Woman denied abortion dies

TYT video:


full story:
th14 hasan Indi TH 1268929f

Savita Halappanavar was refused an abortion of the fetus that was dying and poisoning her body because it still had a heartbeat.

As the heartbeat faded, the abortion was granted but it was too late. Savita died shortly afterwards of septicemia, and E Coli infection.

Irish doctors allegedly told Savita “This is a Catholic country” when she asked for an abortion for the pregnancy she was miscarrying to avoid further complications. After 3 days of blinding pain, shaking, vomiting and passing out, she again asked for the abortion that would have saved her life and she was again refused.

Savita was neither Irish, nor Catholic. Her beliefs were disregarded and, her choices were taken from her to continue the life of a dying fetus that would have had no chance of survival. It’s right to life, was more important than hers.

The debate over the legalization of abortion in Ireland erupted since Savita’s life may have been saved had she been granted one. The constitution in Ireland officially bans abortion but a 1992 Supreme Court ruling said the procedure should be legalized in the case that the fetus threatens the life of the mother. Five governments since then have failed to reach a resolution on the change, leaving hospitals hesitant to terminate pregnancies except in the most life threatening of circumstances.

Most Irish women who want abortions travel to England, where it has been legal since 1967, but in Savita’s case this would have been impossible for her to do in the state she was in.
The hospital refuses to say whether or not the blood poisoning that ultimately killed Savita could have been prevented by the abortion she requested. The Prime Minister is awaiting the results medical examiner to determine whether or not to address the issue.

Only two months prior a consortium of Irish doctors gather to declare abortions medically unnecessary. They stated: “We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.” I don’t think Savita Halappanavar receieved optimal care, and I’m sure those she has left behind feel the same way.
source

You might be interested

Comments

Reply Attach
  • 9

    Another sad case of religion overruling reason.

    • Math
    • November 16, 2012, 1:28 pm
    I was gonna write a long response as to why you are right, but I'll do that later.

    SO in short: Yep.
    - FireRoastedFire November 20, 2012, 10:56 am
    Reply
  • 4

    I'm wondering if there is a bigger problem here. What if she had E-coli from eating somethings which caused her to miscarry and caused her septicemia? This seems like a more pressing matter because what if there are potentially more people at risk of getting E-coli?

    Reply
  • 4

    Tread carefully on this page guys, looks like Grandpa Cash is off his meds again...

    Get off my lawn you whippersnappers!
    - johnecash November 22, 2012, 9:55 am
    Reply
  • 3

    Pisses me off... Religion is nothing but trouble...

    • Goober
    • November 16, 2012, 3:35 pm
    There is a broad statement that could be picked apart. . . easily.
    - johnecash November 16, 2012, 3:41 pm
    9/11 and the crusades were both cases of religious fervor gone wrong, but religion is a boon in some aspects. It gives hope in bad situations, it can guide a person to aid someone in need even though it might disadvantage them. (e.g Mother Teresa) Though now that we are starting to understand our world more and advance our technology the idea of God (or gods) is being left behind. While I'll never say religion is wrong or stupid, its going the way of homosexual bigotry. It's being forced into extinction by the radicalization of its followers.
    - serpentrepent November 16, 2012, 3:53 pm
    that argument can literally be applied to anything religions have just stuck around long enough that there are more lunatics who follow that ideology religion does the world more good than harm its just the harm is reported me loudly than the good just like everything in this sensationalistic media
    - Tremp20k November 16, 2012, 11:28 pm
    You seem to think I am saying its perfect. Nothing man does is perfect. I am disagreeing with the statement that religion is nothing but trouble. That statement implies no good comes from religion.
    - johnecash November 17, 2012, 2:22 pm
    It simply means that religion does more harm than good (which is true). If you want to take it to mean that nothing good comes of it, then the saying can't apply to anything, since there's always some good that can come from any given situation.
    - Ertrov November 17, 2012, 3:47 pm
    I would love to hear this. Please quantify the good vs bad of religion.
    - johnecash November 17, 2012, 9:51 pm
    Reply
  • 2

    My first post that resulted in a lot of debate :) yay

    "Debate" huh? That's being pretty generous. XD

    I think in a good chunk of these comments, "shit show" might be more appropriate.
    - CrazyJay November 21, 2012, 8:28 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    /sigh
    Here comes the religion argument.

