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.
Updated: 8.25am
PROTEST MARCHES SPRANG up in cities across the United States yesterday, as a huge security operation stifled clashes in Ferguson, the town at the center of the country’s latest racially-charged riots.
Violent unrest erupted in the St Louis suburb for a second night, after Monday’s decision by a grand jury not to prosecute a white police officer for shooting dead an unarmed black teenager.
44 people have been arrested in violence overnight, police said at a press conference this morning.
Missouri Governor Jay Nixon said the National Guard force in the Ferguson area had been tripled to more than 2,000 troops to back up officers’ beleaguered local police force.
A St Louis police patrol car was burnt by protesters and the force declared the demonstration an “illegal gathering,” warning marchers and journalists alike that they faced arrest.
[image alt="star newspaper ferguson" src="http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2014/11/star-newspaper-ferguson-550x500.jpg" width="550" height="500" title="" class="alignnone" /end]
The Star Tribune (above) reported on an altercation its videographer filmed yesterday near Minneapolis Police’s third Precinct building.
He said it showed a vehicle plowing througha group of demonstrators. Witnesses said that the vehicle “started honking at protesters blocking in the intersection”.
It also says that people appear to get on the hood of the car and the car appears to have run over the legs of a demonstrator. The driver is said to be cooperating with police.
Police also reported on items confiscated last night, describing how “numerous bottles, rocks, pieces of concrete, and a Molotov cocktail were thrown at officers”.
“We will not be silenced”
Meanwhile, armed Missouri National Guard troopers sealed off West Florissant, the road running through Ferguson that was the scene of the worst looting and arson on Monday night after the verdict was announced.
At the Ferguson police station riot police dispersed around 100 protesters chanting and waving placards, including one that read: “We will not be silenced.”
The crowd fell back towards Ferguson city hall, where a patrol car was set on fire and riot officers fired tear gas and deployed imposing armored personnel carriers to regain control.
Crowds were smaller than they had been on Monday. But masked agitators on the fringes of the demonstration clashed with police and there were reports of looting at a pharmacy four blocks away.
“Lives and property must be protected. This community deserves to have peace,” Governor Nixon said, as anger mounted nationwide.
Meanwhile, thousands of marchers snaked along streets and freeways, disrupting traffic on bridges and in tunnels in New York City — leading to a number of arrests.
Protests around US
A peaceful crowd took to the streets in Washington outside the White House.
Similar angry but largely peaceful protests sprang up in cities large and small, from Oakland and Seattle on the west coast to Atlanta, Philadelphia and Baltimore in the east.
In sprawling Los Angeles, 500 people, a racially-mixed crowd including families and children, marched on police headquarters. In Portland and Denver police reportedly resorted to pepper spray.
CNN reported that gatherings large and small had been reported in 170 communities nationwide.
One Vine video showed a protester expressing her frustration to an African-American police officer:
https://vine.co/v/OAgPgXQnmKT
US President Barack Obama called for rioters to be prosecuted, but acknowledged the deep-rooted frustrations of minorities who feel they are unfairly treated by police.
“There are productive ways of responding and expressing those frustrations and there are destructive ways of responding,” he said.
Burning buildings, torching cars, destroying property, putting people at risk. That’s destructive and there’s no excuse for it. Those are criminal acts.
‘Broken process’
Lawyers for the family of slain youth Michael Brown denounced the prosecutor whose grand jury hearing found that police officer Darren Wilson had killed the 18-year-old in self-defense.
“This process is broken. This process should be indicted,” Brown family lawyer Benjamin Crump told a news conference.
Crump criticised the way Wilson had not been cross-examined when he appeared before the grand jury, which decided not to indict him over the August 9 shooting.
But in his first televised comments since the incident, Wilson told ABC News he had feared for his life during the confrontation, believing Brown was attempting to wrestle his gun away from him.
“I can feel his hand trying to come over my hand and get inside the trigger guard and try to shoot me with my own gun,” Wilson said.
Asked if he believed he would have acted the same way if Brown was white, Wilson responded: “No question.”
The officer said he was comfortable that he had acted correctly.
“I don’t think it’s haunting. It’s always going to be something that happened,” he said, adding that his conscience was clear because “I know I did my job right.”
‘A nationwide problem’
Civil rights firebrand Al Sharpton said the Brown case renewed a nationwide fight for greater police accountability.
