Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 312800 comments on the Newsday story from Jan 22, 2008, titled Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision. In it, Newsday reports that:

Thousands of abortion opponents marched from the National Mall to the Supreme Court on Tuesday in their annual remembrance of the court's Roe v. Wade decision.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#307190 Aug 5, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
The invstigative report on Savita's Death is here: http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2013/06/savita... Had the infection been treated when localized, it's unlikely Savita would have ended up w/ sepsis and septic shock.
Funny how you (as usual) ignore what you dont like in the report, including this:

We considered that the patient’s condition involved prolonged rupture of membranes, which
is associated with increasing risk of infection with the progress of time. In this case, the
patient’s condition was rare and serious. There was a lack of recognition of the gravity of the
situation and of the increasing risk to the mother which led to passive approaches and delays
in aggressive treatment.

This appears to have been either due to the way the law was interpreted in dealing with the
case or the lack of appreciation of the increasing risk to the mother and the earlier need for
delivery of the fetus.

When the patient and her husband enquired about the possibility of having a termination, this
was not offered or considered possible by the clinical team until the afternoon of the 24th of
October due to their assessment of the legal context in which their clinical professional
judgement was to be exercised.

...

Delaying adequate treatment including expediting delivery in a clinical situation where there
is prolonged rupture of the membranes and increasing risk to the mother can, on occasion,
be fatal.
The investigation team is aware that clinical circumstances can and have arisen in Ireland
where a termination of pregnancy is an appropriate and necessary clinical step in the
medical treatment and care of a patient.

What you DID post, included (key causal agent #2) the FAILURE of the option of abortion. Their recommendation for that is as follows:

"Recommendation 4b.
There is immediate and urgent requirement for a clear statement of the legal context in which
clinical professional judgement can be exercised in the best medical welfare interests of
patients. There is a parallel immediate requirement for clear and precise national clinical
guidelines to meaningfully assist the clinical professionals who have the responsibility, often
in circumstance of rapid deterioration or emergency, as to how to exercise their clinical
professional judgement in a particular case. We recommend that the clinical professional
community, health and social care regulators, and the Oireachtas consider the law including
any necessary constitutional change and related administrative, legal and clinical guidelines
in relation to the management of inevitable miscarriage in the early second trimester of a
pregnancy including with prolonged rupture of membranes and where the risk to the mother
increases with time from the time that membranes were ruptured including the risk of
infection. These guidelines should include good practice guidelines in relation to expediting
delivery for clinical reasons including medical and surgical termination based on available
expertise and feasibility consistent with the law.We recognise that such guidelines must be consistent with applicable law and that the
guidance so urged may require legal change."

Pay attention to that last two sentences No Relevance. "These guidelines should include good practice guidelines in relation to expediting
delivery for clinical reasons including medical and surgical termination. We recognise that such guidelines must be consistent with applicable law and that the
guidance so urged may require legal change.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#307191 Aug 5, 2013
Also from that report. This was the THIRD time they asked for an abortion, when it was well known that there would be no viable baby:

"O&G Consultant 1 stated that the patient and her husband were emotional and upset when
told that a miscarriage was inevitable. The consultant stated that the patient and her
husband enquired about the possibility of using medication to induce miscarriage as they
indicated that they did not want a protracted waiting time when the outcome of miscarriage,
was inevitable.
At interview, O&G Registrar doctor 2 stated that the plan was to check the fetal heart and
that the patient had asked on the 23rd of October about termination.
O&G Consultant 1 stated that the patient and her husband were advised of Irish law in
relation to this. At interview the consultant stated “Under Irish law, if there’s no evidence of
risk to the life of the mother, our hands are tied so long as there’s a fetal heart”. The
consultant stated that if risk to the mother was to increase a termination would have been
possible, but that it would be based on actual risk and not a theoretical risk of infection “we
can’t predict who is going to get an infection”.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#307193 Aug 5, 2013
From Page 69:

"Key Causal Factor 2:
Failure to offer all management options to a patient experiencing inevitable miscarriage of an
early second trimester pregnancy where the risk to the mother increased with time from the
time that membranes were ruptured.

The investigation team is aware that clinical circumstances can and have arisen in Ireland
where a termination of pregnancy is an appropriate and necessary clinical step in the
medical treatment and care of a patient.

The records and interviews confirmed that - from the time of her admission, up to the
morning of the 24th of October - the management plan for the patient was to “await events”
and to monitor the fetal heart in case an accelerated delivery might be possible once the fetal
heart stopped.

