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 Northern Lights are visible at Porsanger Garrison, near Lakselv, Norway. Andrew Milligan/PA Wire/Press Association Images
HERE ARE ALL the things we learned, loved and shared today.
THINGS WE LEARNED
#CONCLAVE The frontrunners have emerged in the last day of the pre-conclave talks over who will become the next pope in the Roman Catholic Church. Vatican insiders put Milan Archbishop Angelo Scola in the lead, while Brazilian Odilo Scherer, the archbishop of Sao Paolo, is also seen as in with a chance.
#FIRE A man aged 62 has been pronounced dead after a house fire on Clare Island. Gardaí said they are not treating the fire as suspicious.
#LONDON Taoiseach Enda Kenny met with British Prime Minister David Cameron today, where he made a speech at the London School of Economics. Following his speech – during which he called today “symbolic and important” – he was asked by an audience member if Ireland would rejoin the Commonwealth. His answer was negative.
#REFUGE A refuge for domestic violence sufferers is still unopened, a year after TheJournal.ie revealed that it had been completed but never opened due to a lack of funding. Funding issues persist, although the HSE is in negotiations with Teach Tearmainn, who runs the centre. It is hoped a solution can be found by the end of the year.
#JAILED A former UK minister, Chris Huhne, and his ex-wife Vicky Pryce have been jailed for perverting the course of justice after she took penalty points he had been given for speeding 10 years ago. They have both been sentenced to eight months in prison.
#PISTORIUS Lawyers for Olympian Oscar Pistorius have filed an appeal in a South African court against bail restrictions imposed on him. He is charged with murdering his girlfriend, and his lawyers say that the conditions appealed against are unwarranted and not substantiated by the facts.
A photo taken today on the shores of Lough Mask, Clonbur, Co Galway, by TheJournal.ie reader Tomás Burke, who described it as “frosty and windy”. Quite!
THINGS WE LOVED
(Mike Mika/YouTUbe)
THINGS WE SHARED
(Dónal Mulligan/YouTube)
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Of course his plan to turn GPs into abortionists was always going to blow up in his face.
The wheels are coming off the wagon for ‘repeal the 8th’ and their extreme abortion agenda.
@Emma Murphy: ” their extreme abortion agenda” – what is’extreme’ about a woman procuring a safe,legal abortion ? Do tell ?
@Emma Murphy: Considering the GPs won’t be performing any abortions how will they become abolitionists?
I don’t see the issue with conscientious objection. I’m sure half or more of GPs will be happy to facilitate choice, and as someone who is very much pro-choice I will respect a GPs right to object.
The whole basis of being pro choice is to let people decide what’s right for them, and what their conscience will allow. As such I will merely expect doctors to refer patients to a doctor who is not a conscientious objector
ie GPs should not be forced to prescribe abortion pills against their beliefs, or even refer directly to clinics, but they should be forced to give a referral to a GP who can facilitate them rather than washing their hands completely of a patient seeking assistance
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin:
Surely we can all decide whether killing is right or wrong – it is not a personal decision or what is best for people.
If what was “right” for people allowed the indiscriminate termination of other human lives – that undermines all human rights and advances by civilisation.
Abortion is a reality in other countries – that does not make it right.
Human rights are guaranteed by our constitution for unborn humans – anyone debating to remove human rights – simply to allow these humans to be killed.
Is morally and ethically dead.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: where does conscientious objection stop?
@HelloGoogleTracking: stop copying and pasting your posts.Seeing it once a week is cruel enough
Thanks
@Paul Fahey:
Doctors must do everything in the power to heal and save life.
Objecting to killing obviously makes sense in that context.
No doctor can refuse to treat someone with the goal of healing or saving their life, if threatened by disease or illness.
Clear?
@Francis Mc Carthy:
I copy and paste nothing – every post is written individually.
You are once again wrong as always – back up your statements or shut up – you simply add noise. Like an empty vessel hit with a hammer.
@HelloGoogleTracking: “You are once again wrong as always ” – back up where i’ve ‘always’ been wrong ?
****crickets chirping****
@Francis Mc Carthy:
Every time you dehumanise the unborn – you are wrong.
Every time you advocate for a mothers right to kill her own child – outside of extreme medical emergencies – you are wrong.
When you laugh at unborn children being killed – you are wrong.
Almost every time you open you mouth without thinking first – with childlike naive absence of considerations for a death – you are wrong.
Now back up your statements or shut up like i have suggested…….just more noise coming from you.
@thewolf: speaking of imaginations-the greatest one has to be the person that came up with the slogan #loveboth
Hahaha,what an imagination,there..
#loveboats, more like
@HelloGoogleTracking: you’re becoming too emotional,pet..
i’ve always called it by it’s proper medical terms -human embryo ->human foetus <- how is it dehumanising' by calling it by it's proper medical names ?
I advocate for a WOMAN'S right to remove a human foetus from her womb – and for ANY reason within the first 12 weeks -as that is the best hope of what will get passed here..
I don't laugh at "unborn children" being 'killed'- i'm laughing at you ..
You will never be able to shut me up -just like you will never be able to stop a determined woman from ending her unwanted/wanted pregnancy…now cry away..
@Francis Mc Carthy: Since when have ‘medical terms’ or ‘technical’ terms more accurately, been used in everyday human language? I’ve never heard any woman say ‘my foetus’ is moving around, nor ‘hope this clump of cells turns out to be a boy/girl’ so the lad has a point. Pregnancy maybe an unemotional subject for you, but that might just be you
@Francis Mc Carthy: You’re making a show of yourself
@Joe Phillips: thanks for the input,Joe..take a rest,now…
@wrong side: so we’re dealing with emotional terms,now…bless..
@Francis Mc Carthy: Have the thousands that have traveled and are still travelling to England for abortion not had safe abortions? The pro-choice side want unrestricted abortion brought into Ireland at all costs, i wonder why? Also they all come across as extremely anti-catholic, and seem to have an agenda here. They are probably members of the same club that are fighting to have religion removed from schools and church bells stopped. I consider this group of people to be very dangerous, what comes next after this? the burning of churches? The fact that they have the evil George Soros as their financial backer should make people realize, this is not just about abortion, it is a form of manipulation of a people their country and religion.
@Tom&Gerry:time for you to tighten those straps on your helmet & when you have that done,those 10 antennas on top need moving around..
It’s ridiculous, what next refusing to treat LGBTQ patients or Muslim patients or sex workers?
@GizmoIrl:
Doctors, consultants and nursing staff with religious beliefs are discriminated against in Irish hospitals every day of the week.
@Niccolo Saccho: leave your religious beliefs at home. A hospital is not a church
@Marc Power:
Honest men are guided by their principles.
