The most Catholic country in Europe.. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle5273571/
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Political Discussion Thread
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by lordofseas View PostThe most Catholic country in Europe.. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle5273571/
btw they harp on the fact that the fetus wasn't viable (as it was doomed anyway)
so what if it had been viable? they saying all this would've been ok?Last edited by SoulReaver; 14 November 2012, 03:28 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SoulReaver View Postwhy couldn't this happen to a good traditional Irish couple instead :/
btw they harp on the fact that the fetus wasn't viable (as it was doomed anyway)
so what if it had been viable? they saying all this would've been ok?If you wish to see more of my rants, diatribes, and general comments, check out my Twitter account SirRyanR!
Check out Pharaoh Hamenthotep's wicked 3D renders here!
If you can prove me wrong, go for it. I enjoy being proven wrong.
sigpic
Worship the Zefron. Always the Zefron.
Comment
-
Actually what seems to have happened is that the woman didn't die from pro-life medicinal practices but from gross incompetence. In a situation like this what most pro-life doctors do is to try to save BOTH lives. An induced abortion would not have been necessary. Labor could've been induced which would safely deliver the possibly still living unborn child. After that they could've attempted to save the child's life, stabilizing him/her for treatment in an incubator. But there are other possibilities. Was the pregnancy ectopic? Ectopic pregnancies can cause things like this too and their removal is permitted as ectopic pregnancies are not viable. The baby may have a heartbeat for a time outside the womb. But yes it is entirely possible that due to incompetence (and trying to blame pro-lifers and the laws they fought for in Ireland to cover up their incompetence) they didn't do everything medically possible to save both the mother and her unborn baby. As I said labor could've been induced right away and the mother treated and the child treated as the separate people they are, or if nothing could be done at least make the child's death as comfortable as possible. It is also possible that by the time she went to the hospital advanced septicemia may have already set in and she may have died anyway even if treatment were carried out in the manner I described
Comment
-
Originally posted by SoulReaver View Posthey it's also possible septicemia had set in before she even was pregnant!
But in the case of her pregnancy it's possible she may have had septicemia already if some of the child's tissue was already necrotized (sp?)
Comment
-
Originally posted by mad_gater View PostActually what seems to have happened is that the woman didn't die from pro-life medicinal practices but from gross incompetence. In a situation like this what most pro-life doctors do is to try to save BOTH lives. An induced abortion would not have been necessary. Labor could've been induced which would safely deliver the possibly still living unborn child. After that they could've attempted to save the child's life, stabilizing him/her for treatment in an incubator. But there are other possibilities. Was the pregnancy ectopic? Ectopic pregnancies can cause things like this too and their removal is permitted as ectopic pregnancies are not viable. The baby may have a heartbeat for a time outside the womb. But yes it is entirely possible that due to incompetence (and trying to blame pro-lifers and the laws they fought for in Ireland to cover up their incompetence) they didn't do everything medically possible to save both the mother and her unborn baby. As I said labor could've been induced right away and the mother treated and the child treated as the separate people they are, or if nothing could be done at least make the child's death as comfortable as possible. It is also possible that by the time she went to the hospital advanced septicemia may have already set in and she may have died anyway even if treatment were carried out in the manner I described
At 17 weeks the skeleton is changing from soft cartilage to bone and sweat glands are just starting to develop. It weighs about 5 ounces (same as a turnip) and is around 5 inches long from head to bottom. Myelin won't even form around the nerves for another week and the (internal) sex organs aren't even fully finished and in place yet at 17 weeks. The fetus' arms might just be long enough to touch each other and it can possibly form a fist, yet this can't be done conscious yet since the nerves and brain aren't even finished yet. It's not until the 19th week that the brain starts designating specialized areas to process smell, taste, hearing, vision and touch. At 17 weeks it will first start using its eyes and can distinguish light and dark, but that's about it. Its skin hasn't even fully formed yet and its arms and legs won't be in proportion with each other and the body for another two weeks at least. Its eyes and ears have only just moved to the front, closer to their final position at 16 weeks of gestation and it won't be until the 18th week that the ears are in the correct position. It will take about another three weeks before vernix will even be secreted...
I could go on, but I think (hope) you get the idea.
