Why do some people hate abortion in this country,is like the women are robots and cant chose to live a life they want to,if a woman want to have an abortion thats her right,her decision,her freedom of democracy..and im glad they now have an option

@Brendan – try telling that to the pro-lifers.

@stayfrosty- yes highlighting a queried health risk for the women really shows how much I hate them…. Save your rant for somewhere else!

@brendan,this is not a rant,is a womans right to have a choice,if they dont want a baby to grow inside them for 9 months thats their human rights.not the churches or politicians to decide for them

That is an excellent idea. Now lets get everyone else on board and we’d be all set….

You’re absolutely right, given that this is the case, we have to trust women to make the choice that’s right for them.

Surely it is no ones choice but the woman concerned.

Why do people have to row in and get involved on an issue that should not concern them?

I notice that its predominantly men that ate giving their tuppence worth on the issue ? Where are the women’s comments or maybe they don’t feel it’s appropriate to comment in this arena. My own feeling is not so much about the ethical question but what reaction this will provoke in the most God fearing and righteous part of the empire. The so called “God’s people ” can’t handle multiculturalism never mind the human understanding required to deal with an unplanned pregnancy.

Joan , if you think being born in the majority of the Ulster counties ( a Province of Ireland ) controlled by another state means ‘one’ is from “another country” then your galling ignorance can’t be ignored . This clinic is on Irish soil therefore an issue for the Irish people.

The Irish people have voted twice and the result has been to make abortion available in the circumstances offered by Marie Stopes, so what are you on about, Gearoid?

Nick I am on about the north being a different jurisdiction , N Irish is not a nationality thus it cannot be a country. I referred to the clinic being an issue for the people of Ireland north and south regardless of their viewpoint on abortion. The question really is , what are you on about? Stick to the point made , I never referred to voting or voting twice or whatever you are on about.

But how is it an ‘issue’ if twice the Irish people voted in favour of it? Twice, we have voted to allow for abortions if the mother is in physical danger or her mental health is at risk. This clinic provides abortion on exactly those grounds, and no other. I’m not sure why this is an issue at all.

If your argument is that the clinic is the concern of the Irish people, it is important to note the clinic will,be operating within the right to an abortion approved by the Irish people in two referenda.

Irish people did not vote for abortion. I know several pro-life people who voted down the 2002 referendum seeing it as seriously flawed,and designed to exclude the human embryo outside the womb. They were sure the wording was a compromise and would leave the way open for embryo research. I clearly remember the debates that took place and the differences of opinion on the pro-life side. There’s no way that vote can be seen as a vote for abortion.

Maria, what on earth are you talking about? The Irish people voted for abortion if the mother’s physical or mental health was at serious risk, like in the X case. Pro-lifers are entitled to vote any way they like but please do not misrepresent the actual terms of the referendum. What on earth is an embryo outside of the womb? I’m not sure how that even makes sense. What does embryo research have to do with allowing a suicidal woman to have an abortion?

Yup – one of the YD adverts used the photo of a baby with a bandage wrapped around its head – typically showing that the baby has a condition called anencephaly – a condition whereby the baby is born without a brain. It’s an absolute disgrace that any expectant mother should have to give birth to a “living” baby – with a condition that would mean the baby sees at most a few hours of life.
A bit rich from the pro-life brigade I thought.

have you experience of this? Our kid has schizencephaly which is a severe brain illness and we were told she would not walk, talk, know who we are, she’d have seizures she’d have this that ant the other. we had tough decision to make snd we made it. we know have the most beautiful 2 year old girl. she nothing to whst we were told to expect and there is no reason why she will not grow and develop into an independent woman. i really think people should put a little more thought into their comments

I have a brother raising his family, including his daughter who has Downs Syndrome, in Austria, where abortion is readily available. My brother and his wife are regularly treated like abusive parents by strangers, the same people who look with disgust at my beautiful niece. It is clear that society there has little time for children with developmental abnormalities.
Has the Journal community also come to that point where you believe that a child with disability is subhuman and does not warrant being born? Do you believe that an unborn child is subhuman because of the nature by which it was conceived? There seems to be two camps in this debate: the first believing that life begins at conception (after all, this is the point at which this life has its own unique DNA, all it needs to do is be allowed to grow). The other camp doesn’t recognize the child as an individual entity until it magically appears ready-formed at birth. For this camp, there is no reason for children to be born with disabilities (those should already have been weeded out by abortion). There is nothing “liberal” or “progressive” about this camp. They are intolerant and judgmental of “unwanted” children, as well as those who defend the civil-rights of these defenseless unborn children. Perhaps we might look back in thirty or forty years time and recognize the pro-life campaigners in the same way as we look at the anti-apartheid campaigners now.

I have a brother raising his family, including his daughter who has Downs Syndrome, in Austria, where abortion is readily available. My brother and his wife are regularly treated like abusive parents by strangers, the same people who look with disgust at my beautiful niece. It is clear that society there has little time for children with developmental abnormalities.
Has the Journal community also come to that point where you believe that a child with disability is subhuman and does not warrant being born? Do you believe that an unborn child is subhuman because of the nature by which it was conceived? There seems to be two camps in this debate: the first believing that life begins at conception (after all, this is the point at which this life has its own unique DNA, all it needs to do is be allowed to grow). The other camp doesn’t recognize the child as an individual entity until it magically appears ready-formed at birth. For this camp, there is no reason for children to be born with disabilities (those should already have been weeded out by abortion). There is nothing “liberal” or “progressive” about this camp. They are intolerant and judgmental of “unwanted” children, as well as those who defend the civil-rights of these defenseless unborn children. Perhaps we might look back in thirty or forty years time and recognize the pro-life campaigners in the same way as we look at the anti-apartheid campaigners now.

