she said it was a decision that they didn't take lightly.
You think it makes sense that a baby born at 37 weeks is alive and considered a person but one that still happens to be inside at that gestation isn't?
Oh ok, so we should be accepting of the women who commit infanticide because they probably didn't take he decision lightly?
Same here kobay its not something I like the idea of and as such I dont think its a decision a woman would take lightly, the statistics from Canada seem to back that up.
And even if a minority did do it lightly, I would still rather the majority have the right to bodily autonomy should they need it.
You cannot give a fetus equal rights to life without impeding on the life of the woman carrying that fetus, that is basic biology.
Yes, I do. One is out in the world, autonomous and a person, one is not. I don't see the problem with that. They are clearly different. And I say that as someone who had a baby before that point.
Historically, women who committed infanticide were generally treated with compassion by the law. I think that was a good thing.
The thing is, Kobayashi, whether we like it or not law in Ireland is decided by referendum. When it suits us (any of us) we think that is a good thing - the majority can accept or veto any law. And the result of that is that a minority may end up marginalised on any issue, because the majority will prevail.
When it comes to abortion, the majority (men and women) will not - thankfully for them - ever have had to consider it seriously. And therefore the majority is probably going to vote against a very liberal abortion law.
I look at my family. ds1 and dd are vehemently opposed to abortion. Well, they would be. Both of them were adopted - if there was abortion in Ireland it is likely that one or both of them would never have been born. Both are adamant that if there is another referendum they will vote against.
My parents will vote against. My dad is very Catholic. My mum feels all children (and she would call a foetus a child) deserve a chance of life.
dh would probably follow ds1. Because he feels so very strongly, it is hard to not recognise his absolute insistence that he had a right to live, regardless of what his birth mum would want.
I struggle. Because I always thought I was anti-abortion. But I know if dd got pregnant at 16 I would want her to abort (she would refuse) and I know that if I was pregnant now I wouldn't want the baby. So who am I to say anyone else couldn't have an abortion.
But I really struggle with "abortion, on demand, to term". I don't think I could vote for that. I should, but I don't think I could.
So while attitudes stay as they are, I don't think a referendum would be passed.
A foetus at 37 weeks gestation inside the womb is alive, but it's not a person. It's a foetus.
We've had this late abortion discussion up thread, bumbley - why are you insisting on going over it again?
Yes skylerwhite thank you I was correcting bumbleymummys ridiculous statement.
Also as far as I am aware a woman can only terminate a pregnancy after 24 weeks ( in the uk) if the baby has no chance of survival not because she has changed her mind
Considering that at 37 weeks the woman is going to have to give birth either way I don't see how the foetus is impeding on her life. If she gives birth to the baby live, it will (more than likely) survive. No comment about the women who commit infanticide?
Kobay, the woman would actually have to make the effort to kill the foetus at that point to prevent it being born alive and capable of surviving. The woman is not essential to its survival at that point. I can not even get my head around your kind of logic and tbh I don't think you can either. It's just political correctness and feminism gone mad.
Yes Lucy, I am aware of that too. Are you aware that we are discussing abortion to term because that it was some people think should be allowed regardless of whether he foetus is healthy or not. Would you be happy with that?
I agree in part, Maryz, but not all laws are decided by referendum. Most laws aren't, they are introduced by Bill into either the Dail or the Seanad , and have to be passed by both, after committee review, consultation, and various stages.
I think we should stop fannying around with referendum, because as you say, the vast majority of the voting public will never have to consider abortion in direct relation to themselves, so I don't see why they should be considered at all. Just pass the legislation and join the 21st century. Because Irish women already have abortions, they just don't have them in Ireland.
Bumbley, please don't insult me by saying I don't know my own mind, how dare you?
by the way "pc gone mad" is the godwins law of its argument. You lose.
The reason I am going over it again skyler is because I think it's ridiculous that anyone actually thinks like that. Including being sympathetic towards women who commit infanticide. Perhaps I should just refer to you as anti-baby? I'm presuming you aren't sympathetic towards women who murder their children? Or perhaps you are. Do you have a cut off? When does a child's life become valuable enough that you think the murderer deserves to be punished?
Feminism gone mad? Quick, call the police
I did address your point on infanticide, by the way.
I am sympathetic to women who murder their children, yes. Aren't a lot of people? It doesn't mean we think its ok.
But abortion is not murder. Thats no opinion, thats LAW.
Well you've already said that the idea doesn't agree with you yet you still support it. I'm not sure how that suggests 'knowing your own mind' tbh. Doesn't sound like you do to me.
Then you can't grasp the subtlety. Who says that abortion at all agrees with me personally? I SUPPORT ALL WOMENS RIGHT TO CHOOSE FOR THEMSELVES, IRRESPECTIVE OF MY OPINION, OR YOURS.