“This is not a Ferguson problem… This is a problem all over the country,” Sharpton said. “We may have lost one round but the fight is not over. They have broken our hearts, but not our backs.”
Separate protests flared, meanwhile, in Cleveland, Ohio, following the fatal shooting by police of a 12-year-old black boy holding a toy gun at the weekend.
Despite appeals by Brown’s family for calm in Ferguson on Monday, protests rapidly degenerated into looting, arson and running street battles between police and stone-throwers.
Ferguson mayor James Knowles declined to comment Tuesday on Wilson’s future, saying only that the 28-year-old officer remained on administrative leave.
“His current employment status has not changed,” Knowles said.
The August shooting of Brown sparked weeks of protest and a debate about race relations and military-style police tactics.
The Ferguson grand jury concluded Wilson had acted lawfully in firing 12 shots at Brown after he first reached into the officer’s car to grapple with him, then turned on him as he gave chase.
Brown’s death, the aggressive police response to protests and now the result of the grand jury hearing have stirred racial tensions in Ferguson, a mainly black suburb with a mostly white police force.
The town’s community of 21,000 has been on edge since the shooting, and residents complain of years of racial prejudice and heavy-handed police tactics.
- © AFP, 2014 with additional reporting Aoife Barry
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Fine Gael are against abortion. Why the people still vote for Kenny baffles me.
Because they (FG overall) are the best solution the country has on offer currently. That’s why people vote for them.
I vote for FG, as the name suggests, but would change immediately if something more credible came along but unfortunately it hasn’t and doesn’t look like it will.
If I could assemble a Dail full of people of a similar quality to Stephen Donnelly, my personal favourite politician, I would but unfortunately 166 Stephen Donnelly’s aren’t stepping forward.
So we have to make do with what we have, although in saying that the “gender quota” rules coming in mean I’ll never vote another woman again, cutting the list of potential candidates down even further.
You cannot claim FG are “credible” while pretending there are no alternatives. You are a right-wing neo-con by your extreme views so you are unlikely to vote for the alternatives on the left.
You guys can stop tearing down any optimistic statements or positive news. The election is coming and you will loose to Sinn Fein and Independents.
Extreme views?
Here’s a few of my views:
I’m 100% pro-marijuana legalisation
100% pro-gay rights
100% pro-gay marriage
100% pro-open access to abortion
100% in favour of free education and access to healthcare
100% in favour of providing even more welfare to those currently not covered by it, namely the self-employed
And more.
So less of the presumptions, little man. Fine Gael don’t support a lot of those views, but they’re the best fit for how I want the country to be ran currently. There isn’t a party or entity available that supports the above views while also having the credibility to tackle the problems the country is facing. Fine Gael took the hard route and saved the country before and now they’re doing it again. While I’d love to see a few or all of the above coming in here, I’ll sacrifice them in order to see the country having the best available chance at an economic recover and that is with Fine Gael, fortunate or not.
Sinn Fein will never, ever hold Government here. Never. The last Red C poll indicated that Fianna Fail themselves had more support than SF, and with every bit of good news, FG are gaining more support.
So you and the other shinners here can keep dreaming to be honest and thankfully, because Sinn Fein offer this country nothing.
I’m not a man you stupid conservative shill.
Based on your description of an incomplete miscarriage and what I know about them the fetus would be dead so abortion would not be even on the table. Moreso the fetus was never viable oitside of the womb or inside the womb if the fetus was in the condition you describe, so there was no living child to save, only a mother.
__________________
If I’m dying in a hospital, surrounded by doctors, they have a moral obligation to help me. Not to tell me Fine Gael says I have to die.
FG2016. You’re as delusional as Inda-the-half-wit. People voted for FG simply because they were not FF.
We need an entirely new political party and I see one formed this week, direct democracy Ireland.
Hopefully there will be a few more, one of whom will come to the fore in the next 3 years and consign the self-serving gluttonous incompetent pigs of FF, FG, Lab, SF to the dust bin of history where u now find the Green something or others
I agree on Stephen Donnelly his a fine politician, just a pity about the rest
People of Ireland…do not vote for FG…do not vote for FG not FF in the next election. They are both killing this once proud country. FG have lied and flip flopped on every promise they made..they are killing businesses in Ireland with upward only rents and massive rare increases which is causing mass job lossses and zero stimulus. DO NOT VOTE for FG again.
