Then they wanna get a move on with the red or theyâll be daddies 
1 Like
Stop backtracking and talking shit Art. The leading figures in the pro-life campaign do not want to allow child rape victims to be allowed go abroad for abortions never mind having them here.
They want to force them to give birth.
Iâm not backtracking. Iona, Sherlock and David Quinn will all be advocating for retaining the 8th.
See Matty. This is where any reasonable debate or indeed even compromise can be forgotten about . Because for each extremist on the pro life side there is someone on the pro choice side who would let the woman abort right up to ten minutes before she goes into labour after carrying full term.
5 Likes
Lads are out.
I agree, itâs going to be fucking awful listening to this for the next while. But it has to be done I suppose, we canât go on the way we are.
Iâd agree with that too. Might be a bit of fun though watching David Quinn and Coppinger go at it
You sick bastard!
1 Like
No offense but you are a thick thick individual typing that nonsense.
One liners donât work on this one Harry. Adults talking. Back to your blow. Weâll give you a shout after the referendum.
1 Like
You typed that Pro Choice supporters would be happy to see women aborting up 10 minutes before birth.
I really hope your children have picked up their mothers brains.
If you had your way, there wouldnât be any children around to puck up anything.
3 Likes
I have a child at foot you stupid cunt.
I hope she doesnât pick up any of your habits.
Eh yeah, of course it does. Theyâre challenging the decision to have a review in the first place. Why would they wait for the review to finish?
Their argument is the mere existence of such a review would be negative for public confidence in the NMH, and that as the problems have been addressed already by their own internal investigation the HIQA review would only serve to muckrake unnecessarily.
You still havenât established how this has anything to do with abortion. Sheâs the Master of the NMH, if the board think that this would damage the public reputation of the hospital then of course sheâll be on affidavit.
Like many people I believe this to be the thin end of the wedge. There is no doubt whatsoever that if abortion is brought in here it will end up like the UK where, when it suits them, there will be abortion up to birth. Even David Steele, the author of the 1967 act, has said that it was never intended to operate in the way it is now. I could never countenance the notion that a child was aborted just because it was âdisabledâ in some way.
Headlines like this are sickening.
24 November, 2011
âTragedyâ: accidental abortion at Royal Womenâs Hospital
The Royal Womenâs Hospital in Melbourne is investigating the accidental termination of a healthy 32-week-old foetus.
The woman at the centre of the mix-up had decided to abort one foetus on doctorsâ advice because it had a congenital heart defect, which would have led to serious medical problems.
The procedure went ahead on Tuesday, but the wrong foetus was terminated.
The woman then had to have an emergency caesarean section to terminate the sick foetus.
More on this story from ABC News.
At 32 weeks, it was no âfoetusâ, mate.
Firstly, HIQA is statutorily mandated to investigate these types of things. Secondly, internal reviews in hospitals in Ireland frequently donât cut the mustard, and Iâm being very kind here.
A woman died due to lapses in care, a " cascade of negligence" and âone negligent act after anotherâ and get you think the hospital investigating itself is ok? If itâs all kosher why bother passing the health act and setting up HIQA in the first place.
Iâd also say that a woman dying in such circumstances, a deficient unpublished internal review and then an independent investigation being stymied is more damaging to public confidence and besides holles st should be more concerned with patient safety than trying to win a PR war.
Iâm not debating whether or not the HIQA review is warranted. Iâm saying that they are entitled to apply to have the decision reviewed, and that on the face of it, their reasons for seeking the review stand up to an initial assessment. Itâs perfectly normal that they would seek to defend themselves and resist the review going ahead. It would be a catastrophe if they were to tacitly admit their own investigations were inadequate.
You introduced this news item framed against Mahonyâs opinion of the 8th, in a thread about abortion and you havenât been able to identify why.
To be fair har Mike made a very valid point. He exaggerated to stress the point, that was the point of his comment.
No, it would be catastrophic when the court finds against them that the review was inadequate, that HIQA is the statutory body tasked with these reviews, that they pissed badly needed money up against the wall on unnecessary legal fees and that they were more interested in protecting reputations and the organisation than the patient.
As foeinking it to the 8th, as I said earlier, if OâMahony was doing her job rather than campaigning on the 8th, then maybe we wouldnât be in this message.