    Don't go to a religious hospital and ask them to do something against their religion. Would you ask a mosque to hold a pork roast? No. So why should you ask a CATHOLIC hospital to, in their eyes, kill a person?

    I'd say that having a religious hospital is something of a contradiction. Medical ethics=/=Religious ethics. But that's beside the point. If you actually read the article, you'd have caught this:

    1. The fetus was dying anyway. She was miscarrying. You say that in their eyes it would be killing a person but last I checked, carrying mothers are people too. How can they call themselves pro-life, then neglect the mother's life? Had they allowed the abortion in time, she wouldn't have died from infection. They would have only lost one "person" instead of two.

    2. The issue was that in Ireland, it was illegal. (not that she picked the one Catholic hospital) She would have had to leave the country, and in an emergency, there's not a lot of room for travel planning. The article even states that because of where she lived, this wasn't an option.

    3. She was not catholic. I understand you're advocating respect for their religious beliefs, but they clearly didn't respect hers.
    - CrazyJay November 17, 2012, 1:04 pm
    Because it was dying anyway? Because you'd expect them to show human decency even though they're members of a religion?
    - Ertrov November 17, 2012, 1:44 pm
    Ok, but in the eyes of the catholic church, you still should not kill someone. You never know if that person would recover. If someone has a terminal illness, it's not OK to kill them because "they are dying anyway".
    I fully see and understand your point. I do agree with the popular opinion in this case, and the church probably would too (given the circumstances). However, if it's illegal in Ireland, AND in a Catholic hospital, why would they have the apparatus to perform an abortion?

    As for not being Catholic... this opens a whole new can of worms. Again, people going to other cultures and EXPECTING the culture they move into to instantly conform to all their beliefs. We get this shit ALL THE TIME in England - people coming from the middle east, living off our system for free and then COMPLAINING that something here doesn't follow their religion properly. Well fuck off back where you came from and you would have nothing to complain about. (Disclaimer: I am not claiming ALL middle eastern people do this. Just complaining about those that do.). For the same reason - do not go into a catholic hospital and expect them to operate to another religion, or against their own.
    - SkinnyBill November 17, 2012, 2:32 pm
    See my reply to CrazyJay ^
    - SkinnyBill November 17, 2012, 2:33 pm
    "Ok, but in the eyes of the catholic church, you still should not kill someone. You never know if that person would recover." *sigh* The reason she died was BECAUSE they waited and didn't abort the infected fetus in time. I may not be a doctor, but you would think that a medical professional's first response would be to do what they can to help the patient as soon as they can, rather than waiting for it to get worse. Common sense. Also yes, I do think euthanasia for terminally ill patients is acceptable, assuming they're in a lot of pain and as long as its their choice.

    "Again, people going to other cultures and EXPECTING the culture they move into to instantly conform to all their beliefs."

    Is wanting to survive really that much to ask? If the system is that inflexible that it lets people die, than the system is wrong. Catholic or not. I used to be catholic and NOWHERE in the bible does it say that letting a carrying mother die is totally cool if the alternative is an abortion. It's stubborn nonsense and completely unjustified.
    - CrazyJay November 17, 2012, 10:26 pm
    Fair points. I wasn't arguing for or against, I was just saying the point of the catholic church. I know the foetus was infected, and I know that was killing the mother, but like I say, it's possible that infection could have cleared up. Either way, no matter what the church says, (as long as you believe in heaven etc), YOU are the one who had to prove yourself. Noone else. If something like this were to happen, and it's justifiable, then you would PROBABLY get to heaven. So do what you think is right. You're the only one who has to explain it.

