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 :(

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

It's entirely possible that I am missing some fundamental point you are making, apologies if I am, it's not intentional......but......

Savita was miscarrying & showing signs of infection. In this circumstance, an abortion was clinically indicated to prevent the infection spreading. Savita herself knew this & requested one on this basis. She was refused this specific course of treatment BECAUSE of the abortion law - and not just because the doctor was incompetent &/or negligent.

Abortion is also a medical treatment under certain circumstances & Savita was denied the treatment she needed for, basically when you come right down to it, religious reasons.

Yes, the miscarriage was mismanaged BECAUSE of the law.

I simply share it with pro-life and pro-family people.

The same things leftists have done with me for years. I have even been added to "fascism" watchlists by overzealous antifascists despite never being in the BNP, supporting white nationalism, anti-immigration or anything of the sort. Activists of all stripes monitor their political opposition.

Oh, you are a member of SPUC, that explains it.

Were you responsible for those horrible posters they have all over Dublin atm. Because I can tell you if there is one way to make teenager girls anti-prolifers, just continue with those posters .

Why do far more Irish people believe in God, pro-life and traditional values than British people then?

That's bollox Extrospektiv. In Ireland, the RC church exerts its 'control' through schools. The majority of 'Catholics' in Ireland dip into Catholicism for hatchings, matchings and dispatchings and don't practice the religion in any true sense of the word but are willing to pass the brainwashing imperative on to someone else. If (and hopefully when) the state regains controls of schools, let's see how many 'catholics' there are then.

SPUC people always seem a little unhinged. I wonder why?

No, Crikey. It was mismanaged because they mismanaged it. They could have done a d&c on her, they could have aborted the foetus (it happens in Irish hospitals every day). For some reason they chose not to.

I would like to know whether they were following hospital policy (Galway is known to be a tad, er, individual in their interpretation of some medical directives), or whether one doctor made the decision.

I presume the enquiry will find that out.

I am not going over the same things again and again. I say something, someone misinterprets, I explain, then someone else goes back to the original misinterpretation, then that gets presented as exactly what I said, and my explanation is ignored. The debate doesn't move on at all.

A few posters have understood what I've said, and have raised reservations with it, which I can understand. They can follow the argument and can present logical objections to it. You can't Crikey, you don't understand what I'm saying. That's fine. I don't want to change your mind.

I wanted to discuss the topic in a rational way because I found it interesting. But rather than following the argument you're getting stuck on the same details over and over and expecting me to explain again and again. So there was no meeting of minds. Again, that's fine. You want me to say "Yes you know what Savita would have definitely been saved by an abortion" - I'm not going to say it, because to me such an argument doesn't make sense. Emotionally, it fits the tragedy and the idea of the evil doctors with their crucifixes killing women for religion. Logically, it doesn't make sense. What I'm saying is an abortion might have saved her, but we can't know that, so focusing on that doesn't make sense. What we should focus on is the fact that she should have had an abortion to prevent her suffering, even if there was no risk of infection and it was not necessary to save her life.

That's my last word on it. I'm not explaining myself again. I know people don't agree with me, that doesn't bother me. What bothers me is people misrepresenting what I've said, it's incredibly frustrating. If I could have a reasoned debate with someone who would argue logically I would, but even posters who seem to address the actual points I've made then go on to make personal attacks (which I've stooped to as well - you are not stupid by any means Crikey and I'm sorry for implying that) and claim that I've said things I haven't said. It's pointless and annoying.

Extrospektiv: WHy not trot off and join the EDL, as well? Quite a few of them are in the nick at the moment, so they've room for more superstitious idiots who hate women and are incapable of logic.

And I'm never surprised that people in struggling countries still cling to the superstitions they've been peddled by the powerful: believing that there's an imaginary Big Pixie that's going to make you feel better after you die is kind of comforting. Though you'd be better off campaigning and fighting for an improvement in your circumstances while you're alive. Imaginary pixies were, after all, invented for the purpose of enforcing one group's privilege over others.

She didn't know what she was dealing with, so she didn't know that the worse thing she could have done was to ask for an abortion. If she'd have asked for more pain relief or something to make her more comfortable then she might well have been given something that would help. Just as, in the UK, a terminally ill patient asking for euthanasia would mean the case would automatically be subject to higher scrutiny and legal issues but asking for more pain medication (that might have the side effect of hastening death) is a request that is likely to be met.

Sorry. Baptism, Confession, Communion, Confirmation.

God is not an invention.
Abortion is evil.
I am not superstitious.
I do not hate women.

I do hate the idea of advocating the legalisation of injecting killer potassium chloride into a healthy 36-week fetus' heart just because the woman WANTS it. That is because I am an anti-murder Christian, not a misogynist bigot.

I have even been added to "fascism" watchlists by overzealous antifascists

Definition of FASCISM
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

TBH that sounds pretty fair of them given that fascism doesn't necessarily mean anything about race or nationalism...

