Will The Suicide Clause In The Proposed Abortion Legislation Regime Allow Abortion On Demand Up To Full Term?

TruthInTheNews

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
1,522
Will The Suicide Clause In The Proposed Abortion Legislation Regime Allow Abortion On Demand Up To Full Term?

The abortion legislation regime proposed by the Government allows unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks (Head 7) and then restricted abortion up to full term (Heads 4 and 5) based on a threat to the health, including the mental health of the mother or in the presence of fatal foetal abnormality (Head 6).

The threat to mental health, commonly known as the ‘suicide clause’, is the mechanism through which abortion on demand has been enabled in those jurisdictions where abortion is considered a health issue rather than enshrined in law as an individual right.

For example English abortion law requires a threat to the mental health of the mother in cases where the mother and foetus are physically healthy. However, most abortions in England are carried out on women who are physically and mentally healthy. In some cases doctors sign off abortion forms for women they have never met.

So the question is, should the suicide clause be removed from Heads 4 and 5 of the proposed legislation? This would mean unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks and then restricted abortion up to full term in cases where there is a threat to the physical health of the mother or the presence of FFA?

What do you think?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/9846014/Mental-health-excuse-to-sign-off-abortions.html
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/what-would-replace-the-eighth-amendment-the-text-the-law-the-politics-1.3505902
 


Half Nelson

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
21,415
The abortion legislation regime proposed by the Government allows unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks (Head 7) and then restricted abortion up to full term (Heads 4 and 5) based on a threat to the health, including the mental health of the mother or in the presence of fatal foetal abnormality (Head 6).

The threat to mental health, commonly known as the ‘suicide clause’, is the mechanism through which abortion on demand has been enabled in those jurisdictions where abortion is considered a health issue rather than enshrined in law as an individual right.

For example English abortion law requires a threat to the mental health of the mother in cases where the mother and foetus are physically healthy. However, most abortions in England are carried out on women who are physically and mentally healthy. In some cases doctors sign off abortion forms for women they have never met.

So the question is, should the suicide clause be removed from Heads 4 and 5 of the proposed legislation? This would mean unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks and then restricted abortion up to full term in cases where there is a threat to the physical health of the mother or the presence of FFA?

What do you think?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/9846014/Mental-health-excuse-to-sign-off-abortions.html
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/what-would-replace-the-eighth-amendment-the-text-the-law-the-politics-1.3505902
The courts will now drive a coach and four through any abortion limits or restrictions. Welcome to Canada.

"No rights" actually means "no rights".
 

TruthInTheNews

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
1,522
The courts will now drive a coach and four through any abortion limits or restrictions. Welcome to Canada.

"No rights" actually means "no rights".
Not necessarily. There are limits to statutory interpretation.

My view is that the majority do not support abortion on demand after the first trimester (12 weeks) and TDs should vote accordingly.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,655
The proposed Irish legislation gives the final decision to a doctor. The Irish medical establishment is not as liberal as their UK counterparts (remember all the IMO votes against repeal). Only 75 abortions were granted last year under the PHLP Act.
 

Half Nelson

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
21,415
Not necessarily. There are limits to statutory interpretation.

My view is that the majority do not support abortion on demand after the first trimester (12 weeks) and TDs should vote accordingly.
Except we didn't vote on that.
We voted to remove all constitutional rights from the unborn.
It was a proactive step and cannot be interpreted as an intention to allow any rights remain. To therefore invoke any semblance of rights or implied rights in legislation will be viewed as unconstitutional.
In any court action the life of the unborn will count for nothing. The only point of judicial contention may be the definition of "born" (not the definition of unborn).

Afaik, in Canada "born" is when the body is completely separated from the mother, without so much as a toe remaining. Our courts may be forced to come up with such a definition.

This will demolish any claims for injuries at birth.
 

TruthInTheNews

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
1,522
The proposed Irish legislation gives the final decision to a doctor. The Irish medical establishment is not as liberal as their UK counterparts (remember all the IMO votes against repeal). Only 75 abortions were granted last year under the PHLP Act.

I disagree. Irish doctors will use the suicide clause to facilitate abortion on demand up to full term just like their English counterparts.
 

damus

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 28, 2011
Messages
23,512
Are women going to feign being suicidal? Is that what the OP is suggesting? Is mental ill-health of less important or any less of a threat to the health & well-being of a woman? Why belittle mental illness?
 

paddycomeback

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Messages
1,908
The grotesque spectacle of Yes triumphalism, revelling in the deaths of thousands of babies, knows no bounds. Any legislation will be challenged and as the SC has already decided a foetus is nothing it will have to allow abortion up to birth.
 

