Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
One particular time in hospital, I was so upset I just wanted to get out of it. I walked out with a drip in one hand and catheter in the other, out to the front of the hospital and realised I couldn’t go anywhere and just sat down on a bench and started crying because what could I do? I was in this situation and I felt like it was a never-ending cycle.
MARGARET BYRNE, A 65-year-old mother-of-three has become used to doctor appointments, endless prescriptions and daily injections. Back in 1999, she was suffering from stress urinary incontinence as a result of natural childbirth.
Her consultant asked her if she would try a new procedure, which would involve inserting mesh tape, called a mid-urethral sling that support the urethra. Byrne said she was told “it would be quick, easy, 20 minutes, home the same day and a very short recovery time as opposed to six weeks recovery with the other one”.
I didn’t hear of any negatives from him about the tape.
After the surgery, Byrne said she developed an infection which was cleared up with an antibiotic. However, after the healing process, when she and her husband resumed sexual relations, they realised something was wrong.
He could feel something very sharp and so could I. So, on inspection, which is not really something you want to do, I found that part of the tape had cut through my vagina and was now sticking there, sharp-edged.
‘Each one was unsuccessful’
She returned to her surgeon who recommended another procedure to “pull skin over it and sew that in place and that would cover the tape”.
Again, on trying to resume sexual relations after the healing time it was the same story. The tape had eroded into my vagina again. This continued, I went back and back and had a series of operations over three years and each one was unsuccessful.
Eventually Byrne asked her consultant to remove the problematic transvaginal mesh device. In her final surgery, he performed a different procedure to address urinary incontinence.
Although there was an improvement with her incontinence issue, the mother-of-three has suffered from regular urinary tract infections since her last surgery.
“Also, I have a problem with my bones which the GP and my bone consultant can’t explain. My pelvis broke in two places, right and left side last year [and there had been] no trauma,” she said.
She is on daily injections for this issue and she said her GP is trying to determine whether there is any connection with her surgeries.
Chronic pain
The US Food and Drug Administration reclassified the transvaginal mesh implant as a high-risk device in 2012 and some 100,000 women there have filed lawsuits.
Three group companies of manufacturer Johnson & Johnson are fighting a class action from 800 women in Australia who claim they suffered serious complications following these procedures.
The Australian government is also holding a Senate inquiry into the use of these devices.
Johnson & Johnson maintains it has acted ethically and responsibly in the research, development and supply of these products.
In 2012, one of its subsidiaries Ethicon stopped sales of four of its vaginal mesh products, but the company insisted at the time that safety was not the reason.
It is only in the last year that the issue was highlighted in the UK with coverage in particular from The Guardian newspaper, which revealed NHS figures suggest one in 15 women who underwent a mesh procedure later had to have the implant either partially or fully removed.
A number of support groups, like Sling the Mesh, have been set up online and many of the women who have experienced complications as a result of the procedures have described experiencing chronic pain and having difficulty walking.
Other reported issues include headaches, lack of energy, discharge and bleeding.
In some cases, problems started a short time after the surgery, in others, it was years afterwards.
Many said they were not warned of the potential complications and that their concerns were dismissed by their doctors when issues with the mesh began after their surgeries.
‘I was never told about complications’
Now women in Ireland who experienced complications from these procedures have started to come forward.
Janet Roche is another one of these patients.
The 48-year-old had the mesh implant in 2010 to try to tackle her stress incontinence.
She had suffered incontinence after her first two children and after she had two more, the problem worsened.
“I just happened to mention it to my doctor in passing when I was down for something else and he said ‘we’ll have a look at it anyway’. It was in the hospital that he mentioned the surgery. They said there was significant leakage, but that they had a solution,” she told TheJournal.ie.
Roche said she was told she could go on medication for a couple of years, but that she would ultimately need the surgery anyway to properly address the problem.
“I didn’t like the idea of taking medication for two years. At that time I wouldn’t have even had Disprin in my house. They never actually told me what the procedure was. I was so naive when I think about it now – I didn’t even ask. They said they were going to lift the bladder up, but they never mentioned how they were going to do it and mesh was never mentioned at that stage. Certainly I was never told about complications.
“I don’t take chances, I’m not a lucky person and I never have been, so if they had mentioned for one second any of these risks, I would never have gone ahead with it. I have four kids, I wouldn’t have taken that risk.” At the time, her children were aged 12, ten, five and three. About six weeks after the procedure, Roche started to experience intense pain.
I was crying on the couch, I was in bits. I can’t describe the pain. They did an ultrasound and said my bladder wasn’t emptying, it hadn’t been emptying properly since the surgery. They said there had obviously been an overcorrection so I’d have to retrain my bladder, catherising myself four or five times a day.
“I was put on long-term antibiotics, but nothing worked, nothing worked for the pain.
“They tried to put it down to other things along the way and they said it’d settle down or I was still healing. They said I could have interstitial cystitis. I was afraid it could be cancer because I had some of the same symptoms.
“In seven years I haven’t had a urine sample that didn’t have blood in it. Sometimes they said it was thrush, or maybe I was being too intimate with my husband. Once they asked me was I sure I actually was in pain, like it was in my head.
“Within months I was begging them to reverse it. For seven years they bounced me between two departments.”
It was only in June last year that Roche said a consultant confirmed her pain was caused by the mesh implant. The mesh had migrated into her urethra. These devices are designed to fortify the natural tissue, which grows into and around the tape. This makes them incredibly difficult to remove in their entirety.
She had a partial removal in April this year and has been told the surgeon took out as much as was possible.
However, she said she is still experiencing pain and has been told she will probably have chronic pain for the rest of her life.
“It’s constant pain medication, morning and night. Sometimes a sleeping tablet is the only thing that will work when it gets really bad. The pain frightens the life out of me.”
Though the 48-year-old said she has suffered terribly over the last seven years, it is the impact on her family she is most angry and upset about.
My relationship with my husband is probably the hardest thing to bear. He’s been fantastic, he’s never complained, but it all falls on him.
Since I had this done, my poor husband, at this point it must be nearly two years since [we had sex]. Whenever I wasn’t in pain, I didn’t want to risk triggering it and he was reluctant to touch me because he didn’t know if he was doing something to hurt me. Even with it partially removed, we’ve tried and he can feel something there hurting him when we try to be intimate.
I don’t feel like a wife anymore. I’ve said to him I would understand if he left me because I can’t give him that. He said there is no way he’d look at another woman.
