International

Remembering Savita Halappanavar

The untimely passing of Savita Halappanavar is truly tragic. The pro-life community deeply cherishes the sanctity of life and mourns her death. But her death is not an argument for legalizing abortion.

According to news reports, Savita was 17 weeks pregnant when she was admitted to an Irish hospital in Galway. She faced severe complications, miscarried, and later died from septicemia. Although the case is still under investigation, her husband says she desired an abortion and that if she had been allowed to abort her child in the midst of the complications, she would have survived.

Abortion activists all over the world have jumped on this case to say that abortion saves women’s lives, without waiting for any corroborating details from the medical investigation. The truth is that there is no evidence that abortion would have saved Savita’s life. In September, the International Symposium on Excellence in Maternal Healthcare – comprising experts in obstetrics and gynecology from across the globe and 140 Irish medical professionals in the field – concluded in the Dublin Declaration that abortion is not medically necessary to save the life of a pregnant mother.

Based on early reporting, it appears that the deadly infection may actually have resulted from slow administration of antibiotics, though nothing can be said with certainty until the investigation is complete. The health minister added that there is no reason to believe Catholic influence interfered with providing necessary treatment for Savita.

Ireland prohibits direct abortion in all cases. Yet Irish doctors are always obliged to save the life of the mother, even if it risks the life of her baby. In fact, doctors who don’t intervene in such circumstances can be struck off the Irish Medical Council registry.

Abortion campaigners claim that doctors are afraid to intervene in life-threatening circumstances because of Ireland’s pro-life laws. But then they proceed to muddy the waters by obfuscating between interventions that risk the life of the unborn child and direct abortion. A common example is the conflation of premature delivery or treatment for ectopic pregnancy with direct abortion. If doctors in Ireland are confused, it’s not because of the law. It’s because of pro-abortion activist groups which distribute misinformation to doctors, legislators, and the public.

Furor over Savita’s death rings disingenuous when one recalls the pro-choice lobby’s deafening silence over the deaths of Manon Jones, Jessie-Maye Barlow, and Emma Beck after they were subjected to abortion in the United Kingdom. Where was the ire over abortionist negligence when Tonya Reaves died in agony? Where were the calls to change abortion laws in order to protect women then? The one-sided advocacy of activists demanding change exposes that their concern isn’t about protecting women so much as protecting abortion.

Medical evidence shows that women’s mortality rates are actually increased by abortion. A single induced abortion increases the chance of maternal death by 45%, while women who have two or more abortions face 114% and 192% increased chances of premature death, respectively. Women who have abortions are at increased risk for mental health problems, depression and suicide, and breast cancer.

In reality, abortion-free Ireland remains the safest place in the world to be a pregnant mother. According to UNICEF, the nation consistently boasts one of the lowest maternal mortality rates in the world (#1 in 2005, #3 in 2008). The World Health Organization identified Ireland as the nation where women face the lowest lifetime risk of maternal mortality – far less risk than in abortion-providing nations like the United Kingdom and the United States. Savita’s story is newsworthy precisely because it is so rare!

It’s time for abortion activists to stop using Savita Halappanavar to further their agenda. Until the investigation is complete, we won’t know what exactly went wrong with her treatment. But we can know one thing: abortion never saves a woman’s life. It just kills a baby.

Live Action on Facebook
  • rymnd87

    What you have written is perfect non-sense! Based on what has been reported so far, Savita was suffering from septicemia directly related to the fact that she was undergoing a miscarriage. Ever heard of Eclampsia, guess not! For that you would need some “gray matter”, what is it? go ask a doctor!

    • Mary

      Were you this outraged over the women who died because of an abortion?! “…..Furor over Savita’s death rings disingenuous when one recalls the pro-choice lobby’s deafening silence over the deaths of Manon Jones, Jessie-Maye Barlow, and Emma Beck after they were subjected to abortion in the United Kingdom. Where was the ire over abortionist negligence when Tonya Reaves died in agony? ….”

      • LauraP

        Tonya Reaved died of a surgical complication from a wanted medical procedure. It is very rare, but it happens. That doesn’t make her death any less tragic, but it had nothing to do with abortion being legal or illegal. All surgery has risks, even getting your wisdom teeth pulled. Sadly, Reaves was one of the very very very few people who succumbed to that risk, and if abortion were illegal the risk of her dying, and any woman who obtained an illegal abortion, would be astronomically higher. To compare these two cases is an insult to both women.

