Agreed. The original wording for that amendment as I said above was to guarantee the unborn a right to life no matter what. The woman’s right to life was an afterthought. SPUC and PLAC would have been quite happy to allow women die from pregnancy complications, they ONLY care for the unborn.. And they swore blind it would do no harm.. Mary Robinson predicted the cases that were to come, William Binchy adamantly denied that the wording was dangerous (in a very condescending manner too).

But their own god is the most prolific “abortionist” in existence. He’s also the most prolific murderer, something tells me he doesn’t hold individual lives *that* sacred. So for them to use god as a rod to batter the children with is highly disingenuous, there’s no mention of abortion in the bible.

Mind you, why am I surprised that people reading the bible are making up their own meanings out of it? According to the bible Adam wasn’t alive until God breathed life into him – he BECAME man after that. When does life begin? It began a few billion years ago and has been a continuos process ever since..

The whole thing was about keeping women in their place and nothing more. The women who backed it are equally as guilty (sadly for some reason there’s a type of woman for whom bitterly tearing other women down is all they are capable of). It needs to be repealed, it’s dangerous to have that nonsensical clap trap in our constitution – it costs ACTUAL lives.

@peter.

You hit the nail on the head when you mentioned that voters are ‘understandably confused by the x case’. Much of the media, press and politicians’ portrayal of legislating for x is that some ‘magic formula’ will be concocted so as to protect the life of the mother. It is understandable, then, how many voters would believe that legislating for x can provide protection for maternal health. I know I did, until after reading your posts and subsequently informing myself re article 40.3.3. I have also read a forum set up by parents who are seeking legality re termination where the foetus has been diagnosed with a fatal chromosomal abnormality. These parents, on top of facing the heartache of such a diagnosis currently have to travel to another country to terminate the pregnancy. Legislating for x will not consider the needs of these parents. How barbaric is that?

It is odd to think that a sector of the Irish people who voted for 8th amendment are now dead and many of the women who this directly effects were not even born in 1983!

I have heard pat kenny, various ‘experts’ state there is no appetitie for a referendum on this issue. On what grounds I wonder? Very little coverage is given to the need to amend our constitution.
I would like to share your optimism re the changing opinion on abortion Peter. To some extent I do. But, and this is my subjective opinion, i feel the brain washing that went on before and during the 80′s ( including when I was at school) still has a strong grip on the Irish psyche.
I think it could take another generation before we see pregnant women given equal status in our society. I certainly dont expect to see a referendum being brought forward by the current government. I hope I am wrong on how long it will take.

The problem is that we will never get the chance to vote on that. I’m for restricted abortion ie medical reasons and rape etc but I would vote no if outright abortion was on the cards.

There’s only one thing worse than people who are so in thrall with the Catholic Church that they regard everything they say as unquestionably right- and that’s those who are so anti-Catholic that they base their opinions on contradicting the position of the Church. The Church has nothing to do with this debate. It’s a question of conscience for individuals and society as a whole. You might be happy for Abortion to be a form of contraception but don’t think others who put a greater value on life are doing so because of the urgings of their priest.

Vincent I can’t believe, as an intelligent human that you honestly believe that anyone, anywhere uses abortion as contraception? No one choses it glibly, no one is happy to have to face one and no one is that lazy or complacent that they’ve had the thought “I can’t be arsed with contraception, sure if I get knocked up, I’ll just nip down the local abortion clinic cos that’s just as handy”

I promise you abortion is not a lifestyle choice and you’re deliberately misunderstanding a crisis pregnancy if you think it is.

Hi Abbi. To be clear, I don’t for a second think every woman enters into it lightly. 21% of the UK’s pregnancies ending a termination does prove that for some, it’s just a medical procedure like a tonsillectomy. I’m not trying to be provocative- but that’s an obscenely high statistic that suggests that yes, for some Abortion constitutes contraception of last resort.

That in no way measures the thought process of women: women who agonise over supporting their current children in this economy, women who know having a child will tie them to having an abusive partner, women dealing with severe health issues unrelated to pregnancies.

You have absolutely no idea what the thought process of women who have had abortions is.

Respectfully Vincent, I can’t accept that. Are you saying 21% of ALL pregnancies in the UK are terminated? I would like to see the source of that statistic.
I still don’t think anyone is choosing it over, let’s say, the pill. I don’t think anyone has it in the back of their minds as a safety net like divorce. I think it’s the very last option and the most desperate one that I personally wouldn’t deny someone.

@Abbi – For what it’s worth, the UK Department of Health publishes figures for deliveries and abortions in England and Wales.

In 2011 there were 189,931 abortions carried out in England and Wales: https://www.wp.dh.gov.uk/transparency/files/2012/05/Commentary1.pdf.

In the same period there were 723,913 live births: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_270569.pdf

Adding the two together you get a total of 913,844 pregnancies, meaning a termination rate of 20.8%.

For context, page 15 of the first PDF there includes a breakdown of the reasons given in each case. You can get a breakdown of the explanations for the headings here: http://www.efc.org.uk/young_people/facts_about_abortion/uk_abortion_law.html#4

Category ‘F’ is the one in which an abortion was administered to save the life of the pregnant woman. This was the case in only 1 abortion in England and Wales in 2011.

Unfortunately, that figure ignores that massive rate of miscarriages, Gavan.

Just a thought Vincent.
But if indeed 21% of pregnancies in the UK end in abortion – how do we know the real reasons behind them?

Rape is one of the most under reported crimes on the planet, Incest is probably not going to be something a woman pregnant as a result of would wish to admit. There could be girls from strict religious backgrounds who have fallen pregnant out of marriage and fear for their lives if they are discovered pregnant – they may have a health condition which the pregnancy would exacerbate and for that reason not wish to carry to term.. These are merely some of the possible reasons – and in each, it would be easier to claim you were suicidal than have to deal with the legal ramifications of any of the others (ie reporting rape / incest / abuse or being forced to suffer the health consequences)

Fact is, you don’t know. So how dare you cast your assumptions upon women who are making one of the most difficult decisions of their lives.

