@Chucky Arlaw: no it should be their CHOICE whether to refer or to do anything at all that they don’t agree with. Are you not pro choice?

@Greg Kelly:
The Repeal people are wearing the hat now. They want to wave the Big Stick and use the law to bully conscientious objectors into submission.
The empathy hashtag has been dismantled it would appear.

@Greg Kelly: the choice is; do your job in it’s entirety or find a new one.

@Greg Kelly: that’s not as clever a point to make as I reckon you think it is.

Ithought that doctors first and foremost were there to save lives,and as far as your comment that patients will not get access to health care is a nonsence,and that referrals be made an obligation,.This abortion was badly thought out and the head of this government should have known and consulted the doctors,if only to show respect for his fellow doctors,there is no need for the big stick and you will do as you are told,they should be trying to help any doctor who is a conscientious objector,or is this country becoming a dictatiorship and no one will have any rights there is not a thing about the cervical cancer patients,or those suffering mental health issues,that need to be addressed or the housing or hospital waiting lists these seem to have been put on the back burner

@Karen Wellington: I presume that taking life was not in the contract of employment. We’re not talking about removing a splinter from a thumb here.

@False 9: keep doing your best to make sure that desperate women suffer unbearably just so that you can bury your head in the sand while up on your “no abortions in Ireland” pseudo high horse. Abortion has been a fact of life for women since time immemorial, what we’re doing now is trying to make it legal and safe in a patriarchal society where women must beg on their knees to be allowed to care for one another. If you care about “unborn children” so much why don’t you get off your ar*e and start fostering children or fundraising for children’s charities.

@False 9: do you think a GP contract lists every single medical procedure or treatment available in practice today? Their job is to treat their patients’ health concerns and help them maintain a comfortable standard of health, ideally while exhibiting compassion.

@Veronica: it’s all about women to you though isn’t it. Women’s rights, downtrodden women, poor women…. What about the children, lost lives? Have you ever once mentioned them? No. Ending life is not healthcare.

@Karen Wellington: yes Karen and where do you think it may mention the premeditated ending of life of one of the healthy patients in a pregnancy case? See the problem?

@False 9: yes, it is all about the women to me, I’m actually quite vocal about that in case you hadn’t noticed.

Considering that you say you care so much for children, why haven’t I seen you commenting encouraging more people to foster children, or to adopt older children who are less likely to be adopted? Or promoting schemes to make sure that every child in Ireland does not go home from school hungry?

@False 9: if they’ve gotten all the way through medical school and subsequent GP training they’re probably not delusional enough to take the view that a foetus equates to an actual person.

This is about leverage for renegotiating their contracts.

@Karen Wellington: yes. These doctors are misusing the situation where a tiny minority of doctors are refusing to give healthcare to women, and using it to leverage a financial benefit. BTW, these (minority) of doctors claiming religious objection should be struck off. Their job is to provide a prescription for a health issue, not perform a DNC. Follow your medical council advice, or leave it. It was the same nonsense with pills, coils and morning after pills, and if I recall, smear tests. Leave your prejudices at the door. We have thousands of Muslim doctors in this country who have managed to do it, so stop thinking your Catholic bigotry against women makes you so special.

@False 9: psst, the woman is the patient.

@Chucky Arlaw: if you go to your GP and their medical opinion is that you’re in the wrong GP’s office should you still pay?

@Elvis Polkasalad: vast majority of the people of Ireland don’t agree with you

@Elvis Polkasalad: Maybe you should have campaigned in the recent referendum.

@Larry Doyle: i did, and my conscience is clear, u all give out about what the catholic church did in tuam but you all are doing the same .

@Barry Somers: vast majority of germans agreed with hitler , was what he done right?

@Chucky Arlaw: i would never harm a child outside the womb ,so why would i agree to harm a child in the womb.

@Francis Mc Carthy: thanks francis ,

@Elvis Polkasalad: but you would take a woman’s body and free will hostage without a thought.

@Elvis Polkasalad: WTF?

@Elvis Polkasalad: You just lost what little credibility you may have had.

@Elvis Polkasalad: And u just lost. Ha haaaa

@Elvis Polkasalad: If your conscience is clear then stop hiding behind a false name. You are a coward.

@Ian Phillip Creaner: triumphalist ?? Poor reflection of you as a person …

@Deborah Behan: you’re not implying that Elvis impregnated these women are you? THEY had sex. THEY got pregnant. They are a hostage unto themselves. The do everything for me for free right now generation of today need to accept some responsibility. Not everything can be dismembered, hoovered out of you and flushed down the toilet just because it is an inconvenience.

