Printable View
Has anybody see this story from the BBC about an Irish girl being denied permission to trave to Britain for an abortion?
Surely it is illegal to deny travel rights unless on suspicion of a crime of some sort, which abortion is not, in Britain.
Makes for pretty perverse reading, especially the psychiatrists view.
It is illegal. The AG says they have no right to detain her, the Gardaí say they can't, etc.
The HSE needs to stfu and let the poor girl go before they do any more damage to her or themselves.
As if they didn't have enough on their bloody plates...
adam
Gardai entitled to prevent travel unless there is a risk of suicide or a clear risk to the mothers health.
Agree its ridiculous.
Also bemused by the appointment of council to act for the foetus (which will only survive for a few days outside of the womb).
But then again, there was a referendum relatively recently on the abortion question.
I dont think anyone will actually stop her , she should have said nothing and just gone like the rest do .
While i dont agree with abortion i think in this case its acceptable . In most other cases it isnt .
Was there not a referendum which allowed a right to travel and information about 10 years ago?Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
It would seem that she was planning to, and the HSE got wind of it. But that's hardly the way it should be anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by anto1208
In other news, all travel links to Holland will now be cut in case Irish people smoke pot or use prostitutes there.
Aw ffs!!! where do they expect me to score teenage amputee eskimo 'round here?Quote:
Originally Posted by John83
So we onto Miss D case. How long before we reach the end of the alphabeth? :rolleyes:
The entire system is a mess - its illegal here but ok to travel abroad to commit act that is illegal here.
Truelly an irish solution to an irish problem.
Are you agreeing with her being detained or what?Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
Yeah, 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution. I presume the problems in this case are because the girl is under 18?:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Schumi
Saved by Ryanair.... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
It's disgusting that the state, via the HSE has interferred in such a way. Fair play to Miss D for not taking the easy option of just saying she was suicidal, and questioning anyone's right to interfere with what she wants to do with with her own body least of all some (probably) busy body catholic fundamentalist in the HSE.
Hopefully the EU will eventually rule that the ban here, for what it's worth, is illegal anyway. Probably would've already if it wasn't for the time contraints involved in taking a case.
The HSE in this case are acting in 'locus parentis' ie they recently obtained a District Court Child protection order... so in effect they because she is a minor have the same powers/resonsubilites that ordinary parents have over their kids. So the fact that citizens have the right to travel to other countries to avail of services not available here only applies to citizens 18 and over.
The issue for the HSE is that IMO whilst they fully intend to allow her to travel they feel it best to have the issues involved tested in the courts.
Also some reference was made to the Court appointing a legal team to represent the rights of the 'unborn' child. Again it is necessary to this as a result of the confusion that still pertains as to what exactly are the legal rights of an 'unbron child'.
The whole mess is a result of the fact that FF/PDs having being 10 years in power didn't have the courage to legislate for all aspects of the 'aborition' issue and instead have left us in a legal limbo as a result of stupid referendums which have been held to placate right wing nutters.
On numerous occasions over the last 10/15 years judges have again and again called on the legislatures to legislate for this.... of course they have failed to do so as they are cowards and thus kids/young adults like Miss D are left to suffer.
There is an absurdity to the whole thing alright which actually comes across better when read through foreign press sources.
Just google Anaecephalus "news".
I wouldn't google "images" if you're any way squeamish. I'd an older sister born in the late '60's with this condition and I don't mind admitting I found it quite upsetting when I realised what had actually happened to her. We were always just told she was stillborn and it wasn't until far more recently we got any details. My mam never even got to hold her. Whipped away as soon as she was born like she was some kind of 'devil-child'. Her name's 'Mary' ...given to her by the nurses.
Agree that the situation is ridiculous and forcing the HSE to bring cases to Court to get guidance on how to proceed is a farce.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calcio Jack
As a matter of interest CJ, within what scope does the Constitution, as amended, allow the Government to legislate? How far can they realistically go without becoming unconstitutional?
From memory the referendum was in 1992(ish) and was raised because a 14 year old had been raped, so surely the fact that she is under 18 would have been covered in the subsequent amendments?Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
Preventing people the freedom to travel is a thin line away from a fascist state.