Very well said Abbi.

Seriously doubt the vast majority of them are because of rape just as I did about they to save we owns life’s (which Gavin has shown). The lies and half-truths from both sides is amazing.

@Nick – Very fair point which I hadn’t considered.

The same 2011 stats show 241,055 women lost a baby during pregnancy or birth – meaning the proportion of terminations is actually 16.4%.

Apologies, that figure I just quoted is incorrect: the number of miscarriages I mentioned there is from 2009 and 2010 combined.

I can’t find figures for 2011, but on the basis that the rate was unchanged, the average number of miscarriages would be about 121,000. That makes the termination rate 18.5%.

#Shanti- even you don’t believe one in five pregnancies in the UK are the result of rape / incest or medical necessity. So if you don’t mind, I will “dare”.

Vincent. I said I didn’t know the true reasons, I put forth some possible reasons – it was not a definitive and exhaustive list and you know it.
The point I was making was that there can be many reasons a woman may wish to terminate, and without knowing what those reasons are – YOU have no right to judge.

#Shanti- I didn’t judge. But the subject is under what conditions abortion should be allowed, as covered by the SBP poll. My point is that despite pro-abortionists focusing on rape/medical reasons for sanctioning abortion, the reality is that most abortions are not about this so these instances should not be the focus of the debate. I didn’t judge anyone. I was commenting on the reasons for abortion- which are under discussion by my elected representatives and the country as a whole. Given that we live in a democracy I will feel free to voice my opinion, I will feel free to vote in accordance with that opinion and will do so in the hope of influencing my country’s law to correspond with that opinion. Our constitution says I have every right to do so. I’m sorry if that doesn’t suit you.

You are free to voice your opinion, but you keep trumpeting your own assumptions out as facts and that’s not really the same thing.
I mean, after the Savita case you were the one arguing tooth and nail that the legislation already existed, Gavan had to point out that you were wrong because you refused to believe the rest of us.

Now you’re saying that suicide / rape etc shouldn’t be focused on because that’s not the reason for the majority of abortions, but how do you KNOW?
You’re positioning assumptions as fact (again), facts tend to be backed up by evidence so could you please provide the evidence that says you are correct?
Abortion is a nasty experience by all accounts.

You say you don’t judge, but you’re branding a large enough chunk of the female sex as liars when you say that the reasons they have given for termination are false. You’re also judging their decisions by your morals. If that’s not judgement then please tell me what is.

#Shanti- show me please where I called women liars? I said that pro-abortionists focus on a very small niche to leverage abortion for all. My point (again) is that the UK statistics suggest rape/medical reasons are a minute % of abortions and the focus should be on the real reasons of the majority if we’re going to look at reasons/dangers of extending instances where abortion can be allowed. The SBP poll shows the majority of the Irish nation does not favour allowing abortion outside of medical reasons and rape. As for the Savita case, while clumsily worded my point was that the Doctor was covered by the existing legal framework (albeit the Supreme court rather than legislation). This has subsequently been widely accepted- though the very fact that the Doctor misunderstood this emphasised that the situation needed clarification. Anyway, again- show me please where I called women liars….?

#Shanti- I’m curious. Honest question- of that 21% of UK healthy pregnancies aborted, how many do YOU think are carried out because of social reasons- by which I mean the mother/father don’t want the child because they’re single or too young, too poor, too busy..or already have “too many” kids, or aren’t with their partner / don’t want a child with their partner. It’s an honest question. Honest answer please.

Ok, perhaps here I have misunderstood you along the way.
I have said that I am in favour of abortion on demand up to a certain point, but we are not going to get that based upon the X case.
The X case is not even going to cover fatal foetal abnormality. So we are straying outside of what is up for discussion. I got the impression that you were arguing that legislating for this case was a bad thing and that suicide should be removed – if this is not your position then please accept my apologies..
If you are saying that suicide is the thin end of the wedge and should be removed then I’m afraid I can’t agree. It would be damning the genuine cases based upon the perceived dishonesty of women accessing the service.

And yes, there are some who access abortion in the UK because of financial reasons, and some for other reasons too. But ultimately I respect their decisions because I am in no place to judge them.

#Shanti- this is where you and I differ. Your priority is the woman, mine is the unborn child. There are very few circumstances that I can envisage which justifies terminating a life- a genuine risk to the mother is the only one. I believe society’s role is fundamentally to protect the defenceless. That’s why in this instance, on behalf of the child, society does have the responsibility to intervene in what you regard as a woman’s decision alone. We’ll never agree. But then that’s how these things work.

May I ask why your priority is upon preserving a life that is, for a significant portion of its development, more likely to abort naturally than continue?
This is over that of an already living, breathing, functioning woman?

Why you prioritise someone’s right to bodily autonomy being suppressed simply because the potential for life exists within her? If so, where do you think that this life begins?

And why do you call it an unborn child? You are not an undead man. It is a foetus, you are a man (I assume).

#Shanti- you know I’ve sisters and many friends who have had baby’s and when they announce it after 12 weeks not one of them said: I have a foetus in me that has the potential for life! They all said “I’m having a baby!” My definition of life is no more sophisticated than that. I don’t accept that a baby has a greater chance of naturally dying than living- with painful exceptions the opposite is the case. And I most certainly don’t prioritise the baby’s life over the mother’s life. I fully agree that the mothers life comes first. However, the mothers quality of life will never be more important than a baby’s right to life. The waiting list for adoption in this country is enormously long. There are alternatives whereby the quality of life of the mother can be preserved, the child can live and indeed the quality of life of a childless woman can be immeasurably enriched. I don’t see how that can be perceived as a cruel position? As a response to your funny, but undeniably glib “undead man” question- can I ask: do you go round intensive care units switching off the life support machines? I ask because the patients hooked up to them can’t live independently either. Are they fair game too?

Adoption lists are long because it is a lengthy process to adopt and because many people are too short sighted to want to adopt children who aren’t newborns. There is no shortage of adoptable children. Regardless, women are not brood mares who should have their bodily integrity violated in order to give a child to an infertile couple.

