Skip to comments.DEATH ROCKS IRELAND ABORTION LAWS [Pro-infanticide crowd goes nuclear]
Posted on 11/15/2012 3:21:46 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
Savita Halappanavar (31), was on her first pregnancy and "on top of the world," according to her husband, Praveen Halappanavar. Then on Saturday Oct. 20, 17 weeks into the pregnancy, she started to develop back pains and began miscarrying. She went to the hospital and by Wednesday night was moved to the Intense Care Unit. But when she asked her doctors to terminate the pregnancy they refused.
The doctors could still hear a fetal heartbeat and abortions are illegal in the country, if the fetus is still alive, even when it puts the mother's health at risk. But technically the law does allow for abortions when the mother's life is at risk.
Ms. Halappanavar died Sunday Oct. 28.
The Irish times reported that an autopsy carried out two days after her death showed she had died from septicaemia.
About 2,000 people protested in front of the Irish parliament in Dublin last night to change the strict abortion laws in the country.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.discovery.com ...
This is assuming, of course, that her death was caused by complications due to pregnancy and not by any other factor.
Septicemia is a systemic infection, iirc. Whether that was brought about by a dead baby in the womb, or whether the miscarriage was a result of the infection, I don't know. There is more to this than simply a case of 'an abortion would have saved her life' as some might have us believe.
As usual it’s the immigrants causing problems. Doesn’t sound like their name is exactly a traditional Irish name. They didn’t even bother adding an “O” to it.
While it is tragic that this young woman died, changing the law will guarantee only two things, 1) every baby aborted will die, 2) some woman getting abortions will die.
Abortions like any medical procedure carry a risk of the patient dying. More abortions means more women will die.
The law allowed an abortion if the mother’s life is at risk. A choice was made by someone not to do the abortion. The fault is not with the law but those that made the decision.
As others have pointed out we do not know the full story nor do we know if this woman would have died even if an abortion was performed.
When the history of the world is written sometime in the future, this last hundred years will be known as the time when the world went mad.
One of the prime function of any society is to preserve itself and to survive. Killing your unborn baby is the same as killing your future society.
The pro-death crowd puts stories like this on the front page and holds them up as examples of why abortion should be legal.
You never hear the opposite stories - the stories of the mother who dies as a result of an abortion. Those stories just vanish, like the dead mothers.
This is indeed medical negligence & has nothing to do with abortion. Terminating this pregnancy probably would’ve increased her risk of sepsis. What a joke. I see the Irish media is no different than that if the US....leftist spin & full of crap
Savita Halappanavar is a weird name for an irish person
This doesn’t make sense, if she “started miscarrying” then she would indeed have miscarried. This story is devoid of useful facts. Whatever the problem with her pregnancy it seems they did not properly diagnose and treat it. The lack of facts make it impossible to make an informed thought and it’s all just conjecture.
Presumably Ireland has the same sort of inadequate medical care all socialized medicine systems provide ~ and someone forgot that antibiotics work.
Of course there is. One of the lies of the baby-killer industry is that prenatal infanticide miraculously makes extremely sick women well.
“the stories of the mother who dies as a result of an abortion”
And that’s all that needs to be said about this.
Woman dies whom pro-aborts claim would have been helped by an abortion ... massive protest; giant headlines.
Woman killed by abortion ... crickets. Amazing.
O'the hugh manatee?
"Mother and baby are doing fine." No abortion. Safe childbirth. What a concept.
” A mother is supposed to sacrifice her own life to save her child, not sacrifice her child to save herself! “
Not if the child is the cause of the threat to her life. So I don’t agree there.
So you’re saying that my aunt and my cousin should’ve just continued with their doomed tubal pregnancies until their tubes burst, killing both them AND the baby?
Well, as long as the women go down with the ship... I guess that’s the noble thing to do.
This article is as clear as mud, but it sounds as if the doctor didn’t think that pregnancy was the problem and the mom knew something was wrong.
If she had a maternal infection that went septic, it would’ve killed her without medical intervention.
If Western societies die, it clearly won’t be from an overdose of nobility.
I am not trying to change the subject.
You said, “A mother is supposed to sacrifice her own life to save her child, not sacrifice her child to save herself!”
I’m trying to understand when, in your mind, it would be acceptable for a woman to save herself.