‘It broke my heart’
Roche also said she feels as though she has let her four children down. She agreed to have the surgery because she thought she would be able to be more active with her kids if her incontinence was cured.
Even now she is frequently bedridden.
“Sometimes the only relief I got was lying on the bathroom floor. My children used to find me there and they’d put a blanket over me. There were times when I tried so hard not to cry in front of them,” she said.
“My youngest is only ten and she worries about me so much. If I look anyway off at all she’s asking should she get my tablets or ring her daddy. She shouldn’t know all of that, she shouldn’t see that. She doesn’t get excited about going anywhere because we have to see on the day how I feel.
“I’ve gone from being a participant in the family to someone who is just being looked after.
“I even missed my sister’s wedding – that broke my heart. They took this gorgeous picture at it for me, all my sisters and brothers and my mam and dad. I can’t even look at it.”
Roche also had to give up a job she loved, working in customer care for McDonald’s.
“They were so good all through this and kept the job open for me to go back, I couldn’t have asked for better. I’ve been put on invalidity pension now, I just wouldn’t be able to work.
It sounds dramatic to say it ruined my life, but from my perspective, the life I have, I don’t have anything like the life I had before.
Success rates
For stress urinary incontinence, there are a number of options and physiotherapy is the recommended first line of treatment.
The mid-urethral sling procedure took over from colposuspension, which involves stitching the neck of the bladder to ligaments attached to a pelvic bone. The sutures used in this procedure are made of the same material as the mesh implants. Success rates vary from 85% at one year to 70% at five years.
Other treatments include bladder neck injections (30-50% cure at one and four years), fascial slings (66% success at two years) and a laser treatment which is currently being trialled.
A decade-long independent study of 60,000 Canadian women published in 2015 found the majority of women who had the mid-urethral sling surgery (which involves the mesh implant) for stress incontinence had a good outcome from the procedure.
However, one in 30 required a second surgery to either fix or remove the mesh. Patients of lower-volume surgeons were 37% more likely to require a follow-up surgery.
A study of 81 trials published in Cochrane this year found over 80% of women with stress incontinence are cured or have significant improvements with either of the two operations. It found that there was erosion of the tape into the vagina in 2% of the 12,113 cases.
The authors of this research pointed out that their results were based on “moderate quality evidence” as most trials did not describe their methods clearly. They also said there are only a limited number of randomised controlled trials that have published data beyond five years after surgery and this means evidence of the long-term efficacy lags behind the short and medium-term.
While these short and medium-term trials have found low complication rates for implants that are used to treat stress incontinence, there is growing evidence that the efficacy is lower for devices used in women with pelvic prolapse – and complication rates are higher.
A report by the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) said there was a need for further improvement in the composition and design of synthetic meshes, in particular for female pelvic organ prolapse surgery.
It also recommended that non-invasive solutions should be considered before resorting to surgery and the amount of mesh should be limited where possible.
‘Quicker return to normal activities’
Suzanne O’Sullivan, consultant gynaecologist and urologist and President of the Incontinence Foundation of Ireland (CFI) has stressed that patients should be fully informed of both the benefits and risks involved in any surgery.
Her organisation recently published a note on its website to address the concerns of patients who have seen the media coverage of issues with these devices.
“They [the mesh slings] have been shown to be as effective as more invasive traditional surgery with major advantages of shorter operating and admission times, and a quicker return to normal activities together with lower rates of complications. This has resulted in MUS [mid-urethral sling] becoming the operation of choice in Europe, Asia, North and South America and Australasia for treatment of stress urinary incontinence with several million procedures performed worldwide,” CFI said.
Speaking to TheJournal.ie, O’Sullivan said no operation “is safe or complication free” and they all carry short and longterm complications rates.
“The complications and success rates differ with each procedure. Other factors include patient and surgeon variables. Some patients are low risk, slim, and have simple pure stress incontinence and will inevitably have lower complication rates and higher success rates. Obesity, smoking, age, diabetes, previous surgery and mixed incontinence will make surgery more risky and less likely to give complete cure and this is the case with all surgical options,” she explained.
“Whilst each patient differs in terms of symptoms, background medical history, optimal treatment approaches may differ. Relative to other procedures mid urethral slings have been shown, in large studies from all over the world, to be no less safe (and usually more safe) than other procedures and with improved short, medium and longterm outcomes.”
Though O’Sullivan said mesh erosion is the only complication that does not occur with all other operations for stress incontinence, she pointed out that the sutures used in these other surgeries can also migrate into other organs.
“In our unit, we strive to ensure our patients fully understand their treatment. We fully explain each procedure, the alternatives, and the risks and benefits, and we answer any questions they may have. Information leaflets are given and consent forms are signed before surgery in every instance,” she said.
“We list the potential complications of surgery on consent forms signed by the patient, in keeping with best medical practice.”
The consultant said all clinicians have a responsibility to advocate for women who suffer complications of surgery, and all patients who present with life-altering symptons.
We must ensure that accurate and clear information is provided, which will allow women to be confident in choosing the best procedure for them. Open, balanced and transparent discussion is the best approach for all concerned.
Regulation
The Health Products Regulatory Authority said it has identified two unconfirmed reported incidents in respect of transvaginal mesh devices and vaginal mesh implants.
“The HPRA is in regular communication with the Department of Health in relation to the health products regulated under its remit; this includes transvaginal mesh devices and vaginal mesh implants,” the authority told TheJournal.ie.
“The HPRA has provided the Department of Health with an overview of this issue, including the numbers of incidents reported to the HPRA and details of relevant publications in relation to the safety assessment of these devices.”
Responding to a query from this website, the Department of Health said: “The HSE has not made the Department aware of any particular issue regarding the clinical use of this device.
“We understand from the Health Products Regulatory Authority that it has identified two unconfirmed reported incidents in respect of transvaginal mesh devices and vaginal mesh implants.”
In response to a number of questions from this website, the HSE explained it does not collate data on the number of patients who have had mesh procedures. It does collect information on surgeries for stress incontinence and prolapse, but it does not differentiate between procedures that use mesh and those which do not.
It did not address questions about whether it believed these devices are safe or whether it was aware of the international scrutiny and court action involving mesh procedures.
“It is the responsibility of the consultant to explain to patients the risk involved with this procedure, as with any procedure,” it said in a brief statement.
“The HSE does not collate data for the private sector so cannot comment on the treatment of women in private hospitals.”