(in other words - they did nothing)

By 00.30hrs on the 23rd of October, 24 hours had elapsed since the spontaneous rupture of
the patient’s membranes. Clinical evidence within the literature suggests that the risk of
infection in the uterus increases after 24 hours and the balance of risks between conservative management and intervention is therefore changed. This means that the clinical
situation needs constant review and the probable need for termination increases with time.
At approximately 07.00 hrs on the 24th of October, SHO 2 documented his/her impression
that the patient was suffering from Chorioamnionitis and possible sepsis. Once sepsis is
present, fetal demise is certain and the risk to the mother of developing severe sepsis with its
sequelae of serious morbidity and high mortality increases.

The investigation team considers that here was an apparent over-emphasis on the need not
to intervene until the fetal heart stopped together with an under-emphasis on the need to
focus appropriate attention on monitoring for and managing the risk of infection and sepsis in
the mother.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307194 Aug 5, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
From Page 69:
"Key Causal Factor 2:
Failure to offer all management options to a patient experiencing inevitable miscarriage of an
early second trimester pregnancy where the risk to the mother increased with time from the
time that membranes were ruptured.
The investigation team is aware that clinical circumstances can and have arisen in Ireland
where a termination of pregnancy is an appropriate and necessary clinical step in the
medical treatment and care of a patient.
The records and interviews confirmed that - from the time of her admission, up to the
morning of the 24th of October - the management plan for the patient was to “await events”
and to monitor the fetal heart in case an accelerated delivery might be possible once the fetal
heart stopped.
(in other words - they did nothing)
By 00.30hrs on the 23rd of October, 24 hours had elapsed since the spontaneous rupture of
the patient’s membranes. Clinical evidence within the literature suggests that the risk of
infection in the uterus increases after 24 hours and the balance of risks between conservative management and intervention is therefore changed. This means that the clinical
situation needs constant review and the probable need for termination increases with time.
At approximately 07.00 hrs on the 24th of October, SHO 2 documented his/her impression
that the patient was suffering from Chorioamnionitis and possible sepsis. Once sepsis is
present, fetal demise is certain and the risk to the mother of developing severe sepsis with its
sequelae of serious morbidity and high mortality increases.
The investigation team considers that here was an apparent over-emphasis on the need not
to intervene until the fetal heart stopped together with an under-emphasis on the need to
focus appropriate attention on monitoring for and managing the risk of infection and sepsis in
the mother.
Hey well this is clearer but NR had m e with sepsis in the amniotic fluid ...

Of course he also cited a surgery ?????? Yesterday .

I should gave read but ruptured membranes ..imo no way to save baby .

As I already said to knit ..dying baby ..cause if sepsis or vice versa ...She didn't even think mom should get meds that COUKD HURT the a already dying baby .to Treat the s sepsis

But that blood test IF IT HAD BEEN given to the doc ..showing sepsis ..

Might have given them cause ..even under Irish law .

Dad SHOuld sue

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307195 Aug 5, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
From Page 69:
"Key Causal Factor 2:
Failure to offer all management options to a patient experiencing inevitable miscarriage of an
early second trimester pregnancy where the risk to the mother increased with time from the
time that membranes were ruptured.
The investigation team is aware that clinical circumstances can and have arisen in Ireland
where a termination of pregnancy is an appropriate and necessary clinical step in the
medical treatment and care of a patient.
The records and interviews confirmed that - from the time of her admission, up to the
morning of the 24th of October - the management plan for the patient was to “await events”
and to monitor the fetal heart in case an accelerated delivery might be possible once the fetal
heart stopped.
(in other words - they did nothing)
By 00.30hrs on the 23rd of October, 24 hours had elapsed since the spontaneous rupture of
the patient’s membranes. Clinical evidence within the literature suggests that the risk of
infection in the uterus increases after 24 hours and the balance of risks between conservative management and intervention is therefore changed. This means that the clinical
situation needs constant review and the probable need for termination increases with time.
At approximately 07.00 hrs on the 24th of October, SHO 2 documented his/her impression
that the patient was suffering from Chorioamnionitis and possible sepsis. Once sepsis is
present, fetal demise is certain and the risk to the mother of developing severe sepsis with its
sequelae of serious morbidity and high mortality increases.
The investigation team considers that here was an apparent over-emphasis on the need not
to intervene until the fetal heart stopped together with an under-emphasis on the need to
focus appropriate attention on monitoring for and managing the risk of infection and sepsis in
the mother.
Even in the original report the doc admitted THEY MESSED UP GETTING THE BLOOD TEST RESULTS ..

