IMO votes against abortion(52 Posts)
In all circumstances including rape,fatal abnormalities and risk to life of the mother. They are afraid any little smidgeon of abortion will open the floodgates.
If someone could link I would be grateful as I am on my
crappy useless phone.
Why are Irish women still viewed as a walking uterus,a step above the washing machine? Only last week I read where banks may ask mothers (not fathers or parent) to leave work to reduce childcare bills. A quick 'it wasn't meant like that' spin was put out shortly after but the sentiment was there. The little woman can give up her job,it wasnt that important anyway.
I had to google it to discover what IMO stood for. It's Irish Medical Organistion, for anyone head scratching like me
Here's one link.
Bloody hell - what sane Irish woman would put their lives in the hands of this lot?
And this even after the Irish Health Service report criticising doctors in the sad Savita Halappanavar case for putting an unviable foetus in an inevitable miscarriage before the life of the mother.
How does refusing abortion in order to save the life of the mother square with the hippocratic oath thingy then?
Fucking appalling frankly. Same situation in other catholic countries as well.
What I find unconscionable is the law on abortion in NI which is part of teh UK FFS
Its fucking diagusting and it horrifies me.
I thought under eu law that abortion counted as a human right that women are entitled to?
Hippocratic oath means nothing as long as there is a heartbeat.
Even if the foetus can't survive once born,a woman can either continue with the pregnancy or travel abroad for a termination. Simply because there is still a heartbeat.
I personally would never have an abortion, that's my view, but I would defend the right of another woman to have one.
I think it's abhorrent that a particular religion can dictate the laws of a country. Ok if your are RC you are prevented by your religion from having an abortion but if your not RC you should be able to have one. I think the church has no place in dictating the laws of a country.
Just read their comments. They really are vile, despicable people.
One said he didnt want change in legislation as it reminded him.of germany and eugenics!!
They havent got a fucking clue and they dont care about women and whats worse is some who opposed it are women!! Ffs
sweetkitty - would you refuse a managed miscarriage?
Would you continue with a pregnancy if you had cancer?
If your foetus had a condition that was incompatible with life, would you still want to carry it to term?
Those are the things that are asked of women living in Ireland.
These bastard doctors have been wringing their hands, talking (truthfully) about how the lack of legislation after the X case (2 fucking decades ago!) made it impossible for them to treat their female patients.
And now the fuckers, with the blood of Savita Halapannavar on their hands, vote to leave things as they are.
A situation in which a woman's right to life is seriously compromised.
Everyone who voted against the motion should be struck off.
Athinginyourlife - I honestly do not know but what I do know is that I wouldn't want to live in a country where I was told I had to carry on with a pregnancy because it was the law.
I am pro choice I don't believe anyone has the right to tell a woman that she must carry on with a pregnancy.
Sorry, I know you're agreeing with me.
I didn't mean that to seem as personal as it probably did.
I was just trying to make the point that women in Ireland are routinely denied what women in the UK would consider to be medical care - eg an erpc early in a miscarriage, ending a pregnancy so a woman can have treatment for cancer.
This stuff is way beyond being pro-choice.
Getting cancer is not a choice, having an anencephalic foetus is not a choice, having a miscarriage is not a choice.
This is the absolutely barbaric end of the pro-life argument - that women are put in danger to give rights to embryos and foetusus.
Look at the environment in which the doctors live, rather than just the doctors themselves. If you asked a similar number of ordinary Irish people, how would they want the questions of abortion answered? (When there's a risk to the mother's life, when there's a likelihood of severe birth defects, when the woman simply wants it.) If the population generally would say the same as the doctors, then I don't know that it's fair to single out the doctors. Of course it's their duty to think about the people's health, but if there are moral and social issues, maybe they shouldn't be too far ahead of the rest of society. That would start seeming like a medical elite telling everyone what's right.
I do think it was cowardly of them to vote against having legislation introduced to cover situations like Savita Halappanavar's. They probably see that as potentially telling them to do a thing they would find repugnant, but then they're essentially saying it should be left in a legal limbo. Hand me that bucket of sand, I want to stick my head in it.
How is it not against the hippocratic oath to allow a person to die when there is a procedure available that will save them?
But TeiTetua, by saying that noone can have an abortion, they are 'telling everyone what's right'. If they let people have autonomy over their own bodies and if they gave themselves the option of looking at individual circumstances then they can't be accused of telling everyone what is right.
And this is just one of the many reasons why l left Ireland 25 years ago and would never, ever go back. We were campaigning to change the law back in the 80s and coming up against all the same tired, useless arguments those doctors are still using. If you had asked me then I would have never believed that 25 years on so little would have changed for Irish women.
We went through this just after Savita Halappanavar's death, and I think the way the Irish medical people would put it would be "She was in a dangerous situation, but it wasn't certain that she would die. Whereas removing the foetus would be performing an abortion." So to them it wasn't "allowing a person to die", but being prevented from doing anything to get that person of danger.
MsR, are the doctors 'telling everyone what's right' on their own behalf or is it what their entire society believes? Of course "entire society" really means some sort of consensus, but if that exists, I doubt if the doctors are out of line with it. They're in a difficult position--if they expect that they'd be turning themselves into murderers in the eyes of a lot of their neighbours (and maybe they'd think that about themselves, being Irish too) then maybe it's asking too much to expect them to push for change. It seems to be making scapegoats out of the doctors, when it should be the Irish in general, and especially their political leaders, who should be pushing for a change.
The politicians until very recently were entirely in the pocket of the church (and still are for all I know).
I don't know about the media over there, who controls that.
And for sure the church holds huge sway still.
On the matter of the mother being at mortal risk the article says:
"The Irish Medical Organisation (IMO) has rejected a motion calling for regulation in relation to the provision of abortion where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother."
So not to do with any risk of death to the mother, but a real and substantial risk. <shakes head>
One of the people who rejected the motion, did so on the basis that " Ireland was long known as one of the safest places in the world to have a baby and he wanted to take issue with Dr Favier on the issue of safety.". In the context, that doesn't even make sense.
"They're in a difficult position--if they expect that they'd be turning themselves into murderers in the eyes of a lot of their neighbours (and maybe they'd think that about themselves, being Irish too)"
How backwards and ignorant do you imagine Irish people in Ireland are?
And if we are a bunch of thick, superstitious hayseeds stuck in the 19th Century, why should Irish women be denied basic human rights, including the right to life?
Ireland is a member of the Council of Europe. This issue has been to the ECHR and they have instructed the government to legislate.
There is no excuse. There is nothing that makes this piece if barbarity by doctors OK.
After Savita's death they all said they had no choice but to treat women as subhuman.
Now they are voting to keep them that way.
It is disgusting and inexcusable that in a modern EU first world country this has happened.
Shameful. Fucking shameful.
"How backwards and ignorant do you imagine Irish people in Ireland are?
And if we are a bunch of thick, superstitious hayseeds stuck in the 19th Century, why should Irish women be denied basic human rights, including the right to life?"
I'm not making judgements about Irish people. They, um, didn't want English people running their country, so now they're doing it themselves. In the UK there's plenty of controversy connected with health services, but fortunately abortion isn't much of an issue. Not so in Ireland. And I'm afraid it looks as if it's too much of an emotional blockage for anything creative to happen. I think if the people and the government would tell the doctors what to do, they'd do it, but everyone wants someone else to make the hard decisions.
"They, um, didn't want English people running their country, so now they're doing it themselves."
And they had a little slogan 100 years ago: "Home rule will be Rome rule!"
Join the discussion
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.