If you’ve been affected by this issue, we want to hear your story. Get in touch at michelle@thejournal.ie.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Sounds like if we votes yes it’s like signing a blank cheque. Why hasn’t the complete proposed legislation been decided upon and published before this vote.
My moto- never trust what a politician says they’ll do
@Finbarr Barry: have to agree with you Finbarr. We’re being asked to vote on something but we’re not quite sure what that is. I can see the result being a case of ‘better the devil you know…’
@Finbarr Barry: The 8th Amendment is so badly worded, that it is impossible to plan any legislation without it being removed first.
@Finbarr Barry: this is why you should vote no !
@Finbarr Barry: people elect politicians. You are saying don’t trust people. If you are so concerned you can set up a party to deal with abortion and put your beliefs to the test of democracy.
@Finbarr Barry: the draft legislation goes too far. And if there’s a yes vote they’ll claim that endorses the draft legislation so it’ll be undemocratic to oppose it. This despite them currently saying even if you disagree with the legislation vote yes and then lobby to change it! Both sides of this thing very disingenuous but I’m voting No to send them back to the drawing board to deal with “hard cases” and cases involving risk of serious PHYSICAL harm.
@Niall: you’re so right. Mental health… sure that’s just a snowflake generation issue eh? Screw those women… they should have kept their legs shut eh?
@Micheál Ryan: If you don’t know all the proposals ,vote No.
@Mary Duffy: If you don’t know, FIND OUT!
@Jenni Harrison: yeah Jenni that’s exactly what I said. I’m voting no because I have no compassion, I don’t trust women and I want to police women’s bodies. That must be true because it’s on posters. I couldn’t possibly have any other motivation like a strong dislike of the current 8th but a genuinely held belief in some qualified protections for the unborn. See, we can all say stupid insulting stuff Jenni. Incase you did want an actual answer I’ve no issue with genuine mental health being a reason, but the vague nonsense in the current draft legislation is a million miles from that.
@Niall: think about it… any woman’s mental health will suffer if she believes she is in a crisis pregnancy. So you’re advocating some kind of mental health barometer? And who decides on that Scale? Being suicidal is already legislated for. But what about the women in poverty, young girls (excluding rape victims), mothers who already have 5 children and just can’t cope with more, woman who are sick but not on deaths door. All of these women will cite mental health, as being forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy is clearly not good for anyone’s state of mind. So please tell me how you would legislate for these women? Every woman has a personal reason for choosing an abortion.
@Finbarr Barry:
I still haven’t seen any serious discussion of an alternative 8th.Just vague “it can’t be done” with no explanation.As an example,how about
The states acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, while safeguarding the superior right to life of the mother, and giving precedence to safeguarding against significant risks of serious harm to the physical health of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.
This subsection shall not limit provision being made by law permitting in the State the termination of pregnancies of minors, those resulting from rape or incest, and those resulting in diagnoses of fetal abnormalities of the unborn, subject to such conditions as may be laid down by law.
@Micheál Ryan: Because we can only have a referendum to change the constitution. Legislation is the job of the oireachtas. If we were to have a referendum for every piece of legislation, we’d be at the polling booth at least 3 times a week. Repealing the 8th does not guarantee abortion in any shape or form. It only allows for the government to legislate. The legislation could ban it as easily as allow it. Repealing the 8th just permits the possibility of abortion in Ireland.
@Niall: vague nonsense? Serious risk to the mental health of the mother, as assessed by an obstetrician and a mental health practitioner, both in agreement that a termination will avert that risk. That’s hardly vague.
@Dave O Keeffe: it doesn’t say serious risk Dave. Read it.
@Jenni Harrison: I accept all that Jenni but it doesn’t say serious risk (any risk is fine), it doesn’t specify a psychiatrist has to be involved (unlike the 2013 Act) and it doesn’t say the termination should be necessary (just appropriate).
@Larry Doyle: The full heads of the abortion bill are not published as yet.
@Niall: if the mother says she has a mental health issue that warrants an abortion up to 12 weeks, that’s sufficient in my opinion. I may not agree with her reasons, but they’re her reasons and who am I to either judge her or force her to continue the pregnancy?
@Niall: if it said “serious risk” how would you propose that would be policed? What you deem as serious risk may be totally different to what I deem as serious risk. So who sets the barometer? Who decides that a 29 year old in extreme poverty is more vulnerable than a mother of 5 whose level of sanity is already at breaking point? Who decides that a woman whose mix of pregnancy and diabetes may maker her blind is more at risk than a woman whose just starting out her career and her contraception has failed after a one night stand? You simply can’t legislate for every circumstance. And remember we’re only talking about up to 12 weeks here. From then to viability, it is illegal to abort a child outside the agreed terms.
@Jenni Harrison: for that ground it’s 24 weeks (viability) though, not 12 weeks. But on your substantive point, yep that’s the crux of it. If you don’t think there’s a second entity (to use a neutral term) that deserves some protections, then you’re right it’s none of anyone else’s business. I just don’t see it that way try as I have to understand that perspective given how uncomfortable I am voting the same way as the fundamentalist headcases on the no side that I disagree with about 90% on this issue and disagree 100% with on all other social issues like same sex marriage etc.
@Niall: thank you for replying. It’s good to have open discussion even if we fundamentally disagree. I’ll pose one last question to you if you don’t mind. I’m 38, blessed with 2 daughters, running 2 businesses, with sole responsibility for a sick father. I believe I’m a good mum. I also believe that if contraception failed me now, I would be in crises. I literally don’t have the finances to have another child go through Creche and after school care. I would have to give up work to be a stay at home mum, thus letting my staff go and becoming reliant on the state. I love my job. I’m a better mother because I have the head space and freedom to both work and be a mother. I know my mental stability would suffer. I know I wouldn’t be as good a mum. But you would force me to have that baby. Why?
@Finbarr Barry: If we vote yes, we give our legislators the freedom to legislate, which is the reason they are elected and handsomely compensated. Putting complex legislation into the constitution is a terrible idea, and it means that the government is unable to deal with difficult and unforeseen cases without further referendums. (e.g. the X case)
@Finbarr Barry: Sounds like you want to live in a theocracy Finbarr but in democracies, we vote politicians in to act on our behalf. That’s how the whole system works. My moto is to allow people to make the right decision for them and not impose the catholic church’s viewpoint on them.