        • Meghna

          And when we called all these Planned Parenthoods where women died WHY did they hide the fact that abortion CAN be dangerous or even deadly sometimes??

      • Meghna

        AMEN!!!!

  • Jan

    What rubbish! Why do women have to suffer the indignity of travelleing to the UK for abortions! It is your fault that they have to and if they suffer and die there it is also your fault as you proudly proclaim the excellent natal care in Ireland – which you sadly deprive them off.
    SET WOMEN FREE TO MAKE CHOICES OVER THEIR OWN BODIES. Only a deeply misogynist country like Ireland can be so backwards. But the. look at what priests do to children and get away with – STILL! Disgusting!!

    • mary

      Yes, Ireland having the lowest maternal mortality rate in the world is disgusting.??? Look at the whole picture, not just your narrow-minded view.

      • Rebecca Downs

        It is actually *more* misogynistic to claim that women need abortion and that they cannot be on the same playing field as men without it.

    • Heidi

      Women’s rights- I’m all for. Making choices- yes. Scientifically, abortion is not about a woman’s body, it is another person’s body.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Gobi-Obi/100002023605080 Gobi Obi

        I agree

      • Tania

        How can you say that abortion is not about a woman’s body when this woman may have lived if she had been given an abortion? Their child had no hope of survival, but she did. She could have been at home with her husband, grieving the loss of their child. But instead she is dead and her husband, instead of being able to grieve for his child, may now resent it for taking his wife from him. Her parents, instead of mourning the loss of their grandchild, who could not have been helped, have lost their daughter, who could have been had she been given the help she asked for. She was probably completely aware that this was killing her, so I think that your comment is misguided at best.

        • Yup…

          yes, if an emergency termination (which is not actually outlawed in an anti-abortion law) was actually necessary to save the woman’s life, that was the right thing to do. If the life in her womb cannot continue b/c she is miscarrying (and 17 weeks is too early for delivery and survival), or she will die if that particular action is not taken (as opposed to another intervention) there is no point in giving the child a few more hours alive at the cost of the Savita’s life. When a life can continue, you save it. If the child is not going to make it, you don’t let the mother die for something she did nothing to deserve. And they wouldn’t have to rip it apart like abortionists, either. Taking someone off life support (like a baby from its mother’s support) is much less violent than hacking them up with a machete. Still a death. Still tragic. But there’s a difference. In the action and in the motivation behind it. My sympathies are with Savita’s family, I would advise Ireland to stay strong in their position without letting medical neglect happen.

      • http://twitter.com/NikkiGuest Nikki Jayne

        Well, since a foetus is *technically* a parasite, ie it lives off the mother’s body, it sort of *IS* about the woman.

        • Meghna

          You are sick to call an unborn baby a parasite. The fetus is a completely different entity than his/her mother/. Learn some science. Are YOU are parasite if you drink cow’s milk??

        • Mandy

          definition of a parasite: an organism that lives on or in an organism of ANOTHER SPECIES, known as the host, from the body ofwhich it obtains nutriment. Last time I checked an unborn baby is still of the human species so nope not a parasite at all. Actually if you open any basic embryology textbook to the first page it will state that at the moment of conception a new human life is formed with completely unique dna that has never existed before and will never exist again. So that being said abortion is NOT about the mother, it is about the life of a baby.

    • Meghna

      REad the TRUTH of the story, not your opinion, Jan. She did NOT die b/c she didn’t have an abortion. It’s amazing how people only want to see their own opinion glorified, instead of actually reading the medical facts of the particluar case.

      And when a woman is pregnant it’s not only her body, there’s (at least) TWO bodies involved, her own, and that of her unborn child(ren)! And then for you to go off on your own little side kick and start talking about a completely unrelated topic just to spew hatred against the ENTIRE Catholic population, when it was only a few priests that did that. Please bark up another tree.

