Senate Abortion

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by Katana_Geldar, Nov 18, 2012.

  1. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    I could find nothing about this anywhere on here, and this story still angers and saddens me. It shows the extent of pro-life laws when there is a medical need for a termination. It shoes can happen if the personal religious beliefs of the doctor are held in higher regard than the life of a woman.

    If you haven't seen it

    (I seem to recall a conversation we had with Obi-Zahn about this very issue, but I heard he has been banned)

    How can anyone possibly defend the pro-life stance after a case like this? This is what happens when you put religion against every human being's right to live. There's string reasoning to suggest that had the termination been made after it was confirmed she was miscarrying, she would still be alive.

    I'm hoping we see malpractice suits out of this at the very least. Those medical staff need to be on trial for manslaughter.

    I've opened a senate thread with an incendiary case, but I'd like to hear your views. Particularly those from the other side.
  2. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    I'm pro-choice, but I think it's only the most extreme pro-lifers who won't make an exception to save the mother's life.

    I agree with you, and I'm interested to hear what the opposing viewpoint is as well.
  3. thesevegetables Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 11, 2012
    star 4
    This was absolutely horrifying. They had to wait until the baby was decaying inside the mother's body before taking it out. And ended up with minus two lives instead of minus one.
    ALSO: OVERPOPULATION, PEOPLE.
  4. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    Well here's one response and here's another.

    Personally, I think there's every reason to use this issue to both try and change the law in Ireland and highlight what the pro-life group is actually meaning in the fullest extent of the argument that they refuse to recognise. In both cases it's a dodge without addressing the issue.
    Last edited by Katana_Geldar, Nov 18, 2012
  5. LostOnHoth Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2000
    star 5
    I'm very much pro-choice but I find this article to be very emotive and vague on medical facts. Some of the comments which have been posted in response to the story are instructive. Based upon that article, what evidence is there that Savita would still be alive if the feotus had been terminated? Before we call in the lynch mob for the medical practitioners who handled her treatment I would like to see a medical opinion which confirms there was malpractice or that the decision not to perform a termination was based upon religious rather than medical grounds.
    Vaderize03 likes this.
  6. thesevegetables Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 11, 2012
    star 4
    My impression was that she needed a termination to escape bad results to her health but the doctors would not give her one.

    Yeah, she kind of had a miscarriage, but doctors would not take the fetus out.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49839922/
    Last edited by thesevegetables, Nov 18, 2012
  7. GenAntilles Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2007
    star 4
    To save the life of the mother abortion should be allowed. There is nothing Christian about letting two die when one can live.

    If the woman's health was in danger then abortion should be on the table, it should be up to her whether or not she wants the abortion or would rather risk herself for her child.
    Asterix_of_Gaul likes this.
  8. Frank T. Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 6
    What "religious freedom" means to me:

    I have the right to be free of your religion.
  9. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    Her and her husband asked for a termination but they were refused as there still was a foetal heartbeat and she was in a Catholic hospital. And this is despite the fact that she was dilated. This wasn't some woman who made a mistake, or was raped and wanted an abortion, this was a much wanted first pregnancy that just went tragically wrong, as they sometimes do.

    It will take a little while for the proper medical evidence to come out, I understand there is an autopsy.
  10. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    I look forward to seeing people's newly constructed arguments on this contentious topic. I anticipate that there will be new facts and points to be made and people's views will be shifted at some point during the discourse.
  11. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    Good to see you too, Ender.

    Interesting response from the Catholic Herald.

    So, they could have had some sort of Catholic reason in favour of performing the abortion. Who'd a thunk it.
    Mar17swgirl likes this.
  12. harpua Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2005
    star 8
    Oh goody... the semi-annual abortion debate.
  13. Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 25, 1999
    star 5
    I agree that we need to see all the facts, but this is a very frightening case.

    I could see it happening right here in the good ol' US of A, and there would be a litany of voices rising to defend the decision not to terminate, even if it meant the mother would die.

    Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Bachmann, and Sarah Palin would be leading the charge.

    Peace,

    V-03
    Last edited by Vaderize03, Nov 18, 2012
  14. Juliet316 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    Going by the last election some in the GOP are already trying/or speaking on the want to do just that.

    As to this case, just from what I've heard on the news thus far, it's absolutely horrifying. If there had already been a determination that there was no way to stop the miscarriage, then the humane thing to do (as well as the only thing to do prevent the mother's death) was to do the abortion. It's just so disturbing on so many levels.
  15. LostOnHoth Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2000
    star 5
    I think the case highlights the need for certainty in the law for doctors regarding terminations and when they are permissable to save the life of the mother. It will be interesting to see what comes out of the investigation. I haven't seen any comments or statements from the actual doctors who treated Savita so at this stage we don't know whether clarity in the law would have saved her life or not.