How is that so difficult?
That question about commenting in infanticide was for 5mad skyler.
No I don't agree with abortion to full term but then this is also illegal in the UK isn't it? except when the mothers life is at risk.
You can refer to me in whatever manner you choose. Just accord me the right to bodily autonomy.
I am sympathetic to women who murder their children. Like Koba I don't agree with it - but I sympathise with it. The research that I've done on 19th c infanticide reveals that the women concerned were vulnerable, frightened and desperate. Usually very poor as well.
So you support something you don't agree with. Yeah, that sounds really sensible.
Currently Lucy, but not if some of these posters had their way.
What about the ones in the 21st century? I'm also curious about when your cut off is for a child's life becoming valuable enough to not sympathise with their murderers. Or are you always sympathetic if they are poor and frightened?
KobayashiMaru, all laws that don't fit with the Constitution as it currently stands have to be decided by referendum, whether we like it or not.
The Dail can faff around with lots of laws, but not those that are enshrined in the Constitution.
Did you sympathise with Peter Connelly's mum? What about Daniel Pelka's mum? Are you sympathising with her right now? I'm sure she had a very valid reason for starving her son to death....
'perhaps I should start referring to pro-choicers as Anti-foetus/pro-abortionists ...', well, no, because those of us who are pro-choice have nothing against foetuses. Nor do we wish to force abortions upon women who do not want them. Every pro-choice person I know supports the right of every woman to be allowed to make a choice for themselves. I know many pro-choicers who, in fact, could never even entertain the idea of abortion for themselves, but do not wish to deny bodily autonomy to all women, based on their personal feelings. Whereas most pro-lifers / pro forced birthers wish to deny women that choice. To me, that is the key difference. I would never wish to force my beliefs on anyone. However, those who are pro-life wish to impose their will on everyone.
However, that is my opinion, and based on my own experience. I cannot presume to speak for every pro-choice person. I will also admit that I may be at the extreme end of the pro-choice spectrum. I do not, and never will, believe that a foetus has the same rights as the mother. I believe that the rights of the mother always, always trump the rights of the foetus. I support abortion to term. I do not believe that abortion is murder. I have travelled to the UK several times, to support women through having an abortion. I have done this for women that I know, at my own expense. I would happily do it for a stranger, at my own expense, if it would provide a woman with the support she needs.
Oh good lord, its painful. Lets try and simplify.
I don't like chocolate. Lots of people do though. Even though I don't like it, I'm fine with you having it, because it has nothing to do with me. Do you see?
Whether or not I am personally ok with abortion has nothing to do with it. I want those that want them to get them, safely and easily, and those that don't want them I want not to have them.
Seriously, this is a very very common opinion. I think if you slow down and think about it, you can understand this simple concept.
Maryz, I know that, but people of good conscience can (and should) work to change the parts of their society they don't like, or find offensive.
That might be the way it is, but we don't have to put up with it, like it or not.
"Nor do we wish to force abortions upon women who do not want them"
Funny you should say that...there was another thread recently about a young girl who was pregnant and plenty of 'pro-choicers' stated that they would be 'forcing' their daughters to have abortions in that situation.
I can't believe how many people can actually convince themselves that 'life' only begins at birth.
Oh, bugger. I apologise, it took me so long to type up that post, the conversation has moved on. Please excuse the random interjection into the on-going conversation
You seem to think that having sympathy for someone in extremis and believing that what they did was wrong is mutually exclusive. I don't.
The point about 19th c infanticide is that these were the women who were desperate beyond measure not to have a baby. If we had the abortion laws that you seem to want, there would be a much higher rate of infanticide and/or women dying in backstreet clinics.
Problem is Koba, we're not talking about chocolate here. I know what you're trying to say. I just don't agree with you.
KobayashiMaru, I'm not sure that the chocolate argument really illustrates it.
You have to pick something that some people don't find morally acceptable. So "I don't shoplift. Lots of people do though. Even though I don't like it, I'm fine with you doing it, because it has nothing to do with me. Do you see?"
That's how anti-abortion people would see it. Even though you might be ok with it, it's still wrong.
Really skyler? Because unlike the 19c we have contraception now.
Also, just to clarify, you are saying that you do, in fact, sympathise with Baby Ps mother and Daniel Pelka's mother?
Contraceptives are not foolproof, bumbley.
Sorry, KobayashiMaru, I x-posted with your last post.
Yes I agree, but the the trouble in Ireland is that it is very difficult to say "I am pro-choice but only to a certain extent. I believe anyone should be able to have an abortion up until a certain time, or or a non-viable foetus. But I struggle with abortion on demand to term, I can't in concious see that as being ok".
Because no-one hears beyond the first bit - "I am pro/anti-abortion".