@Mary Duffy: If you don’t understand what’s being proposed, stay at home!
@Finbarr Barry: Don’t vote ever again so.
@Finbarr Barry: If you vote yes, all you are doing is removing a constitutional block. Ireland could actually impose a more conservative abortion law after a yes vote passes if it wanted. It would be an equal playing field for good ideas. If you vote no, people reading this website today could die, Because of you. Because you said no at all costs.
The reason there are no solutions is that the unborn has equal rights as a woman under our constitution. How can you legislate for its “death” if this is true?. I understand the unborn has rights, but it’s not my girlfriend, mother or sister. It has the potential to be that to someone someday, but you can’t bake a cake without an oven.
Whatever way you vote, it has a hint of sadness. But favouring the unborn vs the living is crazy when it’s an either or situation.
@Niall: “the draft legislation goes too far”
That’s another lie from the No campaign.
Repealing the 8th means that the draft legislation will progress through the Oireachtas and be debated and amended before it is finally passed as is the case for any other legislation. This is how any democracy works and should work. The final legislation is likely to be the most restrictive in Europe given how conservative our government and opposition are.
@Niall: What part of ‘if we dont remove the 8th’ nothing can change?
This ‘pro life’ father of 5 is voting YES…
When my wife was mentally/physically going through an extremely difficult pregnancy,we both had agreed that if anything went wrong that her life ‘always’ would come first..This proved to me that we both valued her life before that of the ‘non viable ‘ foetuses ‘life’..This also made me realise that a woman/girl that finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy ‘also’ values her life more than that ‘non viable’ embryo’s ‘life’…
Vote YES
@Francis Mc Carthy: when I was pregnant (3times) the baby cane first, no matter what. If that meant I would die so my sons or daughter could live I would do that. Even now I would give my life for my kids. They come first. I’ve always told my husband no matter what my kids come first, if they die I’ll be dead inside anyway and wouldn’t want to live.
@Francis Mc Carthy: you aren’t the first person I’ve seen say this but I’m confused by it. I’m not coming from a place of hostility or aggression, I’m just asking a question, is this not covered in current legislation where a pregnancy can be terminated if the woman’s life is at risk?
@Lily: I would feel the same. But it’s not the same for everyone, and a Yes vote will give parents that choice.
@grainne curistan: you don’t understand what i’m getting at.Why did both of us put her life above that of the ‘non viable foetus’ ? The answer is because we both valued her life to be more important than the ‘life’ of the ‘non viable’ foetuses ‘life’…
Why should my wife’s life have to go further into risk for a ‘non viable’ foetus ?
Why should a woman that finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy put her life at higher risk for something that she has no feelings whatsoever about ?
To me,we look after the ones that are in our life,first..
@Lily:That is your choice.But the majority of women and their partners would want the woman’s life to come first…
@Lily: Interesting. I have two children, one of them with special needs. If an (unlikely due to my age) pregnancy puts my life at risk, my existing children take precedence. So you were prepared to leave your two children motherless if something went wrong with your third pregnancy?
@Zmeevo Libe: 100% Yes.
I never plan to get pregnant again. However if one did managed to get through I would see that it’s meant to be. I would give my life for that one too, leaving 3 children motherless. Being motherless isn’t the end of the world, they have a fantastic dad who would provide for them, as well as my life assurance. They would eventually get a step mother too, they would have my own mother and all their aunts. They would have each other.
@Lily: well that’s just f-d up.
@Lily: Money and a dad doesn’t make up for growing up without a mother, shocking that you think they’d make up for it. So if you were pregnant for a week and were at risk you’d still risk it without once thinking of your other kids. That’s mad tbh.
@Lily: Well I suppose we just differ on that. But don’t forget that decision would be affecting your children. I mean, you would be dead, but they would be wondering when is mammy coming back.
@Lily: It’s great that you have it all figured out, and just know everything will always be wonderful. Well done you!
My children come first for me too. But they need their mother (me, a step mother just wouldn’t do!) I’m voting Yes so that we can all do what’s best for ourselves and our own families.
@Lily: That’s your choice Lily and I wouldn’t stop you from making it so please don’t stop others from making their own decision. Personnally if it was between me and a foetus, I win every time.
@Lily: Sounds like you prefer to be a martyr in your own head than think about the life your husband and children would have. Being motherless is dramatic. My father never knew his mother and my husband’s mother died when he was a small child. I don’t think you have thought this through at all and are just making very emotional virtue signalling remarks. In my view, a mother who would take herself out over a foetus and leave 3 children behind is not right in the head.
@MaryF:
Well you see I wouldn’t see it as just a fetus I see it as a baby that has the right to life and as a mother the baby has more of a right than me it’s mother due to the fact I’ve all ready lived, I had 37 years and it deserves a chance at life, hopefully a long life, longer than 37 years. As a mother it’s my duty and responsiblility to protect the baby inside of me.
If you call than not being right in the head humanity is doomed!!!!!
@Lily: most mothers feel as you do for their children, but I am confused here..if an unborn foetus comes first in your opinion, irrespective of its chances of survival and the mother’s life is at risk, a mother who already has children, who need their mother, how would you be putting your children first if your life was sacrificed, who woulD care for them as you say you would? I find your extreme view just that extreme
@Lily: If my wife was unconscious I’d let the child go. I can’t do it on my own, the other kids need her, we can always try again. I’m pretty sure she’d want to live.
@helen walsh: It’s daftness Helen, I don’t think I’d believe that. Saying and doing are different things. I wouldn’t want to be left alone with the kids, not a chance. One isn’t worth more to me. Kids are the ‘most important’, yeah.. But your wife? Oh I do anything for her.. She takes pride of place over EVERYONE to me.
@Gav Quinn: I’m not sure if I could forgive my husband if he did that, knowing full well that’s not how I would want it.
It’s not a case of trying again. As much as I would love to see my children grow up, I couldn’t sacrifice my babies life so I could live my own. That would be selfish on my part. I just couldn’t.
@Lily: nuts..you would be sacrificing your living children to an uncertain upbringing, you are not puttin* your children first.
@Lily: Humanity is more likely to be doomed due to the earth running out of resources as we approach 8 billion and growing. We’re on our way to becoming planet Easter Island but dreaming about being a martyr is a nice distraction I suppose.
@helen walsh: not uncertain, I have full confidence in my husband. I have full confidence in my kids too. Yes I know he would be devestated at the loss of me and so would the kids for a time at the least. loss is part of life, but they will get over the loss, that I have no doubt. They will be happy because I am not the be all and end all. Life is what you make it.