FG, Could I please ask you to clarify – are you saying that because of gender quotas you will never vote for a woman again?
Is this a typo? Or was it just phrased badly? Surely you are not saying that you would discount any female candidate based upon her sex alone just because you disagree with gender quotas?
My apologies if I have misunderstood you.. It’s just next to the comment about people using the children’s ref as a protest vote it seems a little odd..
It took Sinn Fein a little while to jump on this band wagon. I’m surprised, they are usually quick off the mark.
@ITS Student – Cripes. I see you ranting on here a lot, gave you a fair reply and you’re resorting to your petty insults and “neo-con”, “conservative” and “shill” chants again. I get it, you’re not worth addressing any further, you’ve no valuable input to anything. Thanks for clarifying.
@Shanti -
Yes, I will not vote for another female candidate again and yes, because of her sex. Gender quotas have put us in an unfortunate situation whereby people will now be put into position to run simply due to their sex – to keep the number of women candidates up to prevent them (the parties) from losing funding, as our ludicrous rules now state.
While we now have a situation whereby a certain number of women have to be running, simply because they’re women, then I absolutely cannot vote for them. It’s sexist rules and is putting candidates up for election because of what is between their legs and not because of what they can offer the country or area, which is something I fundamentally disagree with.
There was absolutely nothing stopping women from joining parties and applying to run, or running as independents previously.
Now, we’re going to see women being ran for simply being women and thus I won’t vote for them out of principal.
Sexist rules have gotten a sexist response, I’m afraid. You want to run someone simply because of what is between their legs and I’m going to vote on someone simply because of what’s between their legs.
@Torpedo –
Usually they just have to say “No!” to things. This time they actually had to give it some consideration.
Ok FG..
What if the woman in question happened to be the female equivalent of Stephen Donnelly? Would you really make that big a hypocrite of yourself as a protest against gender quotas?
Shanti,
Yep, would happily not vote for them. As I said, unless the gender quotas are rolled back ill never vote for a woman in this country again, regardless.
Up to 30% of the candidates being ran simply because they have a vagina means ill have to vote for those who I know got there through merit, not their penises, and I’ll have to vote for who I like in that 70%.
This is an extremely sexist rule that has been brought in and I’ll protest against it with the same sexism.
Ok FG. Lets say I punched you in the face, would you lower yourself to my level and punch me back, or would you walk away and press charges for assault?
Because that’s pretty much what you are doing, they want to balance out the sexes in the Dáil, and in obstinance you rule out the female sex – not based upon ability, reason or logic, but based upon pure immaturity.
And you made comment on people using the children’s referendum as a protest vote against the government too..
Illogical, devoid of coherent reason and completely hypocritical.. Can see why you support FG..
Shanti,
Its forced equality, equality purely for the sake of it, not merit.
I can’t support that and thus will only vote for the candidates I know got there through merit.
I see the feminist double standards are out in force, so ill leave it at that point.
Yes, but you also stated that even if that woman had merit you would still not vote for her based upon obstinance.. But by all means, accuse me of double standards..
FG2016 Enda Kenny inherited his seat from his father – hardly merit. Would you rule him out too – PLEASE
The more I see it the more I am reminding myself that the FG2016 label appearing probably is going to be the year of the ultimate demise of the Fine Gael Party – just like Fianna Fáil , they will get truly hammered at the poles by then , if they keep their utterances and lack of decision making & lack of leadership at the same level as it is now – they truly have become a very sick joke .
Their supporters reaction to the only true Opposition Party in the Oireachtas, is pure childishness in the extreme!
It really is political negligence to not have legislated for this in the last 20 years. Our wooden plank of a Taoiseach and his bland supporters are trying to hide behind the argument that abortion is technically possible under current legislation. Technically possible? That sounds like a cop out to me. Technically savitta didn’t get the potentially life saving abortion the current law allows for. Enda you weren’t elected to do an easy job. Stand up and lead this country
Just to add- people calling this populist (and in one case “shameful”) obviously dont care about the motion itself, rather the proposers seeing as the shinners supported Clare Dalys bill when it was introduced, before savita died and the protests started, the only one of the larger parties to do so. Hardly populist seeing as theyve supported it for ages.
Say’s a MAN who opposes abortion.
The facts:
She developed blood poisoning as a result of the fetus dying from miscarriage.