    As for the bottom paragraph, fair point again. But like I say - don't go somewhere with different beliefs and ethics and just expect them to conform. I'm not being horrible, but she clearly is not of Irish origin. She could have moved to Ireland or been brought up there, I don't know. But she is not Irish, and she expects the Irish, who are known to have strong catholic beliefs, and she expects them to just do something against what they believe in.

    Also, something many people forget is that The Bible is not some magical book which says everything Catholics should do. The Bible is a library - made up of many books. And these books are written by different people. PEOPLE. In most cases, noone special. Just someone at the time who wrote stuff down. Many things written in the bible might not have actually happened, or been massively exaggerated, but it was written like that to make the point. News reporters and the media do the same.

    Look at that news video for example. They just reported it with absolute disgust and hate towards the Church and the Irish. At least balance the argument out a bit. This is why I hate the media. They make an opinion and they try to force everyone into that one opinion without telling the full story - just the details required to make you side with them.

    Anyway, i'm digressing a little. Correct, I don't think abortion is mentioned in the bible - because when many of those books were written, abortion likely wasn't a word. It wouldn't have been widely done because you would be ashamed, your family would probably leave you and you would probably die. Like I said, depending on the situation, abortion would probably be allowed in this case. But, the issue is, because the Irish don't allow abortions, the equipment would not be in the hospital to do it with.
    - SkinnyBill November 18, 2012, 5:29 am
    "Also, something many people forget is that The Bible is not some magical book which says everything Catholics should do. The Bible is a library - made up of many books. And these books are written by different people."

    I understand your point about doing what you think is right, but at the same time, I can't see any moral justification for letting a person die like this, just good old stubborn Catholicism.

    If it was an issue of lacking equipment fair enough, but they should have then A) Acquired it or B) Transferred her to a hospital which had it. C) Find a non-catholic doctor to perform the operation. That would have been a better alternative to letting her get worse and die. My point being, isn't it kind of fucked up that any western democracy would deny an abortion in a situation like this?
    - CrazyJay November 18, 2012, 7:48 am
    The problem is, equiptment like this isn't just available. You can't just go down to the local hospital supply and pick up a "My First Abortion" set. You need to order it, it needs building, shipping and fitting. As we discussed, abortions are illegal in Ireland, so there would be no hospital in the country she could have gone to. The non-catholic doctor thing works, but it still doesn't fix the first two problems.

    Also, you need to remember, you can't just make exceptions to laws. She would most likely still need to go to court, and knowing our fucked up western democracy, would still be convicted of murder (or the doctors would).

    And, moving back a bit, talking about "stubborn catholicism", I agree. I think you should be able to follow any religion you like, but there are always extremists who like to ruin it for everyone. As I said above - it's YOUR choice to follow the religion how YOU feel. The church are not the ones who would punish you for doing bad, it would be God, Jesus, (whoever) themselves, talking to YOU. I am a catholic, brought up, and there are some things I disagree with. I believe what I want to believe. It is ME who has to deal with punishment if I am wrong. The purpose of the church is to tell you what they THINK you should be doing. It's up to you to make your decision. But, it gets out of hand and becomes a problem when this teaching becomes enforcement.
    - SkinnyBill November 18, 2012, 8:00 am
    It's worth mentioning if she had to go through the legal process, it's likely the infection would have killed her before it was resolved anyways. As far as transferring to another hospital, I was thinking more along the lines of getting her to the U.K. (I admit I'm a little confused about her not being able to travel, was she too sick? Could she not get there in time, etc.)

    But if nothing else, we can both agree that catholic values becoming laws doesn't help us. They don't have the moral authority, as you said it falls to god/Jesus. Especially when the Catholic church has been linked to more pedophilia than "Toddlers in Tiaras" (not saying Catholics are all pedophiles, in fact this is partially why so many Catholics resent their own establishment and for the record, why my family stopped going to church.)
    - CrazyJay November 18, 2012, 8:13 am
    Yeah, exactly. Thats the legal problem. And still, the problem remains in terms of equiptment. If she lived towards the north, she would be able to cross the border into the UK (to Northern Ireland) and have the operation there. But, when you are very ill and/or pregnant, I should imagine the last thing she would want to do is travel. Also, someone has to pay for it :P

    To be fair though, I don't think catholic values are "becoming" laws. These were existing laws which haven't been changed. Abortions were illegal in the UK up until the 1960s and 70s most likely for the same reason. As for pedophilia, that's a completely different subject. I am not denying this, has happened, but again, the media exaggerate this.

