F
fix
Guest
If the protestors have the limited information we have here then I find that troubling.
- Status
N
nan
Guest
Perhaps terminology is a problem in this discussion. Perhaps the delivery of the baby, even if the chances of the baby surviving this early in its gestational life are slim to nil, would be what sophion means by aborting. I am a maternity nurse here in the USA, and I work at a Catholic hospital. We do not perform abortions, but if the mother’s life is truly in danger, the treatment is always delivery of the baby.Using this case, which may well be a case of malpractice, as justification for abortion on demand is just wrong-headed. Women have died from legal abortion, but I don’t see any legislation changes because of it.
B
bellasbane
Guest
VIDEO: TDs debate the death of Savita Halappanavar The video includes the full 32 minutes of this evening’s debate in Dáil Éireann on the death of Savita Halappanavar…
Lots of details, passion and pain in here.
Lots of details, passion and pain in here.
B
Boatswain2PA
Guest
That article certainly had more specific information.
It is unfortunate, but sometimes, despite our best efforts, patients who shouldn’t die still do. The “standard” care for a woman at 17 weeks with a fully dilated cervix and ruptured membranes is careful watching and waiting while her body miscarries. You carefully watch her because the open cervix and ruptured membranes can be a route for infection of the uterus. Eventually the mother miscarries and may (or may not) at a later date need a d&c to remove remaining products of conception. However performing a d&c, which is much the same procedure as an abortion, in a septic woman is incredibly dangerous.
I can still see several potential ways this came about other than the medical staff simply saying “we won’t perform the lifesaving abortion because baby is still alive.”
Simplest one is perhaps faced with septic, miscarrying mother, medical team started antibiotics and wanted to get infection under control before performing invasive procedure.
S
sophion
Guest
i’m not sure what to call it. But it is outrageous and crazy.
If my wife is pregnant i’ll take care not to visit any catholic countries.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
A 17 week old fetus will not survive birth, that is a medical reality. Their lungs are not developed enough to take a breath, much less have oxygen pumped into them.
My daughter lost her baby at 20 weeks. I spoke with the doctor and asked if the baby could have survived outside the womb at 20 weeks, he said absolutely not. He wouldn’t have made it through birth, even in a C-section.
If the story as reported in the OP is accurate, and this were to have happened here in the USA, the doctors would’ve been charged with manslaughter of the mother, lost their licenses and may have even done jail time.
The hospital would’ve faced a huge law suit.
Jim
My daughter lost her baby at 20 weeks. I spoke with the doctor and asked if the baby could have survived outside the womb at 20 weeks, he said absolutely not. He wouldn’t have made it through birth, even in a C-section.
If the story as reported in the OP is accurate, and this were to have happened here in the USA, the doctors would’ve been charged with manslaughter of the mother, lost their licenses and may have even done jail time.
The hospital would’ve faced a huge law suit.
Jim
V
vames
Guest
It seems indeed to be the main issue in this case, as practitioners describe it here in comments:
thejournal.ie/savita-death-abortion-x-case-ireland-673744-Nov2012/
Diarmuid Brennan:
I can’t understand the doctors on this one, the woman was having a miscarriage the baby was never going to survive, yet they hadn’t the balls to do the right thing! Costs in the loss of both lives! There needs to be accountability!!
Reply from James Connolly:
Being a nurse of anaesthesiology in a maternity hospital I can tell you your opinion is misinformed. When this lady turned up in hospital she was experiencing back pain, leaking of amniotic fluid and bleeding. These are signs that a miscarriage is about to take or is taking or has taken place. From start to end of miscarriage varies greatly from case to case. When this lady presented she was having a standard miscarriage, the signs were that she would terminate the pregnancy naturally, which is what is done normally. This, along with the presence of foetal heartbeat means you cannot artificially terminate pregnancy in Ireland. By the time artificial termination would have been legal, this lady was already severely ill, and as was demonstrated, even with the artificial termination of pregnancy, she still passed away. We, as clinicians, doctors, midwives, medics need laws, not guidelines.
