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 HIGH COURT has appointed an interim examiner to the Bradley Pharmacy Group, which has debts of approximately €24m.
The group, which employs 139 people, operates a number of pharmacies in counties Louth, Meath, Monaghan, Dublin, Wicklow and Kerry.
It says its current difficulties are due to factors including a historical debt owed to Bank of Ireland and a decision by its former main supplier United Drug to change its credit terms from payment from 120 days of delivery to 90 days of delivery had a negative impact on the group’s cash flow.
At the High Court today, Justice Aileen Donnelly said she was satisfied to appoint insolvency practitioner Ken Tyrell of PWC as the interim examiner to a group of related companies which form the Bradley Pharmacy Group.
The judge noted that, while the companies are insolvent and unable to pay their debts as they fall due, an Independent Expert’s Report furnished to the court stated that the group has a reasonable prospect of survival if certain steps are taken.
The steps include restructuring the group’s banking debts, securing fresh investment and the examiner securing approval for a scheme of arrangement with the group’s creditors.
The application for an examiner was made by one of the companies in the group Pagni Pharmacies Ltd.
Lyndon MacCann SC for Pagni said the application for the protection of the courts was being sought in order to allow the examiner to engage with potential investors and put together a scheme that if approved by the High Court would ensure the group’s survival as a going concern.
The examiner would also help provide reassurance to the person employed in the group’s various outlets.
There has been at least one expression of interest form a potential investor, counsel added.
Counsel said that in the event of a successful examinership the group would have an excess of liabilities over assets of €9.1 million. If the group went into liquidation, the deficit increases to €21.4 million.
Counsel said that while the companies in the group were trading profitably and can service their current debts the group was unable to meet repayments owed to Bank of Ireland in regards a historic debt of €19 million.
Counsel said the group’s banking debts would need to be restructured, and the group has been working closely with BOI.
Further difficulties were due to the challenging retail environment the group finds itself in, and the change of United Drugs payment terms, who are owed some €3 million by the companies in the group.
The Judge after appointing Mr Tyrell as interim examiner adjourned the matter to 20 August.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Horrible situation for the family. Before everyone starts been a key board warrior on here and writing nonsense spare a thought for all involved and refrain from been judgemental.
Sadly, Declan, if you read some of the comments you can see how deeply entrenched that some people are instead of having some respect for this tragic situation.
We should not have law that politicises tragedy, nor should we have law that removes common sense from medical practice, we should not have law that replaces the wishes of family with a prerogative of raison d’État.But we do, because we vote for clowns who cannot legislate for societal need because they choose to make make a name for themselves while advancing “novel” solutions that suit a particular agenda.
How this ended up being discussed in the Dáil is a national disgrace, and we have Kenny and Burton in position to keep the circus running. In my view, private hopes and wishes should prevail.
It’s nobodies business apart from the next of kin
I agree however it has been reported elsewhere that this woman has 2 other children. That, in my opinion, would suggest that she could be in a long term relationship or have a partner. Why should that person, assuming its the babys father, be denied an input into what is happening?
You’re right of course. First and foremost, this is a personal tragedy for the girl, her family and her children. It must be unbearable for them to have their tragedy and grief laid bare and cast to one side, for the whole country to gawp at and comment on. It’s their daughter, their decision as next of kin, as to what should happen next.
Hopefully he or she is not being denied anything, but it is certainly none of the “Pro-Life institute” bees wax.
The problem being that with the current legislation and that awful 8th amendment in place, what is being done to this family is, apparently, just fine.
Once more, the legal framework has no issues with a woman being exclusively as an incubator.
Emilio, I take it you believe in a woman’s right to chose? She is 16-17 weeks pregnant so it would imply she chose to have her baby. Isn’t turning off the machines going back on her choice? To say she is being “used as an incubator” would mean that any pregnant woman chooses to be an incubator and in fairness that girl made that choice. No one should be able to take that away.
Cloven, she is to all intents nd purposes dead. Clinically dead, legally dead, dead dead. The law is now forcing her family to keep her plugged in for another five months? It’s insane.
The things we do to women, it’s shocking that they even talk to us
Cloven, you’re making some big assumptions there. Firstly, the legal window for abortion in the United Kingdom is from 0-24 weeks meaning it is impossible to say with 100% certainty that she would have kept the child.
Secondly, you’re assuming that this woman would have been perfectly fine with the concept of her practically dead body being kept alive for the sole purpose of birthing her child despite her family wishing to lay her and her baby to rest.