There’s kids in orphanages all over the world desperate for parents.. There’s no reason the adoption waiting list should be so long. I think you will find that the delay there is more to do with red tape than a shortage of children. Or perhaps it’s just a shortage of Irish children rather than another nationality?

The reason those women said “I’m having a baby” is because that was the outcome they had attached their hopes to. A girl who finds herself pregnant unintentionally doesn’t say I’m having a baby, she says she’s pregnant – if she says anything at all besides “what am I going to do?”.
Same way a woman who wants a baby who miscarries mourns the loss of that potential, while a woman who was worried or considering abortion breathes a sigh of relief.

Would you not agree if the definition of life will be so simple as to extend to what you consider it to be personally, then the choice in whether or not to proceed with it should also be based in personal perceptions? So, if you want to have a baby, carry to term. If you don’t want the baby but can deal with the pregnancy, put it up for adoption. If you can’t handle the pregnancy, abort.. Y’know? Choice..

#Nick- nor are babies expendable inconveniences which can be thrown in the bin like unwanted pets after Christmas. In my opinion.

Again, I think if you knew women who had abortions, you would know very few women think of them as “unwanted inconveniences.” Through domestic violence work, I’ve met women who know bringing a child into an abusive relationship would be dangerous for them and a child. There are women with severe mental health issues who can’t imagine coping with hormonal issues of pregnancies on top of their disorders. That you would classify these issues as “social abortions” and consider it to be “throwing a child in the trash” would indicate you yourself have no personal experience with this issue.

Not to mention I’m baffled as to why you think women who are careless would be good parents. Why would you punish a child by forcing them to be born to someone who would think so little of them?

#Shanti…If the father of a raped girl went out and shot the rapist in the head I would absolutely understand why he did it. It doesn’t mean the state should allow him to do it. You don’t get to take another life. I strongly believe in personal freedom re: Divorce, contraception, gay marriage etc. Abortion is different by virtue of the fact that it is the most innocent that suffers most. And we in broader society have a duty to protect them. And that extends beyond strong prohibitions to Abortion on demand to ensuring Adoption facilities are efficient and widespread. There are better solutions for unwanted pregnancies than killing the baby.

#Nick, I neither accept that the instances you outlined are the rule rather than the exception, nor that there aren’t better alternatives available under those circumstances than killing the baby. I imagine if you asked one of those children would they rather have been adopted or terminated, they’d probably not reach for the Marie Stopes phone number….

But you admit that’s just your view based on no personal experience? Because I have known a lot of women who have had abortions – very few take it as lightly as you seem to believe. How many women have you supported through an abortion?

And no, actually, I worked with a young woman who was brutally raped throughout childhood who honestly believed it would have been preferable to not be born. I personally would prefer to have not existed than to harm my mother (I love her quite a lot.) I have found that people who believe existence is the most important thing are rarely those who suffered extreme abuse.

#nick- again..the pro-abortion activists seem incapable of speaking about the majority, not the minority. It’s always the rape victim that is the reason to allow abortion on demand. I’ll remind you- 1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK are aborted. That many rapists in the UK, you think? Can I tell you why I think the focus of Irish pro-abortionists is so narrow? It’s because they recognise that the abortion on demand argument is unpalatable. They can’t sell it. So they use the exceptions to creak open the door to abortion that little bit more over time. It’s pretty cynical. This isn’t a personal criticism of you, Nick. Rather an observation of the tactics employed by the pro-Abortion movement. 1 in 5.

Vincent, that would REALLY indicate you’re not aware of several statistics: how many women in Ireland and the UK suffer domestic abuse? How many are sexually assaulted? How many pregnant women in Ireland face domestic violence?

1 in 5 is absolutely not surprising considering that the British Crime Survey and other academic research found that 45% of British women encounter some form of domestic violence. It seems a bit low, actually!

I can’t speak for the UK. But I know more girls who have been raped by at least one guy than girls who have not.
I’m Irish.

That would agree with the SAVI report done by RSCI researchers who put the number in Ireland at at least 1 in 5. The fact that Vincent thinks that number is ridiculous would indicate that he has limited knowledge of the reality of women’s lives.

Shanti I wish the article wasn’t so far down the line now so people could see the shit your writing. Honestly, think about what you’re saying.

She’s saying rape is incredibly prevalent amongst young women, as shown by academic research conducted by the Royal College of Surgeons. What are you basing your views on?

#Nick / #Shanti- if you two actually believe that the vast majority of Abortions are attributable to rape, there’s simply no point talking to you. We obviously live in very different worlds. Where you are patently gangs of rapists walk the streets. In my world, the only girls I know who went across the water did so because they were too young or didn’t want to raise their child alone. I simply don’t believe that contention and we’re done debating if you’re seriously contending that that the UK figure is rape dominated.

Rape, domestic abuse, mental health concerns, financial inability to support another child. Very few women just decide they don’t want to parent. And again, we probably understand more about sexual violence rates because we’re women – rape polices our lives quite a bit more. I’ve pointed out to you academic studies on the subject – while you admit you know few women who access abortion and have little knowledge of sexual violence rates.

I simply urge you to become a bit more educated on how much these issues affect women and the difficult circumstances faced by most women who choose to access an abortion.

#nick…and I would urge you to take your head out of the clouds and stop looking so desperately for excuses to justify termination. I can respect people who feel simply that it’s a woman’s choice. But I’ll not entertain fantasy.

Vincent. I totally agree with you these two must have the most horrible outlook on life. How come no one hears of all this raping? Should any women be let outside?

Uh, they do. The SAVI report is fairly widely commented on, and high rates of sexual violence have been discussed here several times. I know the two of you don’t bother to inform yourselves (despite me pointing out references – SAVI in Ireland, the British Crime Survey which notes that 2 British women a week are murdered by partners), but your ignorance is no excuse for the law to reflect the views of those who are so ill-informed.