  • Dutoit Ras

    Sir have you NO SHAME!!!! This woman died as a result of your interference in her life and choices. You write: “..though nothing can be said with certainty until the investigation is complete”. but PROUDLY state “”The truth is that there is no evidence that abortion would have saved Savita’s life” You are horrible and seem to think you are doing God’s will – nothing could be further from the truth. Have some humility, let her go with some respect. Do not stupidly try to make someone in to hero to the cause that killed her.

    • http://www.facebook.com/miles.gervais Miles Gervais

      I don’t recall the word “proudly” being stated in the article. The fact of this article is that the pro-abortionists do use the death of a woman when an abortion was not performed to decry that “abortion saves women” yet fail to raise the red flag when an abortion is the direct cause of a woman’s death. As said, they are not concerned truly with women’s health; but with the idea and concept of abortion. Abortion is never, repeat NEVER the only alternative in saving a pregnant woman’s life. I find it very difficult to believe the idea that killing one innocent life is the only way to save another innocent life, given the advancements in medicine in this world.

      • Detroiter327

        “I find it very difficult to believe the idea that killing one innocent life is the only way to save another innocent life, given the advancements in medicine in this world.”

        I guess thats why your not a doctor. The majority of ob/gyns would disagree with you.

    • Meghna

      For the tenth time, she DID NOT die b/c her pregnancy was not terminated. THat is the opinion of all the OB/ GYN’s involved!

      • disqus_w2FOwvYm9z

        Actually, she did die because her pregnancy was not terminated. That is the opinion of every OB/GYN who has examined her case. She presented with a miscarriage in progress, leaking amniotic fluid and fully dilated. The indicated treatment is abortion (either induced labor or D&E) and antibiotics.

        To put it in perspective, imagine Savita Halappanavar had presented with a giant infected gash on her leg. Appropriate treatment would be antibiotics plus cleaning and suturing the wound. Leaving it open and full of diseased tissue while only giving her antibiotics would be gross malpractice. A miscarriage is exactly like that- an open, bloody wound presenting a lovely home for future infections and housing infectious tissue (the fetus). Treatment with only antibiotics is gross malpractice.

  • Old RN

    Once it was realized that Savita’s baby was causing Savita to go septic, an emergency C should have been performed. Granted, the baby would likely have not survived for long, but cmfort measures could have been provided to the baby until she/he died. At least in a section, they are not going in with the intent to kill the baby; and a section is infinitely more humane than an abortion.

    Had she had the section, of course then treat her for the sepsis, but that is a case of “woulda-coulda-shoulda” now. What I would like to know is, were they treating Savita for her sepsis during the course of her miscarrying? And if so, how aggressively?

    • LauraP

      Yes, a far more invasive procedure, entailing cutting open her SEPTIC ABDOMEN, would have been far preferable to the safer abortion procedure. But we couldn’t do that, because, you know, it’s called an abortion.

      • Old RN

        We open septic people to remove septic organs frequently. We remove a ruptured appendix while full-blown peritonitis is simultaneously occurring (and yes, peritonitis leads to systemic sepsis and multi-system failure quite rapidly). We’ve removed septic spleens, leaflets of liver, sections of intestine, etc. We hang antibiotics (big guns- Vanc, Gent; although both cautiously, considering their propensity towards renal failure- they just love eating nephrons) and run those as we are in surgery. So opening people while septic is not some holy grail thing we would never, ever, ever do; especially when we must first remove the cause of the sepsis to begin with.

        And yes, we have no need to do an abortion. If you value humane treatment of dying children, the last thing you would do is a second trimester abortion. If you value the dignity of humans, and the humanity of children, the last thing you would advocate for is abortion at any trimester.

        • LauraP

          Sorry, this argument does not add up. An abortion procedure is far less invasive. There would have been nothing inhumane about it. And I never implied no one ever operates on people with septic infections, I was merely making the (correct) point that an abortion would have been safer and less invasive. I truly cannot believe the lengths people will go to defend this woman’s death (yes, that is 100% what you are doing) just so they won’t have to admit that a particular medical procedure would have saved her. It is even sadder that you are an “RN”. Your medical expertise being so clouded by dogma that you would take your justification to such lengths is a real problem. It’s the same attitude that killed Savita.

          • LauraP

            My previous comment is especially exemplified by:”If you value humane treatment of dying children, the last thing you would do is a second trimester abortion.” You are stating you value a non-sentient, non-pain capable developing organism over an adult woman dying in agony over three days. Your definition of “humane” is quite backwards.