Save the baby
Cloven: She is dead, she is no longer able to make such decisions. Next of kin are. They have made a decision. Only to be ignored by the system.
Johnny: What baby.
If the state is forcing the family to keep her on life support for 5 months then the state should pay the bill
Will they keep the natural mother alive to feed the baby if it’s born? I think her closest of kin should have the freedom to choose what’s right here, not the loony pro-lifers.
The mother will never know but give the child a chance :(
Jut passing, in the case of an unviable foetus threatening the life of the mother, would you apply the same logic? The foetus will never know but give the mother a chance???
Sam, we really can’t speculate on the father’s role in it, there are a multitude of possible scenarios. He could be uninvolved in the pregnancy, he could have been consulted by the family, he could have been affected by whatever tragic incident left this woman brain dead. We should be cautious about assuming his feelings and position on the issue.
Nick I’m pretty sure it’s impossible for the father not to have been involved in the pregnancy
To have opted out once she became pregnant? Not impossible at all. There seem to be a lot of assumptions that he is both currently in the picture and would oppose her family’s wishes – both massive assumptions which involve violating his privacy.
Actually nick im more concerned about the father and the lack of legal rights, who could be ignored in a court of law or whos wishes are not given weight because a couple are not married.
If this is tragedy going to be used as a test case in the right to life/choice debate i would think we are doing society a huge disservice if that debate excludes a fathers role. There is nothing to suggest that there is not a heartbroken man who has been a longterm life partner who is now being ignored by our legal system and that, in my opinion, is wrong.
“There is nothing to suggest that there is not a heartbroken man who has been a longterm life partner who is now being ignored by our legal system and that, in my opinion, is wrong.” Except that lots of details are being withheld for privacy reasons. So he could be out of the picture or he could have been consulted by the parents and agree – I think his privacy during this horrible tragedy is more important than him being forced into the spotlight to deal with a question which may be incredibly moot.
He could equally be very much in the picture as no details are known, and rightly so. However, if we are to see this case being used as almost a test case in some respects there must be consideration given to fathers who are ignored in the eyes of the law or we will simply be pushing another issue down the road. This entire area must be addressed in its totality and although it may not be possible to legislate for every eventuality, it would remiss to at least fail to a knowledge other eventualities may exist.
But there is no indication that he is both in the picture and opposes her family’s wishes. The government seems to believe that the family’s wishes are irrelevant – which would indicate that both married partners and unmarried ones would be ignored in this circumstance.
It seems clear that if a woman’s husband thought her wishes were to end life support, he would be ignored – so hardly specific to unmarried fathers?
This is a decision for the medical professionals and the immediate family. Everyone else should butt out.
Indeed. The government is way too involved in this issue, as are the pro life groups. It’s the decision of those involved.
That is not true, there are also legal protections for the unborn in Ireland.
If any medical action is taken to end the life of the child, unless legally, can lead to serious criminal charges against the medical personnel.
Also under the constitution, unborn children have full rights to life in Ireland, and a deliberate killing can result in manslaughter / murder charges.
This means the Gardai can be involved, the courts, etc….
Your point is wrong, and simplistic, and ignores the legal and constitutional reality in Ireland.
Your point is wrong, and not based on fact. It is not a child, it is a foetus.
Ah, so because it’s written as such in an archaic document which does not represent the wishes of modern society that makes it ok?
It’s easy to hide behind a broken piece of paper which doesn’t represent modern society.
@Jason,
Disagreeing with a law is not a basis to break it, legal liability is still an issue, and litigation is a real risk.
If you “believe” a law or constitution is “archaic” and “does not represent the wishes……” that is fine, but you will not succeed in using that as a defence in a court of law, and the state is obligated to protect all rights under the constitution, and all judges are obligated to follow and protect the constitution also.
I am fully aware of the delicate nature of this case, and have huge sympathy and compassion all around, I am not in a position to make judgement on whether the unborn child should be killed or not, but I know what the current law in this country is……..and such a killing is 100% illegal.
@Susan,
The “unborn baby” / “unborn child” has full protection under the Irish constitution / statutes, that is my point.
Personally I am pro-life under certain circumstances, and also pro-choice under other circumstances, I don’t agree with universal rules which don’t take consideration of circumstances.
The only place a decision can be made about this case is in the courts, with full regard to the rights of the family, the mother, and the “unborn child”. To ignore any of these involved parties would be illegal.
Susan Adair – the unborn child is Human – and therefore entitled to all the rights that go with being human, including the right to life.