Extrospectiv: Yes. I support the right to abortion on demand, for any reason whatsoever, up to the moment of birth. Because what happens in other women's wombs is not my business. And you can threaten me with your imaginary friend all you like. I've been laughing at rightwing superstitious arseholes for over a decade now, and most of them have either exploded, grown up or ended up in a cell.

Wow SGB. 'Metropolitan, elite liberal.' Is it just me who thinks they need to work on their insults?

If I started a list of people who are just plain batshit crazy, you might probably be at the top of that list. I'm not going to start splitting it up into political alliance and religions, cause really, who has time for that, but yeah. But woah, right there on 'do not make eye contact, keep walking, do not engage'.

Look, I'm signing out of this now, because I really don't want to have a row with people (apart from Extrospektiv - I'm happy to have a row with her ).

Just to clarify my position - if there was a vote on abortion I would vote for it. I think I would be considered to be "pro-life" by a lot of people here, because I'm uncomfortable with abortion up to term, but that's my opinion. I am obviously considered left-wing by pro-life loons extremists, because I can understand that people might want to have an abortion in some circumstances and it isn't up to me to tell them they can't.

But in this particular case I think quoting the law and religion is a red herring, and if it is quoted by the hospital they are using it as an excuse to cover up medical negligence. Savita should have been treated; if that treatment meant aborting the foetus, that is what they should have done, and they could have dont it under Irish law as it stands.

Medical treatment is carried out every day in Ireland which results in the death of foetuses. No-one is prosecuted for it. No-one publicises it. If they had treated her properly, we wouldn't have this thread, because she wouldn't have needlessly died .

Pro-lifers seem to miss the point that women are also humans with a life they would like to hang onto. I hate the term pro-life, 'forced birthers' is my preferred label.

Extrastoopid: I suppose I might have a little sympathy with you if your unfocussed dimwittery was triggered by fertility issues of your own. That is hard to deal with, but hating other women and trying to control them is not going to make your own situation any better.

Metropolitan, elite liberal.

Thats a pretty good compliment isn't it?

I do hate the idea of advocating the legalisation of injecting killer potassium chloride into a healthy 36-week fetus' heart just because the woman WANTS it.

Most people would reject that particular scenario because it crosses most peoples ethical boundary, regardless of whether arising from religion or not.

Also Extro, I'm pretty confident that no one who is 36 weeks pregnant, has an abortion just because they want it. If you really believe that, then you are anti-women. You clearly think very little of all other women, that you need to make their choices for them.

And the SPUC oppose the following:
killing unborn children
killing the sick and elderly
corrupting the definition of marriage
breaking down children's modesty-especially with no parent approval
"unshockable" and "approachable" extreme liberal teachers who have pupils confiding explicit details of their sex lives and refer them to BPAS/MSI

Because we believe thou shalt not kill, a man should leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and fornication dishonours the body.

Nothing unreasonable there... so take your "legal medical procedures" "death with dignity" "marriage equality" "comprehensive sexuality education" "confidential pastoral care" and similar anti-life anti-family anti-God euphemisms to where they belong, in some evil communist state, which fortunately there are few of left- and the ex-communist block is now among the most pro-life,family,God regions of the world. Haha, leftist nutters.

Cailin,

You clearly said that while Savita should have the choice to get an abortion, the fact that the doctors refused it HAD NO MEDICAL IMPACT ON THE OUTCOME.

You didn't ask, or question, you stated it as a fact. And when others posted medical doctors saying that an abortion might actually have saved Savita's life, you sidled off to say that you were arguing about logic or some other nonsense.

There are two issues here - one about freedom over our own bodies and choice; and the other that religion should have no place in medical practice. One doesn't negate the other, and both are valid. Everyone gets that except you, it seems, and I just don't understand why you are invalidating the second, equally important issue in this tragedy.

You can deny all you want, but below are some of of the things you said:

"Hanging on and not removing a live foetus is in accordance with the law in Ireland. It is a law many people disagree with, understandably, but it is the law. It is not medically negligent to do this and the chances are the outcome will be painful and awful for the woman (again, a matter of moral, rather than medical, debate) but unproblematic. Savita's life was not in danger when she entered the hospital, and once the infection took hold termination would not have cured it."

"The issue wrt to termination is an incredibly important one, and I do believe she should have been able to have one, in order to spare her the pain of waiting for the baby to die. BUT not having an abortion did not contribute to her death. Medically it doesn't make sense to claim that it did."

"However, the infection issue is a separate thing, and claiming that an abortion would have saved her life doesn't make sense at all - there's no medical reason to believe that."

"It was only when the infection developed that she was in danger and at that stage having an abortion wouldn't have made a difference."

Foetus-worshippers also have no interest in born babies. Or children. What motivates them is entirely hatred of women and a desperate desire to have women legally reduced to the status of incubators and subject to men's ownership and control.

Extrastoopid does have the distinction of being one of the more literate examples of the type, though.