I have a brother raising his family, including his daughter who has Downs Syndrome, in Austria, where abortion is readily available. My brother and his wife are regularly treated like abusive parents by strangers, the same people who look with disgust at my beautiful niece. It is clear that society there has little time for children with developmental abnormalities.
Has the Journal community also come to that point where you believe that a child with disability is subhuman and does not warrant being born? Do you believe that an unborn child is subhuman because of the nature by which it was conceived? There seems to be two camps in this debate: the first believing that life begins at conception (after all, this is the point at which this life has its own unique DNA, all it needs to do is be allowed to grow). The other camp doesn’t recognize the child as an individual entity until it magically appears ready-formed at birth. For this camp, there is no reason for children to be born with disabilities (those should already have been weeded out by abortion).

I have a brother raising his family, including his daughter who has Downs Syndrome, in Austria, where abortion is readily available. My brother and his wife are regularly treated like abusive parents by strangers, the same people who look with disgust at my beautiful niece. It is clear that society there has little time for children with developmental abnormalities.
Has the Journal community also come to that point where you believe that a child with disability is subhuman and does not warrant being born? Do you believe that an unborn child is subhuman because of the nature by which it was conceived? There seems to be two camps in this debate: the first believing that life begins at conception (after all, this is the point at which this life has its own unique DNA, all it needs to do is be allowed to grow). The other camp doesn’t recognize the child as an individual entity until it magically appears ready-formed at birth. For this camp, there is no reason for children to be born with disabilities (those should already have been weeded out by abortion).

There is nothing “liberal” or “progressive” about this camp. They are intolerant and judgmental of “unwanted” children, as well as those who defend the civil-rights of these defenseless unborn children. Perhaps we might look back in thirty or forty years time and recognize the pro-life campaigners in the same way as we look at the anti-apartheid campaigners now.

not that i care really but any chance some of the red thumbs on my comment could explain why? is that really the mentality of the pro choice brigade?

Anencephaly is the condition whereby the baby is born without a forebrain – the largest part of the brain, and the internal cavity of the skull is very often visible. Most babies born with this, do not survive birth, it accounts for half of still-born deaths, and in babies who survive they die within a few hours, possibly days, there are 3 cases whereby survivors have achieved 2 years or older.
Schizencephaly is a cleft in the brain – sufferers can live limited lives with intervention from various health services. The two are extremely different.
“Pro Abortioners” do not want to rid the world of imperfections. Abortion is one of the most difficult procedures an expectant mother can have carried out. It is never the choice of the doctor, it is always the choice of the mother. The pro-choice campaign do not engage in scare mongering – they engage in facts, and facts alone.

my reply was to Frank i hadnt seen your post when replying Michael. My only point was we would have been fully entitled to make a decision either way and had we been soft and just listened to the doctors we could very quickly made one of the worst decisions ever made. the picture thst was painted for us was bleak to say the least yet here we are two years after the birth with a great kid who has achieved more at this stage than she was ever expected to.

just to be clear Michael im neither pro choice nor pro life, we had our situation and we dealt with it. l will say that while you might be correct in your opinion that abortion may be the most difficult “procedure” a pregnant woman can have i think the most difficult thing a pregnant woman will ever do is what thousands of women do every day in carrying a child full term while after been given bad news and not knowing what lays ahead

@Micheal, you’re right about that. Abortion is never the choice of the doctor, it’s always the choice of the woman. In Ireland, doctors will not intentionally perform an abortion. However, if a surgical procedure is required to save the life of a woman and her child dies as a result of such intervention, that is legal, tolerated and practiced in Ireland, without legalized abortion being enacted.
At nine weeks, anacephaly or other foetal abnormalities would not be detected by ultrasound, so this Marie Stopes cannot argue that it is targeting that market. It is primarily pitching for business from those women who view pregnancy as an inconvenience. Abortion is being used as birth-control, an argument that the campaigners don’t use in the Republic.

Brian, stop scaremongering. Marie Stopes has said it will operate within the law and so will only be able to offer abortion services to women for whom two doctors have agreed have a serious and irreversible risk of health (medically necessary abortions under NI law)

And Johnny, it is incredibly difficult for families with fatal foetal abormalities regardless of the path they take: to terminate or continue. We need less judgement and deciding which is “better” and more understanding for the families involved. Would you really force a family who has decided not to to continue the pregnancy to do so?

Sheesh Brian. Just because a certain people see fit to abuse a medical service does not mean that medical service should not be provided. It’s crazy how this argument cannot find a middle ground. Lack of reasoning from prolifers and pro choicers.

”Abortion is being used as birth control.” Well seeing as how this form of ”birth control” involves women taking two flights, booking a hotel and spending in the region of £500 – £1000 at a time, and sometimes even requiring counselling to make and deal with their decision, I’d suggest that is a really expensive, inconvenient, exhausting and physically draining type of birth control. That’s not even counting the 2-3 days of bleeding and severe cramps. Yeah, abortions are great birth control!!

nick can you show where i said id force anyone to do anything? all ive said was the doctors, through no fault of their own can get very very wrong and thats something to be considered when making a decision. the very fact i mentioned the word “decision” should tell you something

I just think it’s so unhelpful to play “who suffers more.” It’s always a tragic situation.

From my reading the stories here, the children most definitely gained from the decisions made by their parents. My sister was in a similar situation- if she hadn’t been against abortion, I doubt she would have her beautiful 2 year old daughter. People need to do their own research in these situations. Most of the knowledge my sister and her husband got was from online communities of parents whose children were diagnosed with the same condition.

Also, women have the right to an abortion under these circumstances in the republic BUT we do not have the legislation to provide this.

A step forward ?
Marie Stopes “death camp internationa”
Experts in late term abortionl .
The unborn child is the most helpless human,
Ask about the clinic in Victoria Australia. Where it has become a right abort up to 24 weeks and believe it or not , that right to abort can be extended to date of birth if the “Mother” gets a referral to more than one doctor.
Most hospitals and clinics discourage very late term abortions , But Marie Stopes International is the now to go to, they may even give you a teddy bear to make you feel more relaxed.
There are times whe abortion is necessary , the push for change never stops, it has got so bad in Melbourne (the most liveable City) that girls who abort still get the baby bonus of $5,000
Some suspect that many girls get pregnant just to get the 5 grand . Then get rid of it.
No babies up for adoption in Melbourne.