Regarding the mother who is being kept on a life support machine until either the ‘baby’ dies as a stillborn or is allowed to develop enough to be removed from the womb at a later stage and kept in incubation never having had its natural mother. At which time the life support machine will probably be switched off and the death of the mother is recorded. One gets th feeling that this is just an medical experiment, using machines for life support of the mother in the hope of a succesful birth conclusion. As an experiment nobody really know if the baby can survive in the body of a brain dead woman or if it will progress normally after it is born. If this was a farm animal instead of a human one gets the sense that the solution would be an easier choice. Why do we play at being God.
It has been done before and with reasonablely good rates of success – so it’s not an expirement.
Susan , do you think the mother went around calling it a foetus ? No , as she already was a mother to two little ones , I am sure she would’ve said she was pregnant with her baby .
Ah Chris , now you can’t call it an experiment , it is not an experiment at all !
It is you who are wrong Susan.Under Article 40.3.3 he/she is an” unborn child”
At 16 weeks it is a foetus, get it right. It is not sentient. Emotional language will get you nowhere.
@ Joan-do you actually have a point?
@Susan Adair Farrelly – There is no emotional language involved Susan. Just to educate you – the Oxford dictionary definition of foetus is “an unborn human more than eight weeks after conception”. A foetus may not be a fully developed human, but it is human nonetheless. So, for anyone to deny the humanity of the unborn, is to be intellectually dishonest. Those who are pro-choice cannot acknowledge to this humanity in their use of language, because to acknowledge this, is to acknowledge what abortion actually is – the killing of a human, albeit one that is not fully developed.
“..the killing of a human, albeit one that is not fully developed”…..now if that’s not emotive then what is?! Just to educate YOU, I disagree with abortion if the foetus has developed consciousness or is sentient, before that, and in the interests of the woman concerned it should be her choice, Id have a hard time attaching the word human to an underdeveloped cellular organism, and that’s the point here, both sides have opposing views as to when life starts. As I’m coming from a scientific background, for me that is when sentience/consciousness begins.
You speak of intellectual dishonesty, perhaps you might read up on foetal development before responding so condescendingly. Here’s a definition of humanity to get you started : compassion, brotherly love, fellow feeling, humaneness, kindness, kind-heartedness, consideration, understanding, sympathy, tolerance, goodness, good-heartedness, gentleness, leniency, mercy, mercifulness, pity, tenderness, benevolence, charity, generosity, magnanimity, It might help you to temper your attitude towards this woman’s plight.
@Susan Adair F – Nice try Susan, but you know well that my comment was not aimed at this woman or her plight.
No danger of you staying on topic or commenting on the actual issue at hand discussed in article. You’re what’s wrong with democracy and people like you shouldn’t have a vote. Ignorant selfish and narrow minded.
@Susan – Yes, I am what is wrong with society. There is nothing more ignorant, selfish and narrow minded than defending the right of an innocent, defenceless and unborn child’s right to life. If only we had more people like you we could do away with voting altogether because you leftists know what’s best for everyone, don’t you!
Leftist?REALLY? If leftist means defender of rights by all means colour me leftist. Furthermore Id have a better clue than you regarding an issue you’ll never have to cope with or have ability to comprehend..so yeah Id love it it if people like you didnt have a vote, sure youre not exactly coming from a position where you have perspective….. youre just sitting there judging. Nope! I dont know whats better than everyone, but Ill tell you what I dont equate the right to life of an insentient organism to a woman. But sure you carry on, thinking youre in a position that you can comment on, carry on thinking your opinion matters (it doesnt), and carry on denying the rights of a woman over a foetus. You ARE what is wrong with society.
@Susan – Yes I know you’d love if people like me didn’t have a vote – because that’s how Tyrants see the world.
again with the emotive language-and name calling to boot! Arent you a delight. No, no- dont bother addressing any of the points above, carry on thinking your opinion means something.
Susan, you have only made one point in total relating to this issue. i.e. A foetus is not human. I have addressed that in a previous comment. I don’t agree with you, ok. I believe an unborn child is fully human, no different to the way a 5 yr old child is fully human, even though it is not yet a fully grown adult.
The only other point you seem to be making is that anybody who does not agree with your view of things, such as myself, should not be allowed to vote. This is the mindset of a tyrant or a person bent on controlling others. You go on to say that my opinion does not matter. Maybe it doesn’t, but it just means that your opinion equally does not matter.
It just happens that my view/opinion espouses the right to a woman’s bodily autonomy. The fact that you disagree with a woman’s rights over her own body makes YOU the tyrant. Who the he’ll do you think you are to tell another what to do with their body? The audacity of your attitude is nothing short of disgusting. I have no interests in engaging with you further.