If it was terminated, she wouldn’t have that problem or be in constant unbearable pain.
It is you who lies about a lot of things, not the least of which is that you’re qualified to make such blanket statements.
STFU about medicine before you actually hurt someone.
I hope that was meant for someone else?
I find post on the journal, on occasion, seem to be placed randomly about the timeline. It doesn’t read as if it was intended for you.
Says a man who is not a woman:
If I was pregnant and I felt myself that . my life was in danger from a 4 month foetus , I would reserve the right to do what I want with my own body to save myself. In this country that would mean short of throwing myself down a stairs , I would have to go to the UK. There I would receive non judgemental treatment instead of being subjected to the archaic mumbo jumbo that still riddles Irish Society. I wandered into Knock village recently and was confronted by an advertisement selling rosary beads which had the shape of an aborted foetus in each bead. It would make you wonder what sort of minds these people have. Ireland I’s ono longer run by a catholic hegemony. Time to change things.
The masters of populist motions. Shameful really…
And you are the master of stupidity, how shameful.
Who cares who tables the motion; we don’t want to wait another twenty years do we?
Typical Shinners! They know this legislation is going to happen and they are rushing out in an effort to try and fool people into thinking it was their idea!
Sinn Fein as a protector of life!!!!
defies comment………
At least it gives idiots the perfect excuse to oppose such legislation.
‘Well if SF are in favor of it then I can’t be expected to support it’… fools.
@Mart, that’s the exact excuse many on this very site used to vote against the amendments proposed in the Children’s Referendums, except with the government parties swapped in instead of Sinn Fein.
Well said Gerri! S.F on the bandwagon as usual !
Spot on Brendan!
Sinn Féin was the only political party that support the bill back in April, which would have protected the life of Savita. Long before her death, and long before it became a media hot potato.
So no – it’s not a populist motion – it’s a much delayed motion and Sinn Féin deserve every credit for putting it forward.
Sean, the problem with the bill back in April was that it was flawed. It surpassed the terms of the previous referendum so would have been thrown out by the Supreme Court. The only way to get it passed would have been to have another referendum. It could not have been passed as legislation as it stood even if everyone in the Dáil supported it.
Sinn Fein’s bill was credible.
fetus is dead and all that is left sadly is the expulsion of the fetus remains or some form of medical intervention like a D&C to prevent complications for the mother. I find it hard to believe that even in a country where abortion is illegal that medical intervention is not allowed when complications set in – created by FINE GAEL & FIANNA FAIL.
Shanti,
Yep, would happily not vote for them. As I said, unless the gender quotas are rolled back ill never vote for a woman in this country again, regardless.
Up to 30% running simply because they have a vagina means ill have to vote for those who i know got there through merit, not their penises, and vote for who I like in that 70%.
Ah, so you are a hypocrite then. Fair enough, thank you for clarifying.
Personally, I will vote for whomever represents my views the most, regardless of sex or party. But then again, I’m not one for making decisions based upon fallacy..
Dunno how that got there.
You know, I generally oppose gender quotas, but the fact that a man would choose to ignore 50% of the gender because you feel that a political decision you disagree with of some women reflects on all of them? That’s kind of creepy. Plenty of women get elected on merit (plenty of men clearly get elected without it!)
Que the outraged outburst by Youth Defence.
IT’S Student
In the Year of Our Lord 2012, what is a Neo Con? And perhaps you could advise what you are studying because for most subjects one should have basic English and in context the word is “Did” rather than “done”.
With the latter one is simply boasting of an inferior social class and education. Not an auspicious start to any worthwhile career!
You should probably learn how to reply to the right comment before you go insulting everyone else’s intellectual capabilities!
Garry the man who puts zzzz into fitz
I see the FG circus is out in force so instead of trying to get their party leaders to legislate on this serious matter they would rather attack Sinn Fein because they want to get this sorted.That’s FG supporters mentality in a nutshell .A woman slowly dies for 2 days and all the FG gang can say is that Sinn Fein will never have power in this country ..god help us all
This country is led by a catholic ex school teacher, sorry but he is not the man that will make any changes. Labour will blow hot air of so called importance on this issue, but when the head master tells them to be quite and toe the line, they will. This is like Ireland of the 50′s and 60′s.
@FG16 This is not about party politics this is about a young women dying with no legislation in place to protect her. The legislation was not in place years before FG came to government. The sooner something is done the better.