@Niccolo Saccho: unprincipled men force their beliefs on others
@Marc Power:
Which would appear to be your position here Marc.
Just saying.
Let everyone be guided by their conscience.
@Niccolo Saccho: What is this discrimination you talk of?
@GizmoIrl: having a conscientious objection has nothing to do with religion.
@Niccolo Saccho: weak men are guided by religion! Be strong enough to stand by your own principles.
@Niccolo Saccho: We’re all born atheists until some cult comes along and indoctrinates against children’s will and without their consent.
@Royston Fitzpatrick: “We’re all born atheists…” How do you know? Do you have scientific evidence? Or is it your opinion presented as fact?
@GizmoIrl: You cannot force anyone into assisting someone in taking a human life. Try thinking about the mental stress involved where the GP is a person of conscience.
@Niccolo Saccho: I can put up with most of your BS but to claim atheists have no principles is just absolute nonsense. You have to be all levels of ignorant to even utter such stupidity. You are in fact an atheist by believing in one God and rejecting others. You are an atheist of all other gods.
@wrong side: Have you ever asked a 3 month old baby which god they believe in? Let us know when you have the answer.
@Philip Howlin: if you contentiously object to practicing medicine, don’t practice medicine. Do you get to pick and choose which aspects of your job you’re willing to carry out?
@Niccolo Saccho: Rightfully so since their views are in direct conflict with their medical responsibility. Although I’d imagine the number of people who pledge their life in the profession of care would look to inflict superstitious beliefs on those they intend to care for.
@Marc Power: so consciences don’t exist for you
@thewolf: Most GPs in Ireland are private practitioners, but the majority of GPs provide services on behalf of the HSE…
@Marc Power: “A hospital is not a church”
Nor should it be a killing ground.
Doctors have ethics too – and a hippocratic oath
Ethics and the difference between right and wrong is not the sole preserve of religion.
Religions have a view – but few people care anymore.
This does not mean ethics and morality are dead – people can decide for themselves.
A good starting point is respect for life, and not to kill other human beings.
@GizmoIrl: there’s a difference between not providing a service that you object to and not providing a service to somebody you would have provided to somebody else of a different gender, race, creed, sexual orientation.
Not a logical comparisen to draw.
@Karen Wellington: deliberate killing of the unborn child is NOT medicine….Hippocratic Oath…”first do no harm”
@MichaelandMary O’Grady:that 2,400 yr old oath is scoffed at..
@Kal Ipers:
“@Niccolo Saccho: I can put up with most of your BS but to claim atheists have no principles is just absolute nonsense. You have to be all levels of ignorant to even utter such stupidity. You are in fact an atheist by believing in one God and rejecting others. You are an atheist of all other gods.”
Kap lpers , so,so well said. These ‘holier than thou’ fools are really departing from reality. Fact we are all born atheists, then indoctrinated in to believing in one of a thousand different gods. The moral construct in which we live is a geographic lottery.
@HelloGoogleTracking: Doctors in Ireland don’t take the oath nor does the oath say “do no harm” anywhere…
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: they don’t take the Hippocratic Oath, and haven’t done so for a while now. Have you ever even read it? The original version is ridiculous “I swear by Apollo the Healer, by Asclepius, by Hygieia, by Panacea, and by all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will carry out, according to my ability and judgment, this oath and this indenture. To hold my teacher in this art equal to my own parents; to make him partner in my livelihood; when he is in need of money to share mine with him….”
@thewolf: if you’re getting paid to provide a service, provide the damn service
@Niccolo Saccho: Men, honest or otherwise won’t ever be pregnant.
@Royston Fitzpatrick: “Have you ever asked a 3 month old baby which god they believe in?” That’s pretty lame and you know it! Course you can’t back it up, no-one can either way, but most are smart enough not to present glib opinions as facts
@wrong side: 95% of what religions used to claim to be true has been eliminated by the human brain and science, the last 5% will follow shortly, it’s only a matter of time. “I don’t know the answer so that book written by nomads in the Bronze Age must be true” is a weak hypothesis.
@Royston Fitzpatrick: 95% has been disproven? Only if what was stated in the bible was stated as scientific fact. I don’t think many people argue it was. Look up Jordan Petersons biblical series. He talks about how the biblical stories are architipical and psychologically valid. They’re stories to draw lessons from because they help us navigate the complex world.
@Patric Cooney: Stop Patric, you’ll confuse him! He clearly doesn’t know the difference between ‘fact’ and metaphorical story telling. Imagine, an atheist taking the bible literally. You couldn’t make it up!
@thewolf: I don’t actually object to individual GPs opting out of their HSE contract if they don’t want to provide certain services or procedures. I do have a problem with paying them to do provide services and procedures that they refuse to provide.
@Francis Mc Carthy: not by everyone!
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: …but by the majority…
did you know that there is this well known “pro life” college student that was handed their mothers 12/14 week old miscarried foetus ? Freaked me out when i read about it
@GizmoIrl: Don’t be so silly, no one is saying anyone is refused treatment. Doctors are objecting to the ball being kicked into their court by the government regarding abortion, without consultation with said doctors. Some doctors have no problem with abortion, others do. Just like you or me they are entitled to their opinions and beliefs and should not be asked to deny those beliefs.
@Niccolo Saccho: my position is not revelant as its not my body that’s being controlled
@Royston Fitzpatrick: We are all born children of God.. unless we are aborted before childbirth.
@Karen Wellington: killing a child is not part of many people’s job…
I support the right of GPs to opt out but they should be required to do so openly and specify whether that applies just to themselves or also to other GPs in the same practice. This is much better than putting women in the position of expecting independent advice and receiving biased information. Women who wish to consider abortion as an option will know whom to avoid. Equally, those who exercise their right not to consider abortion in any circumstances will be able to select medical practitioners who explicitly share their views.
@thewolf: The voodoo is in your Pro-Life prayer groups, get out and smell the roses instead of revelling in your own ignorance all the time.
@Royston Fitzpatrick: but you’d avoid poorly executed jobs due to moral conflict for example. i think Terry is right, it is more practical
@Royston Fitzpatrick: GPs refuse to treat Irish people daily when they pass them off to the emergency department unnecessarily.
I have no difficulty allowing GPs to object. It’s not just a decision of conscience for women and when we get around to allowing euthanasia I expect GPs to be allowed object to that too.
I don’t think it’s helpful to swing wildly from abortion under no circumstances to ‘you must give me an abortion or I’ll have you struck off’. It’s vindictive against pro life people and unhelpful in an ethically complex (for individuals at least) issue.
There will be enough doctors who agree with the right to choose.
@Royston Fitzpatrick:
Believing that life has value and worth – and that other humans should not be killed is not voodoo.