Go away life institute this is her families decision and there buisness
The comments section should be mindful that we know very little of the details surrounding this case. Try not to leap to conclusions.
They should also be mindful of the family reading some of the sick, misinformed and uneducated comments on here
I’d also like to call for the comments to be closed
This story should NOT have been made public. This is a tragic situation. The family are in my thoughts and prayers. I dont have any opinion only compassion for all involved.
As much as, as a mother I cannot fathom letting a baby die the choice of words here in simply wrong – “deliberately let baby die” is not what would happen. This baby is currently deliberately being kept alive artificially and if the machines are switched off there would be nothing more natural than the baby to go peacefully with Mam. Yes it’s extraordinarily sad but mother nature can be a bitch sometimes and this is one of those times… if she had been alone when the clot occurred this issue would never have arisen. My heart goes out to the woman’s family and particularly her 2 children who must be totally confused as to what’s happening to Mammy right now. Why can’t people just let others be, what happened to personal choice?
“First, do no harm”
im pretty sure leaving someone in a zombie state is doing harm , the family cant grieve properly for a start and now they will be forced to fight the state and have a private matter dealt with in public and have the religious loopers come down on them like a tonne of bricks
The Life institute should just shut the f*** up. What a disgusting idea that this poor woman should be kept alive just to incubate something that is nothing more than a collection of cells at present. The family and only the family can make the decision here, it’s no business for any pro life sickos to be interfering in.
If it’s nobody’s business then why are you mouthing and sprouting out of you
Comments should be closed on this article.
At sixteen weeks, it’s hardly a collection of cells.
In any event, I’m not weighing in on either side of the argument but just to say that whatever happens, whatever decisions are made, the situation is tragic and thoughts and prayers are with the family,at such a difficult and harrowing time.
Thoughts also are with the medical team treating this lady and her unborn child, as I’m sure it cannot be an easy situation, and at the end of the day, they’re only doing their job whatever happens.
At 16 weeks do you know chances of survival? 0%. We still are talking about 10 more weeks before we can talk about real viability.
At this point in time, there is no baby. Just a person kept artificially alive without hope for survival.
The 8th amendment is an abomination.
Actually Emilio the chances are pretty good as long as no-one switches off the machine which is keeping the baby alive.
So in that case it’s perfectly fine to use a woman as an incubator despite the fact that her family stated they want to put her to rest?
Hopefully the baby can be born and some couple can adopt. The woman then can at least have a legacy.
There was a story in china recently about a woman who avoided chemotherapy to keep her unborn alive till term. She died 100 days after the child born. It seems strange that the Chinese now have better ethics then some in these comments.
It takes a special kind of clown to comment to say that comments should be closed.
Plantation, you mean it’s strange that some people in China share the same beliefs as yourself. Believing exactly what you believe does not mean it is ethical.
What is unethical is denying a family the right to bury their dead daughter/partner/mother despite the fact that they have requested that life support be turned off because of archaic religious legislation.
Dave
The circus must be in town so !!
What machine is that Lorem, the mother? I know the pro life loonies love to paint the female body as somesort of incubator, whos rights are to be ignored in favor of what’s inside.
‘Hopefully the baby will be born and some couple can adopt’,forget about what the family wants eh Plantation? You can go off and have your cup of tea and all is well with the world,so long as your personal moral code is satisfied and to hell with the real people dealing with the real situation.
Just because we can do it doesn’t mean we should. Next of kin are against this. Legacy? I thought she already had children.
Jason, what is unethical? because there is a living being inside that “dead daughter”. This unborn child has its own automony to be respected, it has its own distinct life which you want to snuff out because you want to pretend this isnt a human but an inanimate ‘thing’ and the wishes of a deceased woman are assumed to be that the foetus/child must be discarded to die.
Plantation, the wishes of this woman are not assumed to be anything as they have no legal bearing. It is the wishes of the next of kin, the ones who have to watch their loved-one’s body used as an incubator, which have authority in this case.
It is simply unethical to use a body forcefully to fit into some religious ethos despite the legal guardians of said body refusing to allow this.
I don’t want to snuff out any life as you so accused, merely I want the choice of the family to be respected. If the family were the ones saying to keep her on life support to keep the unborn alive then I would support that choice much the same as I support their choice not to use their dead daughter as an incubator.
She had a choice, Plantation, this lady doesn’t. And it’s for the family to decide without Life Institute trying to push their agenda.