I'm not familiar with the Pelka case. In the Baby P case, which was grotesque, horrific and wrong, I think t was pretty clear that his mother had had an appalling childhood of abuse herself. So I had some sympathy for her, not her actions. See the difference?
Oh, never mind. 'Funny you should say that...there was another thread recently about a young girl who was pregnant and plenty of 'pro-choicers' stated that they would be 'forcing' their daughters to have abortions in that situation'. Bumbley, was I on that thread? Have I ever insinuated that I would encourage, never mind force, anyone to have an abortion? I would never dream of doing this, nor would anyone I know.
FWIW, my Mum did suggest abortion to me when I was pregnant at 17. I am bloody well still grateful to her for this. She didn't cajole, coax, force or encourage. She made a suggestion (as a loving, caring parent) and DP and I decided to go with her suggestion. She helped us make the right decision for us. Which is what parents are supposed to do, right?
Yes, skyler, I am aware of that but they are a hell of a lot more effective than the nothing that was available in the 19c
of course we aren't talking about chocolate. But since you can't grasp how someone can want everyone to have the right to do something they wouldn't choose to do themselves, I had to really over-simplify it for you.
Maryz, I don't think shoplifting is a good analogy either its too weighted to the other side, but I see what you mean.
Also, on your last point, I think thats what a lot of people do in fact say, an i think recently it has become a lot more acceptable to say.
Skyler, again, I see what you are trying to say but no, I don't agree with you. Plenty of people have shit childhoods and don't go on to abuse and murder their children.
Shadow, I wasn't talking about you specifically just pointing out that some people who consider themselves 'pro-choice' would actually think it ok to encourage/force their own child to have one if they considered it to be 'for the best'.
Koba, no, you don't have to over simplify it. Just because I don't agree with you doesnt mean I don't understand you.
You said you didn't understand me, and thought I didn't understand my own opinion. If you take that back and would like to apologise for such an insult, I'd be gracious and accept.
Yes, I think much fewer people would vote against an amendment to the constitution that would allow very early medical abortions (i.e. an extension to the morning after pill). I can't understand why the government don't pursue that more actively.
That would help the vast majority of women who get pregnant when they don't want to, and it is something that they might manage to get passed in a referendum.
They could then introduce separate legislation to extend it to foetuses that are non-viable, which would help the women I most sympathise with - those who are pregnant with babies that won't survive.
If they did that, I think Ireland's abortion laws, though stringent, would at least help a lot of women.
I don't think the extreme abortion to term views are helping. Because for every person who expresses those views, they are going to entrench the anti-abortion-in-all-circumstances of others.
Most of us don't express those views Maryz, not in real life, because we know they are unpopular. Especially those of us who actively work in this area, its counter-productive. But here, against those that are so entrenched anyway, sure you might as well, give them somehting to froth about.
It's the anti-abortion folk who are asking directly about the late abortions, though. Even though such cases are statistically very very low. I and other posters are simply giving opinions when asked. Do you think we should lie or obfuscate?
I agree with you on the possibility of introducing early and limited medical abortion. I think that would be a very good step in the right direction.
See, it's hard for me Kobayashi.
My older children were both unwanted. Both voluntarily relinquished for adoption. I will be forever grateful that their mothers couldn't easily access abortions.
It is an exceptionally selfish view for me to hold. I know that, but I'm still grateful.
'Shadow, I wasn't talking about you specifically just pointing out that some people who consider themselves 'pro-choice' would actually think it ok to encourage/force their own child to have one if they considered it to be 'for the best'. Okay, Bumbley, I do see your point there, to an extent. I imagine that we all see the worst in the opposing sides of the argument... So whilst you see that pro-choicers are all liable to cajole their children into having abortions, I see pro-lifers as being misogynistic Iona Institute types, who will yell for the right of every baby to be born, unless it is born to a single-parent / gay family, at which point they will turn their back on said baby, as it is not part of a 'real' family. I'm not being facetious there, btw, that is actually my experience.
I do think it best that we all strive to have a mature, reasoned debate. That being said, I will always be pro-choice, and I will admit to having a somewhat dim view of pro-lifers, after a colleague told me a few days ago that I am a murderer, and that had I ever had a miscarriage, I would have to be pro-life (after four MC's I didn't take kindly to that).
I can understand that Maryz, it must be difficult to reconcile that. Brave of you to admit it.
It's not easy, even for those of us with very staunch views in one direction. I think if its an easy call, you're not thinking deeply enough about it.
I certainly agree it isn't easy.
dd is just 17. If she came to me and said she was pregnant, my initial reaction would be that I would want her to have an abortion, so that she could carry on with her life.
But I know she would be vehemently against the idea, so I suspect I couldn't even mention it.
dd knows a fair few of her peers who have had babies. She knows no-one (as far as she knows) who has had an abortion. I suspect it might be very different if we lived in mainland UK.
