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.
THE WONDROUS LIFE of Irish playwright and novelist Oscar Wilde has been pored over by countless scholars; his personal tale has been told many, many times.
But now a new book by Irish journalist Eleanor Fitzsimons takes a look at a previously unexplored aspect to Wilde’s life: his relationships with the women who surrounded him.
The book is an in-depth study of the women most important to Wilde, like his mother Lady ‘Speranza’ Jane Wilde (herself a formidable and very well-known woman); his wife, Constance, a feminist; actress and friend Lillie Langtry; his tragic and witty niece Dolly; and Sarah Bernhardt, the French actress for whom he wrote Salome.
Fitzsimon’s book is the first to gather the stories of the women above, and the other women who Wilde mentored, encouraged, and worked with. Wilde is, of course, known for his literary achievements and his controversial (at the time) private life, which led to him being imprisoned for homosexuality.
He believed, Fitzsimons told TheJournal.ie, in gender equality, and encouraged women to pursue artistic careers at a time when women’s futures were supposed to stay firmly in the domestic sphere.
Neglected relationships
Fitzsimons believed his relationship with women was a neglected area, so spent months absorbed in archives to find the stories of the women Wilde inspired and was inspired by.
Because of his history and what happened to him – his homosexuality, and the trials and imprisonment - his life is always looked at in terms of his relationships with men.
Wilde’s mother, Lady Jane Wilde, was an “incredible character”, who was also a celebrity. Fitzsimons started off researching her, which led her to discover “dozens and dozens of women who were very influential on his work”.
These were not ‘muses’: they were women Wilde collaborated with, wrote for, and encouraged.
“It was really striking for a Victorian man to have such contact with women,” said Fitzsimons. She was also struck by the fact he edited a women’s magazine, which he transformed into a radical read – “you’d go so far as to say [it was] feminist” – which pushed issues such as the vote for women.
Discovering the women involved in “a life that has been so well-examined” made Fitzsimons think of the potential out there for other well-known men.
You’ll always find testimony about his plays, speeches, etc. They are always from the perspective of the men – the theatre manager, or the barristers or solicitors who were representing him – you’d very rarely find the women['s voices].
“They’ll come and go in biographies of his life,” she said of these women whose lives she is shedding new light on. “There is never any follow-up as to what happened to them after.”
Finding the stories
It was easy to find information about women like Lady Wilde – “she used to write things and say ‘this will make an interesting story when my life is written about’” – but harder for some women. Major sources of information included the letters written by the women, as well as obituaries.
The book shows the power of some women in Wilde’s life. When he was touring America, his way was “paved by society women who held really influential literary salons”, said Fitzsimons.
These women’s power was huge – “they could make or break you” – and Wilde (and other writers, like Charles Dickens) needed their approval. Sadly, Fitzsimons found that some of the women “barely rate a mention” in coverage from the time, with some of them solely referred to by their husbands’ names.
Fitzsimons loved delving deep into archives. In one case, her query to an American university led them to discovering a pile of letters related to Wilde, which were lying abandoned.
Women and Wilde
Wilde was “a funny character” who by no means loved all women, said Fitzsimons.
He loved women who were really independent and strong-minded and different; women who wanted to be in the public sphere, out there working and thinking.
He had less time (or, even, a “real issue”) with the puritanical women in society. Wilde believed that rather than handing out alms to the poor, they should have been helping to educate the less fortunate.
Fitzsimons doesn’t describe Wilde as a feminist, but as an individualist with feminist qualities, who believed in giving people the tools to make something of themselves.
Scenes from a marriage
The book also sheds new light on Constance Wilde, the playwright’s wife, to whom he was married when he fell for Lord Alfred Douglas, or ‘Bosie’.
She’s often portrayed as hoodwinked. There is a lot of evidence to suggest they loved each other very much.
The pair’s marriage was probably over by the time of the birth of their second child, but Constance remained loyal to her husband, even after his arrest and during his trial.
“She kept the lines of communication completely open,” said Fitzsimons. “She was the one who volunteered to go back to England and tell him his mother had died.”
Encouraging women
Wilde was a “spellbinding” man, adored by women. Interestingly, Fitzsimons believes that his work was even more captivating when he read it himself publicly. “People used to just be hanging on his every word,” she said.
What is clear from the book is that Wilde was extremely encouraging to women. In one case, during a trip to America he helped a woman on the beach who had injured her ankle. It transpired she was in an abusive marriage; Wilde encouraged her to pursue her art, which helped to transform her life.
“He just used to say to women: ‘Go for it – you’re brilliant’,” said Fitzsimons. “Time and time again, there are examples of that throughout my book.”
Wilde’s Women by Eleanor Fitzsimons is launched tomorrow evening (Tuesday 20 October) at 6.30pm in the Gutter Bookshop. The book is available in bookshops now.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Sure what would a doctor know?
We should ask a bishop. They know what’s best for everybody.
Yep they know everything including what children in their care need
Is there a need for legislation this doctor asks? ….. how about the almost 10, 000 “needs” forced to travel to the UK and Netherlands each year for terminations for a start? …I would not be a great fan of abortion, especially as a means of birth control but this jurisdiction needs to start taking the needs of woman into account too and provide a safe and reasonable alternative to having to travel abroad for this procedure
I want to own a slave but I shouldn’t be forced to have to pack up and move to Burma to be allowed to do so!
Marc you’re conflating *need* and *want*
Sometimes need and want go hand in hand Chuck……I want peace of mind to know that the state won’t prevent me from making informed choices about my body and I need the legislation there in order to facilitate my wants… as for that other person babbling about a slave in Syria im not even going to waste my time replying such drivil
Yes Marc SOMETIMES they do, but you said there were 10,000 needs. Quite the leap you’re making there
No leap chuck… the 10k needs are all the woman forced to leave this jurisdiction to seek terminations elsewhere as this choice is denied to them here
Once again, wanting is not the same as needing
I will not even bother Chuck as I can tell that you have limited capacity in both reason and English from such nonsense
10k? Bit of an exaggeration? Try again and divide that number by at least half…… usual lies
Marc, your inability to control your temper or tolerate disagreement will not change the fact that ‘need’ and ‘want’ have different meanings
I think women NEED to be given the choice! Some women are not in the right mental or financial state to have a child they don’t want. This needs to be taken into account. I would much rather see unwanted babies aborted than see a woman and child’s life ruined.
Chuck my temper and tolerance levels are both under control. …however I would imagine that you have very little tolerance for the choice s that women should be able to exercise about their own bodies
Marla youre a very strange creature!
Marla. Why not give the baby up for adoption?
I’m not a strange creature, I’m being honest. Look at the pregnant junkies and alcoholics and tell me that that child will be born healthy! As for adoption – yes, of course that’s an option, but so is termination. Going through a pregnancy knowing that you don’t want it? That’s just horrible. Noone should have to do that.
And sorry, my Twitter username comes up here. I’m Rayne.
Marla/Rayne. The problem with abortion is that the pro choicers are trying to make it an everyday procedure like getting laser hair removal. If u dont like that stubborn hair get rid of it…. Same with a baby.. I’ve never met a woman yet who didnt bitterly regret aborting her child..
Way to change the subject Marc. You made an assumption that 10,000 Irish women NEEDED abortions. There’s no basis for believing that all of these were truly needed as opposed to wanted
That’s an absolutely ridiculous comment. Pro-choice is about having the option to terminate if you’re unfortunate enough to end up with an unwanted pregnancy. Have you ever met a young girl who got pregnant? I have. And it’s horrible. No 13 year old should get pregnant. Abortions are not like pedicures or laser hair removal, a casual thing to be done over the weekend or at lunch time. It is a serious, life changing procedure that should be available to those who feel they need one.
I’m always shocked by the lack of compassion, experience or knowledge that a lot of people have about this topic – and they’re the people tend to have a very strong opinion on the matter.
Honestly, the truth is that abortion access is needed. Sorry if you don’t understand that. Lack of access to abortion has been classified as a form of torture by the UN. It also goes in direct opposition to a woman’s human rights.
And aside from all of that, we’ve had two referendums in this country in which it has been decided by the people that abortion access must be granted to women who’s lives are at risk INCLUDING suicide. There is really nothing else to be said here.
A million thumbs up for you, Eleen! You hit the nail on the head :)
If this hypothetical 13 year old didn’t realise she was pregnant until the 8th month, would you give her an abortion then?
She is not hypothetical. And what does the time matter? She’s still a child. She should not be having one herself.
That’s not an answer
Chuck, it should be up to her, her family and her doctor/s to decide what would be the best course of action. No one random person on the internet could be able to give you a realistic answer.
Because it’s complicated, uniquely personal and too serious an issue to take lightly or to leave in the hands of the general public or legislators.
Right, so at 8.5 months that thing the the womb has no inherent right to life and can be terminated upon the word of the mother?
If you need something do you not want it?
Remember when I said it’s a complicated issue and the decision lies with the pregnant girl, her family and her doctors?
Yeah. That.
Why leave the decision in the hands of politicians, lawmakers and the general public? What makes them any more qualified or knowledgeable than health care professionals and those directly involved in the situation?
Deirdre
There are women who have no regrets about the decision to abort their baby.
How anybody could even consider seeking a termination of an 8 month old baby under any circumstances is horrific.
