Legalization of things

Unbelieveable how 20 years after the X case, legislation still hasn’t been enacted as to what constitutes a threat to the life of a pregnant mother. The lack of legislation gives room that religion can interfere in medical care and that’s a disgrace. It also means that decisions that have to be made quickly are delayed, with tragic results such as in this case.

It’s pretty disgraceful, governments have continued to kick the can down the road and this government is possibly the worst given the ruling that they in breach of the European Convention until they act to legislate.

I think it’s pretty clear that a termination would have been legal in this case and so while the situation with lack of legislation is a disgrace this womans death is on the hands of the HSE and consultant in this case. “This is a catholic country” -the guy should be struck off if not jailed.

Looks like the majority want same sex marriage to be legalised.

Majority backs same-sex union, poll indicates

STEPHEN COLLINS, Political Editor
There is broad public support for same-sex marriage and for most of the other constitutional changes backed by the Government, according to an Ipsos MRBI 50th anniversary poll. Most of those proposed changes will be considered by a constitutional convention which will hold its first meeting next weekend.
The only proposed change that does not meet with public approval is to reduce the voting age to 17.
The survey covered a range of issues and was conducted by Ipsos MRBI to commemorate the company’s 50th anniversary. Details of changing values and beliefs over the past half century on a range of issues including religion, Northern Ireland and Europe will be revealed in The Irish Times in the week ahead.
The poll was conducted among a representative sample of 1,000 voters aged 18 and over, in face-to-face interviews at 100 locations in all 43 constituencies.
The margin of error is plus or minus 3 per cent.
Voters were asked how they would vote in the constitutional referendums planned during the Coalition’s lifetime.
On same-sex marriage 53 per cent said they would vote Yes while 30 per cent would vote No, while 17 per cent have no opinion. Women were significantly more in favour of the change than men and younger voters were the most enthusiastic. Voters over 55 are solidly opposed to the proposed change.
Citizens living abroad
On abolition of the Seanad 55 per cent said they would vote Yes, 22 per cent said No and 23 per cent had no opinion. There is an even spread of opinion on this issue across age, class and region. The Government has committed itself to holding a referendum on this issue and it will not be considered by the convention.
The most popular proposal going before the convention is the one to give Irish citizens living abroad the right to vote in presidential elections. The response here was 68 per cent Yes and 17 per cent No.
On the question of whether the reference to the woman’s life within the home should be removed from the Constitution the most striking finding was the number of people with no opinion.
A total of 41 per cent said the reference should be removed, while 19 per cent said it should not and 40 per cent had no opinion.

Must say Broadsheet.ie is pissing me off lately with their abortion coverage. Deleted the app. Was shit anyway.

Question for artfoley - the abortion issue seems to have been brought to a head by the death of Savita Halappanavar yet all the debate seems to be around including the threat of suicide as grounds for abortion. How does the proposed legislation address what happened with Savita? Maybe it doesn’t.

Anyone else think the issue will bring down the government?

[quote=“briantinnion, post: 766573, member: 6”]Must say Broadsheet.ie is pissing me off lately with their abortion coverage. Deleted the app. Was shit anyway.

Question for artfoley - the abortion issue seems to have been brought to a head by the death of Savita Halappanavar yet all the debate seems to be around including the threat of suicide as grounds for abortion. How does the proposed legislation address what happened with Savita? Maybe it doesn’t.

Anyone else think the issue will bring down the government?[/quote]
According to an expert on Newstalk this morning, instances of threat of suicide because of pregnancy occur about one in 500,000 cases and they would expect to see cases of it about every 12 years. These were based on figures in Britain as we don’t have figures for it here because we stick our head in the sand and hope the problem goes away.

And no I don’t think it will bring down the government.

Apparently there is still a very grey area on when a doctor can legally perform an abortion and the legislation will clarify that.
That’s the savita angle to it.

The suicide issue is a seperate matter.

[quote=“briantinnion, post: 766573, member: 6”]Must say Broadsheet.ie is pissing me off lately with their abortion coverage. Deleted the app. Was shit anyway.

Question for artfoley - the abortion issue seems to have been brought to a head by the death of Savita yet all the debate seems to be around including the threat of suicide as grounds for abortion. How does the proposed legislation address what happened with Savita? Maybe it doesn’t.

Anyone else think the issue will bring down the government?[/quote]

the death of savita Halappanavar was hijacked by the pro choice lobby. i’m pro choice myself but what went on there was in the media disgraceful. a lot of people in the hospital shouuld be looking at being struck off due to incompetence/malpractice as there was huge failures in the procedures and by individuals. however, when she asked for a termination, her life wasnt at risk, she died because of fuckups not because theres no abortion in rieland

the x case provided that abortion was allowed if the mothers life was at risk, including suicide but the medical council guidelines on abortion are limited to half a page in the guidelines. there should be full guidelines in relation to this.

