Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Woman dies in Galway after being denied termination

999 replies

AThingInYourLife · 14/11/2012 07:07

Holy evil pro-life bastards, batman

The wonder is it that there haven't been more Angry

RIP Savita Halappanavar :(

OP posts:
ZombiesAreClammyDodgers · 15/11/2012 13:49

If the law were amended to say that it would be negligent to not prioritise the mother's life or health, unless the mother wanted otherwise, that woud be ideal.
Alas I fear that is utopian.

MaryZezItsOnlyJustNovember · 15/11/2012 13:49

x-posted Grimma - the reason Governments are reluctant to try to introduce a change in the Constitution is that people with extreme views from both sides will vote against it.

The law to help Savita is already in place. The doctor/hospital decided (for whatever reason) to ignore it.

LeBFG · 15/11/2012 13:50

This thread is moving too fast for me. To answer ICBINEG quesiton, I was answering: All pregnancies carry non-zero risk to the mothers life. So how can you draw the line?

The line can be drawn. It will almost certainly be a line in the sand and people will argue about cases that fall very near the line, but at least some women in Ireland will get better care than they currently are getting. It may well act as a foot-in-the-door too. All a good thing.

I think religion is a relevant backdrop to this terrible case. I'm not so sure about the place of feminist lobbying however. Just my pov.

verylittlecarrot · 15/11/2012 13:50

No ICBINEG I doubt the doctor thought there was any chance at all. I think it was even stated to Savita that there was no hope at all.
The doctor intended to wait for the heartbeat to stop. To protect the medical team.

You really need to read this

It answers most of your questions I believe.

ICBINEG · 15/11/2012 13:51

gah RL calling...this thread will undoubtedly be dead by the time I get back...so good luck actually discussing the issues in the hurricane of nonsense flying....

RedToothbrush · 15/11/2012 13:51

If the age was put at 12 or 16 weeks it would not have helped Savita.

Quite right, you'd still have a point between 12 or 16 weeks and the point at which it becomes an induction rather than an abortion.

A cut off point won't work. It HAS to be on clinical need rather than arbitrary weeks pulled out of a hat. If religion and the law are affecting the decision making process in anyway against medical need there is a problem.

It really doesn't matter if you are pro-life or pro-choice tbh.

squoosh · 15/11/2012 13:52

The lily livered Enda Kenny needs to start legislating. The government can't pick and choose which issues they want to deal with.

MaryZezItsOnlyJustNovember · 15/11/2012 13:52

Sorry Edam, I'm just trying to explain the position in Ireland.

Many people (I think) would vote to allow abortion up to a certain gestation.

But, and this is a big but, the would be outvoted by extremists from both sides. And the fact that both sets of extremists are very vocal is what is stopping the Government even trying to legislate.

Zombies, putting it that way around would probably be better. It is what most doctors do in any case, quietly and away from the media.

ZombiesAreClammyDodgers · 15/11/2012 13:52

"No actually, all genuine Christians (I am not the judge of who is genuine) worship the One True God and all other people including atheists are idolaters- they make an idol either of their false god/s or the thing in their life they give the greatest attention to."
wow.
name change idea EternalGarbageCanIdolater Grin Grin Grin

pumpkinsweetie · 15/11/2012 13:53

Religion is a personal choice, one of which should not be forced or brainwashed on to others.
This lady didn't get the treatment she needed to stay alive, her baby would have died anyway-17 weeks does not make a baby viable, so i see absolutely no reason as to why they did not carry out the termination needed to save her life considering the baby couldn't have lived outside the womb!
Religion should be a choice, the lady had NO choice in the treatment she recieved neither did her family-that is wrong.

TheCraicDealer · 15/11/2012 13:54

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

MaryZezItsOnlyJustNovember · 15/11/2012 13:56

verylittlecarrot, that link states:

As there is no medically acceptable scenario at 17 weeks where a woman is miscarrying AND is denied a termination, there can only be three plausible explanations for Ms. Hapappanavar?s ?medical care? :

1) Irish law does indeed treat pregnant women as second class citizens and denies them appropriate medical care. The medical team was following the law to avoid criminal prosecution.