To seek and allow the willful ending of life of an autonomous unborn baby, at an age where it is fully capable of life outside the womb is completely and utterly reprehensible. It is barbaric in the true sense of the word.
How much better it would be if we tried to help women who find themselves in difficult situations rather than ending the life of a baby who has their whole life ahead of them. Thank God there are so many doing just that right now, helping those in need, making an effective, positive change in the world. Actually take time and effort to help others in a real and effective manner. Support these women when they need it most.
You can be as convinced as you want that as long as a woman is not allowed to willfully end the life of the fetus that justice is not being served, but to miss that crucial point where the ending of a baby’s life is put second to that is a gross distortion of morality.
They are not autonomous as a foetus they require the woman that is carrying them to make decisions for them and keep them alive. As in fact all children do they require adults to make decisions and keep them alive.
That’s YOUR view…. Why should you choose for others? Just because abortion becomes available… Doesn’t mean you HAVE to have one. I’m pro choice… Personally I couldn’t do it, but, what would u do if u were told your baby would need 24 hour care 7 days a week and would have no value of life …. Do u not see that the best choice for that foetus is termination? Is it fair to bring a child into such a painful world? What about rape victims? Or a 14 year old that may have made a stupid mistake? Should these people suffer for the rest of their lives?
I agree there should be legalisation regarding the period of time the mother can terminate … But I certainly would not prevent them from making their own choice….
Anyway… Your ‘no’ vote will have no effect as any woman that wants an abortion will just go to the UK….
Why should I ‘choose’ for others?Because, unfortunately, and through no fault of their own, the unborn babies I am speaking on behalf of are unable to make their own voices heard.
Many face death, regardless of how anybody dresses it up or makes the claim that it’s anybody’s right to allow such a reprehensible action to be carried out.
I am speaking both for those unborn children and for what I would hope would be made available to my own daughter should she find herself in such a difficult situation. I would hope that she would encounter a caring, supportive society, not one peddling sadness, death and despair.
I am well within my rights to hold such an opinion and I also believe it is my duty as a member of my society to help those in need.
Hippocrateeth, firstly, they are not unborn babies right from the get-go. At least, not scientifically and therefore it is your belief only that a fertilised egg and/or a zygote is an “unborn baby”. Most abortions occur at the beginning of a pregnancy while there is still a high risk of the body aborting it by itself. In your opinion you are speaking on behalf of unborn babies – but it is your opinion I’m afraid and nothing more.
Secondly, a caring and supportive society needs to go hand-in-hand with abortion access. At the moment we have neither. Women and girls with crisis pregnancies are in one hell of a scary position, especially in the current economic climate where having a baby is dooming a lot of women to a lifetime of poverty.
Making sure abortion hardly ever needs to happen would be the end-goal, am I right? So how about instead of taking away the only viable options and choices women have at the moment, we focus on proper sex education, crack down on rapists and rape culture, allow free or subsidised access to contraceptives to everyone (including young teengers), and stop with shaming people for having sex and making mistakes. Oh, and a proper economy that helps mothers continue their education and allowing them to have careers, as well as a society that is inclusive and pro-children would really help too. You’d see a massive drop in abortions, and the abortions that would happen would be very early on in the pregnancies before that clump of cells could be classified as anything resembling a baby.
That’s the only way to go, I’m afraid, because you can’t really deny women their human rights or treat them like children. They’re getting abortions either way – so let’s focus on the real issues here alright?
And what if your daughter really couldn’t face the pregnancy? If she really wasn’t willing to go through with it and said that she wouldn’t.
Would you support her making her own decision about what happens to her, or run the risk that she could decide to take matters into her own hands?
Of course a 13 year old shouldn’t get pregnant, but once another human has come into being, it can never be justified to kill it. In fact I’ve read that most of these young girls go on to have their babies and never regret doing so. Many times it helps to heal wounds, whereas aborting their baby can never be undone and leaves them suicidal in the end.
It helps to be open to the truth in all of this and not to be blinded by ideology or emotions as there are two people to consider in a pregnancy.
Abortion is not a human right of women…..however, the right to life is a human right and this includes all human life, born and unborn. Without the right to life all other rights are meaningless.
Women have a right to choose what happens to their bodies if a woman chooses to terminate a pregnancy she should be able to have the termination in a safe supportive environment.
The right to life doesn’t include unborn everywhere. Otherwise Ireland would not be in the minority of countries restricting access to abortion services.
You may have heard that many of these young girls go on to have their babies and be happy with that, and if that’s true then great, but there’s not much research done into the effects of having an abortion vs being refused an abortion. At present there is research underway, it’s called The Turnaway Study, initial results show more negative impacts from being refused abortion, but the study is not yet complete.
Until this study is complete and held up to scrutiny, and other studies are done that confirm or deny it it is wrong to assume that it is always in the woman’s best interests, or the child’s for that matter to restrict the woman’s choice and force her to give birth.
It is however a huge undertaking, and one that I would not feel comfortable forcing another living woman to complete. I believe that only she can truly know whether she is up to the task.
As a first step please check your numbers. All debate needs to be based on facts. Kind regards
another prochoice lie, the irish rejected the substansive issue, suicide being a reason to allow abortion in a referendum 1993
What about the baby? Does it not have a right to live? Think of Andrea Bocelli and Nick Cannon, they were almost aborted but their teenage mothers changed their minds.
What about the baby’s right to life? There are 3 people involved in every pregnancy. The mother ,the father and the baby.
I would get her the best psychiatric support available to make sure she couldn’t take matters into her own hands. As a responsible parent I know that my teenager is a child and is not capable of making such decisions, especially in a time of crisis like an unplanned pregnancy. Have you not heard all the evidence presented to the Oireachtas Hearings on abortion last february. All the psychiatrists present said one after the other that abortion is not a treatment for suicide ideation and in fact could potentially make the girl’s mental state worse. How can you ignore this evidence. Yesterady the Irish Medical Organisation said the same that abortion should not be available as a “treatment” . This is because they know abortion is bad for women and lethal for unborn babies. The doctors here recognise they have 2 patients when a woman is pregnant and they must do what is best for both.
A fertilised egg/zygote is the beginning of a new human life- this is not an ‘opinion’- this is a scientific fact..an abortion at any stage of pregnancy is the ending of this new life- life is a continuum and to say that the clump of cells does not resemble a baby is tantamount to saying that a newborn infant does not resemble an adult and therefore is not the same life… Secondly, a caring and supportive society will do everything it can to support and care for the women who find themselves in this situation- your point that it needs to go hand-in-hand with abortion access would suggest to me that you believe that abortion will provide the woman with the best outcome as I do believe you sincerely have the woman’s best interests at heart. The problem with this is that very few people can see the real effects that abortion has on a woman- the very damaging psychological effects,not to mention the unspoken guilt and grief over the loss of a child..abortion never reverses a pregnancy- it just turns the woman into the mother of a dead child..to make this option available to women when they are faced with the fear and vulnerability of an unwanted pregnancy to me is providing anything but care and support as it is their fear that dictates their ‘choice’, not a well thought-out and balanced decision..we need to look at society and see how to improve our support of women in crisis pregnancies,financially, emotionally, psychologically- not provide them with an added crisis- namely that of the loss of their child, we need to focus our energies on providing the best care for these women and post-abortive women who also need our compassion and support in their grieving and healing process…I know it is such a difficult topic because the circumstances can be so cruel and challenging but we tend to lose sight of what lies down the road for these women when they make such an irreversible, lifechanging decision in such a short space of time, not to mention the repercussions it has for the life inside her..
“abortion never reverses a pregnancy- it just turns the woman into the mother of a dead child”
That’s an emotionally manipulative sentence, Máire Ní Conaill Óg, and extremely insensitive. A pregnant woman is not yet a mother – not unless they themselves see themselves that way. And I wonder if you’ve seen an early-term abortion (it’s a small amount of blood and bits of tissue) but it would be impossible to call it a “dead child”.
You’re using loaded terms here, Máire, as well as presuming a whole lot about women’s experiences. It’s been proved that abortion doesn’t necessarily cause any psychological damage – in fact it is an unwanted pregnancy that causes psychological damage.
There are times when abortion is absolutely necessary, and there are women who do not wish to be pregnant, and they should have the right to determine their own fate. I’m sick of this police-state mentality that presumes that all aspects of our lives need to be regulated. I for one trust that individual women are human beings, can understand what abortion is, and can make decisions for themselves. Yes, they’re big life-and-death decisions but guess what? Women create new life within their bodies, it’s their responsibility and so they should have the control over when and how it happens. I don’t see how this is a tough concept to grasp: medical professionals will be consulted, there will be time-limits to abortion access, what more do we need here?
But I agree that we need to do a lot more to become a supportive and positive society for women (and girls) who choose to become mothers. We need to be supportive of those who choose not to as well though. Supporting women’s choice and ability to determine their own lives as well as make their own mistakes – that should be the goal and I’m afraid abortion access will have to be a part of making that a reality.
Firstly not 10,000 Irish women per annum travel to abort, in some circumstances women are forced to travel to abort against their will due to outside pressures from family, friends & sometimes the father of the child, these situations are not ‘choice’. Abortion tragedies are under-reported by our media especially in Ireland, the various different abortion procedures are not always safe, never being find to cure medical conditions & leave women scarred for life. Rape victim C has slit her wrists several times & admitted it to Pat Kenny in 2009 on RTE but she is one of the many statistics that ‘Choice to abort’ advocates want to ignore.