I’ve of the mind that, if the pregnancy is doomed, it’s better to save the mom and leave the hope that she’ll be able to have future children. Dead mom usually also ends up with a dead baby. It’s better to sacrifice one to save the other.
Removing an ectopic pregancy is not the same thing as an abortion, but you knew that.
And it's true. Ireland didn't have any troubles until the New Zealand wetbacks started sneaking in.
It ends a fetal heartbeat. It is the exact definition of ‘abortion’ - ending a pregnancy.
What about first trimester preeclampsia? The only way to save the mom is to abort the baby. Would that be acceptable to people here, or is this too close to ‘abortion’? Is that a time a woman should go down with the ship? To give her life for her child?
There are radical comments made here all the time that are as bad as Akin. Many people here believe that there is NEVER a time to end a baby’s life to save the mom. Some are ignorant and believe that modern medicine can save every pregnancy without exception. (Just not true) Others actually believe that women should die before they end a pregnancy.
What REALLY irritates me is that the Left uses these ignorant, uneducated comments as fuel for their cause.
I, and my family, are very pro-life. We look at these lost pregnancies as tragedies and miscarriages. We grieve.
But we feel no guilt.
Wow, that’s a LONG way to swim. Much longer than swimming across the Rio Grande. If they swam that far I think I’d give them citizenship just for the effort.
It’s a New Zealand name. Yes, really.
She actually DID get the abortion, right before she died....
First trimester preeclampsia? I just asked a doctor friend of mine about that and he said to tell you that you don’t know what you’re talking about... They can detect the risk for it in the first trimester, but he’s never seen a full blown case and was taught it happens in the 2nd and third trimester.. His quotes “nothing is IMPOSSIBLE, but you you have a greater chance of having a twoheaded baby, than getting preeclampsia in the 1st trimester....
He said there is never a reason to abort to save the life if the mother. Even ifyou have to end the pregnancy, you don’t have to kill the child, at least deliver it and try to save its life if at all possible...
Well, that's no very adequate definition. Childbirth ends a pregnancy, too.
Morally, abortion is a directly intended killing of the conceived child. That would not include legitimate medical procedures which indirectly cause the child's death, e.g. removal of ectopic pregnancy, hysterectmy for uterine or cervical cancer, meds for mother's illness which trigger miscarriage, etc. --- even when this side-effect of the child's death is foreseen --- and if there is proportionate cause. Preventing the mother's death is a proportionate cause.
In the case of pre-eclampsia --- mother and child both a high risk of death --- a preterm delivery is justified to save the mother, even if the baby's survival chances are very small. There is a decisive moral difference between preterm delivery, in which the child is at least being treated with care, like a dying human being; and a dismemberment (D&E or D&X) where the baby is cut to pieces like a hunk of meat.
Ireland, which prohibits most abortions as illegal, is the country with the lowest maternal mortality rate in the world.
That's a good thing to know.
What's needed here is not precisely "tender-heartedness," but "just judgment" and good obstetric skills.
It's not "just judgment" to intentionally kill an innocent person.
It IS "just judgment," when two people are in danger of death but you can only effectively save one of them, to save the one you can.
With this caveat: the mother and the child are both patients. The doctor must always attack the disease, not the patient.
So do you think inducing labor at 17 weeks gestation is abortion, or would that be all right if you attempt to save the baby?
There is a close connection between abortion and disregard for women in general, and degradation of women specifically as mothers. In the name of a Satanically distorted view of "women's health," women are subjected to dangerous drugs, mutilating surgery, abortions, and a sustained societal and spiritual attack, simply because they can give birth. "D*mn those women! We've got to stop them from having babies! They're supposed to be a consequence-free sexual outlet, and that's all!"
Genuine care for women includes education, vaccines, home and medical sanitation, elimination of child marriage and polygamy, and promotion of the rule of law and free markets for whole societies. It does not include contraceptives and abortion.
Maori, or immigrants to New Zealand from Finland?
“It IS “just judgment,” when two people are in danger of death but you can only effectively save one of them, to save the one you can.”
It just seems to me that many around here would rather see a dead mother and baby rather than just one lost life.
I’m sick about the ‘hard heart’ comments. I held my daughter as she bawled hysterically for days over her lost baby. She went into a terrible depression that lasted for months over the loss. My friend was so grief-stricken. Their comfort came in the form of a healthy pregnancy and a healthy baby girl less than a year after the one they lost.
