|
Discussion: Ireland Changes Abortion Laws
Member Since: 4/26/2010
Posts: 13,102
|
Ireland Changes Abortion Laws
Due to the following case;
Quote:
Ireland is poised to amend its notoriously restrictive abortion laws in the wake of protests after the death of a woman denied an abortion during a complicated miscarriage.
Savita Halappanavar, 31, died in October after an agonizing three-day ordeal in an Irish hospital. The Indian woman arrived at the hospital with severe back pain. Doctors told her she was having a miscarriage, but refused to hasten the process with an abortion, reportedly saying, "This is a Catholic country."
Like Us on Facebook
Despite protests from both Halappanavar and her husband Praveen, doctors said they needed to wait until the fetus' heartbeat stopped, a process that dragged out for three days.
By that time, Halappanavar, weakened from agony and constant vomiting, was near death, as bacteria from the dying fetus had entered her bloodstream, causing septicemia. She died three days later in the intensive care unit.
Irish law allows for abortions only when the life of the mother is threatened, yet doctors still refused to perform the procedure because of the legal fog surrounding the restrictions.
If a later inquiry determined that the doctors had performed an abortion that hadn't been absolutely necessary to save Halappanavar's life, they could have been subject to criminal prosecution.
Some legislators in the Irish cabinet are hoping to clear up the laws.
After weeks of protest, they plan to repeal the laws criminalizing abortion and clarify the rules determining when an abortion can be performed, which will likely only cover instances where the life of the mother is in danger, including when she is suicidal.
There are likely to be no exceptions for rape or incest.
I know that most people have personal views on this matter," said Irish Health Minister James Reilly. "However, the government is committed to ensuring that the safety of pregnant women in Ireland is maintained and strengthened. We must fulfill our duty of care towards them."
"For that purpose, we will clarify in legislation and regulation what is available by way of treatment to a woman when a pregnancy gives rise to a threat to a woman's life. We will also clarify what is legal for the professionals who must provide that care while at all times taking full account of the equal right to life of the unborn child," he said.
Ireland has the strictest abortion laws in the European Union, effectively banning the procedure-a rarity among developed countries.
But public opinion in the predominantly Catholic country is shifting, as faith in the church wanes following sex abuse scandals and now Halappanavar's death.
Read more at Ireland Abortion Laws Changing After Death of Woman Refused Abortion : World : Latinos Post
|
To simplify;
In Ireland before this week it was illegal to have an abortion ever. Now it is legal to have an abortion if the mother's life is in danger. The law has an emphasis that both the mother and the unborn child have a right to life but if there is a chance that both mother and child's life be taken, the child can be aborted.
The law stands that a woman can't openly walk into a clinic and request an abortion because she doesn't feel like having a baby or she wants to choose not to have a baby.
In my opinion, Ireland has made a great choice here, and the law is perfect. It's a great inbetween pro-choice and pro-life, both sides have great, valid arguments, and both sides should be respected. This law is a great medium imo!
Opinions?
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 5/30/2012
Posts: 1,590
|
I was pretty sure abortion was already legalised there but obviously not.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 8/3/2012
Posts: 604
|
No. The law is still too restrictive. Abortion should simply be available if the mother wishes to have an abortion. Think about it for a moment. The process of birth is extremely invasive for the mother - professionals have to reach into the vagina, sometimes the mother's body has to be subjected to injury for the baby to be born and the process can be very uncomfortable. Pregnancy should not necessarily entail that the mother's right to bodily integrity should be violated in this way. The foetus' interest in living, so far as I am concerned, does not outweigh the mother's right to dignity as a human being; protection of bodily integrity and autonomy is absolutely necessary for a human being to have dignity.
In any event, the foetus is not an independent person. It is a parasite on the mother. That is the truth. If the mother wishes to evict the visitor from her house, she should be entitled to do so.
|
|
|
ATRL Moderator
Member Since: 11/1/2010
Posts: 26,750
|
Quote:
Originally posted by -Lewymocha-
Opinions?
|
Should not matter or be counted for.