    • Stev84

      There was no “baby” you vile dipshit. It was a 17-week old fetus. And it would have died with 100% certainty because its lungs weren’t developed yet. There was no way to save it. But you would instead chose to kill the mother.

      In any proper hospital, the standard treatment in her case would have been to evacuate the uterus. And *not* by cutting her open.

  • Heidiboots

    Abrtion IS allowed in Ireland when there is a ‘real and substantive risk to the mother’s life.’ – This includes risk of suicide. The problem is that there is no legislation clarifying what circumstances that effects. The Medical Council give very vague guidance as it is a legal grey area, thanks to our governments’ failure to legislate, contra to European Law. Abortions are carried out to end ectopic pregnancies in Ireland routinely. See p. 21 of Medical Council of Ireland report; http://www.medicalcouncil.ie/Registration/Guide-to-Professional-Conduct-and-Behaviour-for-Registered-Medical-Practitioners.pdf

    • Momma Sue

      Has anyone thought about the Doctors and nurses that have to perform these abortions, they have been known to have problems after aborting[killing] babies, that often are breathing when aborted?

      I

      • Stev84

        Get another job then? They can work in some other part of the hospital that doesn’t offend their delicate sensibilities.

    • Rebecca Downs

      I hope that this isn’t too off topic. In giving my thoughts about Savita’s death and the status of abortion in Ireland in general on my tumblr, I was mentioning how the Dublin Declaration has stated that abortion is never medically necessary to save the life of the mother. What people did not understand and were extremely angry with me about is that life saving treatments, which may harm the baby or even end his or her life are not abortions. This because the direct intention is to save the life of the mother and not to kill the baby, the latter which an abortion does with its intent.

      I got my information from LifeSiteNews, which will I do realize is a biased site, the article was from the Life Institute with a very telling video. Just because something is biased does not make it untrue. And I’d trust pro-life bias before a liberal media bias. Anyways, what was said is this:

      “The Life Institute website has a wealth of information available on the issues raised and viewers are asked to visit the site to learn more. They can read the expert testimony of Professor John Bonnar, who told a parliamentary committee that:

      “It would never cross an obstetrician’s mind that intervening in a case of pre-eclampsia, cancer of the cervix or ectopic pregnancy is abortion. They are not abortion as far as the professional is concerned, these are medical treatments that are essential to save the life of the mother.”

      The outcome of a major International Symposium on Maternal Health held in Dublin this year is also made available. A Select Panel of leading experts at that conference issued the Dublin Declaration which says:

      “As experienced practitioners and researchers in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn in the termination of pregnancy – is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.”

      http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/no-more-lies-new-irish-video-shows-that-abortion-never-saves-a-mothers-life

      I hope that I have interpreted this article and the statements from medical professionals correctly then and if you feel the need to, to perhaps shed some light on the topic.

  • Heidiboots

    Abortion *is* allowed in Ireland when the mother’s life is at risk (including the risk of suicide). Ectopic pregnancies are routinely terminated in Ireland. As the government have failed to legislate, the Medical Council give very vague guidance to doctors. See p. 21 of their guide: http://www.medicalcouncil.ie/Registration/Guide-to-Professional-Conduct-and-Behaviour-for-Registered-Medical-Practitioners.pdf

    • Julia

      An removing the tube in a ectopic pregnancy is not an abortion. The intent is to save the mother, not to kill the child.

      • Stev84

        But of course in Catholic la-la-land just removing the fetus and trying to preserve half of the woman’s fertility is a NO-NO. Although the result for the fetus is exactly the same. This is precisely why priests should be kept far away from medical decisions.

  • Heidiboots

    My first post got deleted.

  • AngryAndDisgusted

    Almost all of the links to back up your claims link right back to this site, and when it doesn’t, it is to another Christian site. I recommend reading some unbiased literature on the subject, just a thought. Anyway, I come from a long line of medical professionals in my family and my mother who has been an RN for over 20 years, who is also against abortion, isn’t even so dense as to claim it is never necessary to save a woman’s life. I think you need to take a biology class or two.

