Woman dies in Galway after being denied termination

[AThingInYourLife]

Holy evil pro-life bastards, batman

The wonder is it that there haven't been more

RIP Savita Halappanavar :(

extrospectiv in your opinion God says it is murder.
I don't even know that a god exists.
And if so, my god is silent on that score.

Extrospectiv, in the same way as I would always defend any woman's right to a termination although I cannot see myself having one, I would always defend your right to not have one.
What I cannot abide is people making that choice/decision for other people.
You have the choice to move to Ireland to not support people who have terminations with your taxes . Doesn't sound like Sanita had much of a choice...

verylittlecarrot, I don't think that Caillin said "a termination wouldn't have made a difference to Savita". We all think that it would have. I understood her to mean whether or not it would have made a difference is irrelevant to the arguement that she should have had a managed miscarriage, which is not actually a termination, although on a practical level not dissimilar.

Yes, the medical staff in question clearly have to answer to what on earth they were thinking, but I don't think the legal side of things is a minor issue here either!

The legal side is important because if this had happened in a place where abortion was legal for most reasons (as is the case here), the Doctors would not have prioritised the life of the fetus to the extent that they did, they would have taken different action without fear that they could get into trouble for it.

And God says that it is murder, which is all that matters, so don't go quoting any laws at me

Yeah - that's going to advance the debate brilliantly. Let's all speculate about what an imaginary man in the sky thinks about all this rather than try and think for ourselves.

Extrospektiv Thu 15-Nov-12 09:13:28
To the extreme-left Irish moonbats (Maryz, FairlyKnuts and UnChartered have all expressed sympathy for fanatically left-wing politics and complained even anti-family anti-life Labour and the few rights parents still have over their children are too much for them): I feel sorry that you were born and raised in a country that respected traditional values only to throw them off for the false liberation of feticide, sexual revolution and statism.

Extrospektiv, would you mind translating that, please.

I'm not sure I get what you are on about, apart from the fact that you have called me an extreme-left Irish moonbat which is a big strange as I would probably be called fairly right-wing by most people [baffled].

The only think I have said on this thread is that her medical treatment was negligent, regardless of the rights or wrongs of the law on abortion.

Acksherly, having read back over Extrospektiv's posts, I suspect being called a left-wing moonbat in her opinion is probably a compliment.

Her posts make her sound as though she is a mad as a box of frogs.

Pacific

Sorry, but that's exactly what Cailin has said all the way through this thread - an abortion could not possibly have saved her so we are focusing on the wrong issue. No one on this thread (as far as I know) has the expertise to make that call - and, from various links posted, it is clear that the medical community feels rather differently.

Girls, there's a woman dead here. And her baby. Their family are devastated. Could we stop scoring points off each other in the name of, or related to, religion? Or none?

But surely - Savita's medical treatment was negligent BECAUSE of the law on abortion?

An abortion was clinically indicated. Did it not happen because the doctors were too fucking stupid to understand the gravity of her situation - or they did understand but were unwilling/unable to perform one because of the law.

Two things suggest the latter - "This is a Catholic country" and "We can still hear a fetal heartbeat".

Neither of those things should have been relevant given the circumstances - the fact that they were indicates that the issue at the heart of this is the law on abortion.

Crikey read my posts. I never said ONCE NOT ONCE that an abortion "could not possibly have saved her" so I have absolutely no idea where you got that from. I said it's not POSSIBLE TO KNOW if it could have saved her. I am so incredibly annoyed that I wasted so much time talking to you last night, I really am. I am so sick of people just reading what they want to read. I said over and over and over and over and FUCKING OVER AGAIN that SAVITA SHOULD HAVE HAD AN ABORTION and still for the love of fucking god another poster whose name I won't even mention still said that I said she shouldn't. How how how can people be so FUCKING STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You know for a fact that I said, more than twice, that an abortion could possibly have saved her Crikey. You read those posts. Why are you misrepresenting what I said?

'Girls'

Patronising.

There's a woman dead because of religion.

"Girls, there's a woman dead here. And her baby. Their family are devastated. Could we stop scoring points off each other in the name of, or related to, religion? Or none?"

Yes. And some of us want to make sure that this can never happen again. However, others of us would like the regulations which contributed to the death of this woman extended to the rest of the UK.

This is not a memorial thread. It is an active, angry, political one.

There's a Facebook page called "postcards for Savita".

Everyone in Ireland has got or are being sent postcards which are for "The Gathering 2013" they are from the tourist board & government, a joint thing I think.

Anyway you are meant to post them to Irish friends & family abroad inviting then to visit Ireland next year.

People are posting them to the Taoiseach and their TD's in protest, with a message something along the lines of, " I am ashamed to invite anyone to visit Ireland, due to Savita, etc etc."

Thought this was a good simple idea.