#Nick- earlier on in this thread you were trying to pin the 21% on the “massive amount of miscarriages” that were included which turned out to account for circa 2.5%….so you’ll understand reticence in buying these new stats of yours. Rape is a serious thing, whether its 1 or 1,000 but its simply not the driving force behind the UK’s abortion figures. Nor would it account for a serious fraction of Irish cases were it allowed here. It’s simply the vehicle pro-abortionists use to further their agenda. Which is pretty reprehensible when you think about it.

And you guys propagate the rape myth.. It’s always some random guy isn’t it? It’s never the boyfriend who takes issue with being told “not tonight”. There’s a few of those around.. They are by no means the majority, to suggest so would be ludicrous.. But in their youth they get around. And leave lots of victims in their wake who are less inclined to report it because they fell for the rape myth – it’s only if you’re raped by a stranger in an alley! Telling your boyfriend no and him screaming you into submission or threatening you with violence isn’t rape, it’s just a domestic isn’t it lads?

Vincent, again, I am struck by your lack of understanding of the experience of pregnancy. MANY miscarriages occur at home: in fact, academic research indicates up to 1 in 3 pregnancies end in miscarriage. The figures Gavan cited are those which occur in a UK hospital – a VERY different figure than pregnancies which actually end in miscarriage.

According to academic research at the Royal College of Surgeons (which you want to dismiss because you as a man are not aware of a lot of rapes?), 1 in 5 Irish ADULT women are raped. As you can see, I’ve never claimed most women abort due to rape – but many do, as well as domestic violence, severe mental health concerns. And I cannot tell you the amount of women who have lost their jobs in the current recession who feel their current child will suffer if they bring another one into a family.

You have created a dialogue that these women are all selfish and thoughtless – you seem reluctant to confront facts by women who have far more knowledge of pregnancy and abortion than you do.

#Shanti- you’re coming perilously close there to calling me an apologist for rapists and I think your argument is best served stepping back from that..

And ps Vincent, if a woman doesn’t wish to be pregnant, by telling her that she has no control over her own body ie – she must carry to term, you are doing the exact same thing a rapist does – deny her rights over her own body. Use her as a vessel with no consideration for her consent.

The same issue as with the rape thing. It’s not about what they show you in the movies, it’s about real life – where some guys think their girlfriend is theirs to have sex with whenever *they* want, her consent was given when she said she would go out with him..

Then why are you denying the prevalence of rape? You yourself admitted you believed it was a rare thing. Where exactly do you get your information on rape statistics in Ireland?

#Nick-you’re the one focusing on rape, not me. As is always the case with pro-abortionists. I’m happy to talk about the myriad of other reasons. You mention economic circumstance and I’ll reiterate there are alternatives to incurring economic hardships for either you or your child through adoption, for example. It’s not a good enough reason to end a life. In my opinion.

I admit – I get frustrated when men deny the frequency of domestic violence. Pregnancy due to a consensual sexual relationship with an abusive partner is fairly common. So are pregnancies for women who have mental health issues and they feel unable to deal with hormonal concerns. But they should just adopt, right?

Now, as for finance, so YOU believe women should continue a pregnancy, explaining to the entire community that they will be placing the child for adoption due to finance (including older children) and risk the myriad of health concerns of pregnancy only to place a child into care (not sure how much you’ve read about HSE care – I wouldn’t put a dog into it) and you see no problem in you, a man who will never be pregnant, forcing a woman to go through all of that?

#Shanti- sex, last time I checked is between two consenting adults. Both bear the consequences, both bear the responsibilities. To put it another way, if the baby lives as its father, I would be legally and morally responsible for him/her for 18 years. So yes, I’m secure in asserting a say in whether the baby can be terminated before its even born. If I’m responsible after its born, I have a right to influence what happens before. I’m not going to dignify the rapist analogy with a response, so reprehensible it is.

She’s dead on, actually. Rape removes power over your body – forcing a woman to continue her pregnancy is similar.

And you’re right, you should be part of a discussion with your partner. But you’re not going to help a woman feed her child – so it’s easy for you to condemn a stranger when it will have no effect on you.

#Nick- Do I believe either a birth into a bad relationship is ideal or that having to adopt out a child due to economic duress is good? No, of course not. Do I believe that killing the baby is a better solution? No, I do not. There’s always a better way. You tell me this- a girl who gets pregnant and just wants rid of it because she’s young, hasn’t huge money and her careers only getting going- you’re happy enough for our laws to allow her to abort the baby? Answer honestly, please.

#Nick- Euthanasia is an offence in Ireland. That is the state removing control over a citizens right over his/her own body. You have an issue with that too?

Again, it’s easy to say there’s always the better way when you will never be that pregnant woman or a child in an abusive home. Very, very easy.

And yes: I believe abortion is unethical in those circumstances, personally, as a Quaker. But I know that is my religious belief, and I cannot justify oppressing that on someone else when there is no philosophical or scientific consensus on when personhood begins.

I also know that young woman might then try to obtain an illegal abortion – and I would never want society to allow for that kind of bloodshed. Again, Ireland dislikes that alternative so much that there is a constitutional right to travel for an abortion.

But it’s also become clear in this debate, while I’m sure you’re well meaning, you also seem incredibly naive about the difficult circumstances which drive women to abortion. I urge you to volunteer with children at risk, with women in your community who are having financial difficulties, with advocating for better child benefit and free LARCs, and maybe learn a bit more about their day to day lives.

Yes, Vincent, I do have an issue with euthanasia not being legal. I believe strongly in the sanctity of the right to bodily integrity, described in Ryan v Attorney General as an incredibly important right in the Bunreacht na hEireann.

Vincent. Do you have any idea how many girls have stories about times where they felt pressured into having sex with a partner at some point throughout her life?
You seek to diminish the grounds which women seek abortion – from feeling its the end of their lives, to having fallen pregnant after a sexual encounter they didn’t want. These things are far more common than you seem to realise.. Sex is between two consenting adults – TWO consenting. You realise that, but there’s an alarming amount of men that do not. Do you think a guy who doesn’t care whether his girlfriend wants to or not should have control over what happens to her body?