I find it ironic that abortion is available, albeit in limited circumstances, in the North. You would be forgiven for thinking the North is more liberal then the republic. Well at least we got our independence, kind of
Sinn Féin claim they are not pro-choice but here they are calling for legislation on the X case which would introduce a liberal abortion regime. Like many others they are cynically trying to exploit this controversy without knowing the facts other than it was a medical case capable of being dealt with in accordance to current law. Legislation to clarify issues involved with the Savita case would be much different to what legislation for X.
The Supreme Court have ruled that we must legislate for the X case, the ECHR has ruled that we must legislate for the X case, our international neighbours and the UN have said we need to legislate for the X case. The Irish people voted yes in a referendum to legislate for the X case. Yet a woman is dead because of people like you who think you know more than all of the above.
” introduce a liberal abortion regime” and where do you get that quote or idea from? Do much scare mongering LarBren1?
It’ll be voted down, of course. Abortion is a big issue and creating reactionary legislation in a time of hysteria simply doesn’t cut it.
Successive Fine Gael / Fianna Fail governments had 20 years and done nothing.
Reactionary legislation? ffs… people have been calling for during the reigns of the last 7 successive governments. Pull your head out of the sand. FG don’t want to bring in this legislation because they know full well that it’ll cost them a good deal of their core vote.. just the same reason as why FF were too afraid to touch it.
If abortion were put to referendum tomorrow, it would be voted against.
You do realise that?
Well if it’s worded like that it probably would be, yes.
Abortion.. Yes or No?… cop on. It’s simple minded notions like that which hinder any meaningful progress on the matter.
This aspect of law was put to a referendum and passed incase you hadn’t noticed.
Furthermore with regards to the issue of abortion in general- attitudes are only shifting in one direction. It’s only a matter of time, as people are realising that for many, it is the least worst option.
It’s sad to think the neo-cons still have big parish voters duped by ideology. Few young people cast their votes and this gives the older right-wing mob a victory. But once that older generation dies, they are gone and ever diminishing.
Mart,
Well really, either you’re for abortion being available or you’re against it. It’s either murder, as many claim, or it’s not. You can’t half murder someone. You’re either killing someone or you’re not.
I support abortion, many don’t and that’s something that a few parties, namely the Churches here, have to blame for.
We’ll only look like bigger idiots if we put in legislation that amounts to “Yes, abortion is fine but only if X, Y and Z conditions are met”. Either it’s murder or it’s not, if it’s not, as I personally believe, then there shouldn’t be any questions over it. Don’t like it? Don’t have one so, pretty straight forward.
Pregnancies that are proven to be non-viable, as Savita’s was, shouldn’t come under the term abortion. Euthanasia would perhaps be a bit more accurate, as you’re merely giving a quick and painless ending to something that will die anyway. Getting euthanasia in would also be very progressive.
What is known is that more women die in childbirth than in abortion but that’s not the point. The is and always will be that abortion is the right of every woman. Period.
In the US, abortion is legal. Legal or not, what any woman chooses is no one elses business. There is nothing that can change that.
There’s no way it would be voted against. No way. Country should be ashamed of itself. I know I am ashamed when this conversation comes up with non Irish people. This should never have happened to this woman or any other woman. I hope she did not die in vain and abortion is finally legalized in this dinosaur of a country and law. There should be a clear separation of church and state. Sick of being bible bashed at.
@Joanne-
If the question was whether you wanted abortion to be accessible in the country or not, it would be voted against and by quite a bit. You’re talking about a country that passed divorce by the width of a hair not so long ago. Almost half the country wanted miserable marriages to be remain bound together legally and suffer in silence.
So if you believe that abortion, what a massive amount of the country believe is murder and infanticide, would get through at referendum then you’re way out of what with what is actually going on in the country.
The whole thing poses a challenge to the government because if they’re just going to legislate for it, then they risk going against the views of what could well be the majority of the country. If they’re going to change the constitution for it, then they know it won’t pass.
The government is there to represent the views of the people, if they ask the people for its views abortion will be shot down and massively so. If they don’t, they run the risk of making a move that could be totally against the wishes of the majority of the country.
It’s stuck between a rock and a hard place really.