So many things wrong, I don’t know where to start..
Maybe some women are pressured into abortion, and that’s disgraceful. It should be a decision that the woman makes herself – not one she is forced into either way.
Nuala.
Do you know what the psychiatric treatment for suicidal ideations is?
Anti depressants.
And guess what? Not only are these drugs contra indicated during pregnancy, the “settling in phase” (ie first few months taking them) ironically make you more prone to actually attempting suicide. Don’t believe me? Check the package inserts, side effects may include suicide and / or violence.
Exactly Shanti. Once you start dealing with the reality of the situation, it becomes clear how cruel and nonsensical it is to deny women access to abortion in a safe environment.
Fair play to Máire Ní Conaill Óg.
Dear Máire Ní Conaill Óg, your response to Eleen is clear, articulate and respectful.
Eleen, you say that “there are times when abortion is absolutely necessary”. Please let us know when an abortion is absolutely necessary.
I am well aware that sometimes life-saving treatment is necessary for a pregnant woman (a mother), and as a result it may be impossible to save the life of her unborn child, but I’ve never ever heard of a case when abortion is “absolutely” necessary.
Perhaps you know something nobody else knows. Please, be kind enough to share you knowledge with us :)
Eleen, It’s a great relief to hear that you “trust that individual women are human beings”. In addition, I would like to say that individual unborn women are human beings too.
Human beings have human dignity from the very first moment of their existence. All human beings deserve their human dignity to be respected by other individuals.
We all human beings have the same dignity, regardless of our race, religion, gender, phase of development (from zygote state to elderly state), health issues, etc.
Our dependency on other individuals does not result in a loss of dignity (in fact we all depend on other individuals, either physically – ie. an unborn child -, emotionally, financially etc.). We, as human beings, have the responsibility of acknowledging such human dignity, regardless of how difficult it may be (many times in life doing the right thing is not easy).
Failure to acknowledge the human dignity of an unborn human being is the same as what the Nazis did with the Jewish, when they regarded them as ‘sub-humans’ in order to justify their execution. Also, I would like to note that slaves used to be considered ‘sub-humans’, in order to justify their slavery.
To do what is right can be heroically difficult, but failing to do what is right cannot be condoned. The murder (deliberate termination of life) of a human being (at any phase of development – from zygote stage to elderly stage) attempts directly against the human dignity of the individual whose life is being terminated, and therefore is morally wrong.
Eleen, you are absolutely right when you say that abortions are: “big life-and-death decisions but guess what? Women create new life within their bodies, it’s their responsibility”.
Yes, Eleen, a woman (and the father too for that matter) has responsibility. And finally, in your own words: “I don’t see how this is a tough concept to grasp”.
God bless you.
Don.
Tubal ectopic pregnancy. The only safe outcome is abortion. The foetus must be removed, thus terminating it. It’s the direct and intentional killing of a foetus because that’s the only way to stop the woman dying.
What about the women who’s lives are destroyed due to abortion? I bet if Jessie Mae Barlow’s RIP family were given the chance to turn back time they would probably not have taken the abortion route.
In Ireland the blocked tube is removed with the dead baby inside so isn’t abortion, play whatever games you like with words but it doesn’t change the cruel reality of the medieval practice of abortion.
Marie not all women regret having terminations or need or wish to be counselled afterwards because it is decision they have undertaken for themselves for whatever the reason.
What people need to realise is that sometimes having a baby is not the answer baby’s do not heal wounds or mend relationships sometimes they tear them apart, then there are three miserable people in existence why should anyone be brought into the world as a pawn??
Why should any teenager have to limit their life because of a mistake??
Why should any grandparent have to take over as a parent to allow their daughter to continue their education or life??
WE NEED TO EDUCATE people that not all contraception is 100% safe only abstinence and babies are not dolls to be dressed up or plasters to heal rifts in relationships we need to stop rewarding people for having baby’s with financial hand outs and houses.
But above all else WE NEED TO GIVE WOMEN CHOICE!!!
Don Quijote I appreciate you being polite, but insisting on calling pregnant women mothers is disrespectful to those who do not see themselves that way, as well as those who have opposing views to you on what constitutes being a human being.
There are times, as Shanti Om has pointed out, when abortion is absolutely necessary. And of course, we can debate what “absolutely necessary” means too.
I respect the dignity of new life, I respect that a living tissue that has the potential to become a human life is something very special and that it should be treated with respect. It’s just that I respect the autonomy and most importantly the bodily autonomy of women more. Women need access to abortion for so many different reasons – none of which are invalid – and plenty of these women will risk lifelong injury and death in order to obtain one. That alone tells me that women need abortion access.
It’s simple really: women are human beings with rights to bodily autonomy. No matter what laws we put in place, they WILL have abortions and control their own destinies. They feel so strongly about it that they’d risk their lives doing it in some cases. You have to deal with this reality – you have to just deal with the fact that women want and need to control their reproductive systems, sometimes to the detriment of a potential human life.
This potential human life, by the way, has a high percentage chance of being aborted by the body itself (which we commonly call miscarriage). Life is not perfect, life is complicated and messy and tough decisions sometimes have to be made. I trust women to make those tough decisions for themselves.
With regards to bodily autonomy – nobody is forced to donate a kidney, or even simply their blood to save another human life. Lawfully, we can never force a person to give up any part of their bodies to save another person’s life. Why do we force women to donate their bodies this way, directly contradicting this human right to bodily autonomy? A woman who is pregnant against her will is FORCED to continue the pregnancy. It’s forced because we as a society have decided that she is not allowed to have a specific medical procedure.
Forcing women to stay pregnant against their will – doesn’t sound like you’re treating them with dignity or respect at all.
I very respectfully suggest that you may be in danger of falling into the error against which you are warning others. Changing the definintion of “In Utero” to include ectopic pregnancy is going outside the factual limits. Ectopic implantation of the child must be removed precisely because it is in the wrong place (NOT in Utero) and therefore poses immediate threat of catastropic haemorage destroying both child and mother. Your definition of termination “In Utero” therefore very precisely excludes treatment of ectopic implantation from abortion.
Good point Hugh, thanks for pointing out that error, I suppose pre-birth is more accurate.
And Marion, yes, in this country they butcher the woman and remove half of her reproductive system rather than give her a pill and let her miscarry..
Can you not see that the medical abortion is a far more compassionate option?
Deat Eleen
Hippocrateeth is not expressing a merely private opinion – The Unborn Has a Constitutional Right to Life in Ireland.
Just as the born has a right to life, so also has the unborn, givenby referendum and of equal force.
The only way to go is on the basis of facts.
Kindest Regards
Not always Shanti om if a woman has the procedure done laparoscopically they can safe the tube (not always possible but there is a better chance) where as having a laparotomy means they will have to remove the tube.
Doctors where possible will have a look with a laparoscope before committing to open surgery they are very loath to remove Fallopian tubes unless absolutely necessary.
Glad to hear it Cliodhna, sadly it wasn’t what happened to any of the women I know but that is simply the women I know and obviously not indicative of wider procedure from what you have said (I have seen you state that you were in maternity before if memory serves, but in Cork yes? As all of my friends were treated in Dublin, laparotomy. Tube and ovary removed :( )
Just a moment. Have you just changed the definition to suit everything that you would like to include? I think I will withdraw from the conversation. Last time I heard someting like this was Lewis Carroll put into the mouth of a character in Alice in Wonderland a statement to the effect that “words mean whatever I say they mean”. My definition of abortion is:” A direct attack o the life of an unborn child”. Any treatment to save te life of the mother that results in the unsought death of the child is not abortion.
Abortion business interests cannot achieve their aims under current Irish medical practice. When questioned by the Oireachtas Committee none of the very senior Maternity Hospital heads could identify any incident where necessary treatment had been denied to a mother because of our current laws or any case where a woman died as a result.
If you are truly interested in saving women’s lives it might be appropriate to pursue Oireachtas members about the investigation of dangerous advice given in post abortion cases where mothers were advised to mislead their GPs. This is truly urgent
very kind regards
I work in Limerick. Unfortunately it does happen if they can’t safe the tube or its already ruptured, they also try giving methotrexate to women to allow them to safe the tube. Very controversial to be mentioning on this thread I’ll probably be lynched. But truly until people realise that every woman has the right to make the right choice whatever that may be for her we might as well be living in the stone ages where women died needlessly.
So Michelle Harte wasn’t denied chemo because she was pregnant?
And in the case of an ectopic pregnancy the resolution is the direct and rather intentional removal of the foetus, that’s an attack on the life of the unborn, it’s to save the mother – but it’s still a direct attack, it’s not like the termination of pregnancy is a side effect – it’s the aim. So even by your own definition, it’s abortion.
Sorry Cliodhna, I shouldn’t have put you in that position – my sincere apologies.
Could have stuck to south west, maybe that’s how I should have phrased it.. Again, apologies.
And agreed, people need to realise that unless it is them facing an unwanted pregnancy personally they have no right to say what happens in another persons body. Same way they don’t get to tell other people what they can and can’t do in the bedroom, it’s none of their business. It’s personal, not public.
(Like I should have had more respect for your privacy, again, my apologies)
Yet another misfortune befalls your friends, Shanti? This is getting spooky now
Eleen, you really didn’t answer my question; would you legalise abortion on demand at 8 months? And “that’s a hard question” isn’t an answer
Yes Chuck, pregnancy is common amongst women. Perhaps more than amongst men ;)
I am involved with several groups, large numbers of women of a wide variety of ages, I never said each one of them was a close personal friend – but closer than just acquaintances..