It's likely that she knows at least one person, its just not something that is ever mentioned, I think. It's much more taboo to admit to here.
'She knows no-one (as far as she knows) who has had an abortion. I suspect it might be very different if we lived in mainland UK.' As far as she knows though, Maryz. As far as I knew, I was the only person in my 6th year class who had had an abortion. Until, 7/8/10 years later, when I bumped into others from my year, they told me that they had had abortions. I hope that none of your daughter's classmates have had abortions (for their own sakes), but it's impossible to know. None of my classmate's parent's would have ever imagined that sciency, intellectual, nerdy, bookish me would have ever have had an abortion either.
If someone is vocally anti-abortion - even if they are an otherwise lovely 17 year old - they will not get told if someone they know has an abortion. It's too risky. The woman/girl can't trust them.
I did campaigning for years before IRL people trusted me enough to say it.
And now people say it a LOT. Because one in ten Irish pregnancies (at least, it could be more) ends in abortion. EVERYONE knows women who have done it, they are ordinary women. 150,000 of them.
From a practical standpoint. Article 40.3.3 prevents any more legislation being passed.
There is a slim chance TFMR is an exception to that. It hinges on a fatally ill baby not qualifying as "unborn" (because it cannot survive to become "born"). But this is just a theory, and a nebulous one. The government has contradicted itself on the issue. So there will be court cases - perhaps to Europe - to get to the bottom of it. Then parliamentary committees, blah blah blah
In 2-3 years, we might have TFMR passed. Probably first there will be a referendum - not on specific legislation but purely to remove 40.3.3. It's appallingly ill thought out.
Then I think it will be abortions within 10 or 12 weeks. That's how it went in Poland and Portugal.
Obviously I would love more liberal legislation along the lines of the rest of the Anglophone world - countries we consider our peers in every other respect - but realistically I think we will get this. In 10-20 years. Depends on the political climate. Labour and Sinn Fein will act on it sooner (SF is far more liberal on this south of the border, it's weird).
It's 20 years since they got that horrendous Article in, it will probably take another 20 to get it out. I'm not going to stop until we do though.
Koba, as I have said before, I understand what you are trying to say but I don't agree with you. What I can't understand is how someone who seems otherwise intelligent thinks like that but hey ho! Each to their own and all that.
Skyler, why shouldn't we ask about them when people are saying that they support the idea of having abortions available 'on demand' to term?
MaryZ, I can completely understand why your children would take the position that they do. People on this thread basically think they shouldn't exist - that their lives weren't worth anything because their mother didn't want them. I'd be pretty offended by that idea.
Shadows, very true. People will always look at the extremists when they are forming their opinions. There are a few people on this thread who support the idea of abortion on demand to term but the truth is that most 'pro-choicers' support the idea of the 24-week cut off (and would be happy to revise it downwards if it was changed) and some even feel uncomfortable with that. FWIW I have no problem with gay couples adopting - a good family is a good family afaiac.
I didn't say that you shouldn't ask them - I was simply responding
FWIW, I don't go around looking at adopted people, thinking 'you shouldn't exist, you shouldn't exist'. But your tenacity in your campaign to attempt to demonise those who are pro-choice is noted.
*simply responding to Maryz's point about not talking about late abortion.
Skylit, I don't think you can have it both ways really. It seems a bit hypocritical to me.
Saying that you don't think adopted children's lives aren't worthwhile because they're standing in front of you so to speak while supporting the idea of abortion to term for a woman who does not want her child. Would you be able to face those people and tell them that you think their mother should have been allowed to abort them?
There's a big support network in the US (there may be others in the US) who have survived attempted abortion. Would you tell them that you think their mother was perfectly entitled to try to stop them being born?
I'd say to any person, adopted or not, that their mother had the right to abort them. That's because I believe in a woman's right to choose whether to proceed with a pregnancy or not.
Sorry, I'm not trying to demonise those who are pro choice at all. I have said all along that women should have the choice.
My posts have been specifically about the situation in Ireland. My point is that there is no way a referendum will pass giving a right to abortion on demand to term. So IMO the government should start with allowing abortion limited by time and get that through rather than mucking around by passing legislation that essentially means that women have to justify their decision.
I am extremely uncomfortable with a situation where women have to prove that they are worthy of getting an abortion. That way well off educated women will be at an an advantage because they can argue their case.
And by the way, dd isn't vocally anti abortion. Not compared to some of her friends. She has a lot of empathy and understanding and has really thought about the issue. She wouldn't condemn anyone for their choices.
My demonising point was not directed at you, Maryz.
I'm actually sorry I mentioned adoption. Because that really is irrelevant to this thread.
I would NEVER suggest any woman should be denied an abortion so their child could be adopted.
Xposted, skyler. Sorry, I misread that.