Another red herring argument – ignoring the fact that an injection to killing unborn children does not require a religious component.
It is simple ethics and morality – and knowing the difference between right and wrong – and respect for life
@Royston Fitzpatrick: have them struck off and replaced with whom exactly? We’re not exactly swimming in medics, areas of the country are completely reliant on a single GP, but you want to start getting rid of them if they refuse to bend to your totalitarian will, and to hell with all the others who rely heavily on the essential services they provide? I know I shouldn’t resort to insults, but my God you are a petty moron.
@HelloGoogleTracking: Your idea of right & wrong can be different to other peoples idea of right & wrong. For instance I think it’s wrong for someone to say, it’s my right to have a child when they expect the state to pick up the tab.
@Cindy Crawford:
You would agree killing another human being is wrong ?
@HelloGoogleTracking: a person or <12 week foetus?
@HelloGoogleTracking: I would agree that ending an unwanted pregnancy is the right thing to do. I wouldn’t agree it should be done at any stage of the pregnancy.
@HelloGoogleTracking: I also agree with euthanasia. You might think I have no compassion but I believe I’m more compassionate than a lot of people who are pro choice. I believe in euthanasia because I don’t think it’s right to force someone to die slowly & agonisingly. I don’t believe it’s right to force someone to live a life where they have no control over their own bodies.
@Cindy Crawford:
I also believe in euthanasia, it should be a human right for any individual to decide the end of their own lives.
Especially considering some of the horrendous medical conditions and immense pain the rob them of all quality of life, and make it simply a torment.
To force these people to live in pain and torture is ethically wrong in my eyes – who best to decide than the person themselves.
A safe and painless option should be granted – however this decision should not be made be anyone else except the person involved – otherwise it opens a can of worms.
@Cindy Crawford:
Once you start breaking down the pregnancy into sections where it is acceptable or not it becomes difficult ethically.
If the human life within the womb is ok to kill at a certain point, and not at another – the only way you could justify it is to reduce its humanity.
This is the difficult part……
Personally I am against abortion on demand – I am pro contraception, also pro choices that do not require someone to die. In medical emergencies – the mothers life should always get first preference – she is here first and if a choice between her and the child, it has to be the mother.
A morning after pill or abortion pill within a very narrow window (in line with medical experiments on foetuses – 10 days max) – also seems sensible to me – this may appear a contradiction, and it is.
As the human life is still there – however that is the furthest reasonable compromise I would be willing to make – as there can never be absolutes, and this is in line with medical and ethical experts who sat on panel to decide max time for experiments without compromising human rights and ethics.
@HelloGoogleTracking: why should being here first determine who lives ?
@Francis Mc Carthy:
Because it is balancing of rights – if both mother and child have the right to life, however due to medical emergency both cannot survive.
Then a decision needs to be made on who to save – the mother is already a adult, presumably with a partner, with a life and loved ones surrounding her.
Both deserve to live, however the mother is here first and can have other children – she does not deserve to die, and her husband / partner deserves their partner. This does not mean the child deserves to die, but it is the lesser of two evils (a concept in ethics no doubt you are unfamiliar with)
It is an extreme case of ethics, but in that scenario – it should be obvious why the mother has preference.
@HelloGoogleTracking: and it should be obvious that the woman’s life is much more precious than that of a pea sized embryo…..good lad..
The GP will not be forcing women to have an abortion nor will they be the physically doing anything other than prescribing a pill or discussing the woman’s decision. This isnt about a moral or a religious debate. Its about what is right for the patient and after assessing all options and the conclusion is still abortion then the GP will write a prescription for the pill that is needed. Most pregnancy care is provided with GP rather then the hospital in the early stages. No GP has the right to use their personal beliefs to provide the correct care for his/her patients regardless of how they feel. I think people need to get off their high horses and stop letting another country provide care for the women of Ireland
@AnnieBelle: no GP has the right not to give his patients the proper care because of their religious beliefs
@AnnieBelle:
If a GP is opposed to abortion then that GP has the democratic right to conscientiously object. Other GPs who wish to provide abortion information can do so if they wish.
Democracy is a splendid system.
@AnnieBelle: What if a doctor is against abortion on ethical grounds? It’s not necessarily a religious viewpoint. Just asking.
@Niccolo Saccho: No, the GP is under obligation to provide the best care they can for their patient. I dont think GP’s will be allowed to opt out nor do I think they should be allowed to. Its not about them. Its about the woman. If GP’s were allowed to opt out of providing care we would be pretty screwed wouldnt we?
@AnnieBelle: So rights for some, but not for all? At least that’s consistent with the prochoice position, I suppose
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
@Andrew Eager: No I never said rights for some and not for all. I dont think GP’s should be allowed to opt out on any reason. Their care for the patient comes before their ethical and religious beliefs. They have a duty of care to their patients and if that duty of care means providing a woman with a prescription for an abortion pill, then yes I think they should have to do it
@AnnieBelle: The problem Annibelle is that when a woman is pregnant a GP sees two patients instead of one. They are there to help the woman have the healthiest pregnancy she can, that’s why certain drugs come with the warning ‘do not take if pregnant or breastfeeding’. No doctor wants to kill a patient, hence the dilemma.
@AnnieBelle: “Their care for the patient comes before their ethical and religious beliefs.” If we replaced the words ‘care for’ with ‘treatment of’, then your statement would be both more accurate and more disturbing. Abortion without medical necessity is not ‘care’, its treating an issue and providing a service
@Rachel O’ Meara: and I dont think any woman wants to have an abortion just for the craic so I think if the woman’s needs are what the doctor needs to care for first and foremost. Its not about two patients. It is about the woman. The human being that is sitting in front of the doctor. I don’t see how a doctor would be ok with not providing a prescription for an abortion pill but would be ok to allow them to purchase unsafe pills or send them to another country
@wrong side: what if doctor is against blood transfusions or contraception? You don’t get to pick and choose which aspects you like, you either do the job in it’s entirety or give it up altogether.
@AnnieBelle:
The issue is that the pregnant woman is not sick, she just doesn’t want to go ahead with the pregnancy. Therefore can a doctor ethically facilitate her to end the pregnancy if he or she genuinely feels that a life will be lost.
@Aine O Connor: a woman looking for birth control or man seeking a vasectomy isn’t sick, should doctors be able to turn them away if they believe in ‘procreation, not recreation’?
@Karen Wellington:
Not the same thing, the contraception debate is long over.
@AnnieBelle: i agree that no doctor should refuse treatment, and most won’t have a problem with abortion. the few GPs who have an ethical problem should be given an out, just to avoid malpractice. probably a minute number of GPs who would risk losing their licence over an abortion, but it might just be the safer option for the woman.