I also live near Dublin, and had a very active social life up til not that long ago, so I know quite a few women.. Most of whom have been pregnant at some point.
Why is it spooky? Have you not met many women?
That’s just it, I have. And the ratio of women you’ve known who’ve had catastrophic complications with their pregnancies compared to women who haven’t is statistically improbable
These “acquaintances” to whom you are “not close” also seem unusually keen to share with you the minutiae of their treatment
Chuck
Can you define what you think a termination at 32 weeks would be? Because having worked in the UK in a hospital that did terminations I can tell you now that you are more than likely mixing it up with induction.
Also I’m not exactly sure what the statistics are but given I know my friends and family have had ectopic pregnancies, terminations, miscarriages unable to conceive, iud, ancephaly and ivf amongst other things then its highly likely other women like Shanti and perhaps yourself have also encountered these.
Shanti
I freely said where I worked. It’s the methotrexate thing I was referring to. All I believe in is freedom of choice and a safe outcome for all. Until you walk in those shoes you will never know what your decision will be but we all have a right to make our own choice and be supported in that.
I think a termination at 32 weeks would be a termination which is carried out in the thirty second week, as Sarah Catt performed on herself. I’m asking if that should be legal?
Of course I know several women who’ve had complicated pregnancies but the volume and variety of them Shanti has personal knowledge of is extremely high. It’s a trend I noted over a year ago which has continued unabated. By contrast, she has in the past claimed that so few women discover that they are pregnant late into their pregnancy that they need not be legislated for whatsoever
Chuck, women talk. It’s what we do. We share experiences, we seek advice.
By comparison, most of the guys I know of my age and above when I have asked them, would say that they don’t really share on that deep a level – while they will talk about their problems with the guys, they’re a little more reserved about how much they share than they are with me or other female friends.
Some of the guys I know who are a little younger are actually far more open about their emotions with each other – which I think is a good sign as its better to nurture a good support network that you can talk to about anything – especially with make suicide rates as high as they are.
If it makes you feel any better Chuck, my feelings on late term abortion are why not opt for induction and give it up when you’ve got that far? It’s going to need to come out anyway so why not send it to a Neo natal unit?
And what so I know a couple of girls who had abortions, a couple who killed themselves, a few missing a tube, one IVF, and personally I have reasons why pregnancy is risky – is that what you’re thinking is so odd?
Chuck
What Sarah Catt did was both extreme and illegal and no one in their right mind would advocate for that.
Right Shanti, women talk about everything but none of them ever mentioned finding out that they were pregnant later then normal?
Cliodhna, scroll up and you’ll see that’s exactly what Eleen was doing. I agree with you though, it’s repugnant. But what if I said 8 months instead of 8.5? Or 7.5? If you draw a line anywhere then where do you draw it and why?
If you put any time limits on abortion then you can’t accuse anti-abortionists of “telling women what to do with their bodies” without acknowledging that you do the same thing, just at a later stage
I have heard of one woman who said that she discovered she was pregnant when she went into labour. She was a girl I went to school withs older sister, lived a few blocks away from me, she had looked pregnant, but if she didn’t know she didn’t know.. I just don’t understand how she missed it..
Chuck
That’s a very petty way to make a point your forcing my hand one way or another.
Either I come down on your side or I’m a lunatic because only a lunatic would advocate for termination after 14 weeks.
Ok, so “only a lunatic would advocate for termination after 14 weeks”. Fine. Now, according to the rules set by Eleen, Shanti, Nick Beard et al you are now an “anti-choice” extremist who tells women what to do with “their bodies”.
And to you, they are lunatics
Don’t worry, I don’t think you’re either. But id like to know why you settled on 14 weeks?
Right Shanti, well I’ve known four women who discovered they were pregnant at 6, 8, 9 & 9 (upon labor) months respectively. If they or the woman on your story wanted an abortion, do you think they should’ve legally entitled to one?
Chuck
I settled on 14 weeks because it gives women a chance to decide on what they want to do when they find out their pregnant if you consider most women find out between 4 and 6 weeks.
Also because I saw something when I worked in the UK ( which incidentally made me more pro choice) that no woman should ever have to go through. It left a memory that still brings me to tears, saddens and sickened me beyond anything I have seen in the 23 years I have worked as a nurse and a midwife.
It made me realise that some women are very very vulnerable and need to be given a voice and I hope I do that everyday at work.
Firstly, to Hugh: the 8th amendment giving the unborn a constitutional right to life was not based in scientific fact. There is no consensus on when exactly a foetus becomes a human being, and the constitution holds up a perhaps widely held belief – but a belief nonetheless.
Chuck: feel free to pretend to know what I was talking about and speak on my behalf.
Just to be clear – when I said a decision should be made by the woman and her doctors about the best course of action – best course of action didn’t mean abortion. It meant the best course of action, depending on the circumstances.
There should be guidelines and rules – as there generally are for medical healthcare professionals. A time-limit system makes sense, but I’m pretty sure there will be times when it doesn’t make sense and exceptions may have to be made.
If a woman is adamant about having a late-term abortion, there should be guidelines for that too. But since each case will be so unique and different, I don’t see how anything would work except going by a case-by-case basis, and allowing doctors and patients the freedom to make the best possible choice without fearing repercussions.
The reasons why a woman would desperately want or need a late-term abortion are probably very serious, and shouldn’t be taken lightly.
Seems very like the facts of oxygen and base metals – best explanation of the phenomena available within the limits of research to date – The US Senate is not affected by the 1983 referendum –
In Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, it states that “There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological and scientific writings.” Every abortion involves, either surgicallly or chemically, the destruction of a human zygote or a human fetus, and the subsequent removal of same from his mother’s womb. Therefore, every abortion ends a human life. (“US Congress”)
Do you have any scientific evidence to offer as a counter Eleen or on what scientific evidence exactly is any such counter explanation of the facts based ?
Life begins at conception, but that is not what we’re talking about here. I’m not here to try and pretend that a fertilised egg and subsequent zygote etc is alive and human.
But there is a massive distinction between being biologically alive and being a living, breathing human being.
A human zygote is not a human being but a potential human being. If you look at your own wording, and the quotes by countless “pro-life” sites, you will notice that what they refer to is “human life” “human organism” or “beginning of a human being”. They are NOT scientifically, actual human beings. If they were, women would be sent to court jail whenever they had miscarriages in order to prove they didn’t murder the person living inside them. An acorn is not an oak tree, a zygote is not a human.
Therefore, when a person says they are saving unborn children – they are scientifically and biologically incorrect. Usually they are referring to anything after fertilisation which is, frankly, ridiculous. The Personhood bills being pushed in the US for example, are trying to twist logic and science to fit their own agenda, or their own belief system. As a result they are creating dangerous and life-threatening laws that would lead to such a severe policing of women’s bodily autonomy that we would have to classify women as sub-human in order to stop breaching their human rights.
Quite frankly I think this mix-up between a human organism capable of becoming a conscious human being and an actual human being is intentional tactic in a greater scheme to chip away at women’s right to control their reproductive systems.
I get that the potential human being is alive and growing and special. But I don’t believe for one moment that it should have rights equal to or above the woman carrying it. Most women feel very strongly about this, as is evidenced by the fact that a huge percentage of women terminate their pregnancies – some risk their lives in doing so – and for once I would like to live in a world that actually accepts that women make their own choices and respects their self-determination – for better or for worse. This is not something you can legislate (or you can, but it makes very little difference).
Shanti, how would you treat a suicidal patient? all of the top doctors with decades of experience have said abortion is not a treatment, so how with all of your years of medical training (NOT) would you treat them.
Did you ever see the bodies of the ripped up babies Cliodhna these former abortionist can never forget them…“One of the girls called me into the lab as she was cleaning up, and on the end of the cannula, which was the instrument at the end of the hose, was a little baby’s foot. It was about half an inch long. This foot was perfectly formed. I couldn’t believe it. I was so amazed at the sight of it. It was all black and blue…The baby’s body was completely ripped apart because of the abortion. ”I know that the Lord has forgiven me, but I can never erase those things from my mind. The sounds of those bones breaking. The sight of those babies…You tell me that this baby doesn’t feel anything. I will tell you differently.” – Deborah Henry, Former Clinic Worker
This IS the young girl the pro aborts love to forget …Devastating story of the girl in the “C” CASE ..In 1997 Miss ‘C’ was a young Irish girl, [legally a minor,] who became pregnant following a brutal rape. She had been taken into care to protect her from the rapist, but social workers then insisted that she was suicidal as a result of the pregnancy and wanted an abortion. When the parents opposed the abortion they became the subject of a vicious media campaign. Miss ‘C’s baby was aborted in a clinic in Britain. It was a hugely contentious and tragic case which dominated the headlines for days. In the years that followed, abortion campaigners repeatedly used Miss ‘C’s case to demand the legalisation of abortion in Ireland.