Well done its great for irish women to have this clinic up the road some women become pregnant on child with no chance of survival they are forced to carry that child full term and along the way put up with people asking when are they due and when baby is born they have to live there final few hours in pain and if the woman chooses not to do that they have to make the trip to the uk which is very wrong remember some women have no choice but to do this

@Deadly Buzz –

Thanks for your comments. I am quite happy to respond to the points you raise.

The point on doctors botching operations is not “moot”. A woman was severely injured thanks to the work of a doctor employed by Marie Stopes – this doctor had operated on another woman previously and she died as a result. It later came to light that he had no valid medical indemnity insurance at the time. If Marie Stopes intends to open a clinic in Northern Ireland, then these issues should be addressed and explained. You mention Dr. Shipman and Dr. Neary – two disgraceful cases where the health of patients was routinely trampled on. But they caused scandals with huge media coverage. Everyone is aware of what happened and so can be aware in the future. The Marie Stopes incident did not receive anything near the same coverage.

Botched abortions are different in another way too – because a separate human being is involved, the unborn child. In 2010, 66 babies were born alive in the UK following “botched abortions.” The law in the UK does not cater for their care so they can only be left to die. Some lived for a few minutes. One lived for ten hours before finally dying. At present, Marie Stopes intends to carry out abortions up to 9 weeks but the experience in the UK shows that once abortion is introduced into a society, the time limits extend indefinitely.

Ireland is a world leader in terms of maternal health. Pregnant women receive whatever treatment they need to save their lives. Doctors have regard for the life of their unborn child and do their best to save it – as the pregnant woman in question would want. This has always been the position in the Republic, and it remains the case.

The article you quote from the Huffington Post deals with American abortion law which differs hugely from state to state. The writer mixes up many different situations in making her case for abortion. She is concerned that the ban on partial birth abortion may present a difficulty in saving women’s lives. With all due respect to her research, this comment leads me to think that she does not know what is involved in partial birth abortion. It has nothing to do with saving women. Doctors in Irish hospitals have an excellent record in this area. They do not lose women’s lives due to our ban on abortion.

In terms of rape or incest, it is important to remember that none of us are aware of or have anything to do with the circumstances of our conception. We have rights due to our humanity and they must be respected. From the woman’s point of view, abortion is a traumatic event which does not present the best option to those terrible crimes. Women in those circumstances need support and compassion that can bring healing, not the short-term solution of abortion which often brings worse problems later on.

Children with special needs are no less worthy of a right to their life than anyone else. They present a serious case to society to give all the necessary support, both financial and otherwise, to their families so that they can have the best quality of life possible. We cannot say that these children should have their lives ended before birth. What message does that send to those families who are bringing up their special needs children? They give a huge amount to their families – as can be seen from this video, “99 Balloons” where Matt Mooney speaks about his son Eliot who lived for 99 days. Matt was later inspired to set up a charity for children with special needs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th6Njr-qkq0

These difficult cases present new challenges for families and society but at heart we need to remember that we are still dealing with human beings at their most vulnerable stages – families in need of support and sick children in need of love and comfort.

Once conceived,what about the right of a child to remain in it’s mothers womb and NOTbe cut out, placed in a plastic bag and incinerated in an industrial waste facility complete with the smoking stack.
Reminds me of the photos of the death camps from WW2
There are times when Abortion is the common sense answer to a medical problem , but when a clinic like Marie Stopes International opens for business, and consequently profit, Auschwitz springs to mind, and the trains start rolling in,then the basic right to life itself is denied to most vulnerable human creature .
It seems to me that there is some urgency by the (so-called) pro – choice people to recruit girls to opt for abortion instead of pushing for adoption, is this a mustering of collective guilt because they themselves had done it.

John, you are spectacularly misinformed. If it’s about the “right of the child not to be cut out and placed in a plastic bag”, I have no idea why you’d have an issue with the Marie Stopes clinic, as they will only offer medical abortions (pills which lead to a miscarriage) – not exact the gruesome scenario you’re envisioning out of nowhere.

“Urgency for pro choice people to have girls opt for abortion as opposed to adoption?” I don’t know if you’re aware of the history of adoption in Ireland, but women have been manipulated and exploited to provide adoptable infants, regardless of their own wishes. The motives of those who wish for women to place a child for adoption (no matter what the women wants) are rarely pure. Why is there no mandatory enforcement of open adoption agreements, universal access to counselling, waiting periods for women who have placed a child?

No woman should be “pushed” into adoption. Have you not seen the horrible effects it has had on women forced into it?

To Nick Beard
I am spectacularly misinformed?

I worked in the medi/industrial waste industry ,and occasionally helped out with the loading of the incinerator , and I can tell you firsthand what the GRUESOME contents of the yellow plastic bags look like after the late term abortion clinics disgorge their human waste. Some times the bags burst open when pushed through the chute by the hydraulic ram , I have seen the tiny bodies, I Know what i am talking about.
Nick ! You are the one who is spectacularly mis informed.

Are you a share holder of Marie Stopes?
Why else would you dress up so nicely such a procedure.
BTW some of my best friends are adopted, ask an adopted person what they think.

To Nick Beard
I am spectacularly misinformed?
I worked in the medi/industrial waste industry ,and occasionally helped out with the loading of the incinerator , and I can tell you firsthand what the GRUESOME contents of the yellow plastic bags look like after the late term abortion clinics disgorge their human waste. Some times the bags burst open when pushed through the chute by the hydraulic ram , I have seen the tiny bodies, I Know what i am talking about.
Nick ! You are the one who is spectacularly mis informed.
Are you a share holder of Marie Stopes?
Why else would you dress up so nicely such a procedure.
BTW some of my best friends are adopted, ask an adopted person what they think.

Again, you cite late term abortions. Marie Stopes will be performing medical abortions up to 9 weeks only. So your rant has absolutely nothing to do with the services offered. So yes, you sound incredibly uninformed when you ignore the distinctions between early medical abortions and late term abortions.

I also note that you remain silent on the mental health of WOMEN who place a child adoption. But who cares what those incubators think, huh?