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307196 Aug 5, 2013
Corgi lover wrote:
<quoted text>No one ever is doomed. If we thought that,many people would have died that are living now through modern medicine. If A doctor told a family to just give up, well he wouldn't be a good doctor, would he.
Knit

My bet is you won't read this

But it's from YOUR BIBLE


http://biblescripture.net/Sirach.html

Good words for us,all IMO.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307197 Aug 5, 2013
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>All abortions are elective Rose regardless the life and health reasons. She can still choose to continue the pregnancy or not. You are equating "elective" as if it's for any flimsy reason.
I do know what you mean Neo ..mom can choose to put off treatment
For her baby

Sorry

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#307198 Aug 6, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey well this is clearer but NR had m e with sepsis in the amniotic fluid ...
Of course he also cited a surgery ?????? Yesterday .
I should gave read but ruptured membranes ..imo no way to save baby .
As I already said to knit ..dying baby ..cause if sepsis or vice versa ...She didn't even think mom should get meds that COUKD HURT the a already dying baby .to Treat the s sepsis
But that blood test IF IT HAD BEEN given to the doc ..showing sepsis ..
Might have given them cause ..even under Irish law .
Dad SHOuld sue
Keep in mind Rose, that NR said he was a doctor.
pjckmen

Hanoi, Vietnam

#307200 Aug 6, 2013
This is my second visit to your content. I failed to leave a comment before, and wanted to tell you I really like your article. www.friv200.com

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#307201 Aug 6, 2013
Corgi lover wrote:
<quoted text>Doctors can stop a miscarriage from happening nowadays. So hurrying a miscarriage is abortion.
And in this woman's case, stopping the miscarriage would have been murder, knutbar.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307202 Aug 6, 2013
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>Keep in mind Rose, that NR said he was a doctor.
Ahh well THat's,a new one ..really ..one day She had surgery causing sepsis..the next her amniotic fluid had sepsis,.

No wonder I'm confused..if a,DOCTOR is,.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307203 Aug 6, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>And in this woman's case, stopping the miscarriage would have been murder, knutbar.
Thing is, with ruptured membranes ..I don't BELUEVE that's,possible

Also she's worried the AB meds,bad for the baby .

If mom dies..baby is,dead and this poor child already dying ..
Most likely the cause of the sepsis .
grumpy

Northport, NY

#307205 Aug 6, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
The invstigative report on Savita's Death is here: http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2013/06/savita...
The Causal factors of her death are listed as follows:
Key Causal Factor 1:
Inadequate assemssemnt and monitoring that would have enabled the clinical team to recognize & respond to the signs that the patint's condition was deteriarating due to infection associated w/ a failure to devise & follow a plan of care for this patient that was stisfoctorily cognisant of the facts that:
- The most liekly cuase of the patient's inevitable miscarriage was infection and
- The risk of infection and sepsis increased wtih time following admission and especiallyfollowing the spontaneious rupture of the patient's membranes
Key Causal Factor 2:
Failure to offer all management options to a ptient experiencing inevitable miscarriage ofa n early second trimester pregnancy where the risk to the mother increased w/ time from time that embraines were ruptured.
Key Causal Factor 3:
Non adherence to clinical guidelines related to the prompt and effective management of sepsis, severe sepsis aand septic shock when it was diagnaosed.
_________
Ultimately, each physician (and nurse) expected that the others were following up on the blood test taken when Savita was admitted to the hospital. Her white blood cell count was elevated (indicating infection). They went several days assuming no infection (she even vomited twice).
By the time they diagnosed Savita w/ an infection (E. Coli infection of the amniotic sacs) it had spread to her blood stream(sepsis).
They began antibiotics too late - and had to change them after finding out which bacteria was involved. She declined very quickly and ultimately died of cardiac failure.
Had the infection been treated when localized, it's unlikely Savita would have ended up w/ sepsis and septic shock.
If nothing else, it makes an excellent case for a lawsuit.
Validated

Ardsley, NY

#307206 Aug 6, 2013
Why didn't they ask to have their baby delivered in an emergency situation vs aborting?
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
Also from that report. This was the THIRD time they asked for an abortion, when it was well known that there would be no viable baby:
"O&G Consultant 1 stated that the patient and her husband were emotional and upset when
told that a miscarriage was inevitable. The consultant stated that the patient and her
husband enquired about the possibility of using medication to induce miscarriage as they
indicated that they did not want a protracted waiting time when the outcome of miscarriage,
was inevitable.
At interview, O&G Registrar doctor 2 stated that the plan was to check the fetal heart and
that the patient had asked on the 23rd of October about termination.
O&G Consultant 1 stated that the patient and her husband were advised of Irish law in
relation to this. At interview the consultant stated “Under Irish law, if there’s no evidence of
risk to the life of the mother, our hands are tied so long as there’s a fetal heart”. The
consultant stated that if risk to the mother was to increase a termination would have been
possible, but that it would be based on actual risk and not a theoretical risk of infection “we
can’t predict who is going to get an infection”.
Validated

Ardsley, NY

#307207 Aug 6, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey well this is clearer but NR had m e with sepsis in the amniotic fluid ...
Of course he also cited a surgery ?????? Yesterday .
I should gave read but ruptured membranes ..imo no way to save baby .
As I already said to knit ..dying baby ..cause if sepsis or vice versa ...She didn't even think mom should get meds that COUKD HURT the a already dying baby .to Treat the s sepsis
But that blood test IF IT HAD BEEN given to the doc ..showing sepsis ..
Might have given them cause ..even under Irish law .
Dad SHOuld sue
Morally and ethically,it is wrong to kill another's life,deliberately to so call "save" another. That baby should have been delivered,worst case scenario. The wo.an died from lack of treatment. Too late treatment is what killed her,not her baby.