[quote=“artfoley, post: 766742, member: 179”]the death of savita Halappanavar was hijacked by the pro choice lobby. i’m pro choice myself but what went on there was in the media disgraceful. a lot of people in the hospital shouuld be looking at being struck off due to incompetence/malpractice as there was huge failures in the procedures and by individuals. however, when she asked for a termination, her life wasnt at risk, she died because of fuckups not because theres no abortion in rieland

the x case provided that abortion was allowed if the mothers life was at risk, including suicide but the medical council guidelines on abortion are limited to half a page in the guidelines. there should be full guidelines in relation to this.[/quote]

You make a good point on the hijacking. I think the “this is a catholic country” was taken out of context and blown out of all proportion.

I don’t think it was. It was a shocking comment to be made in the context for many reasons and came across an example of the small minded minority that want to enforce their beliefs on everyone else.

I am not sure that art’s view is necessarily correct. Dr Peter Boylan was very definitely of the view that the law was a factor in the series of events leading to the death.

It may have been a factor at the start but the law fidnt misdiagnose the acute sepsis, nor did it fail to observe savita in accordance with policies nor did it prescribe the wrong antibiotics. Savita died because her carers failed, not because of the law

[quote=“artfoley, post: 766742, member: 179”]the death of savita Halappanavar was hijacked by the pro choice lobby. i’m pro choice myself but what went on there was in the media disgraceful. a lot of people in the hospital shouuld be looking at being struck off due to incompetence/malpractice as there was huge failures in the procedures and by individuals. however, when she asked for a termination, her life wasnt at risk, she died because of fuckups not because theres no abortion in rieland

the x case provided that abortion was allowed if the mothers life was at risk, including suicide but the medical council guidelines on abortion are limited to half a page in the guidelines. there should be full guidelines in relation to this.[/quote]

I’d disagree with what you say above, Art. The inquest pointed to massive systemic failures in the hospital as opposed to by individuals, I believe. Every physician made a right call in an exact circumstances but the lack of communication over and tracking of her condition is truly shocking. I would lay the blame for this at the cutbacks the country has suffered and the enormous pressure medical professionals are under. Unfortunately, when this system breaks down, people actually die.

While you may be correct that her life wasn’t at risk when she asked, it was very definitely stated in her inquest that had an abortion been granted(for a foetus that had already been diagnosed as unviable), she would more than likely be alive today.

With regard to the catholic country comment, I believe it has been taken way out of context and that it was an effort to explain and empathise with a woman in unbelievable distress.

The acute sepsis is an extremely rare condition, it accelerated at an unprecedented rate, The antibiotics were the same as would normally be prescribed Art, but in hindsight, stronger ones may have suceeded had they been administered quicker. Maybe you find it all black and white and it’s easy for you to lay all blame at the door of the medical profession, as opposed to your beloved law.

I hope you never get sick Art.

The antibiotics prescribed, co-amoxiclav and metronidazole, were not appropriate. They cover the same spectrum, i.e. they kill the same type of bugs. There’s no point giving both together.
It is too easy to blame “systems failures”, The people who set up the systems should be responsible. The consultants hold the whip hand in most of these cases. They earn the big bucks and should take more responsibility.
I agree that a lot of the fault lies with the cutbacks. However, the communications failure here wasn’t acceptable. Setting up a safe system for handover isn’t rocket science.
I have a theory that because the junior doctors do so many hours and have way too much responsibility and important decisions thrust upon them, even at intern level, that they inevitably begin to become less careful than they should be.

[quote=“Juhniallio, post: 766815, member: 53”]I’d disagree with what you say above, Art. The inquest pointed to massive systemic failures in the hospital as opposed to by individuals, I believe. Every physician made a right call in an exact circumstances but the lack of communication over and tracking of her condition is truly shocking. I would lay the blame for this at the cutbacks the country has suffered and the enormous pressure medical professionals are under. Unfortunately, when this system breaks down, people actually die.

While you may be correct that her life wasn’t at risk when she asked, it was very definitely stated in her inquest that had an abortion been granted(for a foetus that had already been diagnosed as unviable), she would more than likely be alive today.

With regard to the catholic country comment, I believe it has been taken way out of context and that it was an effort to explain and empathise with a woman in unbelievable distress.[/quote]

no system fails juhy, people do. in respect of the catholic country comment, it was totally inappropriate,; there are a million other ways to explain something to a patient withiout using a phrase like that which could be so misconstrued as that.

she may have been saved if she had have been granted an abortion when she asked for it but it would have been illegal. that sais, the IMC guidelines are woefully inadequate

also, IMHO, a big brouhaha has been made about the lack of clarity in the law so as people will avoid being struck off not because it was applicable to these facts

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/timeline-savita-halappanavar-s-last-days-1.1357554

[quote=“Juhniallio, post: 766824, member: 53”]The acute sepsis is an extremely rare condition, it accelerated at an unprecedented rate, The antibiotics were the same as would normally be prescribed Art, but in hindsight, stronger ones may have suceeded had they been administered quicker. Maybe you find it all black and white and it’s easy for you to lay all blame at the door of the medical profession, as opposed to your beloved law.

I hope you never get sick Art.[/quote]

ive put the timeline in my other reply, you should read it

What a silly phrase.

great contribution :rolleyes:

[quote=“Juhniallio, post: 766824, member: 53”]it accelerated at an unprecedented rate/quote]
Hardly.[/quote]