And you do know Marie Stopes is a non profit organisation, right? So there aren’t shareholders as such. Surprise, surprise, you did no research before commenting.

What about the motives of some of the people who push women towards abortion? There is no doubt that there is money to be made- there is a large fee and consultation charge for every abortion. What do you think of an abortion business that offers bounses? The reward for a job well done! Mandatory open adoption and a waiting period? How about a waiting period before an abortion? The Marie Stopes Clinic does abortions up to 9 weeks- not much time to think of other options? The fact that they’re early abortions and the human being is much smaller doesn’t change the fact, that life is a continuum and the differences are concerned with what stage of development we’re at.

So you’re opposed to basic rights for women who choose adoption, Maria?

What makes you think that, Nick?

“the mother will feel less than sympathetic towards the child” so off with its head? Calloulsy stop the vunerable childs heart beating beacuse its mother might be “less than sympathetic towards” it? Really?

Humans concieved out of rape are not automatically monsters, mentally or physically ill or otherwise “incompatible” with life.

As pointed out in the article: “Doctors in Ireland adhere to the internationally-recognised distinction between medical treatment carried out to save the life of the mother where the baby dies as an unwanted consequence” This is the bottem line. There is no need for abortion in this state.

Aborition is murder. The medical team are murders and the mother of the child is a murder. A cold blooded murderer.

Ahh. Roger come on. Where did I suggest that these children are monsters.? I was pointing out that the ability of mothers looking after children borne out of love, is entirely different to those borne out of rape. That’s all.

Nice to know that someone like Roger isn’t judgmental about the harsh realities a woman has to face if she is impregnated by rape.

@Dhakina’s Sword

Dr. S. Makhorn’s study of pregnant rape survivors is one of the only studies of women pregnant by rape.

Contrary to the belief that most rape victims want abortions, between 75% and 85% of pregnant rape survivors continued with their pregnancies.

Negative attitudes towards the child consistently changed to positive ones as the pregnancy progressed; the overwhelming majority of the women had a positive view towards the child by the time of delivery.

Please provide link to this study, Evelyn. You cite it frequently and never provide links.

And the fact that some women choose to continue their pregnancy is a horrible justification for forcing a woman who has already had control of her body taken from her to be denied further control.

The study is on page 58 of “Psychological Aspects of Abortion” by Mall & Watts; or you can find summaries on the web very easily by googling keywords e.g. Makhorn pregnancy rape

The point is that people (on both sides of the debate) presume that all – or the majority – of pregnant rape survivors want abortions. This isn’t true.

In this context of many pregnant rape survivors declining abortion, it is essential that we explore what supports are needed for the special needs of these women.

There are women who have abortions following rape who feel that the abortion re-victimised them, and in fact compounded – instead of easing – the trauma of rape.

Furthermore, judgement directed at the child is a problem with society’s attitude to children conceived in rape, and is not a character flaw or an inherent problem within the child.

People have compassion as to how a woman could feel being forced to carry a pregnancy after her rape – having your body hijacked twice against your will is so wrong.

On the other hand, women who freely choose (rather than are forced, as you believe they should be) to continue a pregnancy should be freely afforded all the help they require. I volunteer at a rape crisis centre and work in the sexual violence sector. Have never met an anti choicer in either. Support should include empowering to control what THEY need for recovery.

@Dhakina’s Sword –

I fully accept that your comment is borne out of concern for the feelings of the unborn child when he/she discovers the circumstances of conception. Surely the answer to this is to work on removing society’s prejudice towards victims of rape and their children, not to remove the children.

To suggest that a mother will look differently on her child because of the crimes of its father is to call into question the whole concept of maternal love and bonding, which is not conditional on the rights or wrongs of the child’s father.

Rape is a violent, invasive act which causes extreme trauma to a woman’s body and mind. But abortion is also traumatic. It is invasive, and it can cause extreme hurt in the aftermath too. It should not be presumed that abortion is any cure or answer to the vicious assault of rape.

read the comments, count the amount of people who bring god into this thread and you will be surprised to see its the pro choice people who are at it.

pro life side generally have to prove beyond all doubt that their opinions are not religious based

connor does pro equality mean that if,

1. the woman wants an abortion but the male partner wants to have the kid she has the abortion because “its her body”.

2. the man doesnt want a kid but she does she keeps the baby because “its her baby”

In the second situation is the guy still expected to pay and contribute to the childs upbringing?

just curious about the equality bit really.

Johnny. If it were you, and you really didn’t want the baby – for whatever reason – mental or physical. Would you be comfortable with another person telling you “tough, I want the baby so you’re having it”?

Shanti, nobody can tell a woman “tough” your having it but thats not the point of my post. i questioned the “pro equality”.
if i as a man dont want a kid for the same reasons you mentioned do you think its fair that she can say “tough” your paying for it for the next 18 – 20 years.

@johnny I agree that both sides bring God into this far too often. Both sides should leave God out of this.

Every case is unique and until any of us are in one we won’t know how to react. But what I mean by pro equality is that men can do whatever they want to their body in the country and women currently cannot. If men could get pregnant I guarantee there were be legal abortion in this country. If only men could get pregnant there’d be an iutcry for women to butt out of the argument.

I just want women to be able to decide for themselves what they do with their bosy. And yes if that means going against the wishes of the father of the foetus then so be it. It is her body and the foetus is part of her body. No man should have a right to part of a womans body.

Johnny I agree – there is a level of inherent unfairness to that scenario.. Having said that, I don’t think it’s guaranteed that all fathers will contribute.
I have a few friends who are single mums, some get support, some don’t. Some have fought cases to have maintenance awarded, and are still waiting to be paid years later.
By the same token I have friends who have a great relationship with their kids fathers, and some women who have actively shut the fathers out. It’s humanity – all sorts of scenarios exist.

