Skip to main content

Woman's senseless, shameful and tragic death

Oh, when will politicians consider the welfare of their constituents, especially women, and put to one side their own prejudices and religious considerations?    There can be little doubt that women are usually the "losers" when politics intrude into daily life.   Take the example of the Indian woman, in Ireland, so graphically reported, here, in The Toronto Star.

"For three days, Savita Halappanavar suffered agonizing pain, asking repeatedly that a 17-week-old dying fetus be removed from her body.

For three days she lay in a hospital bed getting sicker and sicker, until eventually she succumbed to septicemia.

While it sounds like a scene from the Dark Ages, this is what happened to Savita, a 31-year-old Indian immigrant living in Ireland, last month.

Everyone wants to know how could such a thing happen in a modern 21st-century nation. In a society much like Canada’s, with the same values, language, health and social structures.

That’s the question medical, legal and ethical experts will debate. They, the media and general public, will dissect the intricate details of this complex case, and package an answer to suit their own agenda.

Savita was reportedly told by doctors that they could not carry out the termination until the fetal heart had stopped because “this is a Catholic country.” This sound bite has been beamed around the world, and it’s a good one, but it doesn’t ring true.

Because the perception that Ireland is still firmly tied to the robes of Catholicism is a fallacy. The mass abuse of children by pedophile priests cut those attachments, and the decaying church, once all powerful, now holds little sway with the people or politicians.

Really, there’s a very simple reason why Savita died. It’s because she wasn’t listened to. She knew how sick she was, and begged doctors to remove the unviable fetus. They didn’t listen to her clearly expressed wishes, didn’t respect, what in hindsight, was her plea for life.

The real tragedy here is that, actually, doctors could have acted legally to abort the fetus. Within what is admittedly a very limited legal framework, obstetricians in Ireland can and do perform terminations in cases where the mother’s life is at risk.

By way of background: Ireland’s constitution officially bans abortion, but a 1992 Supreme Court ruling (known as the X case) found the procedure could be carried out in situations when the woman’s life is at risk.

So, the doctors could have acted. They chose not to, they didn’t listen, instead carrying on their paternalistic pursuit of what they believed was best, or perhaps so as not to put their own necks on the line. This is not a new narrative, and it’s why Savita’s story should transcend the emotive abortion debate and stand as an acknowledgment of all the women who regularly are not listened to when it comes to decisions about their own bodies."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Robert Fisk's predictions for the Middle East in 2013

There is no gain-saying that Robert Fisk, fiercely independent and feisty to boot, is the veteran journalist and author covering the Middle East. Who doesn't he know or hasn't he met over the years in reporting from Beirut - where he lives?  In his latest op-ed piece for The Independent he lays out his predictions for the Middle East for 2013. Read the piece in full, here - well worthwhile - but an extract... "Never make predictions in the Middle East. My crystal ball broke long ago. But predicting the region has an honourable pedigree. “An Arab movement, newly-risen, is looming in the distance,” a French traveller to the Gulf and Baghdad wrote in 1883, “and a race hitherto downtrodden will presently claim its due place in the destinies of Islam.” A year earlier, a British diplomat in Jeddah confided that “it is within my knowledge... that the idea of freedom does at present agitate some minds even in Mecca...” So let’s say this for 2013: the “Arab Awakening” (the t

The NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) goes on hold.....because of one non-Treaty member (Israel)

Isn't there something radically wrong here?    Israel, a non-signatory to the NPT has, evidently, been the cause for those countries that are Treaty members, notably Canada, the US and the UK, after 4 weeks of negotiation, effectively blocking off any meaningful progress in ensuring the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.    IPS reports ..... "After nearly four weeks of negotiations, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference ended in a predictable outcome: a text overwhelmingly reflecting the views and interests of the nuclear-armed states and some of their nuclear-dependent allies. “The process to develop the draft Review Conference outcome document was anti-democratic and nontransparent,” Ray Acheson, director, Reaching Critical Will, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), told IPS. “This Review Conference has demonstrated beyond any doubt that continuing to rely on the nuclear-armed states or their nuclear-dependent allies for l

#1 Prize for a bizarre story.....and lying!

No comment called for in this piece from CommonDreams: Another young black man: The strange sad case of 21-year-old Chavis Carter. Police in Jonesboro, Arkansas  stopped  him and two friends, found some marijuana, searched put Carter, then put him handcuffed  behind his back  into their patrol car, where they say he  shot himself  in the head with a gun they failed to find. The FBI is investigating. Police Chief Michael Yates, who stands behind his officers' story,  says in an interview  that the death is "definitely bizarre and defies logic at first glance." You think?