James Connolly:
Just to provide a background to the medics action in respect of providing pain management: As there would appear to have been a foetal heartbeat present the foetus was still viable (horrible word — apologies). The foetus remains viable until essentially a heartbeat is no longer present. As such, medics have to treat the mother as though a healthy foetus is going to be given birth to, resulting in reduced pain management, reduced strength of pain management leading to reduced efficiency of said pain management. That along with the fact that pain arising from miscarriage is something monumentally painful for any woman who has experienced such a thing.
And moreover:
thejournal.ie/savita-youth-defence-abortion-674078-Nov2012/
James Connolly:
Had she turned up to a hospital in a state whereby abortion were legally available with the symptoms she was showing (bleeding, amniotic fluid leaking, sore back), she would have been offered termination upon presentation at that hospital. Had she refused such a procedure which is her right she would have had termintation of the pregnancy recommended a period of time later, had the miscarriage still not carried through. Had she refused this, which is still her right, emergency termination of the pregnancy would have taken place thereafter, upon the delayed passing of the foetus. In this case had she waited until it was an emergency to terminate the pregnancy, she would already have been septic, her organs would already have been going into shut down, and any intervention as a result of the delayed termination of the pregnancy would most likely have still resulted in the death of both mother and baby.
In Ireland, it is illegal to offer termination of pregancy as a standard procedure. It is also illegal to offer abortion as a semi-elective procedure. You cannot under any circumstances carry out a termination of pregnancy until it is a fully blown emergency. In the case of miscarriage, waiting until the situation is emergent, rather than elective/semielective, is dangerous, and as is now seen, fatal to the mother.
Reply from Rusty Balls:
James, I discussed this earlier today with a relative who works in the medical profession, she basically said everything you just did. She told me that when she worked in a major maternity hospital she saw this exact situation happen quite often, where an expectant mother would have a miscarriage over a period of days and develop septicemia. She described how they could do nothing once there was a foetal heartbeat except try to make the patient as comfortable as possible and treat the septicemia with antibiotics. She said for all the times she saw this happen, all the patients survived. She maintained that, despite what Senator Ronan Mullen says see the article - he says that the doctors should have induced delivery ], no doctor is ever going to cross any legal boundaries in this area and risk their career and possibly a criminal prosecution.
S
seekerz
Guest
You’re correct. No doctor I know of would try that here. Catholics hospitals may or may not have treated (I’ve read different things) but she would definitely have been given the option to transfer elsewhere if active treatment were deemed not licit.
M
michele1984
Guest
They knew, at a time.when they could have saved the mother, that the baby was going to die. What kept them from saving her life was the law mandated from politicians that they could not remove the baby while it had a foetal heart beat. How can this be such a difficult moral dilemma?
What is difficult for me personally is that Catholicism, praying to Jesus and allowing myself to love him and Mary saved me from suicide, when I felt I was going to do myself and everyone a favor my “cutting my losses”. If the Pope doesn’t set this straight, then am I to believe that God views my life and the happiness of my family as less important than that of a baby who will die before anyone knows them? A baby who has no chance to do good and bring others joy. A person with deep mental retardation can do good in this world. This baby had no hope of it. Are we going to disregard science so much as to deny it?
B
Boatswain2PA
Guest
That is what the media is telling you. What the rest of the story is…neither of us know.
Again, I can see how this could happen from a strictly medical viewpoint, without the legal restrictions imposed by Ireland’s laws.
S
seekerz
Guest
This is the sort of thing I have discussed repeatedly in discussions of ‘no exceptions’ abortion and to date the most I’ve gotten is: it is left to the mother and her doctors and depends the particular circumstances. See, that never really made much sense to me: it’s not like there are an infinite number of diagnoses that can complicate a pregnancy. Why should a woman’s right to life get decided on at the time it is in danger and how can someone be faulted for making the wrong decision in the heat of the moment?