I know two girls who have had abortions, one because she was already a single mum and the contraception failed – she was working to make a better life for her and her kid and getting pregnant would knock them back massively. The other because her boyfriend was abusing her and she wanted to escape him – had she had his child she would never have been free.
If I ever get pregnant I will most likely need one, the chance of ectopic pregnancy is extremely high for me beside the fact it would worsen other existing health conditions. I use contraception – but it’s not infallible, and over here I would need to nearly die before they would terminate.

This sort of situation has far too many variables, which is why the *choice* should be there. You were fortunate with your scenario that the doctors were wrong – and I’m sure you thank your lucky stars each day, but not everyone gets that lucky. We have to be able to allow each woman / couple do what they decide is best and keep our judgement for ourselves.

You could say the same about any law protecting children- that people should just butt out and not concern themselves with how vulnerable human beings are treated. Not an option in a civilised society!

I think you’ll find it is in another country…

@Kate -

Thank you for your comments.

I am glad that you recognise that the Marie Stopes clinic is a business. A huge business, in fact. It makes a lot of money from abortions, something it tends not to allude to very often. This is understandable given the fact that a human life is ended in every abortion.

I have never said that women’s lives shouldn’t be protected and cherished – quite the contrary. My opposition to abortion stems from my concern for women just as much as the unborn. There are better ways of dealing with unplanned pregnancies than abortion and I would like to see society focussing on them.

I re-iterate my point that abortion is neither wanted nor needed in Northern Ireland. It is not needed because doctors are already able to treat pregnant women for life-threatening conditions without the need for abortion. This is the case in the Republic where doctors will do their best to save both patients but the woman’s life is always given priority.

It is abundantly clear that abortion is not wanted in Northern Ireland. Any attempts to extend the Abortion Act 1967 have been met by huge opposition right across the political divide in the North. In such a climate, Marie Stopes’ actions are entirely inappropriate and – as you rightly point out – are the actions of a business seeking new clients, not those of a group genuinely trying to bring about what is best in the society in question.

Cora, can you please prove that Marie Stopes is a profitable, successful, money-driven business? Because I hear this claim from every nonsense pro-life propaganda website/leaflet and nobody has once been able to verify that claim.

That charge a huge amount for each abortion so where do you think the money goes? Look at their website and careers section and they don’t hide the fact that they’re a commercial operation. Wonder how many abortions they’d perform if there wasn’t cash upfront? They charge £80 for a phone consultation, £686 for an abortion up to 14 weeks if general anaesthetic is requested. £40 extra for a week-end abortion! They offer staff discretionary bonus schemes which recognise and reward great performance and, surprise surprise, all their employees, their partners and dependents are entitled to free abortions.

They are a non profit organisation, Maria. Do you understand what non profit means?

Charging a fortune to end the lives of healthy babies to fund fancy perks for the well paid staff? Very laudable!

Raynor, it goes back to intent. In the case of ectopic pregnancies, in-utero cancer, etc., when treated in irish hospitals, the surgeons will take whatever steps possible to ensure that both mother and child survive. This isn’t always possible to so. In such instances, the doctor will always give precedence to saving the mothers life above that of the child. Doctors are never faced with a Hobson’s Choice scenario and the State, and pro-lifers would not want the child to be spared if it meant the death of the mother.
Doctors are protected under current existing legislation & the Constitution.

That definition of abortion is not embraced by a single medical board, Brian. You are presenting a fringe view as authoratative, which is medically irresponsible.

It’s also been disproved by C and Michelle Harte that women receive all necessary medical care.

In the case of an ectopic pregnancy the drug methroxate (spelling?) is used. Exact same drug as used for early stage medical abortions – the majority of abortions carried out, for the record.

Of course, over here I suppose they would prefer that the mother waits until her Fallopian tube has ruptured and then remove the foetus by laparoscopy or laparotomy because then they can claim it wasn’t an abortion. The woman’s been through a life threatening experience for no reason other than to keep the pro lifers happy.. Yay..

Will save them from going across the water to the uk then.

Did you not do geography at school Simon? Where do you think NI is located?

You’ll actually find the over 35 group is bigger

sounds like you didn’t do geography mate.. since when did you have to go across the water to get to the North ???

While I welcome this clinic in the north geographically & logistically its just as hard & as expensive to get to for at least half of the Island we live on. Getting a plane to London is just as easy. It would be far better for Irish women to have local services.

@ Simon – it seems indeed there quite a few half-wits on the journal this evening, perhaps you could explain to me the difference between GB and the UK?

UK incorporates all the outlying dependencies – GB is Scotland, England, Wales and NI.

@buckwheat. What are you waffling on about. At least make a comment inline with the topic instead of make that whole your digging deeper.

my initial comment is correct, women used to travel across the water to the UK in order to get an abortion. Now they can just go up to Northen Ireland instead which is still in the UK, but no water to cross.

I fail to see what point your making. ??

Jaysus, I can’t believe we still make this mistake – obviously the ‘across the water’ comment refers, imperfectly but reasonably, to the fact that NI is only a bus trip away.

The UK is a state/country made up of England+Scotland+Wales+Northern Ireland along with a few smaller territories. Great Britain is not a country, it’s the big island directly to our east; Northern Ireland is part of the UK but NOT part of Great Britain. The proper name of the UK puts the thing to rest – ‘The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland’.

It’s a silly mistake to make about our nearest neighbour, but using it as a petty ‘gotcha’ while ignoring the substantive issues is even sillier.

It won’t really help many Irish women, as they will only be performing medically necessary abortions up to 9 weeks – most women will still have to go to England.

Why are they charging money if they claim to be carrying out abortions under the same circumstance that already exist in Northern Ireland?

You need to learn a little bit about it.. No one uses abortions as a method of contraception, least of all teenagers.
1. It’s expensive
2. It’s a horrible experience that one will never wish to repeat – if anything it would make a woman far more careful about contraception had it been the result of a mistake.

Also, what about the women who really wanted their babies but their babies just wouldn’t survive birth or would be in a lot of pain, you wish to force them to prolong their grief? Or the woman who finds out at 8 weeks that her pregnancy is ectopic and if she doesn’t abort she may die? They’ll probably do that for her over here – and you wouldn’t bat an eyelid.. It’s still the intentional killing of the unborn, it just so happens its also saving the mothers life instead of ending two.