But then, twelve years later, Miss ‘C’ spoke out. She said that she had never requested an abortion, and that she had wanted her baby to be given up for adoption. Here’s what she said in an interview with Pat Kenny: “The nightmare still continues, with me going to England to have the abortion. I remember flying over on the plane with social workers to have the abortion…” “I didn’t understand what was happening … I thought I was getting the baby out”. Pat Kenny: “You thought there would be a living baby there?” Miss ‘C’: “Afterwards. Yeah. Then I remember waking up from the abortion and screaming and screaming and crying with the pain so they gave me another injection to fall back to sleep, well I don’t know, I fell back to sleep afterwards. I woke up then and I was in no pain so I asked for the baby and they told me there was no baby…
“I wouldn’t have wanted to keep it; I would have put it up for adoption or something. No I wouldn’t have wanted to keep the baby but I would have liked for it to be put up for adoption…” “I still, still to this day I’m still suffering. I went to get a death certificate done for the baby. I named her Shannon. So, like, that was pretty hard for me to do as well. I went away for a week and I did that. That was pretty hard for me to do as well. But I had to have some dignity: to say that that child was still there… I’ve tried to kill myself. I don’t know how many times I’ve tried to kill myself. But I have a little five-year-old son now so he’s keeping me, he is the best thing that has ever happened to me now…” Once Miss ‘C’ had spoken out, she was never mentioned again by abortion campaigners. She didn’t suit their agenda any more. That’s to be expected; this is an industry that uses the vulnerability and suffering of women to further their own cause on a regular basis.”"”
What you believe is at variance with the human rights set out in our Constitution. The actions of 100,000 or 100,000,000 cannot extinguish those rights. Major violations of human rights throughout history have not invalidated or subtracted from these rights.
for clarity the above response is to Eleen
Mairead.
1. 91% of abortions in the UK take place when the entire foetus is approximately 1 inch long, so that story is a tad misleading wouldn’t you agree? Seeing as the foot was an inch long that must have been a late term abortion, which are a) far less frequent (9%) and b) have far more restrictions upon accessing them.
How would I treat a suicidal patient?
I’d find out why they were suicidal for a start..
If she’s suicidal because she can’t bear to be pregnant, then ending the pregnancy will resolve that. If she’s suicidal because of something else, then ending the pregnancy won’t have any effect whatsoever.
Surely that’s just logical?
It is widely understood that placing a pregnant woman’s life as equal to the unborn was a very bad and dangerous idea.
Our constitution flies in the face of the already established human right to maintain bodily integrity. Women’s lives matter, their rights matter.
You obviously didn’t read my entire post Mairead because quite frankly if you had you wouldn’t ask me that.
right. if you are unfortunate enough to have an alcoholic or addict mother, then you should be automatically aborted. great “choice” there. in fact, you could abort every unborn child who does not measure up the standard of being “born 100% healthy”? Hitler like Nazi eugenics in fact.
Mick.
Who’s talking about addict mothers? Who’s talking about eugenics and Hitler?
Oh yeah, just you.. I invoke Godwin’s Law..
Abortion is already freely available to the Irish … Just a short trip oversees. I’m pro choice on this one … It is similar to the divorce law… It’s the people’s choice. Who is the government to choose for any woman that wants an abortion, it’s 2013… Time for change.
It’s not freely available using my tax money, I’m glad to say. And long may that continue.
Your obviously male ….. And single….
@Dilcol do you even pay taxes or have a job because you seem to spend all day every day on this trolling.
Graham- you got me. Long term unemployed.
So if someone has an opposite view to the majority, they’re a troll?
Was Mandela a troll to you?
Seriously James everyone is entitled to an opinion but some of your posts really don’t make any sense.
Is it because of your multi personality affliction Shaw.
You’re comparing yourself to mandela seriously?
I’m not Kevin Shaw. I don’t have to prove that to you and quite frankly I don’t care if that’s the conclusion you have drawn.
The point I was trying to make is some people have different opinions others may find inflammatory, this does not mean they are a troll.
Quite right it doesn’t make them a troll.
But you are a troll. You are only involved in arguments. Doesn’t matter what the story is about,big or small, you will pick a fight.
But almost every user of this site has copped that on by this stage.
Dilcos is Kevin shaw not you James.
No James not if u comment u are
Well you needn’t worry then Dildo. If you’re not paying tax then you don’t have to pay for any woman’s termination. Simples!
Suicide risk has to be part of the new legislation. It was voted to include it twice in referendums.
That’s not entirely true. The X case decided that threat to the life of the mother made abortion legal. The two referenda were intended to make a separate case of suicide, where it would be illegal. So legislation which didn’t mention suicide would be consistent with X – Dr Coulter-Smith is not saying anything very radical. The problem with singling out one particular threat (suicide) is that it makes it unclear whether other unexpected threats are included.
If it’s left to the medical staff and the patients to decide then suicide risk would be included as would any other factor.
As the man said, leave it broad and everything’s covered.
Actually, Isaac and Dilcos the country has voted for suicide to be taken account of in two referenda.
I think you should read my comment again
Sorry Dilcos. Didn’t read all your comment. A bit previous there, so I was!
No apology for me, for shame Mary, for shame
Isaac- what’s interesting about your original comment dismissing a doctors opinion is how flagrantly it contradicts the usual pro-abortion argument that cites a Doctors definition of “life” as sacrosanct.
Isaac I wrote an apology to you. It must not have gone through. Indeed I do apologise. I confess I didn’t read the whole of your comment and then jumped the gun. Mea culpa! I duly hang my head in shame. I agree with you 100%.
You addressed your apology to me, Mary. And you can’t take it back now.
True but I mistook your comnent for Isaac’s when I was replying and apologised to you. So let me say loud and clear as I agree “100%” with Isaac and both of you have completely opposing views, then obviously I disagree with yours
Dilcos, everybody is entitled to their opinion, but the only one that counts is the Irish people’s opinion in the form of a referendum.
Mary, no need to say sorry, just never stop being you
Thanks, Isaac!
Devastating story of the girl in the “C” CASE ..In 1997 Miss ‘C’ was a young Irish girl, [legally a minor,] who became pregnant following a brutal rape. She had been taken into care to protect her from the rapist, but social workers then insisted that she was suicidal as a result of the pregnancy and wanted an abortion. When the parents opposed the abortion they became the subject of a vicious media campaign. Miss ‘C’s baby was aborted in a clinic in Britain. It was a hugely contentious and tragic case which dominated the headlines for days. In the years that followed, abortion campaigners repeatedly used Miss ‘C’s case to demand the legalisation of abortion in Ireland.
But then, twelve years later, Miss ‘C’ spoke out. She said that she had never requested an abortion, and that she had wanted her baby to be given up for adoption. Here’s what she said in an interview with Pat Kenny: “The nightmare still continues, with me going to England to have the abortion. I remember flying over on the plane with social workers to have the abortion…” “I didn’t understand what was happening … I thought I was getting the baby out”. Pat Kenny: “You thought there would be a living baby there?” Miss ‘C’: “Afterwards. Yeah. Then I remember waking up from the abortion and screaming and screaming and crying with the pain so they gave me another injection to fall back to sleep, well I don’t know, I fell back to sleep afterwards. I woke up then and I was in no pain so I asked for the baby and they told me there was no baby…
“I wouldn’t have wanted to keep it; I would have put it up for adoption or something. No I wouldn’t have wanted to keep the baby but I would have liked for it to be put up for adoption…” “I still, still to this day I’m still suffering. I went to get a death certificate done for the baby. I named her Shannon. So, like, that was pretty hard for me to do as well. I went away for a week and I did that. That was pretty hard for me to do as well. But I had to have some dignity: to say that that child was still there… I’ve tried to kill myself. I don’t know how many times I’ve tried to kill myself. But I have a little five-year-old son now so he’s keeping me, he is the best thing that has ever happened to me now…” Once Miss ‘C’ had spoken out, she was never mentioned again by abortion campaigners. She didn’t suit their agenda any more. That’s to be expected; this is an industry that uses the vulnerability and suffering of women to further their own cause on a regular basis.”"”
“Miss C” is a different case to “C”.
“C” refers to the C Case in A, B & C, and was a woman who had been undergoing chemotherapy and fell pregnant while in remission, she felt that the advice she was given was coloured by the 8th Amendment and went to the UK of her own choice to end the pregnancy.
I’m just waiting on the youth defence to start commenting, should be good!
This legislation is needed, hopefully it will open the window to fully allow women to CHOOSE what THEY want to do!!
Ha Youth Defence has just used this article from TheJournal to highlight it’s pro-life, anti-abortion cause..
So you favour censorship if people oppose the abortion cause? De ja vu of the USSR.
Where did anyone mention censorship, besides you of course Marion?
Termination is not a treatment for suicidal ideation – except when someone is suicidal because of their unwanted pregnancy!
Show us any recorded situations where a woman has killed herself due solely to the fact that she was pregnant.
which is never.
Are you a suicidal woman James ?
When a woman is found dead from suicide a pregnancy is not tested for, so really – how do you know?
Several commenters here, myself included, know women who have attempted or succeeded in suicide, which is what informs our views on the subject. But by all means, assume it never happens..
And were these women pregnant?
If the cause of a woman’s suicide is her pregnancy therefore it would follow that she was pregnant James. …I can’t imagine that too many people, men or woman go around imagining they are pregnant unless they suffer the same delusions as some of the characters on here
JamesWould gave agreed with you on lots of issues 20 year ago but now that I’ve grown up and taken my head out of my ass I find ur opinions appear to be that of someone to young to have a true idea of the real world I have no doubt you get there
@Shanti Om
If a woman was to commit suicide over an unwanted pregnancy I would imagine the poor soul would have mentioned it in a suicide note.