Enough. Good night.

No one here’s about it because the vast majority of raped women are too petrified to come forward. Not every case is branded across the media. As we know the most “interesting” or “shocking” cases are given precedent over others. Just because you don’t necessarily “hear about” doesn’t mean it doesn’t go on in severe magnitude. What an ignorant statement.

That last comment was in response to @james attley

*hears

There is no absolute definition. If you believe the foetus is a life thus you also believe the woman is a mother. It’s the very basis of the debate we’re having.

The definition doesn’t really apply actually. It’s an extremely common sense approach, if the mother gets into difficulty while the foetus is dependent for everything (prior to 24wks), the the life of the mother should be prioritised. If the mother gets into difficulty after 24wks, then labour is induced and a live baby is given birth.
The question of life only applies (barely) when you are asking for termination on demand. And again, the same parameters as above exist.
The question of life was valid when not as much was understood about birth, but now is only used by one particular side of the debate to provoke emotion to what is already a difficult time of any mothers life.

@ James Connelly
You are ignoring the fact James, that 60 babies were aborted alive in the UK last year. These children were then left to die “naturally” by starvation.

Source, Paddy? A reputable one, as well, not LifeSiteNews…

@paddy, why are you quoting UK stats? Most pro-choice arguments I’ve seen do not want the UK model introduced here!! Emotional blackmail once again by the anti-choice side!!

Hi Paddy, the figure was actually 72. 64 were due in cases where more than one baby was expected (37 in the case of twins reduced to one), triplets reduced to twins (18) and triplets reduced to one (9). These were all carried out underground, which is to say that they were not carried out by authorised personnel in less than appropriate surroundings.
The other 8 cases were due to the foetus passing away during appropriate medical intervention, due to the life if mother or baby being at risk.

Apologies – typo – where the emoticon appears should be an 8. That is 18 triplets reduced to twins.

Sorry but I have to disagree with you strongly on this point.

I am in favour of legislation along the lines of the X case (and I’d probably even extend the legislation if it was up to me) but the idea that we can just exclude any group or organisation from discussion or giving their opinion on a major social issue because we don’t like them is fundamentally anti-democratic. This was the same sort of argument that was used to deny blacks, gays, women their chance to speak out on issues over the last century.

Who decides which groups don’t get to speak on an issue? You? I don’t remember appointing you as spokesperson and judge for every group in this country.

The strength of a democracy lies in the fact the we can tolerate opposing viewpoint even when we disagree strongly with them. Are you so unsure of the right of your own viewpoint that you can’t tolerate opposing arguments?

#jessface- I really don’t want to get into demonising people. The reason I quote this figure is that the pro-abortion spend so much time hiding behind rape victims and tragedies that like that in Galway as if they’re the norm. If there’s going to be a debate, lets have it about the true realities we face. I live in the real world. Lets not pretend the vast majority of abortions are because of rape or medical issues. We know differently. Life experience shows us that. We don’t need empirical research. It’s disingenuous to say otherwise.

#Vincent I’m not pretending all abortions are a result of rape or medical issues what so ever. I like you, am a realist. However, I feel it is fundamentally unrealistic to state that the majority of this figure are women who are lazy and are using abortion as a method of contraception. You seem to neglect financial, emotional and stability issues. Granted perhaps a proportion of these women are young girls who were irresponsible and are dealing with the consequences in much the same manner. But if you are to “live in the real world” you can’t make such wild speculations. I’m not defining all cases of abortion as a result of rape, but you seem to be defining them solely as a contraceptive method?? I’m looking at it at all angles. Contraception isn’t always effective you can be as responsible as can be, and still fall pregnant. Now being realistic not everyone is going to remain abstinent. Crisis pregnancy is a real issue and It results for a number of different reasons. That’s being realistic.

#Jesseface- I think I was very clear that I’m not tarring everyone with the same brush. I think the stats do prove rape /medical reasons are the vast minority of cases. My frustration is that these reasons are the ones so often cited by pro-abortionists to justify kicking open the door to abortion on demand. I think that the 63% figure suggests that in Ireland most people agree that the life of the unborn supercedes the financial, emotional or stability issues you mention. I understand and respect that you disagree. We won’t change each others mind either, I think. But the pro-abortion lobbyists should be honest and say “Abortion for all” and try to convince the majority of its merits rather than trying to bring it in through the back door by sneaking it in using tragedies like that in Galway as the vehicle.

“Abortion for all” would be utterly ridiculous.. How would the species continue?

It should be on demand for the first trimester. The chances of miscarriage start out extremely high and only reduce down to 50/50 after the end of the first trimester.. Most women haven’t even announced their pregnancy until this stage because of this fact.

At 12 weeks you get your scan and in the 2nd trimester you can actually find out whether your pregnancy is viable / healthy. At this stage abortion should only be available for medical reasons. If it was simply an unwanted pregnancy, they would have dealt with it already.

Last trimester, foetal chances of surviving delivery are 50/50. At this point induced labour should be used, to give the foetus a chance of life. If it survives birth it has every right to life. But before it is born its depending upon the woman *for* it’s life. So her rights to bodily autonomy have to come first.

I’d take issue with much of what you say.

1. The poll also indicates that people support that serious risks to the mother’s health (but not necessarily an immediate threat to her life) should be grounds for allowing a termination, as should rape.

2. Guidelines are meaningless and just strangle the ability to make sound medical decisions in rapidly changing situations. Clear legislation is what counts.

3. This notion of ‘abortion to the moment of birth’ (by which I assume you mean full term birth) is a complete red herring. Early delivery is the appropriate treatment in most cases. In most cases this is done because the mothers life is at risk or her health under serious threat, and everything possible is done to balance the risks to the mother with ensuring that an early delivery results in a good outcome for both mother and baby. This is a regular coinsurance already in Irish hospitals, with early inductions due to conditions such as pre-eclamsia a routine matter.

