Indian Woman Dies after Refused Abortion Citing Ireland as a Catholic Country

A 31-year-old Indian woman dentist died in Ireland from blood poisoning after doctors allegedly refused to terminate her 17 week long pregnancy, telling her that “this is a Catholic country”.
Irish authorities have launched a probe into the death of Savita Halappanavar, who was 17 weeks pregnant when she suffered a miscarriage and septicaemia at University Hospital Galway last month, The Irish Times reported today.

Her husband, Praveen Halappanavar, an engineer at Boston Scientific in Galway, said she asked several times over a three-day period that the pregnancy be terminated.

Having been told she was miscarrying, and after one day in severe pain, Savita asked for a medical termination.

This was refused, he says, because the foetal heartbeat was still present and they were told, “this is a Catholic country”.

The dead foetus was later removed and Savita was taken to the high dependency unit and then the intensive care unit, where she died of septicaemia on October 28.

“Savita was really in agony. She was very upset, but she accepted she was losing the baby. 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 foetal heartbeat we can’t do anything’,” her husband was quoted as saying by the newspaper.

Despite her insistence that she was “neither Irish nor Catholic”, the doctors refused to abort the foetus.

An autopsy carried out two days later found she died of septicaemia “documented ante-mortem” and E.coli ESBL.

A hospital spokesperson confirmed the Health Service Executive had begun an investigation while the hospital had also instigated an internal investigation.

Abortion is illegal in the Republic of Ireland. The incident has reignited the debate over women’s rights to abortion in the country.

Ireland Prime Minister Enda Kenny said he was awaiting the findings of the probe into the death.

http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/wor...er-being-refused-abortion-in-irelan-9564.html

 

So because a woman dies because of pregnancy related issues the law must be faulty ? Hmmm.. I wonder what rate do women die due to similar issues around the world ?



What do you know , the rates in Ireland are the same as in Australia and Sweden . Countries where abortions are performed with the same ease of ordering a pizza .

Yep clearly the law is flawed , award the husband 1.000.000 $ and go on a nation wide witch-hunt . That should solve the non-issue .

 

One problem with your response, if she wanted an abortion in Australia she would have gotten one.

 

Exactly. And that is the sad thing - she didn't get the medical help she needed. That was inhumane. It doesn't matter which country it is; any denying necessary medical treatment on the grounds of religion is backwards. Yes, it's sad that the foetus was dying, but there was nothing more that could be done for it. There was for this woman, though.

 

I don't know which country where abortion is legal that still does it at 17 weeks, it's over 4 months..
In France the maximum is 14 weeks after the last periods. So about 12 weeks (3 months pregnancy)

Yes in australia it depends on which state, but it seems the legal delay in case of woman health issues is more (up to 5-6 months).

 

The UK (or at least in England). Some states in the USA. Several other countries, too.

 

I think it's wrong to end the life of unborn babies in week 17, with the exception of extremely compelling circumstances. In this case, she was already having a miscarriage, and it may have saved the mother's life. So, while I'm in agreement with many people who think they should have terminated the pregnancy a day or two earlier, I wouldn't feel the same if it were just unwanted. Around 17 weeks of pregnancy, the baby starts kicking, and it can also hear and react to loud noises. They start to develop little fingerprints.

Here's a picture at 17 weeks of pregnancy:

 

I am not sure. According to Aajtak news channel , this happens due to their Ireland laws.

 

The issue here wasn't unwanted, wasn't about a "viable foetus", but the woman's health. I guess you haven't been in that situation. I hope you never are (or anyone you're close to).

I don't disagree though that all life is valuable and any life that can be saved, should.

Perhaps they were so backwards and misunderstood the Hippocratic Oath, though.

 

No disrespect intended. But your response indicates you haven't read my post you're replying to.

 

I did read it.

I don't think anyone was suggesting that it is generally a good idea, like popping smarties.

 

I think abortions could be handled by robots because the first law of robotics says:
"A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm."
And it all depends on the definition of human being, at what age is a foetus a human being?
If a human being is defined by being out of the womb, then all is fine and a robot would have performed the abortion to protect the human being (the woman)
But if a human being is defined as the age of the foetus, like 3 months old, then the robot would have throw an error, or be stuck in an endless loop.

 

Why am I not surprised that you have no guts to take any stand one way or another and instead pretend this is some idiot robot story. Either you think abortion is okay to save the life of the mother or you don't. God I hate spineless fools.

Why should anyone consider your opinion? You were the one who thought there was nothing wrong with Hitler. And said why should you care about what he did since you were not a Jew. Why should anyone care what you have to say now? Are you a pregnant woman? Are you a fetus?

I find that I respect people who have different opinions on topics such as this. Yours, however, is worthless.

 

Thankfully in Australia this issue has been settled. Our Catholic Opposition leader is personally against it, but realizes that it's not his play.
Not everyone likes it but women have freedom of choice.

 

Yep killing a human being is just a choice . All we need now is the right for postnatal abortion for both men and women and we'll be set .

Here's a picture of a wise choice :



@Bush & Ryan - Women die due to pregnancies in the same numbers no matter if they live in Australia (easy abortion country) or in Ireland (emergency abortion country) . It doesn't matter if she would have gotten an abortion of not , statistically her chances of dieing were the same .

 

I think you're missing the point. The woman would have not been told 'This is a Catholic country' and denied THAT opportunity altogether - sure she may have died here but when she came to the doctors and they decided the baby was dying then it likely would have been removed straight away. Religion or religious dogma would not have come into it.

It was the Irish' religious belief itself that denied her the opportunity to survive, according to the MSM. And, if that is the case, it is wrong imho.

 

They didn't refused the abortion due to religion they refused the abortion because the law only allows abortion only under special circumstances . The doctor that consulted her felt that the circumstances weren't met so he refused to perform a procedure that would have been illegal . Once they acknowledged that the abortion was needed they performed it . She still died despite receiving treatment .

Given the fact that Ireland is still struggling financially it is possible that certain tests weren't performed in time or that the results didn't came back in time . I know my fair share of people who lost a loved one due to these exact same reasons .

It is speculated that they knew the baby was dead and irrecoverable when the doctor denied the abortion , if that's the case we're talking about malpraxis and the doctor in charge should get the appropriate punishment .

 

You best summarized what I just felt was the exact case there

 

Hahaha Browntwn you are taking things too much at heart.
Why I don't take a stand one way or another is because I don't care, I don't think anybody is important, so my opinion as you said is worthless, but so is yours, really even if you can't realize it being too much into anything that comes up.

All I have to say is that for a dead woman she looks quite happy in the photo. That's it.

Now go ahead and give me a negative rep point on another unrelated thread like you did before, it's funny imagining you believing you've found people you don't like and giving them negative points, as if anyone cared, only you do and you're nobody, just like me

But to give an opinion on the case, I think if a doctor thinks that the life of the woman is in danger he will perform the abortion, except if some stupid religious beliefs or stupid laws come into play. Because a doctor is supposed to save life and in this particular case even if we can say that there were two life at stake, no need to do medicine studies to know that if the mother dies the foetus will die too, so it's better to save one life and sacrify the other rather than lose both. But yes, if there was some religious beliefs involved, then common sense doesn't apply anymore..
I prefer to believe that the doctor involved didn't realize that the woman was going to die due to infection if nothing was done, and so that is a mistake and if there's ways to punish him for overlooking that problem, then he should be punished according to the law.

Feeling better?

 

It is perfectly within law.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/11/14/us-ireland-abortion-idINBRE8AD1QD20121114