Not everyone leaves a suicide note
“Nellie” – I don’t believe you’re Irish or well educated and as such will not be paying heed to any o your ill-written comments.
And if she doesn’t leave a note then you’re free to ascribe any motive you like?
James your comment are very misinformed and ill written too. Should we all take your advice and ignore you too….
That’s entirely your prerogative. I don’t strive for grammatical perfection but comprehensibility, both of which seem to allude Nellie.
Rather than blanket statements perhaps you could explain how I am misinformed and provide me with the correct information?
You said that women who are pregnant and suicidal should be locked up until they feel differently. That is a very misinformed statement to make
Some might call it that, but it would certainly alleviate any risk to either child or mother.
And once she’s had the kid, she can toddle off and if she still feels down she can do the necessary.
So locking a woman up for 9 months wouldn’t cause any further damage??? Your knowledge of mental illness is terrible to say the least. I do believe in the past we as a society did lock up pregnant women in laundries and that obiviously worked out so well
The problem is we kept them locked up after they had the kids and offered no psychiatric help. It’s only to protect the child from it’s mother, once she’s had it she can top herself or get more help.
And in your knowledgeable opinion what treatment do women recieve for depression while pregnant?
Oh and also for suicidal thoughts?
U base I’m not Irish on what James as for educated (I not go a private class ) you can believe what you want young man
The girls I knew had been freaking out about being pregnant and what they were going to do and then they were dead, so it might be a fair assumption to make..
And no. No note.. They hadn’t told everyone they were pregnant, especially not their “pro life” parents.
Funnily enough Shanti, every time an abortion story comes up it seems you have extensive personal knowledge of friends of yours who’ve fallen victim to every single medical/legal/psychological/societal misfortune imaginable. Have you considered that you might be a jinx?
Really? Every single one? I don’t think that’s true.. I don’t know any women refused chemo during pregnancy despite the fact I know it has happened.
I also have never known anyone who suffered from pre eclampsia.
But by all means, exaggerate, make stuff up, generally try to attack me to make your case.. It says a lot more about you than me buddy.
Any chance we could lock you up James in a psychiatric ward for 9 months?
James, you’re a bit of a shit aren’t you.
That is not true. All the psychiatrists at the Oireachtas hearings said so and they are the professionals. They all agreed on this.
Oh! let us forget about suicide ideation due to abortion after all these victims don’t help forward the abortion cause.
What about those who have committed suicide or like 2 of my close friends who turned to substance abuse & alcohol due to abortion, don’t blame the graphic images on their depression because one of them lived in England for 20 yrs? Let’s just forget about them shall we?
Personally, I appreciate that the decision to abort is not an easy one. The only people whom I have ever seen try to assert that it is are those on the anti choice side.
As with any major decision in life there are repercussions, most of us do possess a conscience. This is why I respect any woman no matter what choice she makes – because none of them are easy. And I can’t imagine the judgement women receive in our society when they make decisions is helpful. Single mothers are judged, women who have more kids than they can cope with are judged, women who abort are judged, when a mother gives away her child – at some point her child is going to judge her. It’s like they are damned no matter what choice they make – and that bothers me.
What’s that supposed to prove Chuck?
Woman in very uncomfortable situation prioritises taking care of her already very sick son. She says she is not sorry for making this decision, there was a high chance she may have harmed the baby by her actions already – and wouldn’t want to wish the fate of her first child on another. She made peace with her decision, has no regrets and even went on to become a mother again.
Or are you judging her as an irresponsible woman who should be punished for her actions, beg for forgiveness and be ashamed?
That’s nonsense, she said it was an easy decision (she thought the process was uncomfortable). It’s a riposte to the first two sentences of your last post
Actually, how I read that was that all the circumstances surrounding the pregnancy made the decision easy. She had another child she needed to prioritise, she was already working 3 jobs to cover costs, and in order to keep going to work she had been using drugs which were liable to have harmed the baby.
So she decided abortion was the best answer for those circumstances. She was prioritising the child she already had. Would you judge her for that?
I totally agree. If pregnant women were offing themselves on a regular basis there may be a basis for a suicide clause.
Luckily there isn’t a plethora of expectant mothers killing themselves as the pro-choice brigade would have you believe.
Id love to know how you come to think the way you do, i really would.
He didn’t take a bang on the head as a baby like you did, Lesley.
If you mean that suicide should be taken into account then I agree with the sentiment, but I deplore your turn of ohrase. What an ugly use of language
How many pregnant women would need to die before you would consider it necessary? Is there a quota of dead pregnant women that must be reached?
I come to my conclusions based on principles doing what one wants where another is not harmed and freedom of choice where none else are harmed.
If women are truly suicidal then taking the baby out won’t change their issues. Anyone who would rather top themselves rather than carry a child for 9 months (as a result of their actions in most cases) is selfish and should be admitted to a facility until they feel differently.
Joy, can you show us any women who has killed themselves cause they was pregnant?
Joy – I would need to see an established pattern. If a woman happens to have a trout in the well and says her neighbours dog is making her suicidal, do we slaughter the dog?
In-fact if anyone says anything is making them suicidal, can we destroy/kill it?
Joy- how many babies would you have die to protect an exceptional suicide case?
Isn’t it strange how Kevin shaw has disappeared the last few days
( expects Kevin shaw/Peter daly comment further down in a feeble attempt to try prove their not the same person)
Interesting you say that Leslie…. Did ye hear the one about the Bush admininstration organising 9/11?
I am Kevin Shaw!
NO I’m Kevin Shaw
We still have 4500 Irish women having abortions every year
Get up outta that Jim!
Over 50000 Irish women have had abortions in the last ten years
Most pregnant women in this country don’t report suicidal tendancies. Its much easier to organise an abortion in Britain than tell their ob/gyn. Why? Even if they did tell their ob/gyn very little is done. For depression and suicidal women once your pregnant doctors will not provide anti-depressants and with the cutbacks to mental health services access to professional counselling services are extremely difficult. Also all psychologist dealing specifically with pregnant women are all based in Dublin. Approximately 4000 women travel to Britain every year for a termination. Abortion does occur in Ireland. We as a society choose to export the “problem” rather than deal with it. As for the comments about locking women up until the “feel” differently are deplorable and show how little you actually know about it. So until you actually have experience it’s best to keep you misinformed opinions to yourselves.
On another note, I don’t think we could afford another 5,000 elective surgeries this year.
Hmmmm. That sounds awfully familiar.
Magdalene Asylum, that’s it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_asylum
That was in response to James O’Neill’s – “If women are truly suicidal then taking the baby out won’t change their issues. Anyone who would rather top themselves rather than carry a child for 9 months (as a result of their actions in most cases) is selfish and should be admitted to a facility until they feel differently.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3134924/
A 2011 study showed that homicide and suicide where the highest cause of death in USA. A WHO study showed that in developed countries ‘direct causes’ including suicide, were higher than medical cause in case of maternal death.
A lot of women commit suicide during pregnancy. I’m reluctant to mention this, so please excuse me if it upsets anyone, but it’s not that long since that poor women committed suicide in howth, whilst pregnant with twins. I stress that I don’t mention this as an argument for or against abortion. I mention it ONLY to show that pregnant women do indeed commit suicide.
Lesley, I believe Kevin Shaw was banned. Personally, I liked him.
Ceara- the UK collates figures on the reasons for abortions over there. “Suicide” is less than 1 tenth of 1%.
No you’re both Spartacus!
James O’Neill – yesterday you said:
‘The affairs of others are not my concern’
Today you are up on your pulpit telling women what they should do with their bodies.
Are you:
A) Troll
B) World’s worst libertarian
C) Still in school
D) Read 6 pages of Atlas Shrugged and didn’t really understand the message
Well from reading your comments dilco its sounds like matter what the reason you still wouldn’t accept it
James the Irish women who choose to travel to have an abortion pay for it.
@ EBL – Probably B, but replace worst with consistent.
James – you seem to have an excellent understanding of mental illnesses – please do explain where your wealth of experience comes from and enlighten us
Ceara- to save the life of the mother. There’s one for you. The only one.
Dilco your comment makes no sense. Please give a better explaination
Ceara it makes perfect sense. Dilcos is saying s/he’d make abortion available where it is necessary to save the life of the mother. Which is already happening
But chuck its only happening in the cases of immediate threat to the life of the woman not where her life is at potential risk
Don’t be daft, N/A – if you’ve any underlying medical conditions when you get pregnant, for example, there’s a chance the pregnancy could cause serious problems and even life-threatening problems. If you’re faced with a percentage chance of being seriously injured or possibly risk death thanks to a pregnancy, wouldn’t you want to have a say in whether you go through with it or not?
Plenty of cases of women sustaining life-long illnesses and injuries because of pregnancies that impact severely on their quality of life.
Potential risk in this case is not the same as eating a sandwich and risking choking.
Abortion is never necessary to save the life of the mother. Sometimes the doctor has to intervene and perform a life saving operation to save the mother but this, in Ireland, does not involve the direct killing of the baby, so , is not an abortion. Doctors from all over the world at a medical symposium in Dublin last year signed a declaration saying that abortion is never necessary to save the life of a mother.
Nuala, you can change the name and twist the facts to your liking, it doesn’t change the truth.