The notion that legislation for x would mean that pregnant women will be routinely having abortions at 8 months for trivial reasons and babies left to die is scaremongering of the highest order

In fact, legislation for x, no matter what form it takes, will necessarily be so narrow that it will still leave women who have been raped, who are carrying a non-viable foetus or who have serious illnesses in a position where they have to travel to another state to get the treatment they require.

Well said Katie, you beat me to it. Keep the common sense a coming! Regards, J.

Katie, I agree with much of what you say. Having 2 premmie sons I absolutely know that early delivery is the appropriate course of action in the case of complications in the latter stages of pregnancy. I equally agyree that once things happen they happen quickly and I agree it will not be possible to document every eventuality so it will be extremely difficult to draft the appropriate legislation and guidelines (of which the guidelines should not be over detailed). While you are correct in saying it is very unlikely that anyone would choose to exercise the right to termination late in a pregnancy because of danger to life of the mother it is a right that does in fact exist. It is no red herring unfortunately as it will have to dealt with in the legislation.

@ Katie Does, as always, your analysis is spot on. It is so good to see careful and rigorous analysis applied to these matters.

I am glad it is now 2012, not 1983.

If we could only get in emergency legislation to enable clinicians safely and legally intervene to save the life’s and health of pregnancy women, the Referendum can take its time.

One thing is clear. No one wants what happened to Savita and other women ever to happen again. This is a unifying and positive thing. No one thinks any longer that the interests of a foetus should take precedence over the life and health of the woman carrying the foetus.

In 1983, the debate was quite extremist and inflammatory. The passage of time and the reduced dominance of the Roman Catholic Church, a major factor in 1983, suggests that a more humane, mature and enlightened debate is now possible.

Not necessarily.. They might if I was Buddhist. Not the reasons I chose the handle, sorry..

I would say Ireland’s nearly 100% “pro life”. The issue is pro choice or anti choice.

36% apparently want an extremely liberal abortion law. Leave out don’t knows and that’s probably nearly 50%.

That’s some statistical gymnastics you’re doing there, William…increasing 36% to 50%. Especially since in polls, undecideds tend to break along the same ratio as the general populace- they just take longer to decide. As for the pro-choice word play / spin- a vote for abortion is a vote in favour of it. Believing otherwise is moral obfuscation. If “100%” are anti-Abortion it’s odd that over 1 in 5 babies in the UK are aborted, don’t you think? The poll is pretty definitive that 63% at least don’t want that here.

A proponent of small government control over capital flows argues for big government forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies from conception to full term? Another capitalism authoritarian speaking “the real truth”?

Yeah, because exporting the problem is a really mature way to deal with it, isn’t it?
The only problem with legislating for X is that the “pro life” lobby would have you believe that all women are so inherently trustworthy that they will suddenly give up on contraception, throw all caution to the wind and knock down to an abortion clinic claiming they’re suicidal if they fall pregnant..

This same “pro life” lobby pushed for a referendum that guaranteed the absolute right to life of the unborn in 1983 – thankfully someone thought to add in an equal right to life of the mother because these guys would have preferred if women were still dying from ectopic pregnancies. They flat out denied than A, B, C, X, Michelle Harte, Savita Hallapannavar or any other cases would ever result from their idiotic Pro Life Amendment. After all, they had “god” on their side to steer them the right way..

Well god is the biggest abortion doctor on this planet. Up to 80% of pregnancies, GOD terminates. So the disingenuous cries of the “pro life” lobby to treat unborn life as “sacred” ring as hollow as they come.. And those who claim to be atheist pro lifers are still victims of the SPUC brainwashing while at CATHOLIC school.

Inherently UNtrustworthy, my apologies..

@Mark Reading isn’t your strongest point is it?

I’d call it self defence rather than attack..
These religious beliefs have permeated every aspect of our lives. They have pushed through a pernicious constitutional amendment which despite their assurances, has contributed to deaths (not to mention the butchering of women).
You and anyone else are more than entitled to your beliefs, but they are YOUR beliefs. And you have no right to expect others to live by YOUR morals. Freedom of religion includes freedom FROM religion thank you very much.

Disappointing to see Irish catholic men who think its their place to tell women how to lead their lives eh Tom?

Do not judge others and you will not be judged.

@tom

No Tom, if I was sexist I would see men as second class citizens, which i dont. If I were sexist toward men I would feel and act that it is ‘ my god given right’ to tell men how they should live their lives and tell men what they should or should not do with their bodies,

The sexism is all yours and your ilk.

I’m sorry, have you discussed this with every family of pregnant women in Ireland who has committed suicide? How have you come to the conclusion that none did so due to being forced to continue a pregnancy?

You are also misrepresenting UK law – to obtain an abortion, the mental health of a woman must only be worse than if she’s forced to continue the pregnancy – this is MUCH less of a burden than the immediate risk to the life of a mother.

And I’m sorry you disagree with abortion to a suicidal woman, but we don’t enforce constitutional rights based on whether every individual agrees. If some people disagreed with freedom of speech or assembly, we’d hardly jettison that.

And please explain where the “10,000″ figures came from. Only place I’ve ever heard that is on the Youth Defence website!

@ Nick Beard
Well Nick, I’m quoting Patricia Casey, who has looked at cases of suicide over the past 30 years, but my guess is its easier to critique and disagree than produce some evidence of your own.
Your second point on the UK law just confirms my understanding that when we accept such obscure reasons as grounds for the taking of a life, there are no breaks on full and free abortion. But may I suggest this is your aim, all you have to do is con the people of Ireland for long enough to think they are being “compassionate”, as you squeeze open the floodgates of abortion.
In relation to the 10,000, our abortion rate is very low at the moment by international standards, moving just half way toward the rate in England, would account for 10000 more at home

Patricia Casey of the Pro Life Campaign? I very much doubt that families of women who have committed suicide would feel comfortable speaking to someone so judgmental about the causes behind a loved one’s suicide. All we know is that suicide is one of the most common causes of death amongst women in the developed world – exactly why someone who committed suicide took her life is really beyond what anyone, particularly an activist academic, can know.