I think essentially a lot of us are agreeing. I think extremists on both sides are doing irish women a disservice, and that is sad because as long as they shout so loudly the middle ground compromise will be missed
Lovely skyler. Nice to think that someone else should have control over whether or not I'm allowed to live.
MaryZ, I think some of us already feel that the middle ground compromise is in place.
None of my peers think that the middle ground compromise is in place. Far, far from it in fact.
Not in Ireland it isn't.
For a young vulnerable pregnant girl to have to sit in front of a doctor and prove she is suicidal in order to get an abortion is wrong.
One of two things will happen now. Either there will be clinics set up that will do abortions on the word of any woman that she is suicidal, or - which is more liely - nothing at all will happen. This legislation won't make a bit of difference, women will still have to travel
That's your opinion MaryZ and squoosh. Many are satisfied with the 'if the woman's life is in danger' clause and some don't even agree with that including the threat of suicide.
Actually no, it's not my 'opinion', it's a statement of fact as to the beliefs of people in my social group.
Even my 70 year old mother's opinion has shifted on this matter in recent years. Progress indeed.
Bumbleymummy unless you are still inside your mothers womb, nobody has suggested you don't have the right to live. The belief that a woman ought to be allowed to terminate in no way, shape or form equates to an idea that people who have been born and whose mothers might have aborted if they'd had the chance do not now deserve to live. So please stop pretending it does. There's no such thing as retrospective abortion.
Oh and speaking as a poster who riffed on the possibility of administering an abortion to my daughter elsewhere... This was in a thread about a pregnant 11 year old in chile. At that age, pregnancy may be life threatening and is certainly health threatening. It is therefore a question of at what point should a parent cease being allowed to overrule a child's wishes with regards to possibly life saving medical treatment. Its also got sod all to do with the law in Ireland.
Only those who are anti abortion in all circumstances are in any way happy with the way it is now.
They are effectively very reluctantly allowing women to not die. How nice.
mainland UK maryz? are you in ni? circs there are slightly different
Do you believe your dd would know more people who have had an abortion if you lived in the UK?
Are you saying because its legal in the UK more women have abortions?
The amount of Irish women who travel to the UK for abortion is IMO much higher than statistics show.
Many women I know personally gave a UK address.
We can't pretend women don't travel but as far as some pro life are concerned "that's all right jack just not on our door step"
How is a complete inability to get an abortion in Ireland " a fair compromise" or a middle ground.
Anyway I think we should stop engaging with bumbley so she can get back to trolling the antenatal choices board and telling women who have booked abortions how wrong they are. I happened to come across a few last night
before I was so disgusted I had to log out
No MaryZ, because currently a woman can have an abortion if her life is in danger so that's not being anti abortion in all circumstances.
Koba, I have done nothing of the sort! I know which thread you are talking about (it actually got moved to antenatal choices - I don't go 'trolling' in there) and I did not say anything to the OP about her decision being wrong.
A good friend of mine met his Irish wife when she was in the UK procuring an abortion. They are now happily married with 3 children of their own.
A very, very happy outcome of an abortion.
She can gave an abortion if her life is in danger? Tell that to Savitas husband.
Well then I guess they are glad that she had to travel for her abortion then slug. So you would support keeping things the way they are to further future matchmaking possibilities then?
Koba her life wasn't in danger when she requested the abortion and we have already been through the fact that the new legislation will fix the 'grey areas' where a doctor may have been concerned about what stage they are allowed to terminate at.
It doesn't matter how many times you say it, you're still wrong. The new legislation will fix fuck all.
Why don't you go SPUC?
We'll just have to agree to disagree then. Most people think it's better than nothing. I have no idea what SPUC means.
Living in Ireland how can you not know who SPUC are?
You don't know what SPUC means? I find that hard to believe, somehow. Although maybe you prefer the Youth Defence
I didn't realise she was talking about an organisation - she said 'go SPUC'.
You're getting a bit childish now skyler.
Really? I was just about to post that I oughtn't to have crossed out the word fascists. They are fascists. And have links with all sorts of repellant European fascist organisations.
Skyler, did you see their site got hacked last week? It showed all the details of how they are funded by american extremists with very dodgy backgrounds, The type that bomb abortion clinics and shoot doctors.
I very much doubt that someone with such strong views doesn't know what SPUC is. Disingenuous at best.
No, the fact that you are accusing me of being a fascist at all.
Wow Koba, even more accusations - trolling, disingenuous. What are you going to throw at me next? Skyler has just accused me of being a fascist so you're in good company anyway...
If you support Youth Defence, you are supporting a fascist organisation. In my book that makes you a fascist. Perhaps you'd like to take this opportunity to clarify your opinion on Youth Defence.
Yes, Koba I saw that. Not surprised, although it was good to have it out in the open. Also read that really interesting Hot Press article from 20 years ago.