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 3/22/2012
Posts: 53,769
|
Quote:
Originally posted by electricrocket
No. The law is still too restrictive. Abortion should simply be available if the mother wishes to have an abortion. Think about it for a moment. The process of birth is extremely invasive for the mother - professionals have to reach into the vagina, sometimes the mother's body has to be subjected to injury for the baby to be born and the process can be very uncomfortable. Pregnancy should not necessarily entail that the mother's right to bodily integrity should be violated in this way. The foetus' interest in living, so far as I am concerned, does not outweigh the mother's right to dignity as a human being; protection of bodily integrity and autonomy is absolutely necessary for a human being to have dignity.
In any event, the foetus is not an independent person. It is a parasite on the mother. That is the truth. If the mother wishes to evict the visitor from her house, she should be entitled to do so.
|
I'm pro-choice, but perhaps a woman shouldn't be allowing children to develop inside her if she's going to treat them as parasites or "visitors" she can simply evict.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/26/2010
Posts: 13,102
|
Quote:
Originally posted by electricrocket
No. The law is still too restrictive. Abortion should simply be available if the mother wishes to have an abortion. Think about it for a moment. The process of birth is extremely invasive for the mother - professionals have to reach into the vagina, sometimes the mother's body has to be subjected to injury for the baby to be born and the process can be very uncomfortable. Pregnancy should not necessarily entail that the mother's right to bodily integrity should be violated in this way. The foetus' interest in living, so far as I am concerned, does not outweigh the mother's right to dignity as a human being; protection of bodily integrity and autonomy is absolutely necessary for a human being to have dignity.
In any event, the foetus is not an independent person. It is a parasite on the mother. That is the truth. If the mother wishes to evict the visitor from her house, she should be entitled to do so.
|
Disagree. That is not a true fact that a fetus is a parasite.
I think opposite. The life of the unborn child DOES outweigh the woman's bodily integrity. Life >>>>> integrity.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/26/2010
Posts: 13,102
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Katie
Should not matter or be counted for.
|
Explain Katie sis. I am intrigued.
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/11/2009
Posts: 4,457
|
Quote:
Originally posted by electricrocket
No. The law is still too restrictive. Abortion should simply be available if the mother wishes to have an abortion. Think about it for a moment. The process of birth is extremely invasive for the mother - professionals have to reach into the vagina, sometimes the mother's body has to be subjected to injury for the baby to be born and the process can be very uncomfortable. Pregnancy should not necessarily entail that the mother's right to bodily integrity should be violated in this way. The foetus' interest in living, so far as I am concerned, does not outweigh the mother's right to dignity as a human being; protection of bodily integrity and autonomy is absolutely necessary for a human being to have dignity.
In any event, the foetus is not an independent person. It is a parasite on the mother. That is the truth. If the mother wishes to evict the visitor from her house, she should be entitled to do so.
|
Condoms and Birth Control exist for a reason. If a woman doesn't want to become pregnant, she should be safe and do her part in not becoming pregnant. It isn't that hard. It's way harder to have an abortion.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 8/3/2012
Posts: 604
|
Quote:
Originally posted by -Lewymocha-
Disagree. That is not a true fact that a fetus is a parasite.
I think opposite. The life of the unborn child DOES outweigh the woman's bodily integrity. Life >>>>> integrity.
|
The foetus is a parasite. The mother provides the very sustenance it needs for survival. Without the mother, it would have no food, no air, no shelter, no protection. It is totally dependent on the mother for its life. It is a parasite.
With respect to your view that the unborn child's life outweighs the mother's dignity, I would implore you to consider for a moment the fact that the foetus' life is not valuable in itself. It is only valuable in an extrinsic sense because what it represents is the potential for life as a human being after birth. This is where the real value lies with respect to the foetus' life. It lies in the potential for it to flourish into life as a human being. So if we see the foetus' life as inchoate in some way, as more of a 'potential' than a 'thing in itself', then it might be thought that the foetus' life has a lower value than one might initially expect.
The loss of potential is a lower loss than the loss of the life of a person. So the foetus' life is not as valuable as one might think, and it is outweighed by the mother's right to dignity.