Our abortion rate is not actually that low – just look at the IFPA figures. Basically, 10,000 is a guess. Unfortunately, figures on the numbers of abortions in Ireland aren’t kept by the government, so groups like Youth Defence can just make up an arbitrary figure.

I’m glad you’re secure in your own “compassion.” Who cares if women like Savita have to die, right?

Good man Paddy, another devout catholic male with all the answers to womens reproductive rights.

Nick, that sounds like more poo poo out of you again. I was astonished that the biggest cause of death for women in the developing world was suicide. So astonished that I tried to find figures to back that up. From what I can see cardiovascular disease is the highest with suicide way down that list.

Paddy.
Maybe the foetus that is produced from a rape isn’t guilty of a crime. But neither is the mother.

And please, I have spoken to people here and people in real life who’s friend hung themselves / jumped in the sea / took an overdose because they were pregnant. Just because its not recorded on their cause of death doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen..
Although, for the pro life side the fact that women travel to the UK seems to mean it doesn’t happen..

Speaking of foeticide and your belief on the matter, fancy asking god why he terminates 80% of pregnancies before implantation and up to 50% of them in the first trimester?

@ Nick Beard
I’m sure you don’t like the pro-life voices Nick, and would gladly ignore, but I don’t believe I owe you an apology for defending life.
You obviously don’t know Patricia Caseys job, to criticise her in relation to suicide, or the causes of abortion.
It is true the 10000 is approximate, but conservative. Are you suggesting the number of abortions will not increase, you probably are.
Savita was a tragic case, and if induction could have saved her, she should have been induced. Can’t see where we disagree there. We do have a two patient model, but we will save the mother, for instance in the case of certain cancers, the practice has been to treat the mother even when the child will be lost. But I’m sure you know all of this already, but what you strive for if abortion on demand.
@ werejammin
Yes a Catholic, what is the point? Should I be in the catacombs perhaps! I hope you don’t consider abortion as pro woman, the majority of abortions are female babies, a little bit of gender selection. As for the mother, increased suicidal risk, increased risk of cancer.
@ Ciaran O Shea
If we want to know how our society will respond to abortion on demand, we have to look to our nearest neighbours who started with abortion only for threat of suicide and rape, look where they are now and we too can get there. The X case was a deeply flawed and rushed decision, without psychiatric input, and we want to set the tone of this country on the back of that?

@ paddy

well said and factual.

Actually, no paddy, you shold not be in the catacombs, but we would settle for you being in the 21st century. The catholic church and its professional minions like yourself need to take your jackboots off the necks of women in this country. Its bible thumping attitudes like yours that led to women needlessly having their hips butchered so that they could squeeze out as many good little catholics as possible.

@ Shanti Om
I agree with you, neither the mother or child have done any wrong. But I don’t believe that adding the death of the child to the situation is adding to the mothers recovery.
I believe that nature provides an expectant mother with increased will for survival, and suicide among expectant mothers is very rare, and then usually because of some underlying mental illness. It is interesting to remember the “C” woman’s experience. She felt much more suicidal following her abortion than before.
I’m pro-life, and like all pro- lifers, we regret that 4700 irish found it necessary to have abortions in England last year. This is not denial, just sadness and regret at the loss of life.
I know from previous encounters that your relationship with god is tenuous to say the least, so I won’t try to explain good and bad to you, or the fall, or what is to come. But we are stuck in this valley of tears for the moment.

@ werejammin
Seems like you have some issues with Catholics. Like all Catholics, male and female, we love both genders equally. I accept of course that individuals have done great wrongs, however don’t underestimate the benefit of Catholics to the society you enjoy.
The hip butchering you refer to was certainly not unique to Catholics, and was like many practices of the past found in time to be more harmful than beneficial; no doubt just like abortion will be viewed in the future!

Actually, James, the most common causes of death for pregnant women are domestic abuse, suicide, much more than cardiovascular issues. Can you point to otherwise in academic studies?

And no, paddy, Sheila hodges, Michelle Harte, Savita, c from abc: all of these women have been failed by our failure to legislate. How many more women need to die because you and Youth Defence oppose legislative clarity?

Can you? You said suicide was and now you’re retracting it. Full of shit!

@ Nick Beard
Always one to put words in other people’s mouths Nick. I am all in favour of legal clarity, I just don’t accept the threat of suicide as grounds for abortion. I know you are in denial, but the Savita case has nothing to do with abortion. If induction was an appropriate part of her treatment, them she should have been induced. “C” has also made it clear that the absorption industry did her an injustice.

Er Paddy – you won’t try to explain good and bad to me or the fall or what is to come? What exactly is that supposed to mean?
I know all about that cult thanks very much, I suffered their brainwashing throughout school. And it didn’t teach right from wrong, it taught incest, bestiality, murder, biogtry, and HATE. That’s why I ditched it.

The fact remains, the worlds most prolific abortionist is your god, the same god who killed the first born or Egypt and kills millions in “natural disasters” every year. Abortion is not mentioned in the bible, god created man from the earth and BREATHED life into him and he BECAME a man.
There’s no biblical passage that backs up the “life beginning at conception” position. You’ve been conned..

You just don’t like women having control over their own destiny.. Maybe one day you’ll get over yourself and realise that..

@ Shanti Om
Well Shanti, you just changed your allegiances. But your right in that we will all know better in the future. And yes women, just like men, have some control over their own future, except of course all of those women killed by abortion. What is amazing is that you will not listen to groups like Rachel’s vineyard who work with the many women who are devastated every day because they accepted the lies of the abortion industry. Women like “C” and Roe.
Your view of god is sadly distorted, but it is common for those who may choose to turn their backs on god, to blame god. He of course is always welcoming back, no matter how far people stray

I don’t deny that there are women who will come to regret their decision. There are also plenty who do not. We should be able to respect their choices as none of us has walked in their shoes.