They will all be financially secure, can make their own paths and know that I loved them and are proud of them.
I’m not religious so when I’m dead I’m dead, no afterlife, no meeting up in heaven. Just the memory of what was.
@MaryF:
So use is as population control, suppose, if we just stick to aborting the families of those who vote yes than it’s a start?
Medical advances mean people live longer, suppose euthanasia at 60 too?
Too many people with disabilities, abort any pregnancy that could result in someone with special needs, low IQ, long term illness?
@Lily: It’s called reason. Ignoring it is foolish – that’s what happened on Easter Island and there’s no-one left there now.
Btw, I haven’t commented on any other topic so please stop with the hysteria about euthanasia, disability, etc.
@MaryF: you hinted that abortion is a form of population control, I explored the idea of population control, you took a distinct dislike to the idea of population control.
I have no doubt in somewhere in the not too distant (100+ years) future there will be measures to bring in population control, unless WW3 wipes out a couple of billion people.
@Lily: Insane. I don’t have my mother any longer and as a young adult it’s hard never mind as a child! Aren’t you lucky at 37 you still have a mother! One that you would happily palm your kids off on if you chose to die for a non viable fetus. She’s getting older, what if she dies soon after you? She’ll be no spring chicken if you’re nearly forty! I really hope Ireland comes out of the dark ages tomorrow, the ignorance of the No side is astounding. None of you have any sensical arguments. No mention of fatal foetal abnormalities making babies and mothers suffer. Love Both? Hardly!
It’s obvious that the 8th amendment needs to be repealed to accommodate for cases like rape, incest, real risk of threat to mother’s life (not just an active threat) or fatal foetal abnormality etc. Even if there is a heartbeat. The problem is what is being proposed to replace the 8th. Unrestricted abortion with no limit set in stone. That proposed bill’s stated 12wk limit is meaningless given the number of u-turns by our politicians on this. Once it has been repealed, the public will have no say on the issue. The yes campaign have a number of valid points for repeal, however unrestricted abortion (which they are advocating for but label as ‘choice’ because it sounds more palatable) has swung my vote to the no side. If it wasn’t for that bill I’d have voted yes, but I’ll be voting NO.
@: the public will have a say through the politicians they elect. The don’t trust politicians narrative is false.
Please reconsider. It can only change if the 8th is removed. No doubt the love boats will lobby for the proposed legislation to be more restrictive. The 8th badly needs to go. I believe in Ireland and our people. We need to get this right, to protect women. I never want to see another Savita, nor another miss p.
@: if you vote no you remove any possibility for the cases you mention to be legislated for, probably for decades. Vote yes and then lobby your local TD for a more conservative bill if you like, but don’t tell the govt that you don’t want the 8th repealed
So you’re will to continue to put girls’ and women’s lives and well beings in danger because of proposed legislation. If you vote yes, then you can lobby your td to put forward amendments to the proposed laws. If we don’t repeal the 8th girls and women in the cases you described will continue to be denied the medical care they need
@: I would vote Yes myself if the legislation being offered to replace the 8th amendment was more sensible, but instead of actually caring for these hard cases such as rape, incest and FFA the Yes side instead wants to use these cases as a battering ram to bring in an abortion regime even more liberal than England, where 1/5 babies in the womb are aborted. Such a serious act as taking another human life should only be offered as a solution under extreme circumstances, not as a form of contraception.
@A Curious Mind: These women are not hard cases, they are our wives, sisters, mothers, friends, work colleagues……….our citizens and they deserve better from you and us all. Vote Yes to Repeal.
@: various governments spent 40 years kicking the can down the road. It’s too late for coulda shoulda woulda and legislate for this that and the other. It’s time for the 8th to go.
@A Curious Mind: That’s just nonsense. So many of the no campaigners are recent converts to dealing with the hard cases only. But that’s frankly a lie.
The issue of dealing with the hard cases has been thoroughly explored and examined by the government, committee the assembly, lawyers and judges. They’ve said it’s impractical to do it.
Yet the no side claim they know better – conspicuous by its absence is their proposal for it however.
This is an odd one. The assumption you make is that by voting no you will stop abortion. But all you are stopping is women, young and old, getting healthcare that they deserve in our country and having to go to the UK. I don’t think that is good enough for our women.
@: “Once it has been repealed, the public will have no say on the issue.”
Its called democracy, we vote in people we trust to do a job on our behalf. If they go against it we vote them out, people going on about we can just legislate for the hard cases. Well that’s bullshit and everyone knows it, the 8th has to be repealed for any legislation to be put forward.
@A Curious Mind: Your just a pure liar, this proposal is much better than the UK, saying otherwise is just a standard go to card for the No side. How can you feel good about yourself knowing your lying about all of this to the people you pretend you care about?
@: No is No and obviously that is your immovable principle, it won’t change after a Yes majority, you and many who share your principles will not be affected, you will always be NO..the idea that every second woman will be rushing for abortions is ludicrou#. Stop policing others
@: ?? (Too scared to insert even a pseudonym?)
Abortion was not compulsory before the 8th amendment you know. We are not going to spontaneously combust when it is removed. We are the only country in the world daft enough to have put such a clause into our constitution at the behest of the catholic church. Its very existence means our legislators cannot do their job and legislate for hard or any other cases – that’s the very reason the church wanted it in the constitution. It makes a farce of democracy – it’s belongs to a theocratic past and we need to repeal it. Anyone who votes no is deluding themselves if they think this is saving foetuses lives. All it is doing and all it has done is forced women on this island to travel to another jurisdiction to access a medically safe procedure. Abortion is part of human life all over the world and we are living in a fantasy if we believe we can stop it any more than if we could stop rain falling. Abortion rates are higher in countries which have little or no access to contraception and lowest in countries where it is both legal and where women and girls have access to good support structures which we currently do not have.
https://www.guttmacher.org/infographic/2016/restrictive-laws-do-not-stop-women-having-abortions
Abortion Rates:
1. 34 per 1,000 women aged 15-44 : Countries where abortion is available on request
2. 37 per 1,000 women aged 15-44 Countries where abortin is prohibited completely or allowed only to save a woman’s life.
