Abortion still under control in Poland

It can't (and doesn't). Unfortunately religious extremists like the PiSites would rather see human misery than see their religious fantasies proved wrong. They thrive on that - some extreme fundamentalists actually belive that human suffering is a good thing.

No, I think everyone would prefer for both women and men not to act like animals.
There should be greater penalties and sanctions against footloose daddies who father a child and split. Within the law-enforcement system perhaps a special unit for tracking such scumbags and then charging them for the tracking efforts, garnishing wages or stopping benefits if they are unemployed, not to mention jail time and/or public service. The portraits of such slime including child-maintenace shirkers with their full names should be published. Women should not bear the entire blame for such occurences. Re incest, social services should be able to alert prosecutors without requiring a complaint from the victimised female.


When a problem exists, it should be solved. If it was an offence prosecuted ex officio, then no private complaint would be needed. In small communities everybody knows everything about everybody else. Such inforamtion will reach local social services which can notify the prosecutor. With today's DNA testing culpability can be determeind nearly 100% of the time. The victim would not have to testify in court, and the convicted party should also have his photo and full name published for all the see. Shame is a great crime deterrent!

@Pol: in such cases, kids who are threatened and made feel guilty do not talk. Often mothers and other members of the family know but they shut up (scared of retaliations, scared of shame...). Unfortunately it happens more often than we think.

As to western women in liberal (goodless) societies to abort more, it is absolutely false! Yesterday I read that %wise, Polish women illegally abort as much as German women legally do. I have also checked with France (official figures) and it is the same too %wise, some 220,000 per year in France against 80 to 100,000 in Poland. The BIG difference is that German and French (among other nationalities) abort in the safety of a hospital (free of charge) whereas Polish women who don't have money have to do it themselves with coat hangers, Domestos, etc ....

Sad that Polish women are treated like garbage!

You misread my post. The victim would not need to file a complaint or testify in court if this was made an ex-officio offence. Esp. in small communities such things are generally known also to social workers who could report their suspicion to the authorities who would investigate. If DNA proved positive the culprit would be tried, convicted, fined or jailed and, above all, shamed with large photos including his name.

Merged: Feminists and other lefties want pre-natal baby butchery "on demand"

A few hundred radical feminists, pro-homo agitators and other assorted lefties staged a noisy demonstration outside the Sejm to demand the "right" to kill unborn babies. They support a "Save Women" committee which has collected more than 215, 000 signatures under a pro-abortion bill which would allow pre-natal murder "on demand". But they were greatly outnumbered by the Poles who have signed a petition supporting a bill drafted by the "Stop Abortion" committee and backed by the Catholic Church, introducing a full ban on pregnancy terminations.

Under the bill, anyone who knowingly causes the death of an unborn child would face a prison term of between three months and five years.

Amnesty International, which should actually be called the "leftist-libetine rights group", has sent a letter to PM Beata Szydlo calling on the government to reject the the pro-life legislation.

Which translates to normal women who object to having the Catholic Church and Parliament telling them what they can and can't do with their bodies.

The Catholic Church is run by sexual deviants (since celibacy is not normal or natural).

A full ban on all pregnancy terminations is about women being breeding stock and nothing more. If a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, then the most moral thing she can do is abort (and prevent the rapists' genes from being carried on).

Do most Poles really want more cases like that of Savita Halappanavar in Poland?

theguardian.com/world/2012/nov/14/ireland-woman-dies-after-abortion-refusal

If the sexual deviants in charge of the RC church want to discourage women from having abortions, then that's their right (including excluding them from the church). They should have no right to determine the behavior of those who are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, Catholic Church has every right to present their opinion just like Rabin Of Poland or Great Mufti of Poland, question is how many people are actually care what they got to say and one more thing there are no Catholic Church in Polish Parliament so get lost with that. Sadly for Parliament Members are elected by people of Poland and that have right to vote way they feel like. What you propose is 'Liberum Veto' and for that majority of Poles will not agree we had it in the past and no more. Do you know what the democracy is? Majority can vote the law which they thing is good for country. You find some bizarre examples to excuse abortion but have you actually seen abortion on your own eye? Have you seen those micro fingers, hand, legs, feet in a hoover? DO YOU AT LEAST KNOW WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

If by normal women you mean rabid libertine feminists Magdalena Środa, Anna Grodzka and Kazimiera Suka, er, um, I mean Szczuka, then you're more than welcome to them.

oh don't start that micro finger thing. Its a clump of cells and comes out like a blood clot, as any woman (many) who has suffered an early miscarriage knows.

Until about 12 weeks that is. After that, I do not think abortion should be allowed.
Abortion is a terrible thing, but so are unwanted neglected children.

and Polonius, 'Suka' and 'er um' is just childish and nasty...

childish and nasty are his middle names....

My own feelings are around what you might call 'natural viability' (the ability of the fetus to survive outside the woman without massive medical intervention) which if I recall is somewhere in the 5th month or so.

Basically the earlier in the pregnancy the easier abortion should be, by the beginning of the 6th month it should be reserved for cases where the mother's health is in danger.

It's hard to put things like that into law though because of various confounding factors.

When you combine that with the well-known tendency in Poland to pass poorly written ambiguous legislation then you have a legal nightmare.