@AnnieBelle: the unborn baby is also their patient
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: yes but the woman takes precedence over “the unborn baby”
@AnnieBelle: have you been reading ‘animal farm ‘ ……some are MORE EQUAL than others.
Our constitution protects mother’s and babies as it should
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: who pays the bills? The woman or the embryo ? You can take your time if you’re struggling with the answer to that one..(i’ll be here for the rest of the day )
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: how did the 8th protect Malak Thawley ?
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: Our constitution will change
@Aine O Connor: the GPs concerns to would only be relevant the 8th is repealed, meaning the debate would be over….
@AnnieBelle: Your argument is nonsence, What you are saying is that a doctor no matter what his beliefs should play a part in the termination of life, even though it might be against his religion, or just his basic human morals,and conscience. It is not just about the woman, it is about a woman her unborn child, and a doctor who is being asked to facilitate in the destruction of a life against his principles.
@Francis Mc Carthy: does that mean you are not working? Are we paying your bills as Well?
@Francis Mc Carthy: perhaps the master of that hospital should have been looking after the patients instead of promoting abortion to the oireachtas committee. Then an inexperienced junior doctor might might not have had to try and look after that unfortunate lady RIP.
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: why wasn’t she allowed a medication abortion ?
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: @Francis Mc Carthy: does that mean you are not working? Are we paying your bills as Well?
Eh? I pay my own bills & so does my wife…and we also pay enough in bloody taxes…any other personal questions ?
@AnnieBelle: So it’s “choice” for the woman, no choice for the GP ? I’m pro-choice….that means choice for everybody. Even Varadkar says people should act on their own conscience, that has to include GP’s. People also have the choice of changing to another GP if not happy with the services he/she is willing to offer.
@Tommy Roche: nope I dont agree. If it is legislated for up to 12 weeks then I think GPs have an obligation to follow that legislation if required. The same way they are bound by legislation at the moment. You can choose to follow it in one way and not another. I genuinely dont see it being that big of an issue with GP’s to be honest though rather a small minority so hopefully it wont be too much of an issue
@Francis Mc Carthy: perhaps it wasn’t suitable for her particular case. Only the medics can answer that.
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: cop on! She had an ectopic pregnancy and because the doctors had detected a heartbeat in the foetal sac- she then couldn’t get treated with that medication..
@AnnieBelle: Do not pretend that you are concerned for the women of Ireland, the pro-choice side want unrestricted abortion brought in to Ireland and will do anything for it to happen. This is about getting rid of Christianity , especially Catholicism in Ireland, these people on here advocating for abortion care nothing about women, it is all about eroding anything to do with Christianity. Look who the pro-choice side have as their financial backer, George Soros the most evil man in the world today.
@Francis Mc Carthy: Newsflash you do not know the details nor do I but pills are not always the answer. In some cases of ectopic pregnancy the fallopian tube is damaged or ruptured in which case surgery is necessary there really isn’t a pill for every ill.
@Karen Wellington: so you believe that even though, if it passes, the law allowing abortion will be brand new, doctors who conscientiously object should have “give it up altogether”? This is your view of how this situation should be dealt with? In a country already dealing with a shortage of doctors, qualified GPs should have to leave their profession, a career they spent many years and a lot of money and hard work building, because the goalposts have moved?
Jesus Christ, are you just slow??
@Tom&Gerry: wow no need to get hysterical there now. I never mentioned anything about getting rid of religion so don’t just assume that that is the reason I am pro choice. This to me has nothing to do with religion it never has. I do not believe that a foetus under 12 weeks has equal rights to a woman. I believe the 8th needs to be repealed. I find the whole thing hypocritical that we can give information about abortion and allow women to travel to a different country to obtain an abortion completely and utterly backwards. If we are allowing women to travel then we are accepting abortions are happening. People just don’t want that sort of thing being paraded around. Lets just turn a blind eye to it. Disgusting treatment of women in Ireland yet again. My reason for pro choice is because I believe women should be trusted to make the right choice for her. It is none of my business why a woman wants to end a pregnancy. It doesn’t effect me why she would choose to so therefore I do not think I have a right to question this. I believe that for what ever reason, if a woman chooses to end her pregnancy then this is a discussion between her and her doctor and nobody else. I believe that if I ever need to obtain an abortion then I should be allowed to in the safety of my own country and through my own medical services. I hope that if my child ever need to access an abortion then they would also have the facilities and means to do so. So before you start spouting tripe from behind you key board don’t just make assumptions and assume this is all about wanting to bash religion. It has always been about women and respect for them.
It says it all about the reality of abortion that GPs are outraged that they might be forced to be complicit in such an act. This should tell the general public something about the nature of abortion.
Another point to bear in mind is that this is being portrayed as some sort of act of tolerance by the government. But in reality, Article 44 of the Irish Constitution protects freedom of conscience. So the Fine Gael government would probably have been barred ultimately from forcing medical professionals to be complicit in abortions against their will. This is no concession by the current government.
@John Reid: *some GPs.
@John Reid: “forcing medical professionals to be complicit in abortions against their will” – nobody is going to force anyone. If they don’t like their profession they can go a do something else.
@thewolf: when the HSE has contracted (is paying) these GPs to perform globally recognised medical procedures they can do their job or find a new one
@cortisola: Don’t be so stupid, there will be no doctors leaving their profession because they do not agree with abortion. Women may just have to travel to England like they always have.
@Tom&Gerry: or they’ll have to visit one of the majority of GPs who don’t have a problem providing modern medicine to people in need of it. And the ‘some GPs’ referred to in the article can cancel their HSE contracts and go it alone.
@HelloGoogleTracking: do you have anything constructive to say? A point to make?
@Karen Wellington:
Only that any attempt to force doctors to participate in the ending of a human life – against their wishes and medical ethics……
Is doomed – ill conceived and crazy – we do not live in a totalitarian state. All individuals have rights – and a doctor has a right to object out of conscience – not only because of religious conviction, but also on the level of individual ethics and respect for human life.
Good luck with you attempts to control others behaviour – or viewpoints. So you can self justify killing others…..and ignore the weight of that action.
Pretending it is some innocent medical procedure without a victim.
@HelloGoogleTracking: you’re previous comment (which just outright insults and bile) was deleted and now I seem needlessly aggressive there. Oh well.
I don’t have an issue with the few GPs who object opting out of providing HSE approved services. I would have a problem with them getting paid by the HSE but not providing the services and procedures they’re contractually obliged to provide. And if they are willing to provide abortion care to medical card holders it would be discriminatory not to provide it to other patients. Or do you think they should be allowed to half object?