Where have I said I support Youth Defense? You're the one who brought them up! I don't know anything about them - I would have to google.
You don't know anything about Youth Defence?? And you claim to live in Ireland? And have strong anti-choice opinions. I'm with Koba - disingenuous at best
Where have I claimed to live in Ireland?
Apologies, claim to be Irish.
No Lucy. I think you are misunderstanding my point.
In Ireland ATM if one of dd's 16 year old friends got pregnant they might well have an abortion. But it is unlikely they would tell anyone, because they would know that a lot of people would judge. Obviously, if they have a baby everyone knows, and certainly among dd's peer group they would get a lot of support.
Judging by their conversations, abortion isn't something they would consider. Of course if they actually got pregnant things might be different.
actually she called YD fascists, not you. However if feel like thats the same thing, thats your own business.
The intent was clear Koba - she was associating me with what she considers to be a fascist organisation.
BUmbley, I completely disagree that the new legislation will make a bit of difference. Before the legislation women Were treated for life threatening conditions even if that meant the destruction of the foetus. Some doctors wouldn't do it, but legally they could.
And Savita Halappanavar sadly died because she was appallingly treated medically. She wasn't observed properly, her infection wasn't treated properly. This legislation wouldn't fix that one bit.
I really feel for her husband who is being used by the pro choice lobby.
On other threads you've stated that you are Irish. So unless your nationality has changed....
So bumbley, are you irish? Do you live here? Do you know anything about the Irish constitution, or are you just anti abortion full stop?
I'm not sure what thread that was skyler - I tend not to give out too much personal information on here. For that reason MaryZ I'd rather not answer your questions about where Im from etc. I would like to point out though that it is possible for someone to be a certain nationality without being familiar/affiliated with all of that country's organisations.
Re being anti-abortion full-stop. No, but I am quite conservative about the circumstances under which it should be available.
Don't be facetious bumbly. No one should ever have to travel abroad to have a simple medical procedure.
Well if you're an Irish woman aged between 20 and 70, and opposed to abortion, I find it disingenuous in the extreme that you claim to not have heard of YD.
Fair enough if you don't want to say where you're from/living, but you did state on another thread that you were Irish.
It's not always a 'simple medical procedure' . I'm not sure why you think I'm being facetious.
Not being disingenuous - I genuinely haven't heard of them.
Then I suggest you take steps to learn who constitutes the anti-abortion lobby in Ireland.
Because this is a thread about abortion legislation in Ireland .
I don't think its fair to see he is being used by the pro-choice lobby, Maryz, he's involved with the pro-choice groups and happy to be. I know this to be true. He wants change, and he wants no other woman to suffer like his wife did.
He is pro-choice.
Why do I need to learn who constitutes the anti-abortion lobby to discuss my own opinion about abortion legislation in Ireland?
If you wish to remain uninformed, that's your prerogative. But it might mean that you don't understand when other participants in the debate refer to those who constitute to anti-abortion lobby. Which is what happened up thread.
You still aren't answering my question. What difference does it make to my opinion whether I know who those groups are or not?
I didn't say it made any difference to your opinion. I said it might help you to participate more fully in the debate.
Although I would add that that an understanding of who SPUC/YD are is essential to understanding the circumstances in which the 1983 amendment took place, and all subsequent referenda on the issue. Regardless of your position pro/anti-choice.
Most of us like our opinions to be informed by, y'know, facts and stuff. If you don't feel the need for any of that, thats fine, but people won't take you seriously. Up to you.
I just think they jumped on the bandwagon Kobayashi. In my opinion she was horrendously let down by the hospital and the staff there. There were so many holes in their procedures and in the way they treated her.
It was medical negligence full stop, imo. The abortion issue is a red herring. And he is being constantly told that she wouldn't have died had the abortion laws been different. That may be so, but she wouldn't have died if she had been treated appropriately for the medical condition, the infection, that she died from.
bumbley, it makes a big difference. Trying to discuss anything on a thread with someone who knows nothing about the country, the laws and the lobby groups on both sides of the debate is pretty much impossible. Particularly if that person is so intractable in their views that they aren't prepared to listen.
You say you aren't against abortion in all circumstances. But you are really. You are just reluctantly and contemptuously allowing some very few women (chosen by you and people like you) to have an abortion if they can persuade you that they are to be pitied enough, or are ill enough .
Why skyler? Knowing about their existence will make no difference to my own opinion and the only reason they came up in the debate was because you asked if I preferred them over SPUC - hardly essential to the discussion. . You too Koba, this is the first time they have been mentioned on the thread. Care to share why you think they are so important to helping people form their opinions and why not knowing about them should exclude you from a debate?
I refer you to Maryz's post just above.
Because if it wasn't for the likes of SPUC and Youth Defence, it would be possible to have a reasoned debate about abortion in Ireland.