    • http://twitter.com/Astraspider Astraspider

      That’s the L.A. M.O. Throw up self-referential and tautological links, give the appearance of attestation and research, hope no one notices.

    • Kelsey Arnold

      As a pro-lifer and longtime reader, I have to agree with you about the links. Self-referential links do NOT support an argument, whether they link back to the same author or merely the same group.

    • Julia

      I think the reason some of the links lead to other liveaction posts, is because the pertinent part of the source is quoted there. All the ones I looked at, the cited articles had the links to the actual studies, reports, etc.

      As for unbiased coverage, the mainstream media is notoriously liberally slanted. Have you picked up a NY times, SF chronicle, etc. lately?

      • AngryAndDisgusted

        No, I don’t read the NY times or SF chronicle. I read from several different bloggers online and watch different youtube channels (liberal and conservative) to get my news and stay current. As for science, I am currently in college on my way to medical school to become a surgeon.

        Sure, the news may be biased, but science is not, and the fact is that there was a dead corpse inside her and that is what killed her. There is no reason she should have been denied an abortion.

        About the sources though, he should have cited the direct source, not linked back to the same site he is writing for, which is obviously biased. Yes, us liberals are not the only ones who can be biased, believe it or not.

        • Meghna

          DEAD corpses don’t GET aborted (killed) they’re already deceased, they just get delivered.

  • http://www.facebook.com/miles.gervais Miles Gervais

    Josh, I do agree that the links should not lead to this website if you wish to defend the point. I will say however I am so glad to see this article. There is never an excuse to abort; a woman’s life can be saved in a myriad of other options with today’s medical advancements. I would also like to know where the pro-abortionists are when an abortion, legal or illegal, directly leads to the death of an innocent woman. Where are those women’s rights? Where is her justice? Addressing the dangers of abortion to the health of women does not serve the propaganda though. Thus, you will not see it addressed.

    • machintelligence

      I would also like to know where the pro-abortionists are when an abortion, legal or illegal, directly leads to the death of an innocent woman. Where are those women’s rights? Where is her justice? Addressing the dangers of abortion to the health of women does not serve the propaganda though. Thus, you will not see it addressed.

      Very well: These data are from the USA

      The risk of death associated with abortion increases with the length of pregnancy, from one death for every one million abortions at or before eight weeks to one per 29,000 at 16-20 weeks, and one per 11,000 at 21 or more weeks. The latter numbers have decreased significantly over the past 10 years due to advancement in abortion surgical procedure techniques and the new medications used to terminate pregnancy.

      58% of abortion patients say they would have liked to have had their abortion earlier. Nearly 60% of women who experienced a delay in obtaining an abortion cite the reasons were the time it took to make arrangements and raise money.

      This seems more dangerous than live birth, but…

      While Ireland appears to have one of the lowest maternal death rates in the world, experts are concerned that the real figures are vastly under-reported. June Shannon investigates

      Thanks to advances in obstetric care, maternal deaths are still a relatively rare event in Ireland.

      However they do occur and despite the fact that official reports have long heralded Ireland as one of the safest places in the world to have a baby, at one maternal death in 100,000 live births, experts believe that the true number may be as much as 10 times that figure.

      Source:

      http://www.medicalindependent.ie/page.aspx?title=maternal_death_%E2%80%93_into_the_great_unknown

      Finally, a woman who elects to have an abortion of her own free will and dies from the procedure has not had her rights violated. What justice could you possibly be referring to?

  • Mama K.K.

    Great Article Mr. Craddock!

  • http://www.facebook.com/pol.omaoleoin Pol O’maoleoin

    Pot Kettle Black with this nasty deceitful article ….. Pro-abortionists are using this ‘to further their agenda’ etc etc from the man who himself uses it to further his own agenda’….. you really have no shame do you. BTW where are you guys when the ‘saved’ child ACTUALLY is born??? Nowhere to be seen….shame shame shame on you

    • mary

      For every adoptive baby there are 30 to 40 couples waiting to welcome the child into their family. Shame on who???

      • ParliamentHillCat1

        This baby was going to die, you idiot! They should have ABORTED ON DEMAND!!! This family has lost a daughter, a community lost a beloved dentist, a man lost his wife all for a 17 week old thing!