@Karen Wellington: Do you know for a fact that the majority of GP’s in this country have no problem assisting abortion? I would bet my life you are wrong on that. Believe me a lot of GP’S will have no problem cancelling contracts with The HSE. At this moment in time the HSE needs GP’S far more than GP’s need them. Sometimes it is wisest to follow your conscience and stick with you principals, i makes you a more wholesome and better person.
@Tom&Gerry: and are you staking your life on a fact? I’d be interested to see your data on that one.
@Karen Wellington:
The doctors have the rights to with hold services based on personal objections, I do understand your point.
However it would be more valid if all doctors refused, in this case the woman involved can simply go to another doctor. A couple of phone calls in advance to prevent wasted journey.
The original doctor should not be paid unless he provides the service, and I am sure they will not charge for refusing service. They will simply refer the woman to another doctor.
But I do understand your point, just don’t think it will be a big issue.
The alternative is to attempt to force this on all doctors, and that isn’t legal.
@Karen Wellington: It’s very obvious that’s what you really want to see happening; GPs careers destroyed for daring not to subjugate their own morals and ethics in favour of the progressive agenda.
Most likely won’t happen though. Judging from the article content, it seems probable that GPs will still contract services to the HSE and will still be able to conscientiously object to abortion. Bad luck..
Pro-aborts reaction to this is revealing. It appears the “if you don’t want an abortion don’t have one” standard has out and replaced with “if you don’t want an abortion don’t have one…unless you’re a GP then you should be forced to perform the abortion”.
@Roddy Reagan: You’re really crap at analogies, make stick to the jigsaws.
@Royston Fitzpatrick: he’s all over the place :) poor rods..
@Roddy Reagan: the same reason you won’t find Jehovah’s witnesses working in the ICU. if your personal beliefs interfere with the job, you’re not qualified to do the job.
@Roddy Reagan: how is a GP preforming an abortion??? By writing a prescription? Its not like they are holding down the woman and shoving pills down her neck. The woman is well within her right to decide to take the pills or not. No performance by the GP needed
@Roddy Reagan: As a pro choicer, i am in agreement with allowing gps to opt out. I would rather not be provided a treatment by someone unwilling.
Thankfully my own gp is of the belief that women deserve choice, so i would imagine he will opt in. Given how helpful he is in my quest for sterilisation, it would surprise me if ge opted out.
@Julian Friesel: but the goalposts of the job’s remit have only just changed. Why should those who worked hard to qualify and build a career have everything they’ve worked for jeapordised because the accepted professional responsibilities have changed??
We’re never happy in this country. Not content with the fact that they are about to get their wish of legalised abortion, the so-called “Pro choice” lobby now want their fellow citizens to be compelled by law to provide the service, whether they want to or not. Its enough to almost make me understand how those bakers felt.
Don’t see this ending well.
GPs are paid by the state to provide services , as such they should have to provide all services legal in this state
in many rural areas it could be difficult for a woman in a crisis to find an alternative doctor
@Stephen Kearon: We are like still in Middle Ages and not getting any closer to modern world. Broadband, health service, transport – nothing is done in rural areas…
@Stephen Kearon:
They can refuse to kill other humans
@Stephen Kearon: yes, but GPs are not employees of the State. They are self-employed business men/women.
@Stephen Kearon:
Doctors cannot refuse to treat illness or disease, to save life.
A healthy pregnancy does not require any treatment in the absence of a medical issue.
Wanting to kill the unborn child is not a medical condition – possibly a mental health issue but killing the child is not a treatment.
@HelloGoogleTracking: As long as any pregnancy can cause huge physical or mental health issues to the woman-then an abortion is seen as an appropriate treatment…hope that helps
@David Murphey: “Most GPs in Ireland are private practitioners, but the majority of GPs provide services on behalf of the HSE…”
This is basically religious licence to discriminate.
No different from the two holy Marys who refused to bake the gay cake.
@Tony Dowling:
They were set up as part of a financial scam.
@Tony Dowling: ridiculous comparison. People are born homosexual they aren’t born pro-abortion.
@Tony Dowling: You cannot force a person to kill or to assist in killing a human life.
@Roddy Reagan:
Prove it – that is a theory – possibly true – possibly untrue.
Either way what difference does it make?
@Tony Dowling:
If a shop doesn’t provide the item you want it is the norm to find one that does no matter what you wish to purchase.
@Tony Dowling: correct me if I’m wrong but the bakers wouldn’t print a cake with a slogan they disagreed with. They didn’t provide that service. They were happy to provide the gay couple with a service they did provide
@Tony Dowling: how do you bake a gay cake? Do you put a little glitter in the cake mix or something?
@Tony Dowling: The holy Marys as you called them were set up, it was a financial scam, the same fraud was tried in England and US. It was a nasty , mean thing to do to a young couple who had just started out in business, the young couple were known for their very religious protestant beliefs. So they were easy targets. The young couple had no problem baking the cake, it was what they were expected to write on the cake that was offensive to them. No one should be forced or bullied into doing anything against their beliefs.
@Tony Dowling: I don’t know why you assume that disagreeing with abortion is necessarily a religious position. There are many secular ethical and scientific arguments against abortion. I am personally in favour of repeal. However, if you can’t grant that there are profound philosophical and ethical considerations to grapple with and to balance in coming to a position on abortion then you clearly haven’t thought about it in any deep or meaningful way. Freedom of conscience is crucial in any free society, especially on ethical issues such as these.
Well up until now, gps who are pro choice have faced 14 years in prison for providing advice to a woman facing a crisis pregnancy and until very recently, doctors were forced not to provide life saving cancer treatment to pregnant women. I imagine that was a traumatic experience for many. Never mind watching the mental and physical anguish of your patients who are forced to carry a baby with ffa to term against their and their family’s wishes. But, as someone who is pro CHOICE, I accept the doctors’ choice to opt out just as i accept a woman’s choice to continue with a pregnancy under any circumstances.
@Anne Marie Devlin:
People have full access to information about abortion – what are you talking about?
Mothers lives are protected in cases of medical emergency, and have priority.
Any points that are not red herrings?
@HelloGoogleTracking:Can any pregnancy cause fatal harm to the woman ?
Yes or No ?
@Francis Mc Carthy:
If a medical issue arises threatening the womans life (diagnosed by a doctor) then under Irish law – the mothers right to life has precedence over the unborn.
This is basic ethics, and reasonable balancing of rights, and I agree with this. The mother life is always protected.
In all other circumstances the childs right to life is protected – and killing the child for paranoia is not a good or responsible action.
Hence why you think it is ok……taking responsibility for you actions and child is not always convenient.
@HelloGoogleTracking: i just asked you for a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ ..
@Francis Mc Carthy:
So what?