    There is a huge difference between "PEDOPHILE TOUCHES YOUNG GIRL" and "CATHOLIC PRIEST TOUCHES YOUNG GIRL". It's just the wording. Also, the media will write ANYTHING it can to sell it's shite. They will HIGHLIGHT cases like Priests, Scout Leaders, Teachers etc, because it causes controversy. I have no data, but most likely, there are no more pedos in the church per person, than individual people or other organisations, but you only hear about it most when it involves the church. I am also fairly sure these people would be stripped of their title, and maybe excommunicated. Still, that is nothing compared to them having to explain themselves to God... :L
    - SkinnyBill November 18, 2012, 11:49 am
    What I should have said was "laws based on catholic values rather than secular values don't help us." Sorry if it didn't make sense.

    The issue isn't that there are more pedos in the church than anywhere else, rather how the institution deals with them. In a lot of these cases, priests would get moved to other perishes, or the church would cover up for them entirely instead of handing them over to the police like any other criminal. This has been going on for years, that's why it's considered to be such a scandal. As an example, there was one Bishop in my province convicted of it (as well as having child porn.)

    Also, you can't really deny that the nature of priesthood *might* be part of the problem. No women allowed, can't get married or have sex...some of these guys have to be pretty damn repressed. (But not all)

    Ended up massively off topic, but what can you do? XD
    - CrazyJay November 18, 2012, 7:42 pm
    I agree. I don't nessecarily see why it matters that it was a catholic hospital. It has to deal with the fact that it is illegal in Ireland.
    - Jofus1992 November 19, 2012, 5:29 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    So you guys have a problem with a adult dying but not a baby. Okay.

    Not a baby, a fetus. And apparently you didn't actually read the information, or you would have been aware it was dying anyway, and just taking her with it. There was no way to save the fetus, yet the 'doctors' refused to abort it, so both the mother and child died.
    - Ertrov November 18, 2012, 4:08 pm
    This is in general.
    - Jjbigscreeners November 18, 2012, 4:45 pm
    Then why bring it up in an unrelated case?
    - Ertrov November 18, 2012, 4:50 pm
    Because the hypocrisy is comical.
    - Jjbigscreeners November 18, 2012, 4:50 pm
    Yes, clearly when discussing a case of idiotic doctors letting a woman die is a great time to crack a joke.
    - Ertrov November 18, 2012, 4:56 pm
    I don't know man, I find deaths of innocent women due to medical negligence quite hilarious. *blatantly obvious sarcasm*
    - CrazyJay November 18, 2012, 7:59 pm
    Join the people that find the deaths of innocent human life acceptable.
    - Jjbigscreeners November 18, 2012, 11:33 pm
    I can't tell if you're trying to be sarcastic, or if you're just being an idiot.
    - Ertrov November 19, 2012, 2:27 am
    lolwut
    - CrazyJay November 19, 2012, 7:34 am
    You are 17?
    When you're old and wise enough to have an understanding of this in it's huge entirety I may entertain your opinion!