EDIT:
Oh and did you know that inducing labor and delivery in the second or third trimester of a pregnancy is one of the methods for abortion? It's called induction abortion, so were you suggesting those highly religious doctors should have performed an abortion any way?Last edited by fems; 15 November 2012, 04:15 AM.Unmade Plans (WIP: 11/20):
Sam's life takes a turn in an unexpected direction when she's faced with an unplanned pregnancy. The decision to keep the baby and raise it on her own will alter her life forever. Relationships are put to the test, especially the one between her and Jack. She doesn't know what to expect from him and he surprises her at every turn.
On FFnet or AO3
My S/J fics can be found on FFnet and AO3. I also tweet and tumble about the ship and my writing/stories.
Comment
-
Originally posted by fems View Post
EDIT:
Oh and did you know that inducing labor and delivery in the second or third trimester of a pregnancy is one of the methods for abortion? It's called induction abortion, so were you suggesting those highly religious doctors should have performed an abortion any way?
Comment
-
Originally posted by aretood2 View PostA lot of people who see abortion as being bad for religious reasons would actually say yes. When you throw the mother's life into the mix, it's no longer the same situation.
The distinction you are implying is that all that matters is life, and Quality of Life is unimportant.sigpicALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CREATOR OF THIS SIG GO TO R.I.G.A lie is just a truth that hasn't gone through conversion therapy yetThe truth isn't the truth
Comment
-
Originally posted by fems View PostDid you even bother to read the entire article or does knowledge of a fetus end with "it's a life starting at conception end of discussion" for you? The woman was 17 weeks pregnant, there's no way induced labor could have saved the fetus as it's far too premature; the youngest micro preemie to have ever survived was almost 22 weeks and you can bet that there were many complications.
At 17 weeks the skeleton is changing from soft cartilage to bone and sweat glands are just starting to develop. It weighs about 5 ounces (same as a turnip) and is around 5 inches long from head to bottom. Myelin won't even form around the nerves for another week and the (internal) sex organs aren't even fully finished and in place yet at 17 weeks. The fetus' arms might just be long enough to touch each other and it can possibly form a fist, yet this can't be done conscious yet since the nerves and brain aren't even finished yet. It's not until the 19th week that the brain starts designating specialized areas to process smell, taste, hearing, vision and touch. At 17 weeks it will first start using its eyes and can distinguish light and dark, but that's about it. Its skin hasn't even fully formed yet and its arms and legs won't be in proportion with each other and the body for another two weeks at least. Its eyes and ears have only just moved to the front, closer to their final position at 16 weeks of gestation and it won't be until the 18th week that the ears are in the correct position. It will take about another three weeks before vernix will even be secreted...
I could go on, but I think (hope) you get the idea.
EDIT:
Oh and did you know that inducing labor and delivery in the second or third trimester of a pregnancy is one of the methods for abortion? It's called induction abortion, so were you suggesting those highly religious doctors should have performed an abortion any way?
The principle of double effect would probably apply in a situation like this:
An action having both a good effect and a bad effect can be undertaken if:
1) the action itself is not intrinsically wrong
2) the bad effect cannot outweigh the good effect
and 3) the bad effect cannot be used as a means to achieve the good effect
I think the simple induction of labor would fulfill double effect since as I said before labor in and of itself, induced or not, is not an action willfully and intentionally ordered towards the purpose of killing the child. The dying child could also have been extracted via emergency C-section.
Also in the second or 3rd trimester the child's development is normally more advanced (by 3rd trimester definitely, second trimester could be a little dicey esp. if it's early in the second trimester) and, if healthy has a higher chance of surviving a premature birth so I don't see how the induction of labor in and of itself (or a C-section) would cause the child's death. Post-delivery complications though could arise that could lead to the child's death. I can see the induction of labor as a prelude to late-term direct abortion procedures (according to wikipedia C-sections can even be involved in late-term abortion procedures)
The incompetent doctors may have been confused (esp. if a language barrier was involved) and not known which context the term "abortion" was being used in....for example a miscarriage is sometimes called a spontaneous abortion. Generally what we're opposed to is direct abortion, the intentional destruction of the life of the unborn child via methods known to in and of themselves cause such a thing to occur
Comment
Comment