TruthInTheNews

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
1,522
Except we didn't vote on that.
We voted to remove all constitutional rights from the unborn.
It was a proactive step and cannot be interpreted as an intention to allow any rights remain. To therefore invoke any semblance of rights or implied rights in legislation will be viewed as unconstitutional.
In any court action the life of the unborn will count for nothing. The only point of judicial contention may be the definition of "born" (not the definition of unborn).

Afaik, in Canada "born" is when the body is completely separated from the mother, without so much as a toe remaining. Our courts may be forced to come up with such a definition.
Changing the constitution does not necessarily restrict the ability of the Dail to legislate for a restrictive abortion regime.
 

stopdoingstuff

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
22,399
Yes it will. The whole point of the push for abortion is to devalue human life and it will be devalued as much as is possible without people ever being confronted directly with this reality. By hiding behind the hard cases argument, a fig leaf is provided so that people need not acknowledge that the main users of abortion services will not be rape victims or sick people but people who are so selfish and devoid of morality that they will kill their own child so that the party need not stop or so they can continue to afford an extra car etc. The mental health excuse is the perfect way for us to pretend that something noble is going on while all that is really going on is that consumption and convenience has trumped basic human decency.
 

TruthInTheNews

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
1,522
Are women going to feign being suicidal? Is that what the OP is suggesting? Is mental ill-health of less important or any less of a threat to the health & well-being of a woman? Why belittle mental illness?
Yes. Women literally fill out a form and tick the box marked mental health. How can you assess the mental health of someone after a ten minute consultation?
 

Half Nelson

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
21,415
Changing the constitution does not necessarily restrict the ability of the Dail to legislate for a restrictive abortion regime.
The Dail has to act according to the constitution. It cannot now argue that we "should" limit or restrict abortion if its reasons even imply that the unborn child is taken into consideration.

The proactive element of repeal means that the courts must actively ensure that the unborn child has no rights.

This was not a passive referendum - we set out to take away those rights and the courts must ensure they are taken away.
 

ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
49,731
The threat to mental health, commonly known as the ‘suicide clause’...

Really? The suicide clause?

The possibility of suicide is a possibility of a threat to somebody's physical well-being. It is caused by issues of a mental nature.

A threat to a woman's mental health isn't a suicide clause. If the pregnancy causes a SERIOUS (key word in the proposal) risk to a woman's mental health, that is different to a mental issue threatening her physical well-being via suicide.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
8,115
Changing the constitution does not necessarily restrict the ability of the Dail to legislate for a restrictive abortion regime.
This amendment does not create a right to an abortion, it gives the legislature the authority to create laws for abortion. Personal rights in this country are not found in statute law they are derived from the constitution.
 

ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
49,731
The Dail has to act according to the constitution. It cannot now argue that we "should" limit or restrict abortion if its reasons even imply that the unborn child is taken into consideration.

The proactive element of repeal means that the courts must actively ensure that the unborn child has no rights.

This was not a passive referendum - we set out to take away those rights and the courts must ensure they are taken away.
Bull. The Oireachtas could legislate to ban abortion.
 

damus

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 28, 2011
Messages
23,512
Yes. Women literally fill out a form and tick the box marked mental health. How can you assess the mental health of someone after a ten minute consultation?
So it's going to be a 10 minute consultation after 12 wks with psych's - is it? Is it any wonder that people choose to stay quiet about their MH difficulties. Do the women in your lives know that you've got such a low opinion of them?
 

Half Nelson

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
21,415
It's amusing to read Yes voters now trying to argue that the unborn child will have an entitlement to some sort of protection under the law.
Such protection will only hold only as long as it doesn't clash with any constitutional right of the born.

I give it two years.
 
D

Deleted member 34656

Except we didn't vote on that.
We voted to remove all constitutional rights from the unborn.
It was a proactive step and cannot be interpreted as an intention to allow any rights remain. To therefore invoke any semblance of rights or implied rights in legislation will be viewed as unconstitutional.
In any court action the life of the unborn will count for nothing. The only point of judicial contention may be the definition of "born" (not the definition of unborn).

Afaik, in Canada "born" is when the body is completely separated from the mother, without so much as a toe remaining. Our courts may be forced to come up with such a definition.

This will demolish any claims for injuries at birth.
If disability isn’t diagnosed before birth, won’t that be malpractice?
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top