It’s too grey an area. That’s why all the options should be there to allow each woman to make the decision that is right for *her*.

Shanti, thats not so true… i knew one girl that had eight abortions simply because she didn’t want the child and didn’t have the brain to use a contraceptive durin the act of intercourse so “cleaned up” her mess afterward?
Another person i know had two, again because they weren’t responsible to think at the time about the consequences.
Both those cases, in my opinion, were treating abortion as a contraceptive…

Gavin.
With all due respect, 8 abortions? Did this girl have more money than sense?
It’s really not a pleasant experience, contraception would be cheaper, and easier on the body. My main concern there would be the improper use of contraception.

Gavin, I know a girl who had 487. I also know a liar when I see one.

Murder is murder end of!!!!! … . ..no child ever chooses conception …..and for those that what to argue about the 0.01% of cases that are actually aborted because of rape or incest….. why r the rest disposed of …… inconvenience …..r lack of responsibility in terms of contraception there have been reported cases of 15 – 16 yr old girls having between 10 – 16 abortions as a form of contraception ……. How is murder justified ….due to ignorance ????

I’m not lying William, call me what you will but this girl was crazy… She used to eat ecstasy tablets like they were candy but some how managed to hold down a job and the guys she dated always had money to burn. I think she has regrets now but who knows what goes on inside some peoples head?
Say what you will but when the door has been edged open just ajar, it’ll leave open to fact that ignorant people will use it as a convenience to their own lifestyle..
The principle of allowing that to happen is simply wrong!!!

So this girl was crazy and had difficult circumstances, but you would force her to parents against her will? Women who have multiple abortions (I suspect 8 is an exagerration) need access to counselling and help. The system isn’t the problem (if women have trouble with contraception, is it really appropriate to force them to have a child?), the problem is that your instinct would be “deny her an abortion” rather than “suggest she seek counselling and support”

That girl in particular was crazy, not insane and so yes, she should take responsibility for her actions. Counselling of course can help but perhaps after having her first or second child she would stop and consider what she was doing, having her motherly instincts kick in…
Unfortunately its a big crap pie, but it has to be eaten and abortion should never be an option.
Reggie Dabbs, who came to speak in Dublin around various schools a couple of years back is great testament to that http://reggiedabbsonline.com/story.php

”but perhaps after having her first and second child she would stop’

that’s a massive assumption there Gavin. So you would rather she was forced to give birth to all those eight children, despite you even suggesting she was mentally unstable and not able for it? My god you really don’t care about women at all do you? How do you know her drug use and abortions weren’t a symptom of something bigger and more troubling? It’s obvious that this woman probably needed some sort of help if, as you say, she was popping drugs so frequently and not caring for the consequences. It also worries me, how little you seem to care for the actual children once they’re born. Chances are they could have been born addicts themselves, or suffered from neglect if she really didn’t want them. Oh but it’s okay for the first one or two to suffer right? So long as she stops having abortions!!!

Tracey, you must be VERY bad at maths if you think 15-16 year old girls can have had between 10 and 16 abortions. Is this the sort of utter nonsense you religious nuts discuss with each other?

Here’s an interesting statistic I came across:

22% of U.S. women are Catholic but 27% of abortion patients say they are Catholics. So Catholic women are actually over represented in abortion statistics. When the chios are down their faith gets dumped. (Something like 98% of Catholic women use contraception when they are sexually active btw)

@ Gavin – unless you were her psychiatrist you cannot distinguish whether that girl was mentally unstable or not. Your description makes it sound like she very well may be. I believe Penelope and Nick covered everything else I would wish to say to you.

@ Tracey.
No one here mentioned rape or incest, not sure what you brought it up for – to avoid the point I made about ectopic pregnancy? Fatal foetal abnormality? The costs involved? Or the trauma involved? Not to mention the side effects..

I am yet to meet a rational person who thinks abortions are a good thing. Those on the pro choice side know its not pleasant, nor is it good for you. We just realise that sometimes the pregnancy can be worse, and in those cases a woman should have the right to choose what she does with her own body.

As as William pointed out – 16 yr olds having that many abortions? Who the hell is paying for them? And why haven’t these kids been given proper sex, relationship and contraception education?

I’m sure this will torture those who regard abortion as murder in all circumstances but personally, I would hope that any girl who would have 8 abortions and be in the habit of guzzling ecstacy “like candy” would never end up being responsible for a child.

I’m sorry if this insults anyone but in my view there is a cluster of cells which becomes a child when it has developed to a point of being able to survive outside the womb. I don’t think that we should do what we want before that point but certainly there are people like the one described I would hope would not have a child while continuing to be so irresponsible.

The fact that this one girl has had 8 abortions speaks much more of the girl’s own mentality than it does about the availability of abortion IMO.

Don’t want an abortion, don’t get one!

because a baby after it’s born does not need the mother’s body to physically survive. When it’s forming inside of her it is dependant on her blood and nutrients. If something was living inside me that I did not want, it should be my human right to get rid of it, whether it is alive or not. Oh and sometimes pregnant women can be vulnerable too. I hate the way pro-lifers never use those two words together.

Don’t want a baby, don’t have sex! That is it’s primary purpose, not pleasure. Technically a newborn infant can physically survive without their mother, but it is in no way an independent being who can take care of themselves, they need a parent or at least a primary caregiver. And you speak as though a baby is a parasite, not the direct result of a consensual act between two responsible human beings. Perhaps it’s best for all of us that you don’t want to procreate. Of course pregnant women can be vulnerable, unless I explicitly state otherwise do not assume that I think that. And do not assume that I speak for all people who are opposed to abortion, this is my personal opinion.

Don’t know if you’ve ever HAD sex but it’s pretty god damn pleasurable!!

Indeed I have, and no babies died as a result!

So many things..
1. Adding a caveat like “it’s ok in the case of rape”..
So, is there any onus to prove a rape actually occurred in order to access the service? Or can anyone just say “I was raped” without evidence? If not, then the rape needs to be proven in a court of law – which would take longer than the pregnancy and be unfeasible. So this caveat is actually nonsense as it would still prevent women from accessing the service legally.