Some of these people act like a woman should just allow herself to die with her baby. If she lets go and lives on to have more children, somehow that makes her a hard-hearted monster.
Enter the surname -Halappanavar - and then scroll down, and the only place that comes up is Manukau City, New Zealand. Yeah, I thought it sounded Finnish or Icelandic or something like that, too. But the deceased mother in question was brown-skinned, black-haired: looked like maybe Indian to me. But New Zealand seems to be the ticket.
Fascinating. Every day is a learning experience!
(I am not speaking of you, of anyone here on this forum. Not at all. I have just been thinking about the "image and likeness of God" and how we have all of us --- all of us --- fallen so far short.)
Lord have mercy.
I know what you mean. Tagline.
Well, what exactly would warrant that at 17 weeks?
Too bad they can’t muster any sympathy for the babies.
I don’t know. I know that would be a horrible decision to have to make, and I would not want to make it.
It seems like I have read about someone who faced such a decision though they were further along than 17 weeks.
Another news report, with the liberal newspaper’s
editorial comment at the end:
Indian woman refused abortion in Ireland, dies
The Times of India
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Bangalore/Belgaum/London: A 31-year-old Indian dentist died recently in Ireland from complications following the hospital’s refusal to conduct an abortion to save her life. Her death has triggered calls for a review of the Catholic nation’s near complete ban on termination of pregnancy, even on medical grounds.
Karnataka-born Savita Halappanavar died on October 28, three days after she was admitted to the university hospital, Galaway, for treatment of a messy 17-week pregnancy that had left her in agony. But the doctors repeatedly rejected her pleas for an abortion, citing Ireland’s orthodox ban, leading to a worsening of her condition even when it was clear that the baby could not be saved. Savita died of septicemia.
According to British newspapers, an Irish deputy, Patrick Nulty, said Halappanavar’s death points at the “pressing and urgent need” for parliament to “show responsibility and legislate” , calling on his party to press for reforming the abortion law.
I am neither catholic nor Irish, she said before dying
The newspapers also said that the Halappanavar’s family is considering legal action , arguing that the fetus should have been removed earlier to save the woman’s life.
Irish authorities have launched a probe into her death. Her husband, Praveen, an engineer at Boston Scientific in Galway, is flying back to Ireland. Within hours of Savita’s hospitalization on October 21, doctors determined that she was miscarrying, Praveen said. Over the next three days, they refused requests for a termination of her fetus to ease her surging pain and fading health. The dead fetus was later removed and Savita was taken to the high dependency unit and then to the intensive care unit, where she died of septicemia on October 28.
“Savita was really in agony . She was very upset, but she accepted she was losing the baby ,” he told the Irish paper in a telephone interview from Belgaum . “When the consultant came on the ward rounds on Monday morning, Savita said if they could not save the baby, could they induce an end to the pregnancy. The consultant said: ‘As long as there is a fetal heartbeat, we can’t do anything’.” “Again on Tuesday morning..., the consultant said it was the law, that this is a Catholic country. Savita said: ‘I am neither Irish nor Catholic’ , but they said there was nothing they could do,” Praveen was quoted as saying. He said his wife vomited repeatedly and collapsed in a restroom that night, but doctors wouldn’t terminate the fetus because its heart was still beating.
The fetus died the following day and its remains were surgically removed. Within hours, Praveen said, his wife was placed under sedation in intensive care with systemic blood poisoning and he was never able to speak with her again. By Saturday, her heart, kidneys and liver had stopped working and she was pronounced dead early on October 28.
Praveen told TOI he is getting frequent updates from his friends in Ireland. “The PM has given an assurance to get the matter investigated by an independent agency.’’
The debate in the Western world on abortion is often portrayed as one between the ‘pro-life’ and ‘pro-choice’ camps. As this case should illustrate to those who view an anti-abortion position as pro-life, that can often be a dangerously misplaced notion. In this specific case, it appears clear that the yet-to-be-born child’s life was doomed whether or not an abortion had taken place. The mother’s life, on the other hand, could have been saved had the abortion been done. The ban on abortion therefore ended up taking a life that need not have been lost. How does that square with viewing the ban as pro-life?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.