@Jason
The family have no legal authority to end the life of the unborn.
The legal authority you refer to is the life support of their daughter, so there is a clear clash, that is the issue at hand.
If they exercise the legal authority to turn off life support for their daughter, that will have the knock on effect of killing the unborn child. This is not legal under Irish law, and the right of the child to life has to be considered.
The only place the decision can be made as to which rights take precedence is in the courts, who will refer to the statutes and constitution, and balance the rights involved.
The families “authority” as you refer to does not supersede this reality.
A collection of cells?? At 16 weeks?? Have a little look online at a picture of a 16 week old fetus. Definitely more than a collection of cells.
Jason, Basically your argument seems to be the law says the family has the final say and that is that. An argument from authority.
I am not making a religious argument. If liberals gave a hoot about autonomy they would respect the unborn childs natural rights to exist, to avoid this problem they insist the child is just a “clump of matter” or some other dehumanising phrase,
By having other children and by bringing this life to 14 weeks in the full of her health establishes precedent that she wants the baby to live. Her wishes should be respected.
LoneHurler, do you know her wishes? Do you know what she would choose if she knew the situation that she is in now? Who are you to decide her wishes? I think her next of kin are the only ones that can make such decision and live with it. You, me, the state, are not.
Precedent was set Emilio.
Shame to see this tragedy being jumped all over by people with very little consideration for her family’s wishes.
Also a shame to see people with so little respect for life openly advocating to kill a baby unnecessarily
It’s hardly unnecessary seeing as the family don’t want their loved one being kept alive for 5 months just to be an incubator. The family have made their decision.
The decision to turn off the life support would result in the death of a second person, the baby.
This life is protected by the constitution, and also basic human rights, the wishes of the mother are unknown.
Given these circumstances, I can see a clear resonable case that can be made to protect the baby.
Furthermore the wishes of the mother are unknown, but even still the baby would be protected under Irish law.
Assuming the child is healthy, surely it should not be ignored, or treated without due consideration to its life too, this is not a matter for only the family and medical profession, it is a legal issue about protecting life.
I can understand the families distress at losing their daughter, and how difficult it must be to have her kept alive, but cannot understand their wish for there grandchild to be killed, the child is part of their family and part of their daughter.
There is no baby.
@Emilio
I meant “unborn baby”
Which has full protection under the Irish constitution and Irish Law.
Don’t be so pedantic.
Maybe the child is not healthy? Maybe the traumatic brain injury suffered by the woman had an effect on the baby she is carrying. Maybe her parents are elderly and don’t feel they could care for a disabled child. Maybe the baby will not survive outside the womb, without some form of machine assistance. There are so many details we don’t know about this case, I think it’s very unfair to judge them and say you can’t understand why they don’t want their daughter’s baby.
“Don’t be so pedantic”
It is not a matter of pedantry, it is the key distinction here for me. If the pregnancy was, for example, at the 30th week, I would find it very hard to agree with the decision of her next of kin.
The constitution makes no mention of the word baby. Get it right.
@Grace,
I agree 100%, if the unborn child isn’t viable, or is unhealthy, that is a very valid consideration.
I did say in my post “Assuming the child is healthy” to take that into account.
@Susan,
The constitution applies to unborn babies, that is a fact, and you know it, your point is stupid.
Emilio , do you think any woman who is pregnant , goes around saying ” I’m pregnant , but its not a baby ” ??
Again, stop referring to it as a baby. If you feel the need to be condescending, at least get your terminology right.
Foetus not baby
Jonathan , I’m sure the mother didn’t go around referring it to a foetus. , I’m sure she was calling it her baby .
Would you say the same thing to this woman Jonathon? http://www.thejournal.ie/portlaoise-baby-1830076-Dec2014/
I’d tell her to get better doctors to look at her foetus.
do you count the 9 months before you were born as part of your life? Is your birthday 9 months before you were born?
I’m only asking as this question points out a double standard on this issue
I know the date I was born. I don’t know the date of implantation so hard to start counting from there.
Dave to you have kids???
They were my children from the day my wife told me she was pregnant
we had a scare at the14th weeks and we were afraid we were losing our baby not our foetus you idiots
Galway2007. I am sure her parents thought of that pregnancy as their grandson/daughter for a while. Until their daughter became clinically dead. Do you understand that they don’t want nor for themselves or for that possible child a life without a mother? No, you obviously not.
Not really. Your parents could give you a fair idea. Or just count back the length of the pregnancy.