2. “If you don’t want to get pregnant abstain”..
What age group is this directed at? I get telling teens to abstain for a while, perhaps gain some life perspective and self respect first.. But when people make these suggestions to adult women, and women who already have families (which makes up a large chunk of the women who access this service in the UK) it is clearly ludicrous. I’m sure that you are aware contraception is not infallible and that there are myriad reasons why a woman may seek to terminate a pregnancy – not all of them indicating that the pregnancy was unwanted.

All anyone is asking is that the option be there. No one seeks to promote it, no one seeks to claim that it’s a best case scenario. We just ask that the option be there, for those few occasions where it might be needed, without judgement.

And of course – that education about sex, relationships, responsibilities, contraception and STIs be stepped up nationwide to keep the numbers low.

When did I say I didn’t want to procreate? I never said a foetus is a parasite Amy, I believe you were the only one of us to mention that particular term. I’m well aware a newborn can survive without it’s mother – a foetus cannot. Get my point now? Sorry for the late reply, I was too busy having non-procreational sex all weekend.

It certainly seems that, given the view of some women who are in favour of abortion solely at the discretion of the woman for any reason at any stage, it’d be wise for men who oppose abortion to think twice if they’re in a relationship and having sex with a woman who holds such views. These issues are often not spoken about until a crisis pregnancy occurs and, too late, the man realises that it’s quite possible for him to be written out of the picture. Must be heartbreaking to really want a child and to have no say over whether that child survives.

If it’s nothing to do with the paedophile Catholic Church who’s it to do with?

william people can form their opinions based on experience or that of friends or family they can base their opinions on lots of things some complex some not but because the persons opinion is similar to one organisation or another does not mean they are led by that organisation although it seem to be acceptable to label anyone who disagrees with the pro choice brigade as a “religious nut”

Johnny, can you tell me the name of any organisation NOT backed by a religious body that opposes a women’s right to choose whether she carries a pregnancy to term or not?

People who are brainwashed into believing in any religion CANNOT form an unbiased opinion. Their brains don’t work properly BECAUSE they have been brainwashed. They can’t think logically. They can’t accept evidence or information that contradicts the brainwashing.

If the religious fanatics in NI are not nuts, what is a nut then? Is someone, like Ian Paisley their ex-PM, who thinks the world is 6,000 years old, not a religious nut?

william grogan, if you are too stupid to see that people base there opinions on numerous things then there is no point talking to you. ive got kid they were baptised because my wife has her faith, we discussed it and as it was important to her i went with it. my kids will be given a choice early on as to what path they want to take unlike alot of the church bashers here who will go with the flow and have the communions, confirmations, church weddings and all that. my opinion on abortion could not have anything less to do with any church or religion it based on experience, some personal some of people close to me. if you are the best the pro choice or pro life side can come up with they should tske a long look at their tactics

Johnny, I repeat, can you tell me the name of any organisation NOT backed by a religious body that opposes a women’s right to choose whether she carries a pregnancy to term or not?

Are you actually saying that your own PERSONAL experince is going to make you support a law that criminalises women and doctors for carrying out an abortion. YOUR OWN PERSONAL experiences? Are you serious?

william you imbecile why are you asking me about organisations? you are the one talking about organisations. i am talking about personal opinions and YES i would call myself and my wife having to make a very real decision on this matter two years ago as a personal experience. maybe you think it doesnt affect the husband/partner maybe you think they should not be part of the decision thats your opinion. my experience is personal and from your last comment i can see i have more experience on the matter than you. and too be clear for you WE decided together to have the our kid and now have beautiful 2 year old who has about a 10th of the medical issues the doctors told us she would have. i guess she lucky youre not her dad YOU ARSEHOLE

one other question William where the hell did i say i support any law? can tell tell me where you get that from anything i said?

Johnny, what the fxxx are you talking about? What have your personal experiences got to do with demanding a law that stops pregnant women making their own decisions about whether or not to bring a pregnancy to term? The point about the organisations and Peter’s point saying “it’s nothing to do with the church” is that ONLY religious organisations oppose a women’s right to choose. This is what the discussion is about and not what you decided to do. Therefore in reply to the point of the header on this thread and your point, it is a religious issue. The “opinion” we are talking about is whether people are entitled to choose. Your experiences give you no right to make that decision for anyone else. Whatever you and your partner decided is your opinion and no one else’s business.

@william, Peter was giving his own opinion and i assume felt the need to point out to people like yourself that HIS opinion had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CHURCH.

thats where you came in with your crap “the peadophile catholic church” thus branding all catholic clergy as child abusers because of the actions of a minority.

then you tell me im stupid for allowing my experience of something influence my opinions

ive no time for the catholic church and i believe all necessary services should be available as needed to all women in the republic. i dont think abortion should be available wholesale to women.

Peter and you may claim that his “opinion” has nothing to do with the church but I repeat again, name any organisation that is not religious that campaigns against a women’s right to choose? It is the church. There would be no anti-choice politics or movement except for the religious. Anti-choice is based on idiotic religious mythology.

I stated a fact, the Catholic Church and it’s offshoots ARE the most paedophilic organisations in Ireland. While all clergy did not commit paedophilia, most of them must have known about it, which makes most of the clergy who engaged in the massive cover up equally guilty. Irrespective of the clergy the Catholic Church from the very top down allowed paedophilia to continue for decades if not centuries. They then with total hypocrisy try and claim the moral high ground on a woman’s right to choose.

You are indeed stupid if you think your personal experiences would allow you to force a women to have to go abroad for an abortion. What is “available wholesale” mean? We are still back to you forcing your position on OTHER People who don’t give a sh1t about your opinion.

Do you not see the reasons for the child abuse, the abuse of women, the cover up AND the anti-women anti-abortion stance comes from the same place. The Christian misogyny and hatred of women, the source of all “sin”.

If you do a bit of googling, you’ll see secular pro-life and atheist pro-life groups.

