The Late Late show

Started by T O Hare, January 30, 2009, 01:50:33 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

AZOffaly

I'm very uneasy with the blanket 12 week approach. I do feel the health aspect needs legislating for, but I think the 12 week aspect is a step too far. I don't see why they couldn't have had this referendum without allowing for the provision to legislate for term based abortions, rather than of medical necessity or aggravating factors.

I am in no way meaning to be facetious here, or trivialise the horrible decision a woman would make in those circumstances, but I don't agree with elective abortions.

sid waddell

Quote from: AZOffaly on May 01, 2018, 02:39:01 PM
I'm very uneasy with the blanket 12 week approach. I do feel the health aspect needs legislating for, but I think the 12 week aspect is a step too far. I don't see why they couldn't have had this referendum without allowing for the provision to legislate for term based abortions, rather than of medical necessity or aggravating factors.

I am in no way meaning to be facetious here, or trivialise the horrible decision a woman would make in those circumstances, but I don't agree with elective abortions.
The referendum is not on the proposed legislation.

It's on the proposed abolition of the 8th Amendment.

Politicians are elected by the public to draft and enact legislation. That is their job and that is our political system. Legislation on such a matter will inevitably reflect public opinion.

If you can't see why there is proposed legislation ready to be debated in the event of a Yes vote, I can't help you.

It's because women are fed up with being treated like shit and rightly want change. And a huge proportion of men feel the same way about the issue too.


AZOffaly

Quote from: sid waddell on May 01, 2018, 02:54:59 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on May 01, 2018, 02:39:01 PM
I'm very uneasy with the blanket 12 week approach. I do feel the health aspect needs legislating for, but I think the 12 week aspect is a step too far. I don't see why they couldn't have had this referendum without allowing for the provision to legislate for term based abortions, rather than of medical necessity or aggravating factors.

I am in no way meaning to be facetious here, or trivialise the horrible decision a woman would make in those circumstances, but I don't agree with elective abortions.
The referendum is not on the proposed legislation.

It's on the proposed abolition of the 8th Amendment.

Politicians are elected by the public to draft and enact legislation. That is their job and that is our political system. Legislation on such a matter will inevitably reflect public opinion.

If you can't see why there is proposed legislation ready to be debated in the event of a Yes vote, I can't help you.

It's because women are fed up with being treated like shit and rightly want change. And a huge proportion of men feel the same way about the issue too.

I understand what the referendum is about. I posted that in my first post. But the referendum, the way it is phrased, allows for the proposed legislation to be passed. I think the 8th could have been repealed or amended further without opening the door for elective abortion legislation.

I understand why it is drafted and ready to be debated, I just don't like it. And the only way it can be stopped is by voting down the referendum, which is a pity because that means some necessary changes would also be shot down.

If you feel that legislation which allows for elective abortions up to 12 weeks (and perhaps further legislation that would extend that to later in future years) is a good thing because it give women a choice over their bodies, then again I understand your stance, I just don't agree with it.

seafoid

Quote from: AZOffaly on May 01, 2018, 03:00:43 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 01, 2018, 02:54:59 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on May 01, 2018, 02:39:01 PM
I'm very uneasy with the blanket 12 week approach. I do feel the health aspect needs legislating for, but I think the 12 week aspect is a step too far. I don't see why they couldn't have had this referendum without allowing for the provision to legislate for term based abortions, rather than of medical necessity or aggravating factors.

I am in no way meaning to be facetious here, or trivialise the horrible decision a woman would make in those circumstances, but I don't agree with elective abortions.
The referendum is not on the proposed legislation.

It's on the proposed abolition of the 8th Amendment.

Politicians are elected by the public to draft and enact legislation. That is their job and that is our political system. Legislation on such a matter will inevitably reflect public opinion.

If you can't see why there is proposed legislation ready to be debated in the event of a Yes vote, I can't help you.

It's because women are fed up with being treated like shit and rightly want change. And a huge proportion of men feel the same way about the issue too.

I understand what the referendum is about. I posted that in my first post. But the referendum, the way it is phrased, allows for the proposed legislation to be passed. I think the 8th could have been repealed or amended further without opening the door for elective abortion legislation.

I understand why it is drafted and ready to be debated, I just don't like it. And the only way it can be stopped is by voting down the referendum, which is a pity because that means some necessary changes would also be shot down.

