Interesting title for a law regarding women's health, isn't it? In the USA the 'knee jerk' reaction is to believe this deprives the rights of women and sides with the fetus. Right? At first glace, the immediate USA reaction is "Oh, no another oppressive abortion law."
This is the title of the Irish abortion law that protects women's lives. Women are no longer chattel of the government required to breed before any other priority in her life.
Savita Halappanavar and her husband Praveen photographed at their home in Galway.
Galway is a seaside province in Ireland. Nice couple. They were married and were building a life together when she died because an abortion was not performed.
She never asked for an abortion for an unwanted pregnancy and denied becoming desperate and seeking to end the pregnancy. This is not it at all. She was having a miscarriage and during that miscarriage she asked for an abortion. She was denied.
The law does not dictate religious practices, but, it does subscribe to the fact regardless of a religious preference once the woman's life is in danger she is given priority. I mean to have a society value a woman's life any other way is hideous, oppressive and ridiculous. Without the woman alive and healthy, there won't a baby. Any other argument is simply stupid.
A woman alive means she can again carry a pregnancy when she believes she is ready to take responsibility for another life.
DECEMBER 1, 2013
Guttmacher Institute
BACKGROUND: In its landmark 1973 abortion cases, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a woman’s right to an abortion is not absolute and that states may restrict or ban abortions after fetal viability, provided that their policies meet certain requirements. In these and subsequent decisions, the Court has held that:
- even after fetal viability, states may not prohibit abortions “necessary to preserve the life or health” of the woman;
- “health” in this context includes physical and mental health;
- only the physician, in the course of evaluating the specific circumstances of an individual case, can define what constitutes “health” and when a fetus is viable; and
_ states may not require additional physicians to confirm the attending physician’s judgment that the woman’s life or health is at risk in cases of medical emergency.
Although the vast majority of states restrict later-term abortions, many of these restrictions have been struck down. Most often, courts have voided the limitations because they do not contain a health exception; contain an unacceptably narrow health exception; or do not permit a physician to determine viability in each individual case, but rather rely on a rigid construct based on specific weeks of gestation or trimester....
Think about how completely moronic that demand is of a government. Physicians don't practice based on rigid construction. If they did people would die. Every person is as different as their fingerprints and DNA. While the practice of medicine or surgery is guided by GENERAL understandings of anatomy and physiology there is no guarantee that a patient will react to treatment or surgery as expected.
Genetic variability demands a thinking person with an understanding of the human body to perform any medical procedure, surgery or prescription. That means with an undetermined outcome a physician has to be free to treat the person as circumstances arise. Now, giving penicillin to a person known to have a severe allergy is not what I refer to, that is negligence. But, in the average practice a physician needs the freedom to treat the individual, NOT THE TEXTBOOK.
In all abortion decisions, the viable fetus needs to be put SECOND to that of the life of the mother, including her mental health.
This is the title of the Irish abortion law that protects women's lives. Women are no longer chattel of the government required to breed before any other priority in her life.
Galway is a seaside province in Ireland. Nice couple. They were married and were building a life together when she died because an abortion was not performed.
She never asked for an abortion for an unwanted pregnancy and denied becoming desperate and seeking to end the pregnancy. This is not it at all. She was having a miscarriage and during that miscarriage she asked for an abortion. She was denied.
A report into the death of Savita Halappanavar (click here) and related issues has found a failure to provide the most basic elements of care in her case.
The pregnant 31-year-old died in an Irish hospital in October last year.
She had asked for a termination after being told she was having a miscarriage, but staff refused. Days later, she died from infection.
A 257-page report by the Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA) was issued on Wednesday.
It found there were many missed opportunities, that if acted on might have changed the outcome for her.
The report was conducted after the HIQA was asked by the Republic of Ireland's Health Service Executive to investigate the safety, quality and standards of services provided at University Hospital Galway....
So, now there is a new law to protect women. The politicians are playing with the words,, "...clinical guidelines...". They are attempting to manipulate the new law, hence placing women back into the danger zone.
...Reilly insisted that abortions can be carried out without the guidelines being in place....(click here)
Health Minister Reilly is correct. There is no other issue regarding women receiving abortions. There isn't. Once it is legal everything is then up to the woman's physician. There is a reason why physicians get the big bucks and this is one of them. After a decade of school and internships, they practice. End of discussion.
This new law might need the support of peers from countries where women are esteemed and not government chattel as in the USA, to end the silly debate about physician competency in carrying out abortions.
Demanding a woman carry a pregnancy either unwanted or a danger to the woman's health is about as oppressive as it comes. A woman's life is more important than the fetus she is carrying. There are cases where accidental death allows the fetus to continue life and that can respected for the spouse or father. But, in all other instances a woman's life is more important than the unborn. So, now there is a new law to protect women. The politicians are playing with the words,, "...clinical guidelines...". They are attempting to manipulate the new law, hence placing women back into the danger zone.
...Reilly insisted that abortions can be carried out without the guidelines being in place....(click here)
Health Minister Reilly is correct. There is no other issue regarding women receiving abortions. There isn't. Once it is legal everything is then up to the woman's physician. There is a reason why physicians get the big bucks and this is one of them. After a decade of school and internships, they practice. End of discussion.
This new law might need the support of peers from countries where women are esteemed and not government chattel as in the USA, to end the silly debate about physician competency in carrying out abortions.
The law does not dictate religious practices, but, it does subscribe to the fact regardless of a religious preference once the woman's life is in danger she is given priority. I mean to have a society value a woman's life any other way is hideous, oppressive and ridiculous. Without the woman alive and healthy, there won't a baby. Any other argument is simply stupid.
A woman alive means she can again carry a pregnancy when she believes she is ready to take responsibility for another life.
DECEMBER 1, 2013
Guttmacher Institute
BACKGROUND: In its landmark 1973 abortion cases, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a woman’s right to an abortion is not absolute and that states may restrict or ban abortions after fetal viability, provided that their policies meet certain requirements. In these and subsequent decisions, the Court has held that:
- even after fetal viability, states may not prohibit abortions “necessary to preserve the life or health” of the woman;
- “health” in this context includes physical and mental health;
- only the physician, in the course of evaluating the specific circumstances of an individual case, can define what constitutes “health” and when a fetus is viable; and
_ states may not require additional physicians to confirm the attending physician’s judgment that the woman’s life or health is at risk in cases of medical emergency.
Although the vast majority of states restrict later-term abortions, many of these restrictions have been struck down. Most often, courts have voided the limitations because they do not contain a health exception; contain an unacceptably narrow health exception; or do not permit a physician to determine viability in each individual case, but rather rely on a rigid construct based on specific weeks of gestation or trimester....
Think about how completely moronic that demand is of a government. Physicians don't practice based on rigid construction. If they did people would die. Every person is as different as their fingerprints and DNA. While the practice of medicine or surgery is guided by GENERAL understandings of anatomy and physiology there is no guarantee that a patient will react to treatment or surgery as expected.
Genetic variability demands a thinking person with an understanding of the human body to perform any medical procedure, surgery or prescription. That means with an undetermined outcome a physician has to be free to treat the person as circumstances arise. Now, giving penicillin to a person known to have a severe allergy is not what I refer to, that is negligence. But, in the average practice a physician needs the freedom to treat the individual, NOT THE TEXTBOOK.
In all abortion decisions, the viable fetus needs to be put SECOND to that of the life of the mother, including her mental health.