Maria. That’s a lot of good telling me to Google! There are not organisations, except religious organisations, opposed to Abortion. Trying to include organisations set up specifically to campaign against a women’s right to choose is irrelevant. The Catholic Church was not set up to campaign against women’s rights, it’s just a part of it’s philosophy.

Scooby Doo mantras?!!?
ALL this clinic will do is help women whose lives are in immediate risk by their pregnancy up to 9 weeks as is the law in N.I
That is IT in relation to Abortion. It will also provide necessary STD checks and the full range of sexual and reproductive health care.
If it’s not needed it will close and you’ll get your wish!

” Abortion is never necessary to save a woman’s life.”
Please educate yourself first Liam.

Liam, where did you go to school? Where do you get your logic from? Your comment is beyond rediculous, but you are, of course, entitled to it.

You tell that to the woman who has just had an abortion carried out as a result of an ectopic pregnancy – I’m sure she’d agree that abortion is “never necessary to save the life of the mother”.

@gastrophase Abortion is NEVER necessary to save the life of the mother. Doctors in Ireland regularly perform operations, legally and safely, on pregnant mothers to remove cancers, or even ectopic pregnancies. The basis for this, and why it remains legal, is that it is not the surgeons intention to kill the unborn child, however the child’s death may be a necessary, though unfortunate,consequence of the life-saving surgery. It’s not pedantically, it’s pragmatism.
Pro-abortion campaigners regularly declare that abortion is necessary to save a mothers life. Just because you say it repeatedly does not make it right.

BL, just because you say it regularly, does not mean that abortion is never necessary to save the life of the mother.
Ectopic pregnancies, placental abruption – both require termination if the case is severe enough, as to proceed with pregnancy would result in the mother bleeding to death.
Doctors will always work to save both the life of the mother and the baby, but unfortunately, it is sometimes unavoidable that one life is save-able while the other is not.

And that is why, Micheal, these procedures have been, and will continue to be, carried out by surgeons in Irish hospitals without ever the need to legislate for abortion. “The State will”…”where practicable”…”vindicate that right”. Unfortunately, it’s not always practicable or possible to prevent the child from dying, but so long it was not the intention of the surgeon to kill the child, s/he did no wrong.

Liam a kindred spirit

Brian, the Michelle Harte case has shown that women do NOT receive all necessary medical treatment and medically necessary abortions. You can keep repeating that all you want (along with the definition of “medically necessary abortions not being abortions – once which has never been embraced by any medical board and is considered a fringe opinion in the medical community) but the C and Michelle Harte cases show Ireland is failing women.

BL – it is still a grey area – and to leave it as a grey area is dangerous and irresponsible. Abortion must be legislated for – the current legislation is not enough.

what .. that makes no sense !!!!!! explain the logic behind that ??

I’m guessing you’re anti-choice, Lorcmul. Choice Ireland has been very much opposed to the austerity cuts affecting women. Women should be able to choose not to become parents – but if they wish to become parents, money shouldn’t stop them.

“I hate to have to say it, but you give me the awful impression of someone who hasn’t read any of the points against your position, ever” – Christopher Hitchens

“[A]nyone who has ever seen a sonogram or has spent even an hour with a textbook on embryology knows that emotions are not the deciding factor [in abortions]. In order to terminate a pregnancy, you have to still a heartbeat, switch off a developing brain . . . break some bones and rupture some organs.”
-Christopher Hitchens

Er, whatever about “stilling a heartbeat”, there’s not going to be any gory bone-breaking or organ-rupturing (or, indeed, as mentioned above, bags of recognizable corpses) in the new clinic. They’re going to use medication to induce a very early miscarriage in women who meet their criteria, aborting a very very tiny foetus. The end result will look like a very heavy period.

Really, the failure to distinguish between late term abortions (which are extremely rare and almost exclusively for tragic medical reasons) and first trimester abortions – primarily, I assume, because late term abortions sound much more grisly and “bad” – by abortion opponents is incredibly annoying. Oppose the clinic on its own terms if you want, not with ADDED DRAMATIC IRRELEVANCE.

Very few god fearing people in Ireland, you’ll find church fearing and God fearing go hand in hand.

It’s called a spotlight fallacy. One very extreme element of a group gets a disproportionate amount of spotlight from media sources.
This causes some people to come to the hasty generalisation that this applies in all cases. It’s the very definition of illogical.

The majority of abortions carried out are nothing like you seem to imagine, the actual statistics available from the NHS prove this. You are talking about a minority and tarring the rest of the women who have used the service with the same brush, more fallacy.

Seriously, try doing some research on the subject. Find out what is involved, look at the statistics – and I am not suggesting you springboard from a pro choice or anti choices side – I’m saying go to the actual facts, from medical descriptions to statistics from health services. Then see how you feel about it. At present you seem to be stuck on some extremes, such a polarised view will never allow you to see that this situation is myriad shades of grey.

@Mike Meyers –

The abortion debate concerns human rights. It is not a religious debate. As stated above, the Pro Life Campaign is a non-denominational group because people of all faiths and none recognise the injustice of abortion to the unborn child – and the fact that there are many better options for the woman.

I am also a fan of the late Christopher Hitchens. Did you know he was pro-life? You might like to read some of the points he made against the pro-choice position. For example, the article referenced here:-

http://www.newstatesman.com/lifestyle/lifestyle/2012/10/being-pro-life-doesnt-make-me-any-less-lefty

And his article in Vanity Fair here:-

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2003/02/hitchens200302

As an avowed atheist, he saw no difficulty with also holding a pro-life position.

I hear this guy is a few sandwiches short of a picnic!!

Did you watch it?

Have done before. Pretty disrespectful to Holocaust survivors!

But as long as they have bananas that fit their hands, we’re alright!!

Which part is disrespectful???
I think anything that highlights the horror of human disposal through legalistic means can only do it justice!
Half of these kids didn’t even know who Hitler was!!!

you don’t see how using the Holocaust to make a ludicrous comparison to a (sometimes) necessary medical procedure is disrespectful?!!?
Ray Comfort is an idiot!!