@A Curious Mind: Lots of No campaigners claiming they would vote Yes if only the legislative proposal was -> more like the 8th amendment. No-one is falling for that baloney. Vote No means continuing with delusion and hypocrisy. Vote Yes means an opportunity for our democratically elected parliament to debate, refine, agree and the pass laws (which is what we pay them to do btw).
I think it is going to be close, every vote matters! Will the clocks be going back or forward in Ireland?
@Joe Hill: The clock went forward in Ireland in the last referendum when we recognised two lives in same gender relationships and social inclusion, this referendum too would recognise two lives in a pregnancy and social inclusion but some voters are hellbent on seeing only one life in a pregnancy and an extreme version of social exclusion.
@Gkell1: Forcing our inconvenient truths on Britain or forcing a 12 year old rape victim to carry her baby to term isn’t compassion. Remove the 8th.
@Ruairi Gagarin: Yes, and just like the state forcing a 13 year old to get on a plane, go to the UK for an abortion. Scoring points with extreme cases is quite petty. But what’s at issue here with a lot of people is one thing and one thing only.
@Ruairi Gagarin: “Forcing our inconvenient truths”
A developing boy or girl in the womb is hardly an inconvenient truth or a pest to be exterminated . Bodily autonomy is great if you live in a jungle but in a society there has to be some inviolate rules to prevent one person ending the life of another for no reason otherwise it undermines law and order.
I discovered from the effort to research the issue on many fronts that Irish people are genuinely decent and humane when they are allowed to be as it is burned into our genetic memories to be fair, innovative and positive but also tough when we need to be.
@Gkell1: Irish women have terminations. Every day they travel abroad to have them. This is the inconvenient truth for some people.
@Ruairi Gagarin: “Irish women have terminations. Every day they travel abroad to have them. This is the inconvenient truth for some people.”
When I put the ballot paper in the box with a No vote, it is to protect the principle that law and order is a protector of life on this island and not a vehicle for one section of society to be granted something that will never be an entitlement or right. It is also a vote for the medical community to do its best to save lives so any country that undermines both the law and medicine never will recover a balance for a stable, creative and productive society.
Anarchy never sounded so good when it is wrapped up in words like compassion but make no mistake, in event of a ‘yes’ vote our society will not wake up to a freedom but to an act of self deception.
@Ruairi Gagarin: the only ones with an “inconvenient truth” are the Yes side, who on several times have covered up or destroyed no posters showing the reality of abortion. You campaign so much for abortion to be legalised, yet you don’t want people to see the reality of abortion. Because you know that if people saw it it would shatter your pretence that it is a civilised answer of how to deal with the problem of unwanted babies.
@A Curious Mind: Before life saving heart surgery should you be forced to wait for a TV to be set up to show you a video of how the surgeon will cut through the layers of skin and bone, spread your ribs apart, move your lung out of the way, cut open the pericardial sack, clamp off different veins……….? Bloody pictures aren’t going to convince anyone of anything except that the ones holding them are intransigent bullies who feel their opinions matter above all else.
@A Curious Mind: ok.
The majority of Irish women that go to the UK to end their pregnancy,will do it before/during the 9th week of pregnancy
Of those,72% of Irish women will “choose” the ‘surgical abortion’ compared to 28% of women from the UK
Why do you want 44% more Irish women than UK women to have the abortion that you are whining about ?
@Gkell1: Stop going on about Irish people being decent and humane, I want to my country to be humane to the mother above a few week old embryo. The mother is always more important because without her there would be no embryo, if for some reason she wanted to get an abortion who the hell am I or anyone else to say she can’t get one. Im voting Yes and its the same for everyone I know because we don’t live with our heads in the sand pretending this doesn’t happen already.
@Gkell1: When Irish people repeal the 8th, it will be just like 1982 not Armageddon. (You sound more American than Irish by the way)
The answer to the unborn having too many rights relative to the mother, is not for the unborn to go to zero rights, but to find a middle ground. We’re being told that’s not possible but I simply don’t believe that. Watch how suddenly possible it becomes if there’s a No vote.
@Niall: exactly Niall. They re-ran the Nice treaty referendum quickly enough. They can do the same for this
They won’t. It’s not FF directly in power. It took long enough to get this referendum. It’s time for change. Vote yes
@Niall: Where is this famous “middle ground” you speak of? Why in the last 35 years has no one found it? Why haven’t any of the famous 1,000 “lawyers” that say they’re against Repeal put forward a different wording that will make everyone happy? Your vagueness on such an important issue is very disappointing but not at all surprising.
@Larry Doyle: they didn’t even ask the attorney general to try to come up with wording. Here’s an example for you:
The states acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, while safeguarding the superior right to life of the mother, and giving precedence to safeguarding against significant risks of serious harm to the physical health of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.
This subsection shall not limit provision being made by law permitting in the State the termination of pregnancies of minors, those resulting from rape or incest, and those resulting in diagnoses of fetal abnormalities of the unborn, subject to such conditions as may be laid down by law.
@Niall: and you’re qualified to make that conclusion? Knowledge of the law and constitutional drafting?
@Niall: It needs to be legislated for, no other nation has the rights for unborn in its constitution and their still protected. Before the 8th there was nothing in the constitution but the nation didn’t see massive amounts of abortion. Its the same lies that the No side said we’ll see abortion clinics up and down the nation, that’s another lie because only places like hospitals will be licensed to do the procedure.
@Niall: “Watch how suddenly possible it becomes if there’s a No vote…”
The No campaigners have had 35 years to come up with an alternative and you’ve come up with nothing, zilch, nada.
We need to repeal the 8th so we can finally legislate on this issue at long last like every other democratic country in the world.
We need more love in this world. We need to choose life and love over death and hate! Stopping that heartbeat is not love – regardless whether you are religious or have a lack of faith. Love both – vote no!
@Niamh: Bit rich that statement, seen as you have no regard for the living breathing women and girls
@Niamh: Love Boats to keep sending vulnerable Irish people abroad on the ferry. Vote Yes to repeal the 8th amendment.
@Niamh: forcing a woman to suffer while her baby miscarries is not love, it’s pain. Valuing a futile heartbeat while a woman develops sepsis is not love, it’s torture. Cattle are treated better. Forcing a woman’s body to rot for two weeks on life support so she can act as a morbid incubator, while her family plead to switch off the machine is not love, it’s grotesque. If you saw miss p you’d vote yes. The no side’s toxic fallacies are the most sickening part of the campaign. It’s not black and white. Have compassion for those who are suffering.