This is why the government are talking about clarity of existing legislation – to see where exactly we are and if changes need to be made in order to prevent what happened from happening again and if so how they need to be made. If it’s a constitutional amendment they may as well forget about it. If it’s through just legislation then they have to get that legislation passed by predominantly Catholic legislators.
It’s not as easy as “Put this in there and it’ll all be grand”, unfortunately it just isn’t.
She was having a miscarriage, but it was incomplete. She was in great pain, and after 24 hours she begged doctors for an abortion, to end the pregnancy as quick as possible. As the fetus still had a heartbeat, she was denied the abortion.
Finally, the fetus died, and the woman developed blood poisoning and died a week later.
No sane-minded person would vote for Right-Wing Fine Gael Blueshirts if they were of child-bearing age. With the exception of the old grannies who will soon wither in their populace.
You haven’t a clue ITStudent. You were not there. You are cobbling together pieces of populist press and forming an opinion, which is fine in private, but not fine on a public forum.
Wait for the inquiry.
@ Glass Half Full,
I hope I’m not talking to the same person using a different username, but if you want to wait another 20 years for nothing to be legislated for, why don’t you contest the next election with that as your number one manifesto?
ITS student
You’re paranoid, but that explains a lot regarding your vehemence here.
The legislation is already there. It’s interpretation is probably the key fault in this instance.
The populist reaction to this sad story is frightening. I find it shocking that SF and Independants alike have pounced on the issue for political inches. It’s quite frankly sickening.
I imagine every person connected to this poor family are stunned and shocked at the Irish and international attention. Too many wrong opinions being thrown out as fact. Let’s find out the exact circumstances first, and form an opinion based on facts shall we? Anything else is populist unsubstantiated rubbish. End of.
FG. It’s not about clarity of legislation, it’s about implementing legislation full stop.
As some of the journal staff have pointed out on the threads over the past few days (as some seem to be under the misguided idea that legislation exists already). There was a Supreme Court judgement in 1992. Since then NO legislation has been enacted to give weight to the Supreme Court ruling.
We had a referendum to try and overturn the Supreme Court judgement and it was defeated.
The legislation on the books regarding abortion is the Offences against the person act 1861, which states that it is illegal for a woman to “procure a miscarriage” or for anyone to help her. This law outdates our states formation by over 50 years.
As you can see the Supreme Court ruling stands at odds with the current legislation creating a murky and unclear area for doctors. This is what the ECHR told us to sort out. We need legislation and we need it now, nearly 21 years waiting is inexcusable and is solely down to governments refusal to legislate – or in short, do their jobs (and dear leader should probably remember that he has a mandate from the people, his personal views are irrelevant).
If the majority were against abortion then they would have voted to overturn the Supreme Court judgement – they didn’t. We voted for legislation and we are still waiting..
Actually, Glass Half Full, Savita’s husband and famiy were so outraged that they contacted Irish press and pro choice groups to make sure legislation happened so no family would suffer like this again. So, no, doubt they’d be shocked or outraged that people also find this situation horrible.
There is no legislation covering abortion for maternal life reasons. Please get the facts right.
Sorry to burst your bubble Nick.
http://www.safeandlegalinireland.ie/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12&Itemid=18
Rgds, GHF.
There is a constitutional provision. There is no legislation. Nowhere on that page does it specify a law. Under the constitution, it is legal, but procedures to carry this out have not been put in place (similar to what the situation was with blasphemy until recently).
Sorry to burst yours Glass..
The Supreme Court ruling in 1992, the “X case” ruled that abortion was legal in these circumstances.
HOWEVER,
There is NO LEGISLATION to give weight in application to the Supreme Court Ruling.
The legislation still says its an offence to procure an abortion, that’s still on the statute book (offences against the person act 1861).. THIS is what the ECHR told us to get our asses in gear over.
Please see Gavans post to Vincent Dolan here:
http://www.thejournal.ie/savita-demonstration-leinster-house-674695-Nov2012/
And Sineads post at the end here:
http://www.thejournal.ie/international-media-savita-675478-Nov2012/
Also there’s a comment below Sineads on that article that explains it quite well too.
There is NO legislation giving effect to the Supreme Court ruling – that abortion is legal when there is a risk to the mother.. THIS is your error.
Nick, look. An abortion procedure could have legally been carried out on this poor lady in order to save her life. Its there, in black and white. No medical staff need have worried one little bit about any repercussion. The fact is, it wasn’t carried out. For whatever God awful reason.