As it is they polarise opinion so much that it is hard to have any sort of debate. As it is with you, in fact.
I agree with you wholeheartedly about the medical negligence MaryZ....
I disagree on the rest. You didn't even bother to ask what circumstances I consider abortion to be acceptable before you started making judgements. You have also decided that I know nothing about the country and the laws simply because I didn't know about two particular groups. I guess that would rule out a lot of people who live in other countries from having an opinion..... Hmmm didn't we touch on that earlier? I believe that some of you were insisting that anyone was entitled to an opinion about the laws in other countries. Interesting...
Why skyler, it didn't answer the question either.
Well then isn't a good thing I'm not inv
Also, you can't understand the way abortion legislation has developed in Ireland if you don't understand the role of lobby groups in influencing that legislation.
Well then, Isn't it a good thing I'm not involved with either.
So that prevents me having an opinion on it too? Really? Why?
Well, I don't think you know much about the abortion debate in Ireland if you have never heard of SPUC and YD.
And you can of course have an opinion on laws in other countries. It doesn't necessarily follow that it is an informed opinion. Informed opinions, as opposed to ignorance, improve the quality of debates.
x-post. It doesn't prevent you from having an opinion. It prevents you from having an informed opinion.
Ok, so now that I know who they are, what has changed? Certainly not my opinion, or my entitlement to post on this thread. Anything else?
You still haven't explained why knowing who they are has anything to do with the thread... If they were so important why not being them up earlier?
You are happy with the situation as it is now. Therefore, by definition you will only allow an abortion if a woman can prove she is going to die. That's how I know what circumstances you consider abortion to be acceptable.
You can of course have an opinion.
But equally, it is better generally to have some idea what you are talking about before you start stating your opinion as fact.
If you agree with me about the medical negligence, why on earth do you think the recent legislation would have saved Savita Halappanavar's life? Because it won't. If she was in the same circumstances today, and they were as negligent as they were, she would still die.
Do you even know what the wording of the new law is? Do you know what circumstances abortion will be allowed? I suggest you go and find out
YD were brought up earlier. And SPUC.
To clarify, the part of the law that would have affected Savita Halappanavar is worded this way:
Head 3 Risk of loss of life from physical illness in a medical emergency
(1) It is not an offence to carry out a medical procedure, in accordance with this head, in the course of which or as a result of which unborn human life is ended, where
(a) that procedure is carried out by a medical practitioner,
(b) he or she in good faith believes that there is an immediate risk of loss of the pregnant womans life other than by way of selfdestruction, and
(c) the medical procedure is, in his or her reasonable opinion, immediately necessary to save the life of the woman.
(2) The opinion referred to in subhead (1) shall be certified by the registered medical practitioner referred to in subhead (1) in the form and manner prescribed by the Minister.
The relevant bit is "(b) he or she in good faith believes that there is an immediate risk of loss of the pregnant womans life other than by way of selfdestruction"
The whole point of Savita's treatment was that they didn't believe there was an immediate danger to her life. So they wouldn't have given her an abortion under the new legislation either.
That's why the bill is a load of bollocks.
Where have I said it would have saved her life? I think having proper medical care and attention could have saved her life, regardless of whether she was allowed an abortion or not and even with the abortion she may still have died due to medical negligence.
Yes, I am aware of what the new law is.
So you agree that the new legislation will make no difference to women in Ireland and the new laws are a waste of time and just fudging the issue?
Just because it wouldn't have helped Savita (and you've already said yourself that it was medical negligence that killed her so an abortion may not have saved her anyway) doesn't mean that it won't make a difference to other women.
Well it won't make a difference to any woman. Women with enough money will continue to travel. Women with no money and little education will find it hard to convince a doctor she is suicidal.
So these laws are no less restrictive than what we have at the moment. Which will please the likes of SPUC and Youth Defence and all the other extremists
If she's genuinely suicidal then it shouldn't be an issue.
And how exactly does she prove she is "genuinely suicidal"?
It's not possible to prove.
and the likes of you will determine that, bumbley?
How do they prove that their mental health is at risk in the UK?
No, Koba, I'm not a doctor.
They don't have to in the UK. Don't be facetious.
I'm not being facetious at all. One of the grounds for abortion in the UK is that the mental health of the mother is more at risk if she continues the pregnancy. How do you think they go about proving that? Or are you suggesting that doctors just provide abortion on demand up to 24 weeks in the UK?
Yes, bumbley. Yet again you are showing your ignorance. In the UK they have to show their health is at risk (physical or mental). In Ireland they have to show there is a risk to their life as distinct from their health.
That's the whole point
In effect it is abortion on demand, in the UK <as it should be>. it's not like anyone really gets turned down when they ask, luckily.