        • Rebecca Downs

          Oh my goodness! How unclassy can you be here? Calling someone whom you disagree with, even if you do genuienly feel that they be wrong, an idiot, is certainly not going to get them to see your point of view any more. It is all tragic. But it was not for some “thing.” How much more can you misunderstand babies in the womb? You yourself referenced it was a “baby” but then call it a “thing?” Not correct, and certainly not classy, in the slightest.

          • Timmehh

            I agree, no one should call someone else an idiot. However, why is it you haven’t called out a pro life person who has called someone the exact same name?

        • Meghna

          Are you also a THING? For the tenth time, ALL the Ob/Gyn In Irelamd and in India said she didn’t die b/c she didn’t have an abortion!

      • Tania

        There was no chance whatsoever that this pregnancy could have been saved, and if there are so many people waiting to adopt, why are the children’s homes so full? Or do you only want to adopt the ones that would have been aborted?

    • Julia

      Do you know anything about the pro-life movement? A huge chunk of their work and resources goes into pregnancy centers, etc. that help the mother before and AFTER the child is born, and pro-life people also help women deal with the many emontional problems they face after an abortion.

      And lots of pro-life people adopt, even children with serious heath problems or mentally disabled children.

      Since you are concerned about “choice” shouldn’t you be concerned about the helping a woman to make the choice to keep her baby as much as helping a woman abort her baby? Where are you after the child is born? or even after the woman has an abortion?

    • Basset_Hound

      REALLY Pot?

      It so happens that members of my church are very ACTIVELY involved with mentoring programs for school children around the community. It also happens that crisis pregnancy centers provide relationship counseling, financial workshops, support groups for those ending abusive relationships and parenting classes, free of charge to anyone.

      http://www.prestonwoodpregnancy.org/support.php

      BTW, where are all those wonderful enlightened people from Planned Parenthood after they’ve vacuumed out the woman’s womb (and her wallet). THEY are the ones who are “nowhere to be seen”..

      • Stev84

        Crisis Pregnancy Centers are a fraud. They lie to women all the time. They aren’t even staffed with real medical personnel. They withhold medical information. They delay tests and they do unnecessary tests.

        • Basset_Hound

          You don’t have ANY clue as to what you are talking about. Doctors and nurses frequently donate their time to crisis pregnancy centers.

      • Meghna

        AMEN!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/john.doey.73700 John Doey

    Such compassionate people the anti-choice advocates are. Rather than back down on rigid dogma it’s easier to let a women die. It seems right wingers hold on to worn out dogma over necessity and human life in most situations so this isn’t surprising.

    • Meghna

      For the tenth time, she didn’t die b/c she didn’t have an abortion. Read the facts, dude

  • manderso

    Josh, you are just full of shit. A lying bunch of it.

  • Pingback: A brief update: 140 Irish doctors sign Dublin declaration | Griffin's Realm

  • Went Rogue

    Every year thousands of women travel from Ireland and Northern Ireland to England to get abortion care there. So it’s not that Irish women don’t get abortions — they’re just forced to leave their country to receive one.

    • Meghna

      CARE is killing another person? Sad.

  • LauraP

    There is no way for you to continue to cover up the true agenda of the pro life movement. It’s not about saving “babies”, it’s about misogyny. The doctor here made a choice based on a misogynistic worldview that is so pervasive that it allowed an entire hospital to watch a women die in agony over days. No amount of “we support women” language or your ridiculous and continuous coopting of social justice language will cover up that what this is all about is controlling women’s reproductive autonomy. You can’t even admit, in the most heinous of cases, that someone might have needed an abortion. Trust me, God would have wanted this woman’s life saved, by any means necessary. He’s big enough to understand the need for abortion in cases like this, and truly in any case. It is the author of this article, this website, and those who support this view who think he is too small. Shame.

    • Stev84

      Yup. If men could get pregnant, no one would even be talking about this.

      But according to the Bible, childbirth is god’s punishment for Eve taking a magic apple from a talking snake, so letting women die is ok. This is only slightly exaggerated, as historically this was precisely the reason why medical care for pregnant women remained underdeveloped until the late 19th century.

      • machintelligence

        “If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.” Florynce Kennedy (1916 – 2000)

      • Julia

        “If men could get pregnant, no one would even be talking about this”
        That is a lie. It has nothing to do with man/woman. It because abortion kills a person. Maybe you don’t realize this, but polls show that women are more pro-life than men.