@Ian Phillip Creaner: oh dear Ian. I’d check in if I was you. The only thing “lost” is lives.

@Elvis Polkasalad: is good to hear that you’re looking after your womb then

@False 9: get a life you sad trolling sap

@False 9: more evidence that those against abortion are more into punishing women and girls for the sin of fornication than actually giving a sh!t about “the unborn”.

Like, that comment is almost so obviously woman hating its got to be a joke.

@Elvis Polkasalad: don’t have one!

@False 9: Elvis did not impregnate them, a man did. An irresponsible, immature, selfish man who does not have to deal with the physical, psychological or even financial consequences for the rest of his life. All he has to do after failing to contain his emissions and changing a woman s life entirely, is do a legger.
A man like many men who have just been a little lucky or perhaps not so much if the woman discovering the type of person she is dealing with does not bother informing him.I wonder how many little False 9 s have gotten flushed away? We will never know.

@Chrip Ramsay: what is the difference between the referral to another doctor and just prescribing the 10 week pill, or referral to a hospital/clinic. Doctors should not be able to object to following a process in their training manual because they view the patient differently as a woman, anymore than a bakery refusing to bake because they object to the customer being gay. Are doctors allowed to object against sending women for radiotherapy of they know it will damage an unborn foetus. The more logic that is applied to this, the weaker these (few) doctors position stands.

@Gulliver Foyle: The argument in the article is around how they can confirm the gestation period, do they need ultrasound equipment etc, and the need for psychological services. Who is going to fund it?
No one, within reason, should legally have to supply a service they don’t want to. Any service they do supply should be supplied to all irrespective of sexual orientation or sexual history

@CrabaRev: If they can’t confirm the gestation period with confidence, then they can and should refer the patient, without delay (!), to a consultant or practice with the facilities who can.
The principal issue is that some GPs are saying that they can’t even make an initial assessment of a patient and WON’T refer them to a place that can. That is utterly disgraceful, given the distress the patient may be under and the time-constraints within which a decision must be made. The more delay there is, the more danger to the patient – very unethical.

@Twitnoc: p.s. psychological services may be required for any patient who presents with any condition (even a pregnancy they intend to continue to term with!), so that argument is a red herring.

And with regard to cost, maternity care for a pregnancy taken to term would FAR exceed that of an early abortion. Another red herring. This is a minority of GPs seeking to exercise a totally inappropriate moral judgement on their patients and another cohort who are immorally using the introduction of this treatment to lobby for more money.

@Rob Lyn: and if a GP believed dealing with gay patients was wrong for religious reasons would it be ok to refuse them medical treatment also?

@Barry Somers: where’s the moral dilemma in treating gay patients and is this against the moral code of any religion? I can’t remember all of the 10 commandments but I don’t remember anything about treatment of gay people. This is a critical moral decision, religion independent, about whether it is right to take another life. A large proportion of doctors don’t want any act or part in it it seems.

@Barry Somers: no, of course it wouldn’t. Such a GP shouldn’t be allowed to practice as a GP.

What is your point? If you are trying to draw a parallel I do not see it.

@Andrew Connolly: yes, we can let those who object to providing healthcare call themselves non-general practitioners, or “religious doctors”, and they can let the church maintain their register, and manage their remuneration and contracts. All the other doctors will be managed by the medical council, and we will call them general practitioners, or doctors.

@Andrew Connolly: There is no reason why GPs cannot opt out of providing the service if they wish. Its as easy to opt out as it is to opt in. But for the doctors, by being allowed to opt in, they get negotiation power. we won’t opt in unless we get funding etc.

@Jack McGready: You are a p&thetic sh!t stirrer. The only “movement” involved in the referendum was the highly funded, highly organised, ultra catholic “Yes Campaign”. It was soundly defeated by normal right thinking people who came out in their droves. Get a life!

@Andrew Connolly: Because they will be targeted by Pro Lies lunatics. Their campaign managers have said as much.
It needs to be opt out to protect women and G.P.s
They can provide a list of those who do opt out…they will be under no threat from anyone.

@Chrip Ramsay: or of interest, do the doctors who object really object? That hairy “mindfulness” gp from cork during the campaign provides well women clinics, including contraception, cervical screening, family planning and fertility referrals such as IVF, all of which one can claim are against their religion. What else will we allow them to object to that prevents them from doing their job

@Greg Kelly: Let’s say there was a Jehovas Witness doctor, he or she would be against blood transfusions, do you think it would’ be OK for the doctor to to withhold this service?