As a matter of interest CJ, within what scope does the Constitution, as amended, allow the Government to legislate? How far can they realistically go without becoming unconstitutional?[/QUOTE]
The Govt can't legislate via the Constitution per se... they can however hold a referendum to (1) Delete an article or part of same, (2) add to an article and/or change one.
However the problem arises from the fact that they continue to in practice attempt to legislate via the Constitution but such changes more often than not have ended up having to be interputed by the Supreme Court who have a habit of sometimes making an interputation that causes more 'issues'.
Thus it makes sense to legislate on this issue rather than coming up with rigid ammendments to the Constitution and the courts have as I mentioned on a number of occasions stated that is the way to deal with this... however at the risk of repeating my self FF/PDs have shyed away from doing that... its called cuteness by some but IMO it's plain and simple cowardice.
If the reason she's having an abortion is that the child is going to die... and the irish legal system insists that this child has rights the same as any of us, it would open a massive can of worms were she allowed to "terminate" (don't know why the media has stopped saying abort, both words mean the same thing) on that basis. You could have a euthanasia case call the "Miss D" case as precedent.
Here's the BBC's take on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6618911.stm
Yea she doesnt want to have to go through carryin gthe baby for 9 months and giving birth for he/she to die . they give the baby a life expectancy of 1 to 2 days .Quote:
Originally Posted by GavinZac
Normally i am against abortion and i dont think this "its a womans body she cant be told what to do" holds any water . But in a few cases its for the best .
Abortions happen anyway. Might as well legalise them and make them safe in conjunction with free contraception and real sex education.Quote:
Originally Posted by anto1208
For what its worth I think all the politicians are afraid of Abortion Referendums as they can't win. I also think as a Nation we are immature if having situations where its only legal if suicidal. If the country had any maturity we would just legalise Abortion & get on with life like the rest of the planet. If women are going to travel to the Uk they may as well get it done closer to home.
Amen.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
KOH
If that's the case then I can completely understand their reasoning, but why am I hearing it from someone on a message board. Who are they using for PR, Gerald Ratner?Quote:
Originally Posted by Calcio Jack
So personal civil liberties hold no sway in this discussion? I think 'it's a womans body she can't be told what to do' is the main argument to be honestQuote:
Originally Posted by anto1208
Keep this thread strictly on topic please. If you want to have a general discussion on abortion, start another thread. And that had better stay civil too.
In fairness I think it will be impossible to discuss this case without occasionally straying into the grand picture of whether abortion should be legalised here, and if so, why should it beQuote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
In fairness, I just told ye not to, and gave ye a way of straying into the "grand picture" without going off-topic in this thread. So just do that please, and stop taking this thread even further off-topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GavinZac
But she wouldnt have the abortion in Ireland, so I dont think the case could be used as a precedent for an eathanasia case. The legal system would be stopping her from visiting a country where she will not ommit a crime of any kind, according to that country's legal system.
I dont think the government is entitled to do that.
See new topic ....pretty much ends this thread since every one agrees she should be aloud to travel . And they where saying yesterday its in the law that she is aloud to have it here .Quote:
Originally Posted by jebus
Looks like we cant do that either ??Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
in fairness its murder anyway and she should just give the child the right to the few days which is better then nothing to have....anyway she like all the others who travel over to have one should have kept there legs closed in the 1st place!..... its plain murder in my eyes just because you cant see the baby dont mean its not there, it should be outlawd everywhere!.
Oh my God...................Quote:
Originally Posted by gilberto_eire
what!!Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
You can't anto1208. It looks like you can't. If you had been willing to debate maturely and not stoop to the kind of mindless commentary I would expect from the religious right in the US, we'd still be having this debate. The thread was locked because of you, and just you.Quote:
Originally Posted by anto1208
This thread was locked because of gilberto_eire, and just gilberto_eire. And rightly so. The child doesn't have a brain, ffs. :rolleyes:
gilberto_eire has been warned about the comment above btw. There won't be another warning.
adam