As long as they have to declare themselves openly and ahead of time so women don’t seek their help and get sent away, or shamed, or lectured at such a distressing time. Also so other patients can make an informed decision on if they are the best GP for them. Lots of people won’t want to attend a doctor providing this service. I personally wouldn’t trust someone who objects to provide me with the best care available in any form if I know they can’t leave their personal opinions or religious leanings at the office door to make my health a priority. I can’t be the only woman who would doubt that doctor feels I am capable of decisions about my own health.
This Harris fella really is a creature, isn’t he?
Harris obviously doesn’t remember when chemists shops adopted the same ruling over the sale of condoms. Now show us a chemist or supermarket for that matter who doesn’t sell them. GP’s in the main are practical people not bound up in the ideology over what they percieve to be right for women. They know that pregnancy termination is a womans right to choose.
@Chris Kirk: So, now you speak for every GP in the land? You will find that there are many conscientious GPs that will not want involvement in the killing business.
@Johnny Bellew: it says ‘some’ in this article, where are getting ‘many’ from?
@Johnny Bellew: Nobody is asking GP’s to provide terminations, just give the women the advice they seek and let them make their own decisions.
@Chris Kirk: Giving advice is being complicit.
@Johnny Bellew: Personally I would call it helpful. The GP looks after his/her patients and offers useful advice. Many of them (not some) are educated in the science of common sense and decentcy, over morality, already do this.
Maybe we could create a Catholic enclave on an island off the coast where all the god-botherers and their GP’s could practice the doctrines of their cult without bothering the rest of us?
@Royston Fitzpatrick: Maybe you should head offshore yourself. I suggest Spike Island.
@Royston Fitzpatrick: People who do not see themselves as atheists may support a woman’s right to choose. Can we leave the bigotry to others?
@Royston Fitzpatrick: No Christmas, St.Patricks and Easters in Ireland any more ?
@Royston Fitzpatrick: Good man. You’ve convinced me that the only reason you want abortion introduced is to have a go at catholics. Obviously no interest beyond that. Keep it up! You’re needed by the opponents of repeal!
@wrong side: What the opponents of Repeal need is a time machine to get them to the 1800′s from the middle-ages, from there we can take additional steps to undo their brainwashing and welcome them the 21st century.
@Royston Fitzpatrick: do you ever get sick of the smell of your own farts?
@Royston Fitzpatrick:
It’s a matter of opinion which side has been brainwashed.
Simple thought experiment:
Fast forward into the future – with evolving ethics and human rights.
I cannot conceive of a future where people still agree killing unborn children is a good thing, or justified in any but extreme cases.
Abortion is barbaric and retrograde obviously – human rights are the future – the arc of history proves this.
Abortion on demand will be a huge point of shame in human history – people will not understand it in the future……
Pro – abortion lobbyists will be viewed as morally compromised selfish monsters. I cannot see a generous way to interpret it historically.
@Aine O Connor: Not really. If you are a Holy Joe Catholic with no good arguments = brainwashed. Pro-choice go with the scientific facts and medical experts = not brainwashed.
@Royston Fitzpatrick:
What is your good argument to kill another human being?
It better be better than “choice” – that isn’t an argument it is the absence of one.
In cases of medical emergency the mothers life is already protected.
@HelloGoogleTracking: “killing unborn children” – lols..
@HelloGoogleTracking: “killing another human being” -an embryo is not another human being…bit of a journey to go there,google…
@thewolf: i get a tremendous ‘kick’ out of it…it’s a ‘howl’.wolfie :)
@Johnny Bellew: Spike Island might be big enough for the amount of true catholics left in Ireland.
@Royston Fitzpatrick: if you don’t like our constitution or our laws here perhaps you should consider moving to some other country where the laws are more suitable to your needs rather than trying to change ours.
@Royston Fitzpatrick:
The Nazis managed to brainwash a whole nation to believe that exterminating their fellow Jewish citizens was ok, people believed slavery was ok , what makes you think that those in favor of abortion on demand for no reason have not been brainwashed. As has been pointed out again and again people who have no religious convictions are also against abortion except in exceptional circumstances. They see the right to life as a human right.
@Rob Cahill: Certainly not, judging by the weekly attendance at our local Church.
@Royston Fitzpatrick: Your intolerance of opposition and use of hyperbole would make it seem that you are the brainwashed one, desperate to demonstrate your liberal credentials. Even to the point that you seem in favour of re-education programmes. Fascist or what?
@Royston Fitzpatrick: I have a better idea, maybe we could create an ant- Catholic enclave on an island off the coast where all the haters could practice their hatred without bothering the rest of us .
If passed I hope the HSE wont do it for free forcing taxpayers to pay for your mistakes except for rape and medical issues.
@Paul: nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. If thats your take on it then the doctors and nurses should stop treating anyone with a heart condition due to smoking or poor diet, drink drivers who are involved in RTA’s
@Paul: So what about mistakes like falling or sports injuries? Or car accidents? I don’t drive and I think football is crap, why should my taxes pay for that stuff? Healthcare in Ireland is for everyone. Why should you get to pick who receives care?
Or is it punishment? Are you that sad and vindictive that you want to punish women for their crisis pregnancies? Perhaps everyone should have to be interviewed for medical procedures? I wouldn’t fancy having to explain why I’m visiting a doctor or getting a surgery or any other procedure.
@Paul: ” I hope the HSE wont do it for free forcing taxpayers to pay for your mistakes”
If you want the HSE to operate like that we may as well get rid of the whole health system.
The health system is designed to treat disease and injury based on need.
Its objective is to heal and save life – a healthy pregnancy without medical conditions does not qualify for any treatment in Ireland.
There is no disease – and two people are involved, and need their health protected under law.
If ‘Repeal’ becomes the law of the land, GP’S could very well be vilified, boycotted and toppled if they don’t comply.
We’re talking about people losing their entire professions,- including nursing staff and all those who work in the healthcare industry.
You know the usual accusations of being ‘anti-choice’ ‘catholic church paedophile enablers’, misogynists, archaic, forced birthers, no regard for ‘women’s rights and autonomy’, etc etc,
@Mary: Think you’ll find it’s the anti choice brigade who’ve a history internationally of protesting and killing medical staff who perform abortions..
@Vigo the Carpathian: Those events are thankfully rare on the whole.
If we had gun laws in this country as in the US, there would be shootings for all kinds of reasons here too, every day of the week.
I predict people’s mental health will take a dramatic nosedive on both sides of this campaign as it continues in this haphazard & unbalanced way.
I can see it already in the way people are in total denial & have tunnel vision about the facts and realities in question.
Expect plenty more ‘lunatic fringe’ type behaviour.
Will our H.S.E be able to cope?
@Mary: Vigo; many societies have been in a seriously sick and degenerative state for a while now; abortion debate aside!