If you and your newborn are both starving to death,do you have a right to eat all the food left so that you don't die?. Realistically,if you die,baby dies ,right?. So,you could argue that too. You wouldn't do that. Your heart would tell you to save both no matter what.
feces for jesus

Brooklyn, NY

#307208 Aug 6, 2013
worships reality wrote:
<quoted text>
that agreemnent sorta threw you there, eh fecal boy?
wasn't expecting that one were you?
so you agree then on the fetus then right ? we don't know for sure. missed your answer.
come on...pull out of jonnycakes for a second and man up.
Reading comprehension isn't your strong point, I see.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307209 Aug 6, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
So you think that even if they had gotten the blood test ..seen sepsis
They should NOT have given her antibiotics because it might hurt
The ALREADY DYING BABY..That was probably the CAUSE of the sepsis??
Obviously they could mot save that baby Knit ..
Going only on the KNOWN may be supposed facts ..the baby dying in the womb was the most likely cause of the sepsis
ESPECIALLY GOING BY NR AND HIS "FACTS" ..it was in the AMNIOTIC FLUID
THEY FOUND THE SEPSIS.
And she was miscarrying.
Well your way certainly would not have sAved anyone ..THRY have her NO.MEDS to hurt that baby ..happy??
Rose: "The DYING BABY was the most likely cause of the sepsis"

E. Coli infection of the chorion and amnion membranes (Chorioamnionitis) was causing the miscarriage. The baby was not causing the infection.

Had physicians looked at blood-test results when admitted to the hospital, they would have seen Savita had elevated white blood cell count (indicating infection).

Everyone assumed somebody else had analyzed the test results, so they continued on as though no infection was present. Meanwhile, the infection spread to the blood (SEPSIS). By the time the physicians diagnosed her w/ an infection, it was already in the blood stream.

Intentionally killing the baby would not treat the infection in the blood. Targeted antiobiotics treat infection in the blood. Infection was diagnosed late, and Sepsis had a stronghold before antiobiotics could control it. Likewise, it takes time to find out which bacteria is involved so that the most effective antiobiotic can be used.
feces for jesus

Brooklyn, NY

#307210 Aug 6, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
And the DNA in.my belief was from Eve ..Not Lucy whatever she was,
Too bad for your belief DNA doesn't show that we are descended from your fabled Eve.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#307212 Aug 6, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
It is I Agree. And this WOUKD be the same wrong is this case under Roe,.
Sorry, I don't understand. Are you saying this would have been the same situation, with the same outcome, had the Irish law been subject to Roe v Wade?
Just trying for a little clarity...
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307213 Aug 6, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey well this is clearer but NR had m e with sepsis in the amniotic fluid ...
Of course he also cited a surgery ?????? Yesterday .
I should gave read but ruptured membranes ..imo no way to save baby .
As I already said to knit ..dying baby ..cause if sepsis or vice versa ...She didn't even think mom should get meds that COUKD HURT the a already dying baby .to Treat the s sepsis
But that blood test IF IT HAD BEEN given to the doc ..showing sepsis ..
Might have given them cause ..even under Irish law .
Dad SHOuld sue
Rose: "NR had me with sepsis in the amniotic fluid"

E. Coli infection of membranes...that eventually spread to the blood (i.e. Sepsis).

Rose: "Of course he also cited a surgery ?????? Yesterday ."

The type of E. Coli infection Savita had is commonly acquired in a hostpital/health care facility. I didn't realize Savita came to the hospital already having an e. coli infection. That's why I predicted she acquired it during surgery after admitted.

Infection of the membranes (amnion & chorion) can happen from bacteria introduced into the vagina during a vaginal exam (more so late in pregnancy).

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Wethersfield Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min Cheech the Conser... 1,459,265
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 36 min don t drink the k... 62,337
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 2 hr Proud American 20,707
News Scientists say they have proved climate change ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Brian_G 7,945
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 3 hr Moses Kestenbaum ODA 71,236
Beware of This Company-Andrews Oil Company, The... (Oct '11) Tue BLOODSEED 11
News MySpace `Predator' Gets 20-Year Prison Sentence... (Jul '07) Tue myspace 12

Wethersfield Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Wethersfield Mortgages