        “But according to the Bible, childbirth is god’s punishment for Eve taking a magic apple from a talking snake, so letting women die is ok.”
        That also is a lie. According to the Bible, childbirth being painful is the punishment for sin, like all pain and work.

        “historically this was precisely the reason why medical care for pregnant women remained underdeveloped until the late 19th century.”
        Actually the reason was that medical care in general was not as advanced.
        So wrong, wrong, and wrong.

    • Meghna

      you are so wrong. ALL the OB/Gyns here and in India ALL said abortion would not have saved her! You abortion people are the misogonisitc ones as you wait until you can tell the babies sex, then abort once you know it’s a girl!!!

  • ParliamentHillCat1

    Josh, you’re an idiot..case closed.

  • Detroiter327

    I just wrote this on another article but here I go again. There is no link between abortion and suicide or other mental disorders. The study you link to was rife with errors and had to be redone. Even after it was redone the study was discredited by its publisher and the academic community at large. The publisher went on to write that Colemans analysis “does not support assertions that abortions led to psychopathology”.

    -http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/199/3/180 – Check out the responses as well.
    -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priscilla_K._Coleman

    (Please note I absolutely abhor using Wikipedia for any kind of source but this page happens to be fairly thorough)

    Using studies that have been discredited only discredits what you are trying to accomplish. Im also confused why you didnt provide a link directly to the study.

    • Meghna

      And would you also be pro-choice? It’s amazing how studies can become twisted when one wants to prove their own opinion is right. Like what about that Dr. who found links between abortion and B. cancer? My once happy friend almost committed suicide after her abortion, how do you explain that one away??

  • Detroiter327

    Have you even read the article you linked to in the Irish Times? It does not say anything about antibiotics being administered late. You should correct your linkage or correct your article.

    (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/1114/1224326575203.html)

  • Hari

    Administering antibiotics alone is not sufficient to prevent miscarriages and the septicemia, sepsis, septic shock & DIC that may develop as a consequence.The source of the infection is the dying fetus and the first order of treatment would be to do a Dilatation & Curettage to evacuate the fetus (the source of the infection), following which IV antibiotics must be administered to control the infection and eradicate the bacteria. Administering antibiotics alone is foolhardiness/negligence, depends on how you see it.

    “Based on early reporting, it appears that the deadly infection may actually have resulted from slow administration of antibiotics, though nothing can be said with certainty until the investigation is complete”.

    She came to the hospital with a miscarriage, which led to the infection, for which she was administered the antibiotics, so the source of the infection was the fetus, and not the antibiotics as you have your readers believe. Your wordplay shows either a conspiracy to undermine the facts of the case or wanton blissful ignorance or an inability to understand the situation (in which case you should not have written this article).

    PLEASE FOR God’s sake, I hope the social conservatives leave their political beliefs and sympathies aside and think of a practical situation as this and withdraw their objection to abortions during the 1st trimester when the mother’s life is at risk. For all other cases of abortion, they could use their yardsticks, no one complains, but this is a unique situation that requires a unique perspective.

    • Meghna

      Did you read the FACTS of what ALL the Dr.’s said Hari? ALL of the Ob’s claimed that she did NOT die b/c she didn’t have abortion.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Gobi-Obi/100002023605080 Gobi Obi

    i would have thought giving the poor woman a ceasarian would have been the obvious action making sure she was clean and safe inside and she could also have had a chance to say goodbye to the baby, they can wrap the babies at this stage so mothers and fathers can say goodbye helping them to heal their loss. Poor people in this sad case. very sad.

    • Stev84

      Oh ffs, no sane person would do a c-section when a septic miscarriage is in progress. What kind of barbarian are you to cut her open for absolutely no reason?

      • http://twitter.com/dreadhelm Josh Craddock

        Why would any sane person perform an abortion in such a circumstance, which would likely only hasten her death?

        Gynaecologist Hema Divakar, resident-elect of the Federation of Obstetric and Gynaecological Societies of India (FOGSI), told The Hindu, “Based on information in the media, in that situation of septicaemia, if the doctors had meddled with the live baby, Savita would have died two days earlier.”