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/underestimating-american-collapse/
Article 44 of Bunreacht na hEireann protects freedom of conscience, which is probably what is compelling the Minister for Health to say what he is saying today about providing for conscientious objection on the part of medical professionals in his proposed abortion legislation. But what we are seeing regarding the concerns of GPs shows the great danger of allowing the government to repeal and replace the Eighth Amendment in our Constitution with an article that says that the Oireachtas, alone, would have the power to form the law on abortions (meaning that the Constitution would have no further say in the matter). Doing as the government wishes, and saying that the Oireachtas’ decisions on abortion could never be challenged in the courts, might even seek in the foreseeable future to prevent people such as healthcare practitioners and workers from exercising a conscientious objection not to be complicit in abortions (because the law surrounding abortion would be in the sole purview of the legislature). This puts the government’s proposed constitutional provision, which would say that abortion is solely a matter for the Oireachtas, directly at odds with that most crucial of Constitutional provisions (Article 44) which protects freedom of conscience.
The government “declares” that it will allow for conscientious objection on the part of medical professionals in Harris’ proposed legislation (how generous of them), but who knows that a future government, let’s say one involving People Before Profit or Sinn Fein), would not seek (in a post repeal of the Eighth Amendment world) to remove this conscientious exemption for health workers and instead to actively seek to punish them for following their conscience.
GPs – human beings, spiritual beings with religious/philosophical/moral principles should be afforded the right to opt out of providing information on the ending of human life.
After all, this is not a totalitarian state (yet)
@Niccolo Saccho: Can’t you see the irony of your last sentence and the women on flights to the UK?
@Niccolo Saccho: Like the objectors to contraception? You have to have a licence to practice medicine which means you have to give medical advice and your own personal beliefs are to be out aside.
@Kal Ipers:
If GPs are alowed the option to conscientiously opt out of providing abortion services then they won’t be placed in the position of having to act against their moral principles.
Simon Harris has recognised this reality and acted accordingly.
@Niccolo Saccho: Of course. When the thinking is pro choice, that’s the only way it should be.
@Kal Ipers: I think you’re over simplifying the issue and in doing so are insisting on a rigid approach that is as bad as a GP not being able to make the call. Pro choice does not mean that a GP must conform, particularly if they have moral objections. It simply means they have a right legally to recommend abortion if they think it is required. Each GP has to be allowed to reconcile their relationship with this according to their own principles.
If they’re trained to do it, they should do it if requested, no matter what their opinion of it is.
@Keith McDonagh: Ludicrous comment. We do not live in a totalitarian state, thank God.
@Keith McDonagh:
You cannot force people to kill – what planet are you living on
It seems unacceptable to the pro-choice lobby that there is even opposition to abortion. Their constant painting of anyone who disagrees as fanatical religious nut jobs is what turned me towards favouring keeping the eighth. I think their real problem is with the church, and their inability to see that their are ethical, philosophical and even demographic reasons to oppose abortion on demand (because that is what they want) indicates that this is a crusade for them for all the wrong reasons.
Maybe the NAGP should poll their 2000 members to find out whether they wish to opt in or opt out.
Doctors won’t be able to conscientiously object. As stated here that would violate the repealed constitution. You can expect pro choice zealots to picket the surgeries of Doctors refusing to facilitate abortions, and likely dragging them to court to get them to do it, just like they make bakers go to court who refuse to make wedding cakes for gay couples in the US. Essentially the Minister is saying vote for it, because if you don’t and its passed we’ll turn the mob on you.
Just like the birth control pill in the 60 -70ts it was up to doctors and if they were religious which most of them were you had to go to family planning clinics the country is going backwards
@Sheila Bedford: Most of them are not religious now.. it’s 2018.
@Rob Cahill: i beg to differ theres a lot of sons and grandsons of doctors out there
@Sheila Bedford:
Anti-contraception is a religious issue. And stupid – and consigned to the past – Ireland is no longer a religious country – maybe you have not noticed.
Objecting to adortion is a very different issue – and not lead by religion.
If you are suggesting all objectors to killing babies are religious – then you are simply wrong.
I hate all organised religions and cults.
I also hate group think lazy people without fully formed opinions based on consideration.
Why is it you think killing a child is ok?
You existed in the womb before you were born – you are the same person now as then – only substantially older – you have a right to life now – and a right to life then.
This is basic thinking – no religious component at all – get it?
@HelloGoogleTracking: you never had a ‘right to life’ as an embryo. Stop with that BS.
@Francis Mc Carthy:
Yes all people in Ireland do, born and unborn from conception.
Read the constitution.
Are you unaware of this fact?
@HelloGoogleTracking: are you honestly saying that in ‘modern’ Ireland that an embryo has a ‘right to life’? Hahahahaha..no,lad..that ‘right to life’ has been well and truly distinguished by the 13th Amendment…Also ,”if” that embryo had a ‘right to life,’ then there would be no 14th amendment,yes ?
this is why i love the journal comments section :-) hahahaha..an embryo having a ‘right to life’…stop it…you’re killing me ;-)
If we have a conscientious objection, we are obliged to offer either a referral to, or info about a doctor who can provide a second opinion. So it’s not just saying no, we have to ensure fair treatment for all.
Is this not contradicting the govts earlier statement?
@Derek Poutch: It is! They’re lurching back and forth, to and fro is enough to induce sea sickness.
Even if the punishment wasn’t dished out through the courts of law,
self righteous ‘repealers’ would take justice into their own hands.
Swedish anti-abortion midwife loses court case
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39587154
@Mary: whose point are you trying to prove with that link?
I am pro choice but I think it is fair enough that GPs who have a pro life belief should not be forced to do this. The best thing is to have a list of the GP’s that will provide this service and a list of GPs who don’t in order to avoid embarrassment to parents looking for this procedure. I am painfully aware that the listings could well turn out into an instrument of harassment from both sides, though. We must all learn how to respect eachother’s views.
@Isabel Oliveira: if the GP’s accept the HSE contract (and the money that goes with it) they should have to provide all legal medical procedures offered. If they want to opt out, fair enough, I think there are already a small number who do opt out of the HSE contracts.
@Karen Wellington: Doesn’t the HSE GP funding relate only to services rendered to medical card holders though?
@Isabel Oliveira: yes it does, but they would be obliged to provide abortion care for medical card holders, and if they do that they can’t discriminate against non-medical card holders.
@Karen Wellington: “abortion care”
That is probably worst euphemism I heard today.
@Johnny Bellew: oh no, I was hoping to win you over with that one.