Galway, that’s looking at it from an emotional standpoint. I’m glad your children are ok. But scientifically it’s a foetus. This next part may be upsetting and I’m sorry if it is.
If your wife was pregnant and brain damaged after 4 months would you want her to be kept on life support for 5 months? Forced to stay when her number has been called
Well sait Pontius. A voice of reason amongst the rabble.
Pontius, maybe you and your wife have made this decision, but this doesn’t seem to be the case here. Yet that doesn’t matter. How would YOU feel if you were forced to go against your wishes because the state says so? Or even worse, because a stupid ‘institute’ says so?
Until its born its a foetus. That is the correct terminology, as much as you all hate to admit it.
Q. If a woman was two weeks pregnant and didn’t know, and the same catastrophic injuries befell her, should we keep her alive for 6 months?
Or maybe we should ban the morning after pill too? Because all you pro life nutters think a couple of cells translates into a sentient human with thoughts and feelings.
“Until I hear what the father has to say also and the circumstances surrounding his involvement” So basically, his privacy should be violated so that you can make up your own opinion? The family involved should have the right to privacy without having to disclose their family details so that busybodies can judge them.
what i would want is what she wanted and none of us knows what this mother wanted
if i new the baby was going to be 100% ok i would keep it going
In this case we don’t know what the likely outcome will be and that is what should decide this
Nick Beard is suddenly becoming concerned on what the father of the child has to say when most of the time she deems abortion a woman’s choice only.
There’s no good outcome here. Please close the comments.
Comments section wont be closed. It’s up to those i
in it to keep it civil and avoid speculating and being nasty over such a difficult and tragic case.
another “institute” jeez. Next of kin decision is the only just one, its not right that the state interfere is a deeply private matter let alone religious zealots
This is a tragic situation where the family should be allowed to make a decision in complete privacy without the media circus that is currently growing. Pro-life groups, pro-choice groups, pro-abortion groups, politicians, the media and the public should leave them alone. No matter what their decision, it’s THEIR decision and they shouldn’t be influenced by anyone or criticised by anyone. Leave them alone…
Carragh I totally agree with you. I won’t be the only person in Ireland today whose heart is broken on behalf of this family. A week before Xmas as well. However it is not their choice as the law has taken away the ability for people to make individual choices in this situation. This means that it can happen to any women and her family and therefore it has now be turned into a public interest issue because it could affect any one of us. This cannot be allowed happen again.
That is true to a degree @Caragh
However there are legal considerations too, and under the constitution of ireland, and the statutes, killing a unborn child is illegal. Also it can attract criminal charges, this is not a matter of discretion, but legal reality.
You or I may not agree with it, but it is not possible to ignore. Also someone must advocate for the baby, as the matter under discussion is the babys deliberate killing. Under irish law the baby has a right to life.
Again, its not a baby, it is a foetus. Stop using emotive language.
That poor woman’s body is being used as an incubator, against her family’s wishes. Shes not a vessel and that must be respected, and Im talking about this moment in time when it is still a foetus.
At this stage it’s safe to say the woman wanted to keep the child. Should her partner of involved not have a say. But from what I understand this happened before in Texas and the foetus developed fairly abnormally as the normal hormone funtions etc weren’t produced by the woman’s body due to her beg brain dead so it’s not like in 9 months you’ll get a bonny baby.
The baby may have a chance of turning out physically fine or not, however what these studies don’t address is the guaranteed psychological damage to the family involved.
In this case the family have decided that they do not want the psychological trauma of having their loved one used as a biological incubator alongside the damage of their loved one being medically dead.
For what seems to be the ten millionth time, it is not a baby it is a foetus.
This story hurts my heart and my brain equally
Judging by your other comments you have a cold heart of stone.
Hurler, you sick person. And ridiculously hypocritical
Yup Hurler that’s the conclusion to be drawn from my comment. Back to your glass house.
Everyone needs to butt out of this – this is a private family decision at a very difficult time, leave them in peace to grief at the loss of their daughter, and not be dragged into the middle of a pro-life pro-choice debate.
If a woman is pregnant and doesn’t want to be, people here say how disgraceful it is that she’s denied an abortion. But when a woman did want to be, you say it’s disgraceful that she can remain pregnant. There’s not many would argue that where a mothers life is in danger she should come first but seems saving at least one only counts when it’s the mother. Something wrong with that thinking
It clearly states in the article that the family want life support switched off rather than having their loved one kept alive for the sole purpose of being an incubator. She is, for all intents and purposes, dead and the family want the opportunity to put their loved one to rest.