    Until then read all the facts before your brain engages mouth.
    - Math November 19, 2012, 7:39 am
    Typical.
    - Jjbigscreeners November 19, 2012, 12:23 pm
    The old belittling approach? Doesn't surprise me. You liberals are always so closed minded.
    - Jjbigscreeners November 19, 2012, 12:25 pm
    Its the hypocrisy of the liberals. Abortion OK, capital punishment for a convicted murderer NOT OK. UCAV Drone strikes OK, water boarding NOT OK. Liberals get pisses when the Amish can't fix your computer, when Muslims cant sell them pork and Catholics can't perform an abortion. You see to a liberal the rest of us are here to serve them. We must do what they say, no matter our beliefs. Oh Hypocrisy, Liberal be thy name.
    - johnecash November 20, 2012, 10:36 am
    Dear Math. I am your senior. In the past when I have brought up your age, it did not make you very happy, yet here you are doing to others what you have complained about me doing to you. Its the hypocrisy of the liberals. Abortion OK, capital punishment for a convicted murderer NOT OK. UCAV Drone strikes OK, water boarding NOT OK. Liberals get pisses when the Amish can't fix your computer, when Muslims cant sell them pork and Catholics can't perform an abortion. You see to a liberal the rest of us are here to serve them. We must do what they say, no matter our beliefs. Oh Hypocrisy, Liberal be thy name.
    - johnecash November 20, 2012, 10:38 am
    @johnecash
    When did I get upset about my age? How old are you?

    Plus mate I am far far from liberal.
    - Math November 20, 2012, 10:42 am
    Here you are demonizing the liberals, and a few comments from now a liberal that matches your mindless fervor will fire back and you'll both drop the average I.Q of this site by about seven points.
    Before you ask i'm liberal in my social views and conservative in my financial views.
    - serpentrepent November 20, 2012, 10:50 am
    So facts about liberals is demonizing the liberals? Interesting. I miss the days; "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country" These days liberals ask what the country can do for them, and then ask for more.
    - johnecash November 20, 2012, 11:00 am
    "Liberals get pisses when the Amish can't fix your computer, when Muslims cant sell them pork and Catholics can't perform an abortion. You see to a liberal the rest of us are here to serve them. We must do what they say, no matter our beliefs. Oh Hypocrisy, Liberal be thy name." because that is nothing but cold hard fact right there. Completely unbiased and can be backed up with nothing but fact after fact after fact. You claim to be such an educated and superior mind but you argue like a twelve year old on 4chan. Stating the base views of your opposition then following it with a rant is not a reasonable argument. Before you try and count out any of my points by trying to claim I'm uneducated. I'd like to inform you that I am a graduate of USD's law program and i have been a lawyer for the last year and a half.
    - serpentrepent November 20, 2012, 2:42 pm
    Yep it's all about what free stuff you can get, not what you can do for your country. A baby lawyer huh. How many of you have I eaten for lunch during real-estate right of way cases. I love how y'all think you understand real estate law until you step in to my house.
    - johnecash November 20, 2012, 7:47 pm
    SerpentRepent, he always does this. He ignores your points, repeats his own, unfounded views, then insults your intelligence. The amount of arrogance that man possesses is really impressive.
    - Logos385 November 21, 2012, 1:45 am
    I like how you make this about how superior you are in real estate cases, when this has nothing to do with it.
    - serpentrepent November 21, 2012, 9:33 am
    No it does not, just like this has nothing to do with you being a baby lawyer. So if you want to stay on topic, address the topic. Lawyers always did have a hard time staying on topic.
    - johnecash November 21, 2012, 9:56 am
    I was staying on topic, I simply stated my level of education so you couldn't whine about me being under educated. Oh, one more thing how do you eat baby lawyers up in real estate cases if your not a lawyer. I've seen you claim to be a small business owner so unless you represented yourself, which is always laughable, I don't see how your did that.
    - serpentrepent November 21, 2012, 12:15 pm
    Do you really know so little about real estate law that you must ask that question? Then again you are a baby lawyer so I can't expect you to know it all. None the less it warms my heart to know you care about my opinionof you.
    - johnecash November 21, 2012, 12:17 pm
    Lol @ Johnecash stating that bringing up someone's age isn't an effective argument... In a post about hypocrisy. Final confirmation that cash is le troll? I think so.
    - Logos385 November 22, 2012, 11:19 am
    Look at you trolling me now. I will give you credit though. You are one of the best spin doctors ever. A troll in your finest form. Bravo, bravo.
    - johnecash November 22, 2012, 2:28 pm
    Reply
Related Posts
Loading...