We need to wait for the inquiry to produce its results. Although, I really don’t think the public in its current mood have the patience.
Shanti Om,
I’m sorry, but that is semantics. Same response to your argument as I sent to Nick. An abortion in this case could have been carried out without any fear of repercussion. G’nite.
In the constitution, it says an abortion can be performed if a woman has a substantial and immediate risk. What’s substantial? Everyone’s clear when it’s 90% certain she’ll die, but what about when it’s 50, 40% certain? Doctors start to worry about repercussions. Which is why legslation can only present more clarity and certainly couldn’t hurt.
While you think people should wait for the conclusion, but you have admitted that you were unable to distinguish between a constitutional provision and legislation. Prominent ob/gyns, including the head of the Rotunda, have asked for it to be clarified through legislation. Why are you ignoring facts that don’t suit your pre-considered theory?
@FG16 This is not about party politics this is about a young women dying with no legislation in place to protect her. The legislation was not in place years before FG came to government. The sooner something is done the better.
You know this probable suit FG, they will knock it around a bit, and in the mean time try and slip in what will more than likely be the most devasting budget to the low and middle class people in Ireland. FG is a rich man’s club!!!
And they say “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing”
Well the comments here are certainly giving weight to that saying.
A little learning is a dangerous thing!
abortion illegal in ireland,, so no irish woman will do it,, bull shit,, we have more abortions in england than the english,,, move with the times ireland,, if that woman died, and left kids behind ,,, their should not be a question on abortion for anyone in medical need, it should be legal, if mother knows her fetus is not going to make it , why wait for a faint heart beat to fade out, and then a dead mother also,,, abortion will happen to who ever wants it, jump on a plane or self induced, a doctor should not even have to question the life of a woman, a wife, someones daughter, sister, aunt,, i think its a disgrace that a woman had to die , she knew her kid was not making it, and could try again,, but not in ireland, it should be clear to every doctor, a life is for saving, a fetus is not life when its dying inside you with no chance,, get real all you anti abortionists, if it were your daughter or sister begging for her life and cant be done as their is still a faint heart beat,,, i feel the drs cannot hold religion beliefs in their duty, their duty is to save a life
Unfortunately its not as clear as you make it out to be Jackie from a purely legal standpoint.
You seem to hold to the viewpoint that the doctors in this case made decision on a religious point of view. That arises from an unsubstantiated statement attributed to somebody who talked about “this being a Catholic country”. But there is no proof so far that anybody actually said this or that if it was said that it had any bearing on the case. Let’s wait untl the facts emerge before we rush to judgement.
To be honest I’m sure there are many doctors all over the country (and probably some in this case) who would agree with you rationale and priorities and in a situation like this would want to put the mother first and foremost but doctors have to respect the law of the land and the law is unclear in what happens here. That’s the nub of the problem.
Leaving the immediate issue to one side we probably always want doctors to respect the law of the land when they practice. But the law needs to be clarified and made easy for doctors to know exactly what they can and can’t do.
This is cynical political opportunism at its worst. Linking the tragic case of Savita Halappanavar to legislation for the X Case is completely inappropriate. If they had any decency they would withdraw the motion.
Is this a regular hangout for Fine Gael conservatives?
I’m Fianna Fail. And not a conservative.
And going onto Twitter, tweeting “F*** You” and then blocking me wasn’t exactly the height of maturity.
Cop on. C from ABC, Savita, Michelle Harte: all women who should have been able to get a medically necessary abortion and who couldn’t. Doctors need to be certain when they can operate and medical guidelines aren’t sufficient. This should not happen to another woman.
If any of our politicians had any credibility this wouldn’t be an issue and legislation for the X case would have been put in place 20 years ago!
You have to remember in Irish law, the law comes first, the person or life is secondary. Sad but true
Meanwhile FF councillors are putting an anti-abortion motion before county councils, building up a head of steam against change.
@FG16 This is not about party politics this is about a young women dying with no legislation in place to protect her. The legislation was not in place years before FG came to government. The sooner something is done the better.
Your faith in Fine Gael is misplaced. They repeatedly opposed abortion and the christian right PD’s wanted to amalgamate with them. 2016 cannot come soon enough, that garbage must be voted out of office.
Is there any one in world thet believes in abortion would like it to have happened to them.