If you feel that legislation which allows for elective abortions up to 12 weeks (and perhaps further legislation that would extend that to later in future years) is a good thing because it give women a choice over their bodies, then again I understand your stance, I just don't agree with it.
AZ

The government organised a popular assembly and asked for submissions on the subject of abortion and the proposed legislation is what they came up with.
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

Syferus

#2014
This referendum would have been utterly pointless if elective abortion was not on the table, AZ. We'd just end up having another referendum later if we showed that lack of courage now.

The people who want the 8th repealed nearly universially support elective abortion so it had to be offered in the public vote if we were going to have an honest and fair referendum. This is actually evidence of a democracy working as intended.

If it's not what the majority want it will be defeated - if indeed it is, you'll just have to live with it. It will probably be easier to live with than it was for young women to travel hundreds of miles for abortions because they couldn't get proper medical care at home, though.

magpie seanie

AZ - as you have pointed out the referendum is about removing the 8th amendment. It's that simple. As has been rightly pointed out for there to be any movement on this the 8th amendment cannot stay in the constitution. In my opinion the constitution is entirely the wrong place for provisions on this issue which is so nuanced and unsuited to a black and white approach.

The recommendations that have been arrived at via and long and considered process including the Citizens Assembly and Oireachtas committee. They are a compromise position taking into account the realities of what is happening every day in this country and the needs of female healthcare. They're also still pretty conservative compared to most EU countries. You say you're uneasy with the blanket 12 week approach - effectively you're uneasy with it happening in Ireland. That's what you're saying. Whether we like it or not women are travelling to England for elective abortions and are ordering pills over the internet. We've seen the terrible consequences of putting our heads in the sand as a nation many times in the past - it's about time we faced up to this uncomfortable reality.

When the referendum is all over the focus needs to be on building a more caring society where respect and tolerance underpins everything This will save more lives than any legislation but requires real commitment and honesty - not throwaway slogans and rhetoric.

AZOffaly

Seanie, Ireland is the only country I have a voice. I'm uneasy with elective abortion anywhere.

Syf, absolutely, I agree with the principles of democracy. I can also disagree with certain laws but can accept that if I want to live in this country, I have to accept the will of the majority. I agree with the majority on most things.

And again, I'm not trivialising it, but the term 'medical treatment' implies there is some sort of medical intervention required to save the woman. There's not. What you are talking about is elective abortion to remove a viable pregnancy because the woman (or the couple) doesn't want it.

Syferus

Quote from: AZOffaly on May 01, 2018, 03:56:37 PM
Seanie, Ireland is the only country I have a voice. I'm uneasy with elective abortion anywhere.

Syf, absolutely, I agree with the principles of democracy. I can also disagree with certain laws but can accept that if I want to live in this country, I have to accept the will of the majority. I agree with the majority on most things.

And again, I'm not trivialising it, but the term 'medical treatment' implies there is some sort of medical intervention required to save the woman. There's not. What you are talking about is elective abortion to remove a viable pregnancy because the woman (or the couple) doesn't want it.

No one should be coerced into giving birth against their will. Preventing that is certainly medical care.

AZOffaly

Fair enough. That's an understandable position. There are others who say nobody deserves to have the chance of life taken away from them as they are in their mothers womb, and I think that's also an understandable position.

*To clarify, in case anyone thinks I'm being cowardly here, I fall into the latter category. But I understand it's not an easy thing. I don't think people will be using this as a form of contraception, or be blasé about it. I know that has been put forth by the No side too.

ardtole

Quote from: AZOffaly on May 01, 2018, 04:03:33 PM
Fair enough. That's an understandable position. There are others who say nobody deserves to have the chance of life taken away from them as they are in their mothers womb, and I think that's also an understandable position.

*To clarify, in case anyone thinks I'm being cowardly here, I fall into the latter category. But I understand it's not an easy thing. I don't think people will be using this as a form of contraception, or be blasé about it. I know that has been put forth by the No side too.
Unfortunately I think there will be instances where a woman finds herself pregnant, without planning to have a baby and will seek to have an abortion, if she feels it may hamper her career or some other issue. It's niave to think otherwise. It might not be an everyday occurrence but it will happen.

AZOffaly

Quote from: ardtole on May 01, 2018, 04:10:36 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on May 01, 2018, 04:03:33 PM
Fair enough. That's an understandable position. There are others who say nobody deserves to have the chance of life taken away from them as they are in their mothers womb, and I think that's also an understandable position.