@Niamh: Are you promoting a more promiscuous Ireland? Are you supporting the government’s plans for a more realistic approach to sex education? Did you enthusiastically campaign for marriage equality? Would you have held Savita’s hand while she was dying and explained to her why you thought a few lines from 1983 in the constitution were more important than her life? I think we’ve had enough of you type of love.
Have compassion on the unborn angels who have done no wrong.
@Niamh: This has nothing to do with faith, keep religion out of the debate please. Sick of faith talking nut jobs, women deserve the right to choose. Its their body and nobody else. Abortion is already here, we need to legislate for it to allow women to get medical assistance instead of taking the likes of abortion pills at home without medical supervision.
@Niamh: We need to take our heads out of the sand and stop brushing women with crisis pregnancies under the carpet. They may go away temporarily (to the UK) but then they come back.
@Niamh: We need more compassion and less hypocrisy – Vote YES!
@Thomas Troy: What about the billions of unborn angels who were spontaneously aborted by nature (or your god) before week 12?
Why fixate on 3,500 terminations decided by women in Ireland?
It’s really just a drop in the ocean by comparison.
Evidence from other European countries is that abortion is higher when abortion is legal in any circumstance. For both UK and France, a third of women have an abortion at some stage in their life. Ireland has an abortion rate of 5.86 per 1000 women aged 15-39 which takes into account the number taking pills online. For Finland the rate is 8.2. For Norway, Sweden and Denmark it is over 10. For Sweden it is 17.6. https://thl.fi/fi/web/thlfi-en/statistics/statistics-by-topic/sexual-and-reproductive-health/abortions/induced-abortions-in-the-nordic-countries My challenge to people campaigning for repeal whereby abortions will be granted for any reason up to 12 weeks is what makes you think abortions will not go up seeing the data from these European countries? Why is Ireland going to be different? I’m not saying having abortion illegal (excluding circumstances when the mother’s life is at risk) is the only answer to having a low number of abortions (e.g. there needs to be better sex education in schools and colleges and more support for women during pregnancies) but it is a good start.
My other challenge to repeal activists is that if life doesn’t begin at conception, when does it begin? I encourage you all to read this article showing that an unborn baby can see, hear, taste, smell and feel at just 9 weeks old. http://www.loving-attachment-parenting.com/baby-in-womb.html. Let’s show a voice for the voiceless and protect our innocent, vulnerable and defenceless unborn babies.
@Niamh: __ “an unborn baby can see, hear, taste, smell and feel at just 9 weeks old”. The article says “to a limited extent”__ How limited?
@Niamh: If, as you seem to believe, life begins at conception then every operation to treat an ectopic pregnancy in this country is illegal. Even the Catholic Church doesn’t agree with you, as you would find out when you present them with the aftermath of a miscarriage, or spontaneous abortion, to be baptised.
@Niamh: Your “facts” are incorrect (as with majority of no arguments). It’s been proven from international data that when abortion has been legislated for and proper support measures were put in place abortion levels decreased over time. It’s the last resort for most women and the proposed legislation is actually quite conservative by international standards.
@Niamh: No mention of countries like Belgium or The Netherlands where abortion is legal, safe and RARE. In Belgium where abortion is completely legal the rate is 6 per 1000. In Ireland where it is illegal the rate is estimated at 5 per 1000. There’s nothing to say that we won’t be like Belgium. Remember the same people opposed divorce on the grounds that the floodgates would open and we’d be divorcing en masse. We have had divorce for 23 years now and have one of the lowest levels in the world. The Iona has yet to realise that Ireland is an independent country with our own outlook on life, traditions and ethics. However, the Iona is happy to allow Britain to deal with our ‘problems’. Hypocrites.
@Niamh: Not true Niamh. Worldwide studies show that abortion rates are lower in countries where it is legal and there is good support systems in place (contraception, sex education, etc.). Switzerland has one of the lowest abortion rates in the world.
https://www.guttmacher.org/infographic/2016/restrictive-laws-do-not-stop-women-having-abortions
Abortion Rates:
1. 34 per 1,000 women aged 15-44 : Countries where abortion is available on request
2. 37 per 1,000 women aged 15-44 Countries where abortin is prohibited completely or allowed only to save a woman’s life.
@Larry Doyle: Exactly and given that 50% of all human foetuses spontaneously abort in the first 12 weeks, it would keep them busy if they had to arrange funeral masses and rites for every one.
If yes wins there will be wild celebrations for ending life.
@James Brown: there will be wild celebrations that Women’s lives will be saved.
@James Brown: And if no wins no one will be celebrating except Rónán Mullen, Maria Steen, the impeached president of UCD student union and the directors of Lolek Ltd.
@Ruairi Gagarin: abortion will not save anyone’s lives. But it will end many.
@Larry Doyle: if no wins there’ll be fireworks in Budapest.
@Larry Doyle: Rónàn Mullen and Maria Steen will be busy liking their wounds this morning. Love boat went down like the Titanic last night.
@Sean Murnin: Pat Kenny is no Claire Byrne alright.
@James Brown: yes I can’t wait. I’m only raging I can’t have one myself. Cop on!
@A Curious Mind: “abortion will not save anyone’s lives. But it will end many.” I didn’t know you became a doctor in between creating new fake Twitter accounts. Must have been a quick course with Dr Nick Riviera.
@Mark McDermott: Killing the unborn is lunatic?
VOTE NO
NO
NO
NO
@James Brown: I’ve never celebrated having an abortion but I’ve never regretted it either. I just consider myself lucky to have been living abroad at the time and so I never had to endure what 170,000 other Irish women have had to in the past 35 years. You may consider an embryo or a foetus to be equal to a living breathing woman but I and many others do not. The church also did not for 1,869 years. There was no prohibition on abortion before “quickening” which occurs at around week 12-13. In fact one of the popes set the date of ensoulment for humans at nearly 24 weeks back in 1531. Islam believes ensoulment takes place on day 166 after conception and also don’t prohibit abortion until after this. The church also believed that male foetuses were ensouled (i.e. became human) one month earlier than female foetuses. (They didn’t know of course that all human embryos start off as females). You could argue that if a fertilised egg is equal to a living breathing woman, and that egg is 100% female every time, then when do men begin to exist?
@MaryF: “The Chuch” – Islam?
What has religion got to do with the ending of life by abortion?
Quote “You could argue that if a fertilised egg is equal to a living breathing woman, and that egg is 100% female every time, then when do men begin to exist?”