      • Meghna

        What kind of babarian are you for not ltting people decide how they want to love their own children?

  • Pingback: BMJ Group blogs: Journal of Medical Ethics blog » Blog Archive » Savita Halappanavar: A Woman who Died Needlessly, not a Political Wedge’

  • Pingback: After Savita Halappanavar’s death, the brutal irony of ‘pro-life’ is exposed | Sarah Ditum - World Bad News : World Bad News

  • C

    Her blood is on your hands and always will be,

  • Chien

    I just learned from another news source :

    Halappanavar’s autopsy has revealed that she died of blood poisoning and E. coli ESBL, an antibiotic-resistant strain of the bacterium.

    E. coli ESBL can cause urinary tract infections which can develop into blood poisoning.

    “The presence of E. coli ESBL is particularly problematic if Halappanavar was given antibiotics to fight an infection that was resistant to those very antibiotics,” Stephanie Gray, executive director of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, said.

    With this report of her dying from E. coli ESBL one wonders how killing Halappanavar’s baby Prasa would have killed the E. coli,” Gray noted.

  • XMW

    Faith is a dirty, filthy poison that taints logical thought processes. One drop of poison in a pure glass of water renders it being unable to drink. Remember that the International Symposium on Excellence in Maternal Healthcare has/had links to a pro-life – that is, (Christian) faith – ideology/agenda, and thus their conclusions are all invalid/cannot be trusted, even if they have any ounce of truth in them. I absolutely agree with you that they are experts; however, the problem with pro-life (mainly religious) thinkers, including you, is that they think an argument from authority is always valid. Arguments from authority are never valid when they have a religious link behind them.

    All pro-life/Christian analyses are automatically scientifically invalid because they make the major assumptions (even if they claim they don’t as in this Symposium’s case), that cannot be backed up with any application of the scientific method, of:

    1. god exists, and/or

    2. consciousness exists after death of the physical body.

    As a more well-known example, a (Christian) Professor in Biology may firmly deny the truth of biological evolution in his/her heart, but writes that he/she accepts evolution just to gain acceptance from the scientific community so that he/she can be promoted to the status of Professor, then proceed to abuse his/her status by spreading garbage about intelligent design or creationism, which is exactly analogous what happened in this International Symposium.

    Remember, pro-abortionists do not have an ‘agenda’ in the same sense as pro-life/Christian groups. The ‘agenda’ of pro-abortionists comes about from rigorous application of the scientific method to all cases, coming to scientifically valid conclusions, which just happen to contradict the conclusions of any pro-life groups. Also remember, that if a foetus is likely to survive upon the death of the mother, the mother will almost always choose the life of the foetus. Abortions are chosen by the mother only because:

    1. Medical evidence states that both the mother and child will die if an abortion is not performed (as in this woman’s case), or

    2. The foetus did not advance beyond the legal definition required to being a full-fledged human, and the birth of the baby will cause tremendous physical and/or mental health issues to all parties involved, including the newborn.

    However, pro-life groups actually have the malevolent agenda of promoting the quantity of life above the quality of life, because of the filthy irrational belief that god will take care of everyone, when clearly the examples of a huge downward spiral in the quality of life when abortions are not performed are rampant. They will always deny that point #1 above is valid, despite the fact that their belief is faith-tainted and scientific evidence supports #1 – and thus any conclusions they make is automatically invalid. And no, the problem is never a lack of their belief in your god, the problem is always the experts’ belief in god and the disastrous effects it has on other people’s lives.

    Why this woman’s death has generated so much controversy is precisely because the conclusions from the Irish professional staff in the hospital are tainted by issues of faith, and not supported by any credible scientific conclusions. No amount of faith-tainted studies dressed up in what appears to be science can support any pro-life conclusion.

    Liberal media may spread false information, but conservative media ALWAYS spreads false information. A prime example is in this article.

    I do not doubt your sincerity, but since your worldview is pro-life, I beg of you to not spread lies that support your view, with your last shred of humanity. Pro-lifers are playing with people’s lives, since they’re supporting quantity of life above quality – so that they have more lives to play with and ruin. Can’t you see that the pro-life worldview is extremely evil?

  • Pingback: Next Saturday: Lila Rose to appear on Fox News’ Huckabee