I feel that bringing god into the situation is bigoted because it refuses to accept the view of anyone else. You have decided that your tome of paradoxes is the truth and for that reason you expect everyone to live according to it whether they believe in it or not. And please spare me the “oh you have just lost your way, but god will accept you back” nonsense.. You have no idea how condescending and patronising that sounds. Why can’t you just respect that other people have their own minds and the free will to make their own choices and decisions?

God has no place in this debate. Religious beliefs are personal, they are not universal. They are subjective, not objective. The only reason I pointed out gods role in miscarriages (and infanticide) is to try and show you how inconsistent and hollow the religious argument is.

I said it was one of the most common causes, James. You Inserted THE MOST COMMON yourself. But as for my proof: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/26/us-deaths-pregnancy-idUSTRE79P7OK20111026

Obviously in varies in countries between suicide and homicide: many pregnant women are victims of domestic violence.

Paddy, while I normally don’t stoop to debate with someone so misinformed that they confuse C from the C case with C from the ABC case (making it clear you’ve yet to bother to read either) – Savita’s case was about an abortion. She requested a procedure which would reduce her risk of complications and as there was no legislative clarity, she was denied.

Again, I am concerned by people with no respect for democracy: as you’ve decided single handedly that you should be able to jettison a constitutional right voted on in two referendums.

Oh, please, Paddy. The CPA report shows 87% of women feel abortion was the best decision. Only the research of the discredited Priscila Coleman (whose editors have even renounced her findings) suggest in any way that abortion causes mental health issues. While you might find it reassuring to try to believe that you are preventing trauma by limiting legal abortions, you are in reality causing it. At least have the courage to admit you’re willing to sacrifice women’s well-being.

That only says that it is an important factor, as far as I’m aware I doesn’t say anywhere that it is one of the most common reasons. It’s also an American study which makes it irrelevant here because your homicide rate just isn’t comparable to Ireland. So that’s not really much proof is it?

Could you answer me this? Correct me if I’m wrong but you’re not Irish nor do you live here, so what has any of this got to do with you? Team America sticking it’s nose in again?

@ Shanti Om
As you say, it was you who brought God into the discussion.
@ Nick Beard
It’s worth noting that we know nothing of the Savita case yet, but if induction was necessary and would help, that’s what she should have received. But for instance one Gynaecologist in The Hindu, Hema Divakar, suggests that an abortion may have lead to her death two days earlier!
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-karnataka/city-doctor-defends-irish-counterparts/article4100316.ece
Your understanding of the constitution is of course self serving. Thanking you for stooping to read my comments.

Hi, James: as far as I know, you never have had an abortion, miscarriage or given birth in Ireland. Nor will you. So this is actually far more relevant to me than it is to you, as I have. Can you point me to an Irish study which notes that women die more of cardiovascular concerns than homicide or suicide? Because so far, all you’ve been saying is “that’s not true” and you’ve pointed out no evidence.

And Paddy, it’s not MY interpretation of the constitution. It’s that of the Irish Supreme Court, supported by the Irish people in two referendum. I really urge you to inform yourself on these issues, as your ignorance of the ABC case is a lack. Also, interesting how you ignore that this piece admits that doctor’s view is a minority view and cites several doctors who disagree with him. But it’s been clear from your statements that unlike those of us interested in science, you attempt to twist science to fit your religious views.

The world Heath organisation. And it is far more relevant to me in this country as I will have a say on the matter….. You won’t!
You seem to think that I’m against abortion but you can think as you like (as yanks do). I think you should be more concerned with the goings on in your own country than over here. Just like why the hell is there such an absurdly high rate of abortion in New York? It seems like its being used widely as a contraception, the exact thing you say won’t happen here. So you’ll excuse me when I say… keep your nose out of our business.

Please point to the WHO statistic which indicates more women die of cardiovascular concerns. I’ve read that study: the largest cause of death is “direct morality” (which includes homicide and suicide). Link please?

And I see you’re one of these men who believes women like Savita and I should have no say over our childbirth conditions. While you, a man who will never give birth, should have an opinion? I don’t live in the US, I’ve never given birth there or had a miscarriage or had an abortion there. If you think the situation in New York is that abortions are only available if there’s an immediate risk to the woman’s life, you have no idea what you’re on about. All anyone wants is for the X case (a constitutional right to an abortion when there is an immediate threat to the life of the mother) to be legislated for.

It’s disappointing when so few Irish citizens seem to understand the Bunreacht na hEireann.

No nick I don’t think that, you’re just making up stuff again and I think you would be perfectly happy if Ireland were to end up like New York. Hopefully that won’t happen in my lifetime.
Go look for the study yourself like I did when you made something up before.
I put as much pass on your opinions as I do the American pro-lifers over here as well, just in case you think I’m not being fair. Well good night, some of us have work to go to in the morning.

I read the study – as you said, you’re making stuff up. At least unlike most pro lifers, you admit it.

Unfortunately, you don’t seem to feel the need to legislate for Irish constitutional rights. Anyone with the basest understanding of the Bunreacht na hEireann and the ECHR judgement in ABC understands the need to legislate. There’s a joke in America that immigrants tend to have the most knowledge of the law – unfortunately, it seems true in this case as well. Ireland is obligated to legislate for abortion when there is a substantial and immediate threat to the life of the mother. Easy to ignore it when your life will never be on the line, isn’t it?

Nick either your blind or a moron. Just go back over the comments again and you’ll see who makes stuff up. And where in the name of Christ did you pull ‘at least you’ you admit it? Maybe the good old lefty trick…. When you know you’re wrong just say something completely different?

I have low tolerance for people who mislead others.

My original comment: “All we know is that suicide is one of the most common causes of death amongst women in the developed world.”

As the WHO notes here, http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/maternal_perinatal/epidemiology/en/index.html, direct causes of death are the common common during pregnancy in the developed world.

Please show me your figures which indicate otherwise in Ireland: otherwise, I’ll assume you’re full of it.

To clarify: direct causes involve homicide and suicide: there’s also the fact that many medical examiners are reluctant to mark deaths that were suicides as suicides.

Do you know how many pregnant women committed suicide in Ireland last year? Do you know how many died in childbirth? I’m betting you don’t…