We’ve had this merry-go-round argument for years now, it’s getting old.
Nuala.
If a woman has an ectopic pregnancy that doesn’t spontaneously abort (that’s miscarriage to you, but not to a doctor) then she needs to have an abortion, especially if it has formed in the Fallopian tube, because there isn’t enough room for it there, and if the tube ruptures both of them will die.
Therefore the foetus is intentionally and deliberately removed from the woman’s body which results in its death. This is an abortion, even by your definition, so please, stop trying to make out that abortion is never necessary. It is the only viable outcome for a tubal pregnancy.
True Nuala on one side of the Atlantic we have Vladimir Putin reversing the abortion culture due the aging population of Russia with no younger generation to replace them & the economic disaster it has caused on the other individual states in the US are reversing the Roe v Wade case because of the impact the abortion regime has played on American society. The IPPF have encouraged youngsters at a conference to ignore science. There will always be those who cannot deal with reality but with the delusion of the abortion culture which sprung up in Western society in the ’60′s.
The delusions of the religious. A woman’s body therefore a woman’s choice. Child rapists preaching from the altar telling women what they can do with their bodies.
Just so we’re clear, you’re calling Dr Sam Coulter-Smith a child rapist? Seems fair.
@daniel – disgusting and slanderous comment.
No it’s not. It’s the truth. Religion is an evil evil thing imposing these kinds of beliefs. Old men preaching about young women’s bodies. Slander you say, so your saying that no priest convicted of child abuse ever spoke out about abortion??
I don’t think he preaches from an altar does he?
@James: Protesting for priests who rape children while shunning suicidel mothers who get abortions… I dare to wonder if you just really love children and babies.
(Now this is an actually slanderous comment, about a disgusting person.)
Daniel you are showing your ignorance of Catholic teaching and your bigotry against Catholics in your comments.
It is always the pro-aborts that bring up the religious issue, science has proven the child in utero is not the mother’s body because she cannot have 2 different blood types, in 50% of cases be two different genders or have 2 beating hearts but like the IPPF in the US have recently stated to youngsters ‘Ignore science’.
I don’t know where you’re getting your ideas from there Marion, but anyway…since you’re talking about science you might want to stop calling the living tissue that will eventually become a child (if all things go smoothly) an actual child. By scientific definition it is not a child.
Eleen, the other day Marion was disputing peer reviewed scientific research in favour of an opinion piece written by a doctor.. It’s quite apparent that science is not her best subject..
Please it appears Eleen is living back in the 12th century when a pregnant mother was deemed to be expecting a potential human being due to lack of technology.
Peer reviewed scientific research changes all the time. How long did it take these same researchers to finally acknowledge the link between smoking & lung cancer even though it was first discovered in 1953.
Shanti, yes I saw that! I’m going to stop trying now, save my energy.
Yes. Science changes, as we learn new things it evolves and expands. If it stayed the same constantly it would be a sign that we had learned nothing. It would be dogma.
What scientific reference are you quoting there Eleen?
In Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, it states that “There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological and scientific writings.” Every abortion involves, either surgicallly or chemically, the destruction of a human zygote or a human fetus, and the subsequent removal of same from his mother’s womb. Therefore, every abortion ends a human life. (“US Congress”)
Again Hugh, trying to mix things up are we? A zygote is not a child. It is a living human organism, it is the beginning stage of human life – it is not a child. It is not a person, it does not have the same rights as a person, nor should it as it is dependent on another human beings body in order to survive.
You can see it as a child if you wish – but you cannot force that definition on others because it is not based in scientific reality.
Our constitution is wrong to put pregnant women’s lives as equal to that of the living organism inside her, Gareth Fitzgerald himself has stated he regretted the decision to hold the referendum. It’s the reason for a lot of suffering and death (there would be so much more if we didn’t have England close by). I don’t care if it ends a human life – over 80% of doctors in this country don’t either – because saving the life of the pregnant woman is paramount.
Not my words – They are the words of the Senate of the United States of America reporting on the evidence of many scientists. Youu are entitled to your own interpretation but it is at serioius variance with scientific fact
kind regards
Again, this is not an interpretation but fact. Look up what personhood is and come back to me.
Eleen – we must face facts.
If you want to change the constitutional right to life of the unborn you cannot do so by way of your own personal interpretation of the law or by reaching for the term personhood which is not in the law. You must either take the case to the Supreme Court (ECHR cannot interfere with the Irish Constitution) or have a referendum.
kind regards
Hugh, funny you should mention referendums.
With regards the situation of abortion we have had 3.
We have the 8th Amendment, which was initially supposed to protect the life of the unborn at all costs, the mother was added in as an afterthought. It passed, presumably because the anti choice movement swore blind it could never result in the death of a woman, and the people meant the very best. It is noble to wish to protect the vulnerable, but this seems to almost always be to the detriment of the woman and her vulnerability.
Then the X Case happened, as those opposing the 8th Amendment had warned it would. After X we had a referendum, as you may remember it enshrined the right to travel and the right to information in the constitution (did the “pro life majority” vote to export the problem?). It also asked us to overturn the suicide part of the X case, the people voted to uphold the X case ruling (if there’s a “pro life majority” why didn’t they overturn this flawed judgement?).
10 years later, again we are asked to overturn the X case ruling on suicide risk, again we voted to uphold the X case ruling (again – why did the alleged “pro life majority” vote to keep this clause in the constitution?)
So by all means, bring on a referendum, but rather than ask the same thing again, how about we vote on whether the 8th amendment should be repealed? See how “pro life” the majority really are?
Exactly, Shanti Om!
Hugh, this is the whole point of the pro-choice movement, and the majority of Irish people have already voted to put pregnant women’s rights above the rights of the unborn – more than once, as Shanti Om explained. The rights of the unborn cannot trump the rights of women.
If what you say about the two unspecified votes is true then the 8th amendment has already fallen. I think you may be mistaken.
You might read more carefully – I set out the reality and expressed no opinion on whether a referndum should or should not be held.
Further – there is no question of “trumping” anything here, the life of the Mother is fully protected under current practice which is lawful under 40.3.3. Should the necessary treatment of the mother result in the death of the child, no law is broke. A direct attack on the life of the child is illegal.
The life of the mother is fully protected except it’s not easy to protect it when we have not legislated for the X case. And even still we’ve had cases that are pretty murky when it comes to protecting the life of the mother in this country, and if we didn’t have the UK so close we would have a lot more. In practical terms, ensuring a pregnant woman’s safety is tough if you’re only allowed to act when it is certain and clear that her life is at risk.
And yes there is a question of “trumping” here, quite clearly. A pregnant woman’s right to bodily autonomy is not protected. That is lawfully if not morally questionable, since in no other circumstances is a person required to give up bodily autonomy in order to save another’s life. If there risk of injury, risk of disability, she is not allowed to terminate her pregnancy – unless it is fairly certain that she will die without treatment. The rights of the unborn absolutely trumps the rights of the pregnant woman in these regards.
Unless I’m wrong in my interpretation here?
Hugh.
The 8th Amendment reads:
“The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.”
I regret that you are wrong: In the period 1990 to 2010, estimates of maternal deaths per 100,000 live births in UK are shown by WHO, UNICEF,UNFPA and World Bank Tables (not my figures or opinion) to have averaged 11.4 for the United Kingdom, compared to 4.8 for ireland. Before you push to change the law in response to the manipulation of tragic cases by pro-abortion campaigners, for the future safety of women in Ireland, I appeal to you to study the records and the scientific facts. Words like trumping are highly emotive and of imprecise meaning.
With respect Hugh, it is you who is wrong.
Ireland has been under reporting our maternal mortality rate for years.. Have you not heard of the Maternal Death Enquiry? Ireland’s figures are at least double what is shown on those tables when we start using the same parameters as other countries do.
The data submitted by Ireland in order to compile the tables you refer to are skewed by under reporting and as such are voided.
http://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-rate-of-maternal-deaths-689729-Nov2012/
Have a look at Table 2 page 12 of the August 2012 report. There a comparison is made between the 20009/10 findings and CSO figures. The CSO single year figure does not reflect the five year trend in the WHO which is 50% higher for Ireland. In addition there is a subtle difference between the the description for the MDE “Maternities” and
The MDE may be lacking statistical experience which contraindicates extrapolation from restricted time periods. Perhaps you have some details of the professional standing of the statisticians engaged in the MDE report and I would welcome that information.When MDE Irerland have completed a twenty year analysis we can evaluate their accuracy against the other long term trended statistics.
In the meantime I will continue to work with the Internationallyacepted long-term trended figures.You might also let me have your view of the statements of the representatives of the major maternity hospitals at the Oireachtas committee when they were asked whether any women had died because of current legislation.
“Before you push to change the law in response to the manipulation of tragic cases by pro-abortion campaigners, for the future safety of women in Ireland, I appeal to you to study the records and the scientific facts.”
Showing your complete lack of understanding about the reality of the situation, and your extreme anti-choice bias. You can try and sound as scientific and unbiased as you want, but it won’t hide the fact that you’re wrong and being willfully ignorant of the facts.
I have done my best and set out the evidence as it is . No rational presentation will deflect you from your convictions and I therefore wish you well and good bye.
Abortion legislation should be ‘short, clear and not mention suicide’
Doctor should be ‘short, bald and we should not mention his waistline’
The people have spoken twice on this, run along now would you.