Well if it had I wouldn’t exist so I think I can safely conclude that I wouldn’t care..
@ Shanti That’s sums it up so ” I wouldn’t care “
Well Richard, as I said the reason I would not care is because *I* would not exist. I’m not sure how the hypothetical feelings of a non existent being are relevant to the discussion..
That is such a crass remark, Richard. The fact that we are here means our mothers carried us to term successfully. If it were the case that I had been a non viable foetus who’s continued existence threatened the life or the health of my mother, them I hope I would have been aborted but as I was born in 1950s Ireland , she would have died like many others.
Jaysus…..theres noting like a mention of Sinn Fein in an article to get the blood pumping with the commentators! Oops sorry…..not the best metaphor to use!
Let abortion in and see what tragedy you will see. Women die every year from botched abortions. Let people make their own mistakes and be responsible for there choices….. Everything goes full circle.
If you are asleep you are asleep and if you are awake you are awake…
Statistically abortion is safer than childbirth. And as for pregnancy itself and all that entails, that’s the elephant in the room (pardon the analogy) that none of the anti choice brigade want to look at..
Does a fetus have rights?
The problem is that legislation, however well drafted, will not provide a legally effective solution unless or until a Referendum is first passed to revoke Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution. Article 40.3.3, despite the valiant efforts of the four majority Supreme Court Judges in the X case, created a legal stalemate where the interests of the mother and the foetus conflict. That’s the nub of the legal problem. Equating the life of the mother and the preservation of the foetus can result in clinicians being unable to intervention in rare cases if the result of clinical intervention is to save the mother at the expense of the foetus or vice versa.
The only legally effective solution is to present a Referendum to the people and to let us decide by democratic majority if Article 40.3.3 is to be revoked. It was very unfortunate that Article 40.3.3 was passed in the first place. Yes, a Referendum will be divisive but the present legal quagmire is unacceptable. It risks the mother’s life in rare cases. The problem is that rare cases happen.
Funny how when you combine all the posts in this thread together it sounds remarkably like a rattling tin.
Think big picture folks. Get yourself elected if you think you’re hard enough.
Otherwise go and enjoy your short time on the planet. It is very short.
How shallow everyone must feel that they are now on their hind legs with indignation about the abortion issue because of the pornographic sensationalisation of this very unfortunate case, having not thought for a moment about it before they read this story in the paper. Suddenly they are bitter about lack of progress since 1992, like they have spent every waking hour in the last 20 years campaigning for some change.
Reality is there are very good people in our health service, working like saints, and without a moan. The rabble jumping to tabloid conclusions in this case in Galway is illustrative about the immaturity of the people and their inability to respond thoughtfully.
Symptomatic not of a great nation, but instead a little island of little minds. Let’s grow up.
Reality is Arbitrasu someone a none national died in agony in the “care” of our “health” system. That none national asked for a termination after being told the foetus was not viable. According to her husband that was refused on a number of occasions, Are you calling him a liar?
It really is crass political opportunism of the worst kind by Sinn Fein although that is completely unsurprising given their track record and I say that as somebody who wants this issue legislated for. As for those who talk about the Claire Daly bill the facts are that this bill would most likely have been rejected as unconstitutional as it went beyond the 1992 Supreme Court decision in the X case in its aims.
We should also remember that in 2002 we voted against an amendment to the constitution that was in response to the X case. This was opposed by pro-life supporters because it would have enshrined the right to abortion in certain cases as was proved by the X case and was also opposed by pro-choice supported because it would have closed off the suicide risk that the also arose out of the X case.
This just shows you how difficult it is to actually legislate on this issue. No matter what decision is brought forward it will probably anger both sides because it won’t go far enough for one side and it will go too far for the other. No wonder most governments have avoided it.
I’d rather a party indulged in crass opportunism than brushing it under the carpet and putting it on the long finger like successive governments have for the last 20 years.
I’m no fan of Sinn Fein, but they’re at least attempting to remedy the situation. Claire Daly tried to in April and all the sanctimonious, handwringing, hypocritical bastards voted No to her bill and are now left with blood on their hands
I wonder what cowardly excuses the government will use to vote down the motion… because we all know they will.
Only a Referendum revoking Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution, the Eight Amendment, can remove the legal uncertainty by enabling legislation to be passed which will allow legal inducement in cases of miscarriage.
have your say