@Karen Wellington: Silly. Many male GP’s for example do not offer Mirina insertion or other procedures of an intimate nature and many GP’s do not offer minor ops and a host a other procedures/services whether for resource reasons or lack of experience or skills in those areas. To legally oblige all GPs to provide all legal procedures is absurd. What’s more, it is draconian and tyrannical in the extreme to demand GPs to provide a service that has the potential to conflict with their deepest ethical, moral and professional convictions – and irrespective of your position on the matter you should at least be able to recognize how the idea of abortion would pose serious ethical challenges for many people.
@Karen Wellington: Yes, That could be correct , albeit not quite straight forward as subject to legal interpretation I would guess.
@Damon16: we’re not dealing with a lack of resources or expertise (who wants to visit a doctor who doesn’t know what they’re doing anyway), this is writing a proscription for the necessary medication and giving directions on how to take it.
Is he seriously trying to say that if the referendum is passed that he is going to legislate to prevent UK or Continental abortion companies from opening clinics in Ireland? Mr Harris knows himself that such a move would be immediately challenged under the provisions of one or other of the EU treaties that the country has signed up to. If the referendum is passed, the only time a GP will see his patient will be to help her with the aftermath and ramifications of the procedure.
If that turns out to be the case they should have to have a notice pointing that out so that women seeking an abortion aren’t going from doctor to doctor getting turned away.
Harris is avowedly anti-choice, surely his handling of this demonstrates that he’s conflicted and not the best person to prepare this legislation?
@Guy Incognito: Harris “anti choice” ? he favours unrestricted abortion of the unborn up to 12 weeks, and wide open, floodgates mental health grounds after that.
this anti 8th Fine Gael policy will result in large numbers of aborted dead.
Keep the 8th. Dump Harris, Varadker, O’Connell and the fools bringing us this nightmare –when they are all retired.
If you believe in a god why do you need a doctor? It was your god’s will that you or your child get cancer (because a tumour doesn’t have free will). So your god should decide if you deserve to be cured. It’s pretty sinful to turn to modern medicine for a cure against your God’s will.
@DaisyChainsaw: What has that nonsense got to do with anything? Most stupid comment I’ve seen here for a long time and that’s saying something!
@DaisyChainsaw: Sure why wouldnt anyone of faith turn to modern medicine. To preserve and protect the life that God gave you.
@Sinead Hanley:and modern medicine is the abortion pills..
@Francis Mc Carthy: When medicine is used to kill it no longer functions as a medicine.
@Francis Mc Carthy: Wrong, they’re pharmaceutical products designed to terminate pregnancies. But I understand your need to call it medicine so that you can propagate the ‘medical care’ lie.
@Francis Mc Carthy: I think Johnny Bellew and wrong side answered that well.
@Sinead Hanley: they seem rather dramatic and sensational answers to me.
@Johnny Bellew: we have the antis trying to make their own rules,again :)
mifepristone and misoprostol are MEDICINES :) You can look this up..
@Sinead Hanley: i prefer to deal in facts.Not emotional hogwash.
@Francis Mc Carthy:
Wrong again – “Medicine is the science and practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease”
Pregnancy is not a disease.
@HelloGoogleTracking: neither are broken bones, but I still went to the doctor when I broke my ankle.
@HelloGoogleTracking: “Medicine is the science and practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease. Medicine encompasses a variety of health care practices evolved to maintain and restore health by the prevention and treatment of illness.”
Why didn’t you include the full quote? Or indicate that parts had been left out?
@Francis Mc Carthy: “Emotional hogwash”.. I think we have had a breakthrough. Emotional avoidance involves denying the truth. Did u know that?
@Sinead Hanley: Eh? You’ll have to give back that money that you gave at the weekend pop psychology course that you attended :)
@Francis Mc Carthy: So you use humour as another defense mechanism. I am no psychologist, far from it, but i do like to “figure out” people.
@Karen Wellington:
Didn’t want to confuse Francis with a sentence too long. There is nothing left out that I am unhappy with – or allows for abortion on demand. Medical emergencies should always include abortion in cases where required to save the mothers life, and rightly so.
Yes medicine is about treating disease injury and all threats to individual health and life.
This includes broken bones – and excluded ending life unless in very extreme cases as referred to above. .
@Sinead Hanley: I know many a psychologist and they wouldn’t dare try to ‘analyse’ me :) – but here you are,trying your best at the pop psychology malarkey,but failing miserably at it…
You should be helping people to have abortions in a safe setting,Sinead-as it might help you to stop hating yourself,too :) my go at the ‘pop psychology’ malarkey :)
@Francis Mc Carthy: Theres defense mechanism no. 3. Displacement. and no 4. Projection. I will admit i do have times where i dont like myself. Thats what abortion does to you. It steals your self worth..
I don’t expect the referendum to pass so this shouldn’t arise. However, if it does then the right to conscientious objection must be watertight unlike the position in the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013 which requires a conscientious objector to refer the patient to a doctor who doesn’t have such an objection.
@Karen Wellington:
In the interest of justice; i would like this to be considered & for people to be informed.
That is all.
Why are the electorate subjected to this politician who has no experience for the portfolio he holds and had very little real life experience.
Can’t beat a good abortion debate lol
Not for long, they won’t.
In UK now, docs and nurses who object to assisting abortions are discriminated against, as pro abortion secular, hospital administrators tighten the abortion noose on them.
Right, now 2 Scottish midwives are in court on conscientious grounds on abortion assistance.
Do u really think we will be any different over time, as the secular, anti Catholic pro abortion bigots grab for hospital and political power ?
Same in Swede. medics, nurses bullied, harasses, discriminated against, career damaged if they do not support abortions.
KEEP the 8th. Keep the pro abortion, bigoted bullies out of our hospitals and GP surgeries.
As mentioned by others. It’s a service. You can’t have conscientious objection allowed for one service when the bakers couldn’t have conscientious objection for their service.
@Johnhunky Dory:
There is a big difference between making a cake and having an abortion.
@Aine O Connor: the Government and the law can force you to facilitate either, whether u conscientiously object or not , it seems ?
very similar bullying… …coming our medics way, if the 8ths protecrtion is taken away.
The only presumption for now seems to be that the repeal referendum will be passed. If it is passes then the better solution for doctors would be to have a panel of doctors who have no conscientious objection to performing the procedure available and published.
@Micheal S. O’ Ceilleachair: yeh really ?
the pro abortion HSE secularists will then, once in power, over time, reward pro abortion doctors who co-operate on abortions, and penalise those who don’t.
gradually, a doctors freedom of conscience will be eroded, thru court action, Ministerial order etc.
Pro abortion medical bullying grow over time, every where else.
Danish churches are NOW being told that they MUST perform same sex marraiges whether they like or not.
Ashers bakery up north, ring any bells ?
have your say