I miss Maria Steen already! Just saying!
dont worry, some of the extreme elements of the no campaign are pledging to fight on during the process of the bill through the oireachtas.
meanwhile, we have the prospect of repealing this in the autumn
41.2 1° In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
cant wait for the 50/50 airtime on that one…
Well at least I think we can all agree on this one - a woman’s place is in the home.
You’d need to leave the engine running!
another measured and reasoned response was from det. insp. ganly who has said that he is not paying his taxes towards abortion.
now, i cannot say what sort of taxes he actually pays (if any) but i’m sure there is a way he can withhold that .0000001c in the euro that will go towards that element of the HSE.
he never revealed if that french student actually was able to vote in the end, which surely would have resolved his manufactured gaslight issue about fraud - one which we saw being used by the No campaign on sunday.
He is the Jim McGuiness of irish politics, forever dining out on that one victory.
Obnoxious character alright. Between him and the Iona institute the no campaign did well to get 30%.
Maybe he and mad John can move to El Salvador ( although why should the Salvadorans suffer ).
Would they bring Ronan Mullen with them? I’d pay for their tickets! He’d forgive me my sin!
let’s see. Who will provide this service ? The hospitals are up to their ears in it , waiting times etc. The GP’s have said they have not be contacted about it.
Does that preclude GPs from providing the bulk of the service if they haven’t been asked yet? There will be a number that will have to be also provided for in hospitals as surgical terminations.
I think it was timmy dooley who was very honest and said they weren’t ready yet but why would they be. Provisions will have to be made and a system devised. At a minimum 1200 doctors signed up for choice so they would be a good place to start
Jaysus your GP man on the news saying we haven’t heard anything yet. The result was only announced 40 hours ago!
On average, each GP will deal with about 3 abortions a year on the expected figures. That’s 6 extra appointments per annum. I think they’ll cope. As for the hospitals, sorry to be so blunt about it but a pregnancy terminated at 8-10 weeks takes a lot less appointments with obstetricians/gynecologists than one that goes full term. The same applies to the supposed additional cost of providing for abortions, there’ll actually be less cost.
But it is an extra workload in the sense that it was exported until now.
But sure it’s ‘Abortion on Demand’ - they’ll all be having one! … There won’t be a cow milked or a baby born in Ireland this year! … If you’re to believe the No campaign anyway.
I suppose there will never be any complications !!!
There’ll be a lower percentage of complications than there is at the moment among those pregnancies that are currently going full term. The less time a foetus is alive, the less the opportunity for complications to arise, especially as most occur later in pregnancy. It’s that simple.
As to Dub09’s point above on what was previously exported, I gave an example of the impact of the expected numbers a few weeks back (see somewhere above) which I honestly can’t be arsed repeating here. On average, you could expect each terminated pregnancy to require ten less obstetrician/gynecologist appointments than one that goes full term. On the current numbers, the cutoff point where the number of appointments required to deal with having abortions currently being performed abroad dealt with here is overtaken by the number of potential appointments ‘freed up’ by the increase in abortions that are currently going full term is only about 500 per annum. Let’s be honest, with the much easier access, it’s going to exceed that - if you’re to believe the No camp, it’ll be 10,000 a year in no time.
Goes without saying I hate applying such cold maths to potential human lives but there’s no way of rebutting the groundless claims that this is going to cost a fortune without running some numbers on it. The No campaign were hyping this in the last week of the campaign and I’ve no doubt it was intended as bait in the hope somebody officially representing the Yes camp would bite and they’d be able to quote something like I’ve written above entirely out of context.
there is an interesting strategy from the No side going on whereby they attribute to the yes campaign the sort of things they were doing themsevles. Examples are saying the yes campaign created many and varied “(insert title) for choice” twitter accounts, had american money used, voter fraud, fake profiles and all that.
meanwhile, ive noticed that two accounts i was engaged with supporting the no side and who were posting the most egregious lies and spin have been deactivated. I imagine this is deliberate, unlike after the marriage referendum where they just went silent, this time they are purposefully deleting themselves - and their posts.
at the same time it is worrying to see how the media have jumped onto the “both sides were at it” story which is plainly not true by a very wide degree and despite all the evidence to the contrary which can be easily researched.
Of course, we know all about how a story which is totally false and which can be easily rebutted by a bit of research can instead be parroted again and again and again until the desired false narrative is created and the objective obtained.
this is the danger of social media and why i think dark ads work so well. Look at trumps birther myth that he created and propagated about obama not being an USA citizen. It was always a load of bunkum and yet they kept shitting on about it, and a lot of people believed it. You just repeat the lie over and over and it sticks.
well, i was more thinking of the “dublin pulled all the mayo players down in the last minute” stuff