I've just seen something apposite on another site, for those who keep asserting how much of a person a foetus is:
"Heres a test:
Im holding a baby in one hand and a petri dish holding an embryo in the other.
Im going to drop one. You chose which.
If you really truly believe an embryo is the same thing as a baby, it should be impossible for you to decide. You should have to flip a coin, thats how impossible the decision should be.
Shot in the dark, you saved the baby.
Because youre aware theres a difference.
Now admit it."
There is a spectrum. You know it as much as I do.
Medical negligence didn't kill Savita.
Peter Boylan, former Master of Holles St, testified at the inquest that the only indication she had an infection was a slightly elevated white cell count.
That should have been more closely monitored but it is NOT in any way an indication her life was in danger and under Irish law she can only have an abortion if her life is in danger.
Both Boylan and the UK expert who chaired theHSE inquiry agree she should have been given an abortion on Monday when she asked for it but only because she wanted it and her health was in danger. There were no indications her life was in danger and under our laws that means no abortion unless you wait to get more and more sick.
As for the pro-choice lobby taking advantage - her parents, brothers, friends and husband all support the attention this has gotten. Her parents would like a new law named after her. If it weren't for the pro-choice lobby, nobody would have heard of her - and if you doubt that, think of how NOBODY has heard about the woman in Galway who had the exact same thing happen to her, except she was lucky enough to survive sepsis. She settled out of court with the HSE a few months ago. You want results or change in this country - you need publicity.
"Laws not doctors to blame for Savita"
Boylan pwns Breda O'Brien of the Iona Institute (do you know who they are bumbley? No?). The Iona and other pro-life organisations are DESPERATE to promote the idea that she died because of medical negligence. That would mean that the laws they created aren't to blame. But it's nonsense. She died because her doctors had to watch her get sicker before they could help her.
MaryZ, I am we'll aware of the difference thanks. You're making assimptions again. I am asking you how they are supposed to show that their mental health is at risk in the UK. You think that it would be difficult to show that you are at risk of committing suicide to fulfill the criteria in Ireland. Showing that your physical health is at risk in the UK is fairly straightforward. Showing that your mental health is at risk would be more challenging yet it still doesn't prevent people from having abortions on those grounds in the UK.
You are ignoring the question bumbley, how can the prove their life is at risk? You don't know, do you? The answer is that very few of them will be able to, so few will be able to access abortions.
HoldMe, I think there was evidence both ways on the point you make. But either is really irrelevant to this thread, because the new laws won't make a blind bit of difference, people like Savita will still die because by the time they know for certain her life is in danger it will be too late.
That's what angers me about the whole thing. This new law is greeted as an "improvement", but it isn't. It will make no difference at all.
Yes, koba, I agree that it is pretty much on demand (although many would disagree with you on that if other threads are anything to go by). It's probably one of the reasons why they are not using the same legislation in Ireland because they don't want that to be the situation there.
You know that an embryo is not the same as a foetus don't you? It's not always the case that you're aborting an embryo - quite unlikely in fact given time constraints etc. In any case, try that test holding a 37 week old foetus. Do you still think there's a difference? Be honest.
HoldMe, when I read the report there was mention of the smell coming from her vagina that had not been reported and the doctor had not examine her. Will check when I get home but that doctor apparently said that the smell was important and would have indicated a more serious infection.
Actually Mary, you're ignoring mine. How do they show/prove their mental health is at risk in the UK? It's certainly more difficult than showing physical health risk but it's obviously still possible because people are still getting abortions on those grounds.
Also, you seem to be going all over the place on Savita. You've already said it was medical negligence and now your saying it was the law preventing her having the abortion earlier.
They don't have to prove anything in the UK. You know that. In fact you said it in your 20:24 post. And then 7 minutes later want me to say how they prove it [baffled]
You are quite extraordinary . You don't listen to anyone do you? I've said from the start that the new law will make no difference whatsoever. The new law states that she could only get an abortion if her life was at risk. The hospital never recognised that he life was at risk.
The vaginal discharge occurred on the Weds, by which time it was already too late according the expert testimony.
Mary, abortion isn't supposed to be on demand in the UK. They are supposed to show/prove that their physical/ mental health would be at risk. It doesn't seem to be that way as Koba has pointed out (although others have insisted that it is on other threads) but that is what is written in the legislation.
Tbh it seems more like you have an issue with Irish doctors - thinking that they are going to be hard to convince.
You have already said that you think medical negligence killed her - if that was the case then why do you think an earlier abortion would have saved her?
Which expert? Dr Astbury said that the foul selling discharge was significant and had she known about it she would have terminated sooner. She had not read the notes herself ( the discharge had been noted at 6.30 am and this was a couple of hours later - she had not been checked every 4 hours during the night as was required by hospital policy. Had she been, they could have picked up on her elevated temperature, increased heartbeat and the discharge sooner.