    I'm not a doctor, but I know that doctors have no obligation whatsoever to comply with a request or a demand from a patient for a specific form of treatment or procedure. So saying "doctors ignored Savits'a repeated demands for a termination" is meaningless really as I would expect a doctor to decide what is the appropriate procedure or treatment and not the patient. If Savita's condition was such that the doctors did not feel as though her life was in danger then it doesn't matter if the law is crystal clear on the subject of terminations, the doctor will not perform the termination if it is not considered necessary.

    The question here is whether the doctors knew Savita's life was in danger but nevertheless failed to perform a termination because of religious grounds or because of uncertainty in the law.
    Last edited by LostOnHoth, Nov 18, 2012
  16. Darth Guy Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2002
    star 10
    One of the nurses said, "This is a Catholic country." I think it's pretty clear there was a religious element (IN THE ONLY EUROPEAN COUNTRY TO ALMOST COMPLETELY OUTLAW ABORTION I'M SHOCKED).
  17. LostOnHoth Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2000
    star 5
    Yeah the anti-abortion law itself seems to have a religious element to it. But my point was that even if the law was changed tomorrow, this tragedy might still have occured because doctors will not perform terminations on demand if they do not consider them to be medically necessary. So even if the explanation given to the patient was "this a Catholic country" it remains to be seen whether that was the only reason why the termination was not performed, given that there appears to be some scope for doctors to perform termninations if necessary to save the mother. If the doctors say that they did not perform the termination because they didn't consider it medically necessary and they didn't consider the mother to be in danger then it becomes a simple malpractice issue.
  18. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    But they had performed abortions to save mothers at that same hospital. Why wasn't this done this time is the answer.
  19. harpua Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2005
    star 8
    Actually, I think that's the question.
  20. Rogue_Ten Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 18, 2002
    star 7
  21. Kimball_Kinnison Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 28, 2001
    star 6
    But that's what @LostOnHoth is saying. We don't know what information the doctors had at the time. The fact that they had performed other abortions to save the life of the mother at that hospital suggests that it wasn't a blanket policy, but more likely a medical decision that it wasn't yet necessary. Depending on the information that they had at the time, that may have been a reasonable decision.

    Doctors do sometimes make mistakes in diagnosis, or in determining which treatment is best. Without further information, we can't say whether this case was one of those.
    Vaderize03 and Jedi Merkurian like this.
  22. Narutakikun Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2012
    star 4
    Yeah, I read about this. Here's my response:

    I do think "life of the mother", where one life is balanced against another, might be the one exception I'd agree to in abortion laws. that said...

    Rape, incest, and life and health of the mother together comprise about 1-2% of all abortions. Life of the mother is even rarer. Cases like this even rarer still. That makes this, tragic as it is, an edge case.

    I may sound heartless saying this, but here goes: anyone who would use this to try to get abortion legalized altogether is simply being intellectually dishonest. When one side is waving a bloody shirt frantically and turning the pathos up to 11 on what is admittedly a tragic case, it can indeed seem heartless to point out that this really is a tragic edge case.

    But the thing is, we humans being what we are - being imperfect - every solution that we come up with for any problem is going to have upsides and downsides, is going to help some people and hurt some people, is going to produce some success stories and some horror stories.

    So, no matter what you do, you're going to end up with a few tragic edge cases. And waving the bloody shirt on a few tragic edge cases can be used as an argument to try to justify... well, to try to justify damn near anything.

    I could use such cases to argue for socialized medicine, or against it; to argue for segregation, or against it; to argue for legalized abortion, or against it.

    I'm not trying to diminish the sadness of what happened to this woman. But I am going to be heartless enough to be the cooler head that tries to prevail through this.
    Alexrd likes this.
  23. Aytee-Aytee Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2008
    star 5
    Quoted for truth. The majority of pro-lifers are only against abortion for morons looking for a the proverbial "Get Out of Jail Free Card" because they didn't want to spend three seconds putting on a condom.

    Cases of rape, incest, and life-or-death situations are a whole different matter and we (pro-life but non-crazies) will generally turn a blind eye.
    Last edited by Aytee-Aytee, Dec 8, 2012
    Sarge and GenAntilles like this.
  24. Juliet316 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    I'll put it quite simply: I'd rather have abortion legal for all to have access to than have a doctor or a hospital beaurcrat decide whether anybody's rape, or incest qualifies them to have an abortion or that a woman/child's condition (I.E not being able to survive outside the womb or other similar types of birth defects) qualifies as a life or death situation for an abortion.
  25. Jedi_Hood Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 10, 2000
    star 6
    I'm opposed to abortion under most circumstances, but in this case it seemed clearly necessary. And, in my opinion, a doctor is the one who should be making the decision whether or not an abortion is medically necessary, despite what happened here.

    Why the assumption that opposition to abortion is always based on religious belief? Like I said, I'm opposed to abortion under most circustances, and I'm agnostic.