*To clarify, in case anyone thinks I'm being cowardly here, I fall into the latter category. But I understand it's not an easy thing. I don't think people will be using this as a form of contraception, or be blasé about it. I know that has been put forth by the No side too.
Unfortunately I think there will be instances where a woman finds herself pregnant, without planning to have a baby and will seek to have an abortion, if she feels it may hamper her career or some other issue. It's niave to think otherwise. It might not be an everyday occurrence but it will happen.

You will always have outliers. I don't think the clinics will be swamped by pregnant women who decided to abort the pregnancy. But you are right, there will be some and I don't agree with the premise.

Syferus

Quote from: AZOffaly on May 01, 2018, 04:03:33 PM
Fair enough. That's an understandable position. There are others who say nobody deserves to have the chance of life taken away from them as they are in their mothers womb, and I think that's also an understandable position.

*To clarify, in case anyone thinks I'm being cowardly here, I fall into the latter category. But I understand it's not an easy thing. I don't think people will be using this as a form of contraception, or be blasé about it. I know that has been put forth by the No side too.

I used to think so too, but it's a position that only worked in the abstract the more I thought about it.

If someone has an unexpected pregnancy and doesn't want to have an abortion no one on the pro-choice side tries to stop her; the same in not true in the reverse. It's an invasion into the private lives of citizens in a similar manner to the ban on same sex marriage. Ultimately the rights of the fully-grown woman are more important than those of an embryo, to put it in the coldest terms possible. The No side wants to pretend the potential human is completely equal to the full grown one - that is hard position to fathom on a logical rather than emotional level.

magpie seanie

There are many issues short of the potential death of the mother that should be considered grounds for a termination in my view. The example mentioned by Dr Boylan the other night is a good one. Surprise pregnancy. Mother has diabetic condition so carrying child to term may result in complications such as loss of sight, limbs etc. Mother A has no children and has tried several rounds of unsuccessful IVF. Mother B has 3 children already at home. Mother A might be willing to take the risk. Mother B may not be so willing. Tell me who is wrong? If the 8th amendment is not removed then pregnancies like this MUST continue in Ireland. I wouldn't want that for my wife or my two girls.

The elective terminations up to 12 weeks is a separate issue. I don't stand in the shoes of the women who are going on Ryanair every week currently. I don't know their circumstances or what's going on in their lives. Perhaps if they didn't have to go and we had good supports and counselling in place less would choose to terminate. I'd suggest that's where a lot of energy should be placed if the new proposed regime comes in. Crucially, also, this 12 weeks covers potentially victims of sexual assault or rape who for many reasons (as we've seen recently) do not want to report the crime. The reality is there are many of these women as the stats on unreported crimes of this nature are significant.

It's a very difficult area. One thing I'm absolutely certain of though is that the 8th amendment needs to go. The proposed legislation has been arrived at via a tortuous process - I cannot see any appetite in the bigger parties to deal with this issue any time soon so talk of extensions of timeframes are a bit fanciful I think. Even SF won't have the appetite - they're barely holding the ship together on it at the moment. 

AZOffaly

#2023
True. A lot of this is emotional. If you look at it in a 'cold' way, as you put it, I can see the logic.

However, for me, the possible things that child could be, or do, or what it might feel or contribute to society, all make it very difficult for me to agree with aborting the pregnancy where the baby would have a perfectly healthy start to life.

For cases like rape and incest, or where fatal foetal abnormalities are detected, I do have a more sympathetic view, although a rapist's baby is not at fault for the sins of the father, I can still see the emotional turmoil a situation like that would lead to.

** Sorry, I was responding to Syf here, but yes Seanie, one thing I agree with you on is that this is very complex question, and neither a blanket ban, nor open season, are the way to go. Leaving this in the hands of politicians is also something I am uneasy with. Look at Simon Harris, and the way his department are handling the Cervical Cancer issue. Do you trust that lad to draft legislation? And if the elective abortions is legislated, do you really, really believe that effective supports would be put in place to make more women choose to keep the baby? Pardon my French, but it will in my arse. This will be seen as an answer to a societal problem, and if anything there will be less supports and less incentive for people to see the pregnancy through.

BennyCake

Repeal the law, and you'll see abortions during your lunch hour. It'll become so common it'll be like getting a tooth filled. Once you go there, there's no way back.

This talk of an abortion because having a child is an inconvenience to career etc, well there's no excuse these days. Plenty of birth control methods easily available.

Nearly 200,000 abortions in England and Wales annually. That's 2 million in a decade. Just think about that for a minute.