My God says that giving cancer treatment is wrong as it interferes with God's will. Therefore I should impose my beliefs on everyone else and I will protest outside childrens' hospitals about the immorality of those who question God's Judgment.

Hmmm.... Funny what you could and how you could interpret medicine (and science in general) if you are so inclined with your religious faith.

Or you could just have different beliefs and respect the choice of others instead of invoking God and saying my way of life is superior to yours at all times.

I tend to think that bigotry, intimidation, and judging others for their decisions aren't part of God's Will and I detest those who invoke God whilst doing exactly that.

Kindly go fuck off.

For your benefit, Crikey, I am quoting a post of mine from last night:

CailinDana Wed 14-Nov-12 21:03:27
Crikey I'm not arguing against you. An abortion could have saved her. We just don't know, and I am betting we will never know. If we focus on whether it could have saved her or not, the whole point of her suffering is lost. It doesn't matter if it could have saved her. She should still not have suffered in the way she did.

Is that post hard to understand? Why have you misunderstood it?

Crikey, I think that when the enquiry finishes up, the result will be that her medical treatment was negligent. Because this wasn't a case of abortion, it was a case of miscarriage. A miscarriage which was mismanaged, resulting in an infection which wasn't treated in time.

In law, they could have treated her. And obviously they should have.

It is of course possible that one particular medical team misinterpreted the law (either deliberately or in ignorance), in which case that too is negligence. But miscarriages are managed every day in Ireland, often those include the removal of a non-viable foetus (which this one at 17 weeks obviously was).

Narked.

"Girls" was deliberate as the 'debate' has been brought by some to the level of the schoolyard. And that's not to insult our children.

An inquiry will reveal why this poor woman died. It is unlikely to find - and wholly correctly - that 'religion' caused her death.

Actually Callin, the whole point of having an inquest is to find out if another course of treatment (in this case a termination) could have resulted in a different ending for this family. So I imagine we will know fairly soon. As it stand at the moment, quite a few medical professionals seem to think that the result of the inquest will be that a more timely medical intervention - a termination - would have prevented her from becoming so ill and then dying.

Actually Easily we have talked about all that already and I'm not rehashing it again.

Yes, EasilyBored, and if that is the case they should have (and could legally under Irish law have) treated her by removing the foetus.

This is what people on this thread seem to be refusing to understand.

Under Irish law she should have been treated. If that treatment necessitated aborting her foetus, it could have been done under Irish law as it is today.

If the particular doctors refused to treat her, interpreting the law incorrectly, they should be disciplined for that.

An inevitable miscarriage at 17 weeks has only one result. A 17 week old foetus cannot survive outside the body.

Religion is the reason a woman had to wait three days in extreme pain, begging for help.

Religion is the reason that the heartbeat of a dying foetus stopped a woman from receiving medical treatment that became essential as infection took hold.

Religion put an unsaveable pregnancy above the life of a woman.

If the medical team misinterpreted the law, it's because it is open to such mistakes. A law which prioritises the life of a fetus over the health and wellbeing of the mother is ripe for abuse and misinterpretation. Exactly how ill does someone have to be before they can have medical management for a miscarriage? How ill do they have to be before they can have a termination? If the law says she has to be at risk of death, then it is a Dr's judgement on whether that is the case, and a Dr can be challenged on his judgement so might want to er on the side of caution or face prosecution. But then if they er too much on the side of 'lets make sure she is really really going to die otherwise' you end up with cases like this, whether the woman actually did die. And do did the baby, so no one fucking wins. To reduce a woman who wanted a baby to lying in agony and having to beg for doctors to terminate an already ending pregnancy is barbaric. To do it in the name of a god the woman didn't even believe in is beyond shameful. That is why it is the fault of not just her medical team, but the lawmakers and the church and every other idiot who voted against a reform of abortion laws. This is what happens when you legislate against abortion. Women die. Of course it's not intentional, of course pro-lifers don't want this to happen, but their short sightedness in the face of the blindingly obvious - that women will need abortions in difficult circumstances, regardless of your own views on morality - lead to things like this happening.

Caitlin, you have changed your argument multiple times, not sure what you hope to achieve. You did start by saying that an abortion//termination would have made no difference to the outcome and then backed down after people provided links where medical experts clearly indicate it would have.

This is about choice, but equally about religion dictating medical practices.

This particular law- or regulation- wouldn't be there to be misinterpreted if it wasn't for the Catholic church.

"Prof O?Dwyer and a panel of speakers also formally agreed a ?Dublin declaration? on maternal healthcare. It stated: ?As experienced practitioners and researchers in obstetrics and gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman. ?We uphold that there is a fundamental difference between abortion and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child. ?We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.? "

Can I just go back to that-as it seems very clear to me that an abortion can be carried out if it is "necessary medical treatment"

Whether the Drs in question didn´t think it was necessary is another thing-but why they would think they would be breaking the law if they did it makes no sense to me at all.