Mind bending question there- however the answer is a simple one i.e when one is conceived. Such a strange logic would see men who change gender later in life lets just say oh maybe at 76 have suddenly come alive?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????//
@James Brown: As you well know, religion is why the 8th amendment exists in this and no other country.
If you are not religious then please explain your opposition to women you do not know or will never meeting deciding to terminate a pregnancy? 50% of all foetuses are aborted by nature or god depending on one’s belief system. Why is this if they are all equal to the lives of their “mothers”? Planned abortions represent less than 1% of all abortions worldwide on this basis – why fixate on these?
@MaryF: Exists only in Ireland- wrong.
“”If you are not religious then please explain your opposition to women you do not know or will never meeting deciding to terminate a pregnancy?”"
Another strange question. If I met every one of those women would it make it somehow different?
You are confused with miscarriage and abortion. Abortion is the ending of pregnancy by removing an embryo or fetus before it can survive outside the uterus.
@James Brown: Okay James please indicate what other country on the planet has prohibition on abortion in their constitution?
I’m more knowledgeable about abortion and miscarriage than you are. I’ve had both which is why this is not an abstract concept for me.
@MaryF: Oh I suppose similar to Ireland’s laws, Malta have an outright ban on abortion.
You’re more knowledgeable than I am? Why assume my age gender reproductive history???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
This is the great scam the yes side didn’t want you to see until the last minute , instead you are distracted by sound bites and slogans , the reality is you are being asked to remove this article from our Constitution and replace it with future legislation you don’t know what that is and could be changed by a future government ! Vote No !
@Alchemy: So you are afraid of having no say so you advocate to have no say for anyone else for maybe another 35 years. Yes To Repeal.
@Alchemy: We are not being asked to replace an article in the constitution with any legislation. That cannot be done in a referendum. We are being asked to remove articles from the constitution so that the oireachtas can legislate. Legislation is the job of the government
@Anne Marie Devlin: you don’t know what that new legislation is nor can you guarantee it won’t be changed by a future government!
@Alchemy: That’s how democracy works. I’m quite comfortable with it thanks. I’d rather have bad legislation easily removed than a bad constitution – very difficult to remove.
@Alchemy: “the reality is you are being asked to remove this article from our Constitution and replace it with future legislation you don’t know what that is ”
Its called democracy, if elected representatives aren’t happy with what is proposed they will vote against it. We elect people for a reason, why does democracy only scare the No side when its about giving women rights they deserve.
@Alchemy: The scam was when the 8th amendment was added to our constitution by the then all-powerful catholic church. We didn’t need it for the previous 60 years and we don’t need it now! Vote YES to remove this remnant of Theocracy so we have a fully functioning Democracy!
@Alchemy: Legislation is whatever the public want – that’s how democracy works. The 8th amendment is a remnant of the catholic theocracy in this country and we need to remove it so we can be a true democracy.
On Friday, your vote will kill or save babies. Please, I implore that you respect the sanctity of human life and vote NO to abortion on demand.
@A Curious Mind: On Friday your vote will allow women medical treatment in their own country or continue to force them to access such care in foreign countries under foreign legislation that we have absolutely no influence on.
@A Curious Mind: At least 12 pregnancy’s a day are being terminated. What is the 8th doing to stop that? If we vote to retain the 8th will that automatically stop?
@A Curious Mind: That’s an appalling thing to say. Votes don’t ‘kill babies….and a No win won’t stop abortions.
This isn’t a black or white situation and you know it. The situation is murky grey and the only way to even attempt to deal with the reality of it is to vote Yes.
Keeping the 8th won’t ‘save babies’…it would only let so-called pro-life people to keep pretending it does while women continue with pills and trips to England.
Or do you also hope to reopen the Magdalene Laundries so you can make sure they don’t? Mandatory pregnancy testing for all women and incarceration is the only way you will actually stop abortions. Anything else is just empty gestures to make you feel good about yourself.
@A Curious Mind: Im voting Yes because it will mean women of Ireland get the medical treatment they deserve. Tbh I doubt your even Irish, probably an American fundamentalist trying (like many other) to influence our referendum.
@A Curious Mind: The overwhelming majority of abortions are carried out in less than 10 weeks in the UK. Irish women are far more likely to have abortions after the first trimester due to the prohibition in place here. An embryo or a first term foetus is not a baby, not even according to the catholic church for the first 1,869 years of its history. The church only considered a foetus to have a soul (i.e. be human) after “quickening” which is approx 12-13 weeks after conception. In 1531, Pope Gregory XIV declared that ensoulment only occurred on day 166 of pregnancy, which is nearly 24 weeks. Also, for most of its history, the church deemed male foetuses to become ensouled (or human) one month before female foetuses. According to Islam, ensoulment only occurs on day 120 after conception which is 17 weeks into the pregnancy. Also, we now know that 50% of every human pregnancy spontaneously aborts before reaching week 12 – that’s 1 in every 2 foetuses that die in the womb. Most women don’t even realise they had been pregnant or that the foetus passed out of their body in their menstrual cycle. I’ve had two miscarriages at week 12-14 and couldn’t see any human like body, just thick blood. Why is there no religious ritual for all these dead “babies”? Also, all human beings commence life as female (which is why men have redundant nipples), so we could ask when does “male” human life really begin?
Voting No because its too extreme and you want then to try again is a big F You to the hard cases.
No.
No.
Everyone is anti-abortion – until they need one.
Confusion guaranteed.
Voting No, Pro-Chance to give a chance to the multitudes of healthy babies that will be aborted for socio-economic reasons, for hard-case abortion. We need targeted legislation not unrestricted abortion. Terminations in Liverpool in the case of rape cases are no doubt difficult, but the alternative to terminate here will result in many more babies being terminated for lessor reasons.
CLICKBAIT WANKS
For our Mothers, Sisters, Nieces, Granddaughers, Wives, who have had to travel abroad to for vital healthcare, I am voting no. Who have had their pain relief stopped by the government because it’s too expensive, I am voting no. Who are exhausted from caring for loved ones and living in fear of the future, I am voting no. Who have children with mental health issues, terrified to let them out of their sight, I am voting no, Who are facing death unnecessarily due to cover ups, I am voting no. Who are living on the streets with no home or hope, I am voting no. But most of all, who will never see the light of day because Simon Harris knows they will never come back to challenge him, I am voting NO.
have your say