The debate has and always will be about people wanting a choice. Right now the family have made their choice and by the sounds of it this choice is being blocked by archaic legislation.
You would be in favour of murder just so that the date of a funeral can be different??
How is it murder? The woman is dead by every definition and the foetus is well below the threshold of being able to survive independent of the mother.
The Chainsaw Institute sides with the family and believes the so called Life institute needs to pfo and leave this poor family to their decision and their grief.
Your institute is just as dogmatic as theirs
Something tells me that The Chainsaw Institute would respect the wishes of the next of kin. Making it not dogmatic.
If the mother had any say she would fight tooth and nail to protect her babies life, no matter what the consequence! I don’t understand this country, why would anybody slaughter an unborn child, well I guess we’ll all have to answer for our actions one day.!
Pass over the crystal ball when you’re done with it.
No one wants to slaughter a child but the pro life side would make you think people who agree that it’s none of their business and up to the people involved and their doctors only are on a hunt to kill as many unborn babies as they can.
I’m gonna put it in perspective here, ok they abolish the 8th and the unborn child has nearly no rights, ok, now imagine this, your pregnant wife, friend, sister is walking down the town and gets mugged and looses the baby as consequence, then they find the mugger but can only charge him with assault because the baby is not classed as alive, then all you pro-choice guys would be crying out for justice and slating our justice system! But listen ya can’t have your cake and eat it too..
most abortion in the uk carried out today are because of the Gender of the baby
And you know this how? I mean, quote some data please.
I know you’re being sarcastic Neil, very clever comment! :) Just incase anyone took it seriously though, I’m going to point out that currently, even with the 8th, assaults on pregnant women that result in the baby dying are only classed as assaults under Irish law and not murders. Funny how we don’t see the pro-life side arguing against that. It really is all about controlling women and what they do with their bodies.
Well then it’s my opinion that the unborn child is given more rights, with attitudes like abortion on demand..jesus I’m all for a nanny state now because your not fit to make decisions of your own, it’s murder like.!
Oh, I see now that I credited you with more intelligence than I should have..
And I didn’t credited you with any to start with..
You didn’t credited me? Or credit me? Lol!
Where did you get that fact??
So a foetus should have more rights than a woman?
Ow no you couldn’t understand what I was saying because of a simple spelling error! Child brain lol
Mature.
We’ll have to answer for our actions one day? Sounds like religion replaced your common sense long ago. There is none left whatsoever. There was a woman a couple years ago called Savita, who refused to fight tooth and nail and simply wanted her life saved. It is hard for the brainwashed to understand that women out there do not consider a pregnancy a God-given present. You are so brainwashed that it is really scary. Leaving the brainwashed part of the population aside, it is even scarier to realize that now we can’t be left alone in peace even when we r dead. I do want to see this 8th amendment repealed for the sake of ourselves and, most importantly, common sense.
Ok then you assume I’m a religious freak(which I’m not), and il assume u like the thought of children being slaughtered! Fair enough
Are a pro life group going to help raise this baby? No. The name “pro life” is so misleading. They’re not pro life, they’re pro birth. They don’t care about the baby after its born. They protest beside the GPO with their graphic images, but if they looked closely around them they’d see junkies walking around with children. They don’t care about the child, only the foetus. A woman should have a choice with her body, and as the woman can’t make this choice, her family should have a choice. They made their choice. It’s an awful situation for any family to be in.
Rather judgmental comment but then again what can we expect from a pro-abort. A foregotten conclusion. How do you know if the child was put up for adoption that no pro-life activists would like to adopt? Lame comments as usual.
Amazed that so many comments support obeying the family’s wishes. The fetus must be given every chance of survival. The family should be comforted and listened to, but they cannot decide to end this life.
They wouldn’t be deciding to end the life of the unborn. They’re merely letting nature run its natural course. The woman is dead by every definition yet the state is forcing the family to wait 5 months to bury their loved one because of her utility as an incubator.
They’re not deciding to end a life. Nature already made that decision.
Does Jason realise how daft it is to suggest that doctors “let nature run it’s natural course”? What kind of world would that be?? The whole point of medicine is to save lives!
Then he re-states his primary argument: kill the child so the funeral can be soon!
Emily, no nature didn’t! The fetus isn’t dead! Again, where would we be if that logic was applied in hospitals?!?
Rathminer, the woman currently has her vital functions being performed by a machine because her brain is dead. The foetus isn’t dead because a machine is providing the biological functions. Switch off the machine and both naturally die.