Conversely, studies also show that a woman is at most risk from suicide immediately after an abortion.
In my opinion, whatever it’s worth, this is actually more evidence that abortion should be available in Ireland. It’s a emotive topic but by forcing women to make a decision, often without counselling or support, to go to England we are actually endangering their lives too. We have to face up to the reality of the world we live in.
The only people who force these women over to abort is their extended family, friends or relatives. As for counselling it is a farce due to the denial of the consequences of abortion.
Just make it legal . People just go to England anyway and since the majority under 40 aren’t religious at all. Who cares what the imaginary man in the sky thinks. If I want to eat healthy and wear a condom its my choice. If I want to stab myself with a fork in the eye and have unprotected sex, also my own choice. Just because it’s not legal here doesn’t stop anyone who wants an abortion to get one…. do people actually realise this… just make it legal…
fine if you want to have unprotected sex and stab yourself in the eye, not sure if its before or after but if a baby is conceived you have no right to end its life because of your irresponsibility
So if we all follow your logic, men should be able to rape women if they feel like it or paedophiles should be able to abuse children if they feel like it. This of course is nonsense. You do not have total freedom to act at will in society. Society draws the line when your actions have the detrimental effect on someone else. That is why rape and paedophelia are illegal. If you want to stab yourself in the eye with a fork the people around you have a duty to protect you from yourself. Most people in Ireland recognise that abortion effects the life of the unborn baby by ending it and so still want it to be illegal.
A rapist or a pedophile do not have another being growing within them, changing their hormonal balance, stretching their body and squashing organs, putting more pressure on their heart and spine, and using up a portion of the nutrients they consume..
It’s in no way shape or form the same thing and you know that.
Conversely – you cannot be compelled to donate any part of your body to preserve the life of another. This is also not really the same thing, but it’s closer than your analogy.
Your point is… pointless. Its all choice. Im not a fan of abortion but people have the right to make their own mistakes and then decide themselves how there own life goes forward from there. Its choice. Like marijuana, alcohol or cigarettes its a personal life choice. It doesn’t matter anyway. If you want an abortion just go to England. Same cost as if you went from cork to dublin for the procedure.
Rapists don’t have abortionists taking control over their bodies to abort a child which can lead to complications or long-term effects & then make a massive profit off the procedure.
We’re arguing for choice here – as in giving women a choice, not forcing abortion upon them.
Women have a wide array of choices open to them when it comes to not getting pregnant. (By comparison, how many ways are there for men to avoid parenthood?)
There comes a point at which you have to take responsibility for your actions. Your rights do not extend to killing someone else just because you choose to
Agreed Chuck – men should have more options of contraception.
In fact, there’s a 10 year male contraceptive in the works, no hormones, just this stuff that’s injected into the vas deferens that coats the tubes and rips the sperm apart – I can’t remember exactly how, I want to say electro magnetism but I’m not sure.
It’s also reversible by flushing the tubes with water and bicarbonate of soda.
Meant to be pretty effective too!
I’m glad we found something we can agree on Chuck. I’ve often said that men need more contraceptive options!
Well I’ve seen one advocated that I just can’t go along with, but I absolutely do see the logic
They call it a “financial abortion”. That is, legally empowering men to wash their hands of any responsibility to their unborn child or to a woman they have impregnated. I can’t see many feminists getting behind that choice though!
I wouldn’t support it either, but it would certainly even things out a bit. “Why should my life be ruined because of a mistake?”
(It’s a long way from happening though. Check out San Luis Obispo County v. Nathan J. A 15-year-old boy was statutorily raped by his teacher…….but still has to pay child support)
I disagree with a child who was taken advantage of being forced to take responsibility for maintenance, but that’s me. Not all feminists think the same Chuck – we are individuals too. I don’t think feminism is about getting more rights for women, it’s more about levelling things out where practicable (and I realise that there’s some things you just can’t make even). I’ve told you before that I think the Irish systems automatic favour of mothers is sexist – it assumes the woman to be the better parent which is not always the case. The child deserves to live with whomever is best equipped to care for them – end of. But until it’s born, you can’t ignore the woman who is carrying its wishes by virtue of where nature has determined it must grow.
When you say financial abortion which are you talking about? As I would have thought that as she mentioned it this woman also had some legitimate concerns that this baby may have been harmed by the drugs and as she had one sick child, she may not have wanted to doom another child to that fate – I know it’s something I would take into consideration if I were in her shoes. The finances are relevant, but so is the possible damage done to the foetus.
I don’t advocate ignoring the woman who is pregnant. I give her life precedence over that of the child, should it become necessary to choose. I advocate for taxpayer funded maternity leave so that her employer doesn’t have to see her as a risk, I advocate for allowing her to write the cost of child care off against her taxes as a business expense (provided she works).
I just don’t think her right to privacy trumps the right to life of another
As for the financial abortion thing, I think you misread me – I’m saying that’s a proposed option for men. It’s already available to women via adoption
It’s not really about privacy though.. It’s about the right to determine what happens to your own body. Pregnancy is not a walk in the park. It’s not child minding, it’s a physically demanding process. And to force a woman to do that against her will is a little different than seeking financial assistance from the father post birth.
Besides, she will travel to the UK if she can. If she can’t she risks taking her life into her own hands via unsafe abortion, or worse, because if a woman really doesn’t want to be pregnant she will do anything to stop it.
Chuck, don’t forget rape victims who had no choice: when you talk about having to take responsibility for your actions, I hope you don’t mean those who had no say in the matter?
Common sense. And what the country wants.
Dildo/Kevin Shaw – Two referenda disagree with you.
And you speak for the country in defiance of two referenda?
Sunday Business Post poll disagrees with you. I’d be happy enough with a referendum on the issue. Enshrine the supremacy of the mothers physical health over that of the baby in law & then head for the polls on suicide. Bring on that debate.
“I’d be happy enough with a referendum on the issue.”
So, you weren’t happy with the two that didn’t give you the answer you wanted, but would be happy enough to try again.
Contempt for the constitution much?
Werejammin – any referendum is a snapshot of public opinion at a given time. I’m sure you’d agree that with an issue such as this the constitution is best served by having the most up to date sample to base legislation on.
Only problem is were are still waiting for the last two to be legislated for..
Jobs not Abortion is what we need
We need a government who understands their job description.. One of those is legislator, and 21 years to turn in an assignment is just appalling..
I certainly hope we aren’t waiting that long for jobs..
Ability to prioritise is an essential of the description- no one died for want of abortion – many are dying for want of jobs and many more will have their potential truncated. Clearly the Government are not capable of delivering both and they are trying to distract attention with offer of abortion. When the law is passed where are the funds to provide abortions to come from?
If the however many thousand women (estimates around 100,000 give or take over the decades?) who have gone to the UK or elsewhere for abortions over the past few decades had given birth -how many more welfare payments do you think the state would be on the hook for? Given our complete absence of jobs that is.
We haven’t enough jobs to go around despite the mass emigration, and we can barely afford welfare – do you not think the (financial) situation would be worse?
I know that sounds callous, but if we are going to put these two issues together, it is relevant.
Not mention suicide? A Supreme Court judge has already indicated otherwise in a constitution judgement. Any legislation that doesn’t mention it will be either invalid or just as vague as the status quo.
A difficult one for the National totalitarian Catholic Party AKA Fine Gael.
A constitution judgement?
If someone is suicidal, they can be prescribed medication. Suicide in the law would invalidate most other limitations in the same law. Frankly, any pregnant woman wanting an abortion could claim she’s suicidal, and there’s no easy well to work out if she’s truthful.
1. Anti depressants list suicide as a side effect.
2. Anti depressants cannot be prescribed during pregnancy due to the harm they would cause the foetus.
3. So because some women may lie that means every one of them should be tarred with the same brush?
padraig, you are a good example of a person who has no idea about the situation you’re talking about. Why don’t you take the time to look into it a little before coming to a conclusion?
Anti-depressants are prescribed during pregnancy when it is necessary. My friend had a difficult time during pregnancy due to depression but cannot fathom the thought of ever aborting her twin boys & taking into consideration she herself was adopted. Also my friend in Louth has just had a baby boy she is a cancer patient undergoing treatment & throughout the pregnancy also due my long term illness I was not taken off my medication due to pregnancy but received frequent check-ups.
Alex White has just been on the news promising to ignore the expert opinionof the IMO. Time to cut out the nonsense of the politicians – We need Jobs not Abortion. NOW.
Why can’t we have both?
Well jobs are first and abortion is unnecessary
In your opinion Hugh.
Theres good reason to believe that a majority of people realise that there are times when an abortion is necessary. The most reliable opinion polls we have, referendums, two of them in the past 20 years in fact.
You are perfectly entitled to disagree, but you do not get to override a democratic decision (one that has been confirmed no less) because you don’t like it..
I suggest you immediately launch your campaign for deletion of the 8th amendment. The will of the people expressed in referendum is supreme.
In the meanwhile I suggest you should at least read the scientific evidence.
Thanks for the tip there, Hugh. It’s not like there’s been a massive campaign to get rid of the 8th Amendment for years already or anything. It’s not like we’ve been demanding the government to legislate for the last 20 years since the X case and that their failure to act is one of the biggest affronts to democracy we’ve ever witnessed in this country. It’s not as if it isn’t clear that currently women’s lives are being put at risk (even if you think this is less important than creating jobs).
have your say