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/10/2011
Posts: 14,820
|
Abortion should at LEAST be legal in the case when the woman got pregnant by rape. Even lots of religious people agree it's acceptable in that situation.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 8/3/2012
Posts: 604
|
It is very interesting that people are asserting that "the woman" should have used contraception. What about the man? He equally could have used contraception. Why aren't we holding him responsible for the pregnancy too?
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/4/2012
Posts: 16,176
|
If I was a woman and I was unable to have an abortion if I wanted/needed one, I would literally feel offended and like I'm being degraded. A woman's body is nobody's but her own and abortion is her own personal, private choice. It should be completely legal.
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 8/8/2008
Posts: 21,933
|
Quote:
Originally posted by -Lewymocha-
Disagree. That is not a true fact that a fetus is a parasite.
I think opposite. The life of the unborn child DOES outweigh the woman's bodily integrity. Life >>>>> integrity.
|
It is a not a child yet. its just a fetus. Even if it has a heartbeat etc. it still cannot survive without the mother. It should be her choice whether she wants to keep it or not. Its a basic right of a woman imo, they are not incubators. I do agree that abortion should not be used as birth control and someone who has more than one needs help.
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 8/1/2012
Posts: 27,547
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Walley
Condoms and Birth Control exist for a reason. If a woman doesn't want to become pregnant, she should be safe and do her part in not becoming pregnant. It isn't that hard. It's way harder to have an abortion.
|
But sometimes a woman becomes pregnant due to rape which is not her fault. Therefore she should be entitled to an abortion.
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/11/2009
Posts: 4,457
|
Quote:
Originally posted by aidan_dolan
But sometimes a woman becomes pregnant due to rape which is not her fault. Therefore she should be entitled to an abortion.
|
I agree that abortion should be legal in cases of rape.
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/15/2011
Posts: 1,698
|
Quote:
Originally posted by electricrocket
No. The law is still too restrictive. Abortion should simply be available if the mother wishes to have an abortion. Think about it for a moment. The process of birth is extremely invasive for the mother - professionals have to reach into the vagina, sometimes the mother's body has to be subjected to injury for the baby to be born and the process can be very uncomfortable. Pregnancy should not necessarily entail that the mother's right to bodily integrity should be violated in this way. The foetus' interest in living, so far as I am concerned, does not outweigh the mother's right to dignity as a human being; protection of bodily integrity and autonomy is absolutely necessary for a human being to have dignity.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/15/2011
Posts: 1,698
|
Quote:
Originally posted by -Lewymocha-
Disagree. That is not a true fact that a fetus is a parasite.
I think opposite. The life of the unborn child DOES outweigh the woman's bodily integrity. Life >>>>> integrity.
|
But doesn't "Life" include the mother's?
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/7/2012
Posts: 41,067
|
Abortion should be legal for anybody. The fetus is growing inside the woman's body, she has to carry it for 9 months, she has to give birth. It is part of her and she should be the one to decide what happens to it. When you try to prevent certain women from getting abortions, you are trying to control their bodies. The only person who has a right over what happens to somebody's body is that person themselves. I am a female and my body and what goes on with it belongs to me and me only.
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 8/8/2008
Posts: 21,933
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Walley
Condoms and Birth Control exist for a reason. If a woman doesn't want to become pregnant, she should be safe and do her part in not becoming pregnant. It isn't that hard. It's way harder to have an abortion.
|
Its not actually. You take a pill if you want to abort early (in most cases) and that's it.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/7/2012
Posts: 41,067
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Walley
Condoms and Birth Control exist for a reason. If a woman doesn't want to become pregnant, she should be safe and do her part in not becoming pregnant. It isn't that hard. It's way harder to have an abortion.
|
Whether a woman (or man, it takes two to tango remember) used birth control or not is not even important. What a random woman does with her life and how she ended up pregnant isn't anybody's business but her own. She does NOT have to come up with a reason to justify her actions to a bunch of strangers who do not approve. When you try to make abortion illegal, you are forcing your personal beliefs on other people. Since when it is okay to force your beliefs on everybody else? When abortion is legal, you have a choice to have one or not. Nobody is being forced to do anything and you can choose to live however you want to. When you make abortion illegal, there is no choice. What kind of world is one where we are forced to live according to one groups way of thinking?
|
|
|
|
|