Medicine is not about saving lives, it is about prolonging lives in a reasonable manner. If you are terminally ill, medicine will only make your last days more comfortable rather than running a futile exercise to try and save you. In this case keeping a woman who is both biologically and legally dead running just to birth a foetus against the wishes of the family is beyond what can be described as reasonable.
No it isn’t. I see no valid argument for giving up this fight.
The family have declared they do not want this, therefore there is no valid argument to continue it. The state is using a body against the wishes of the next of kin.
I think Jason has a “stick it to the man” attitude haha
Yes Neil, because this topic is a laughing matter.
Emily, by that logic you and a lot of us here would probably already be dead. Nature would have killed us if we didn’t receive medical treatment at some stage in our lives. It is natural for humans to strive to survive and develop methods to help us survive, like inventing technology to support life.
Abortion is not a black and white situation
Our constitution says it is
Who exactly are “The Life Institute” anyway?
It’s also worth noting that while apparently a men should not have a say if they oppose abortion there are a awful lot of men on this discussion who do think they have the right to demand that this woman is taken of life support.
Is consistency of argument such a hard thing to do?
None
Of
Your
Business
It occurs to me that most liberals would be in favor of organ donation upon death , actually they’d probably mandate for it , what this woman’s family is going through is beyond words but if modern medicine can sustain this child until it’s born then he/she should be given every opportunity …who are we to define sentient when we can’t even remember been babies , some mums make the ultimate sacrifice for their children ….brave lady
You idiot, how could she be a brave lady, has no idea what is happening to her or her family. What a fool you are
I really wish the journal would switch off comments. While there are national issues at hand these are real people’s lives turned upside down. I know the girl who has passed away. Her family,friends and the wider community are distraught at what has happened. It is a very private and personal situation to this family being torn apart in the media. There are extenuating circumstances also which people are not aware of. These people are also grief stricken. They don’t need the added pressure and torment being thrashed about in some of the comments. It is a very difficult time for all concerned including her partner/father of the unborn. They need privacy at this time
While I have a strong opinion on this I agree that privacy should be respected.
But the family’s rights and needs are being trampled by the pro-abortions.
Same happened in the case of Savita when her husbands wishes were ignored and the case was used for political purposes.
Torture of the living by the nosey and the “caring” people of our society .
Its the family’s decision and theirs alone. Their views must be respected.
I can’t believe “save the baby” got 71 red thumbs and 36 green… We need to have a serious look at our selves as a society.. This baby is forming hands a face legs arms and a brain etc as we speak
The foetus is, stop referring to it as a baby. It is a long way from being a baby yet.
Aren’t you lucky you weren’t in a similar situation when you were in the womb Munster, having people like you refer to you as though you were nothing of any value. Do you think if the child was born they would appreciate people like you spewing such bile.
Save that baby, he or she is innocent…
Rat, what baby?
Emilio, have you got anything else to contribute? Making the same trite comment whenever someone says the word “baby” is very unimaginative and banal. We get it, you don’t consider the unborn to be babies, great, now change the record no?
RIP to the poor mother and condolences to the family.
- the panel of legal and medical experts needs to decide the best course of action based on the law and the medical circumstances a decision which is mainly the viability of the foetus/child.
- I wish them the best in their dilemma.
- the pro choice and pro life hardliners should show more respect in this difficult time for foetus/child and the family.
-Whether you believe it is a foetus or a child he/she/it is fighting for his/her/its life in the most appalling of circumstances.
Respect…
Medievalists should shut their silly,sectarian traps at such a sensitive and tragic time for the family and let the family do what they wish to do. The arrogance of the ‘Life Institute’ (another pop-up Romanist group à la PLAC and SPUC of yore who wish to foist their mindset on the public) is absolutely breathtaking.
This family are in an appalling situation . There is no absolutely right or absolutely wrong decision here . Please can we put aside absolutes and fundamentalist thinking on both sides and hope ( and pray to any Higher Power ? ) that this family and their doctors are treated compassionately and not judged or condemned
Interesting to note that some of my comments have been removed.
#censorship?
Very sensitive topic. There are so many differences to what happens to us when we are not in a position to manage ourselves.
The Journal PLEASE have some respect for this family and remove this thread. It is bad enough that this has made the ”news” but it should not be an open forum for people to be commenting or judging this family. This really is disgusting reading comments about this sensitive issue. Nobody knows the grief and heartache family, friends and the whole community are feeling at this tragedy. It is not right that it has turned into a ‘free for all’!!!
have your say