In much the same way as we discuss what is licit or not licit in cancer or ectopics, we should be able to say what is the licit treatment of infected uterine contents (baby, placenta, membranes) or life-threatening uterine bleeding. If it’s up to the woman and her doctors then it should not be presented by doctors/politicians as a decision imposed by the Church.
R
RobbyS
Guest
“Savita was really in agony. She was very upset, but she accepted she was losing the baby,” he told The Irish Times in a telephone interview from Belgaum, southwest India. “When the consultant came on the ward rounds on Monday morning, Savita asked: ‘If they could not save the baby, could they induce to end the pregnancy?’ The consultant said: ‘As long as there is a fetal heartbeat, we can’t do anything.”’
Read more: montrealgazette.com/news/Ireland+probes+death+critically+woman+denied+abortion/7546683/story.html#ixzz2CDmlKe6C
this is just religious extremism.
No, this is bureaucratic mind-set. In case of emergency, cya by going by hiding behind the rules.
M
michele1984
Guest
Fair enough, for now, until we know the full story. But what should be deeply troubling is that we can more easily see this happening from a religious viewpoint.
B
Boatswain2PA
Guest
Well, yes, but I more agree with Robbie that this is more of a bureaucratical viewpoint. You wouldn’t believe the medically-stupid things I do simply to reduce my personal (and my hospital’s) legal risk.
Furthermore, many folks better versed in Catholic dogma than I am have pointed out that it wasn’t Catholic teachings that prevented her from having an abortion.
R
RobbyS
Guest
Women dies of scepticima during pregnancy even if the child has already miscarried. To induce a miscarriage may shock the system more than letting the child alone. In case where an arrow has penetrated the body, it might be just as well to leave the object in the body rather than remove it and open the wound. Doing the “obvious” is not always doing the best.
B
Bezant
Guest
The irony of this unfortunate case is where it’s not coming from.
C
CrimsonThorn
Guest
God views your life and your family’s happiness as equally as the potential for that baby’s Im sure. Also when God speaks of life and happiness, it is meant in the bigger picture and not exactly in THIS life (superficial happiness).
Ok - I’m Irish.
Firstly, It’s a disgrace that this woman is dead. It’s also a disgrace that the pro-abortion lobby has hijacked her death to promote abortion.
However, Irish law doesn’t prevent her from receiving the treatment that was necessary to save her life.
Galway University Hospital would have been fully within its legal rights to have induced a preterm delivery – or foetal evacuation – in an attempt to save both mother and child. Indeed, not merely would it have been within its rights to do so, doing so would have been normal medical practice.
In this type of situation you induce a preterm delivery, thus saving the mother, and you do everything you can to try to save the child. You almost certainly fail, but you try.
Firstly, It’s a disgrace that this woman is dead. It’s also a disgrace that the pro-abortion lobby has hijacked her death to promote abortion.
However, Irish law doesn’t prevent her from receiving the treatment that was necessary to save her life.
Galway University Hospital would have been fully within its legal rights to have induced a preterm delivery – or foetal evacuation – in an attempt to save both mother and child. Indeed, not merely would it have been within its rights to do so, doing so would have been normal medical practice.
In this type of situation you induce a preterm delivery, thus saving the mother, and you do everything you can to try to save the child. You almost certainly fail, but you try.
B
Bezant
Guest
From the article it seems she had a very promising future and I can only imagine her husband and family must be devastated.
I’m no medical expert, but blood infections can be very serious; my uncle died earlier this year from a blood infection and he didn’t report symptoms until a few days before he passed.
R
R_C
Guest
They weren’t both dying. The baby was dying. To murder it in order to make the mother feel a bit better does not appear to be the best course of action. If septicemia kicked in after the baby’s death and took as a toll the mom’s life, that’s a different issue, unrelated to the previous one.
Might, may, maybe, those are scary words that can lead us on very dangerous paths. I can understand that you do not respect the life of an unborn, but don’t expect others to act at an equal level of irrationality.
- Status