2) Irish law does not deny women the care they need; however, a zealous individual doctor or hospital administrator interpreted Catholic doctrine in such a way that a pregnant woman?s medical care was somehow irrelevant and superceded by heart tones of a 17 weeks fetus that could never be viable.

3) Irish law allows abortions for women when medically necessary, but the doctors involved were negligent in that they could not diagnose infection when it was so obviously present, did not know the treatment, or were not competent enough to carry out the treatment.

I believe the answer is (2) or (3) and the enquiry will tell us that. (1) is incorrect - at least I won't comment on the second class citizen bit, but the medical team were certainly not following the law. They are bound to treat the women, even if it means the foetus not surviving.

ZombiesAreClammyDodgers · 15/11/2012 13:57

Maybe it was (2) or (3) with the reason being the lack of clarity on whether theynwiuld be prosecuted, and / or personal belief.

RedToothbrush · 15/11/2012 13:58

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

MaryZezItsOnlyJustNovember · 15/11/2012 13:58

Gosh, I have just realised that all Jews, Hindus, Muslims and the majority of Christians are idolators in the eyes of Extro.

Madder and madder [amazed].

FreakySnuckerCupidStunt · 15/11/2012 13:58

No actually, all genuine Christians (I am not the judge of who is genuine) worship the One True God and all other people including atheists are idolaters- they make an idol either of their false god/s or the thing in their life they give the greatest attention to.

LOL, just LOL.

squoosh · 15/11/2012 13:59

Heaven has a very strict entry system. All the fun people will be excluded it seems.

TheCraicDealer · 15/11/2012 13:59

I am not the judge of who is genuine

I think a lot of people breathed a sigh of relief there.

MaryZezItsOnlyJustNovember · 15/11/2012 14:01

I don't want to go to Extro's heaven. No-one I love would be there Sad.

I have to go now.

I hope I haven't offended anyone, I'm just trying to correct a few misconceptions about Ireland. I don't agree with a lot of what is in the Constitution, but I don't believe this sad death can be blamed on law, I believe the medical team were negligent and should be held accountable.

My thoughts are with her family Sad.

FreakySnuckerCupidStunt · 15/11/2012 14:02

What's funny Mary is that Jews and Muslims also claim that their version of gawd is the 'one true gawd' and that everyone else are idolaters who worship false idols.

Which is why I have the logical opinion that all of them are bloody wrong.

Extrospektiv · 15/11/2012 14:02

I do have respect for Savita, and I have said on four or more occasions I believe she should have been treated and the hospital was wrong to refuse her treatment on any grounds involving the life of the foetus.

My religious comment is not a "crazy horse" one- it is what the vast majority of Christians believe. I know many different Christians- even liberals from URC, CofE, liberal Catholics, etc. who are pro-gay and pro-choice for example but they still believe there is only one God. They don't believe that there is "their" God for THEM, and a different "anti-choice, homophobic" God for people like me. In the same way, I believe they are wrong, and there isn't a "pro-abortion, gay accepting" God awaiting them when they die and "my" God awaiting me, but only one God. There is no element of extremism in deprecating the use of a personalising pronoun to describe God.

We respect other people without having to agree with all their beliefs or hold the ultra-postmodernist view that everyone has their own reality separate from anyone else's. Atheists don't say there is a God for people who believe in Him and no God FOR THEM, they say there is no God full stop. The same with theists. To insist that one's faith is true and that diametrically opposed views are not contradictorily true at the same time just because other people believe them is part of entirely mainstream faith.

RedToothbrush · 15/11/2012 14:06

Do you have respect for women with mental illness?

Nope.

Next question.

zozzle · 15/11/2012 14:06

I am pro-life and even I think this was wrong!!

Extrospektiv · 15/11/2012 14:07

No- the "majority of Christians" are not idolaters, in fact NO Christians are idolaters overall, as if the God they worship is not Christ they are not Christians.

Only if your definition of "fun people" is the sexually promiscuous, racists, unbelievers and unrepentant foetus/baby/child/adult killers will the statement about fun people being excluded from Heaven be anywhere near true. Don't stoop to such nastiness...

Extrospektiv · 15/11/2012 14:08

I do have respect for women with mental illness...

I am a woman with PTSD.

A mental illness last time I checked. Maybe you're reading a different DSM.

Swipe left for the next trending thread