There is no cross cultural or cross individual consensus on the sanctity of fetal life (or when human existence begins*). Individuals should use their own conscience about abortion and not use force to try to turn women into glorified fertilized egg recepticles....

Are homosexuals deviants too? tsk tsk


Boohoo! Use some more big meaningless slogans while out of real arguments. I can do it to - all evil people murdering unborn children should be ashamed of their own wickedness.


How but they can do whatever they like with their bodies. At least in Europe, thanks largely to the civilisation that exist mainly due to the Catholic Church's influence. However they're not allowed (or shouldn't be allowed)to take a life of another human being.

you mean 'women' not people.
I tell you who should be ashamed of themselves and that is men who impregnate women and then deny their responsibilites.

They do, but they are advocating a total ban on abortion which means that a woman could be forced into giving birth to a severely deformed child, having a child which is the product of a rape, and a child whose life would be put before that of the mother in a medical emergency. I don't think the Church should have the right to force women into those positions. The law as it stands now is still one of the most restrictive in Europe, and apart from making the current government extremely unpopular if a change goes through, it is not going to stop women having abortions.


I didn't say there was, but any change in current legislation would have to go through Parliament would it not?


I don't think severely deformed children and rape are bizarre examples to be honest, but each to their own.


I thought you were talking about the people demonstrating yesterday?


As you are so fond of telling everyone else, you should use proper names and not derogatory terms, but clearly you think the forum rules don't apply to you given how often you break them.

Well, that would be mighty inconvenient wouldn't be?


Why? That child is guilty of the crime. Would you be in favour for a capital punishment for murderer's children?


That is an old lie that is always used by the leftie propaganda. Not factual at all.


Like al the laws, the police and all that legal trifle and carry on haven't stopped criminals from committing crimes./


the Church can do nothing on its own. Cannot implement laws or police them. In that regard depends on laymen, on people on the street to vote such a people and such laws as they find agreeable.

That obsessive fear of the church is not well founded at all. It is an irrational feeling - nothing less and nothing more.

Pope Francis himself has estimated that roughly 10% of Catholic priests are homos. He should know.

No it's the truth. It's what lead to the death of Savita Halappanavar in Ireland a few years ago. The foetal heartbeat was present so although she was extremely ill, the hospital refused to perform a termination despite her husband's repeated requests. He was informed 'this is a Catholic country'. The medical team did not detect that Ms Halappanavar was suffering from septacaemia which would under Irish law, have actually allowed the termination. Both mother and baby died. Very sad. So even though our law was more liberal than the presently proposed law for Poland, it's such a tight margin that tragedies like that can occur. If the purpose of abortion controls is to prevent loss of life, it's very ironic when it actually contributes to them.

For once I agree with you. Dunno if it's still being done, but a while back I heard Sweden was penalising not prosties but their johns (customers). It'd probably be fairer to punish both seller and buyer, but at least it's a start in the right direction. All too often women are singled out for the blame, but it takes two to tango.

I think you're confused.
Here is the right answer -


A Medical Error that was the reason for her dead. That is really low that that tragic accident has been turned around to be used as a tool in the ideological warfare.

Not solely a medical error. Read the facts of the case. The mother was admitted to hospital suffering a miscarriage. The pregnancy was at seventeen weeks and the foetus would have been unlikely to survive. The team could have induced labour but didn't as a foetal heartbeat was present. Although the mother was becoming more and more ill, they did not recognize that her life was in danger, the only circumstance under which they could have performed an abortion. The woman was admitted to hospital on a Saturday night and the baby did not die until the Wednesday by which time the mother was so ill that it was too late. If they had been able to abort the foetus during the initial stages of miscarriage, the mother's life could have been saved.

If she can't have kids, then why keep her alive? (the "pro-life" view)

The mother died on Friday so she was clearly very close to death by the time the baby died. The pregnancy had already gone into crisis when the woman arrived at the hospital and the baby could not be saved so even on compassionate grounds alone you'd think they would have induced labour. That was what the woman herself requested, not an abortion as such. Instead they let the child die inside her during which time the mother was in severe pain. The whole thing was horrendous and the country was absolutely shocked by it.

No, it is a major failure in a medical treatment. That's plain enough to see.
Do you claim to know what would have happened IF they would go on with that procedure you all seems to be so fixated about? I don't know and no one knows. the end result could be well the same. The right question what she was doing being pregnant while after miscarriage and with her sickness.


If doesn't runs about and cries daddy - kill it! (the pro-choice view) That is the root of all evil.

Are you describing me or yourself.
Of course it's a clump of cells and definitely comes out like a blood.


Is there a better definition than that?
And you are saying that rape effect has less right to live then rapist?
Inappropriate pictures removed.

Not sure what you're claiming here. According to her husband it was her first pregnancy. But even if she had miscarried a child previously that does not necessarily mean that she can't have another child. Many women do. Some are advised not to. Was that so in her case?


Are you suggesting that the mother had an underlying medical condition which made it inadvisable for her to become pregnant? Reference was made to her underlying medical condition in the Catholic media but in the context of the infection which killed her, in the sense that it was not the baby per se which killed her, but rather E-coli resulting in septicaemia. If you have additional reliable information about this case then provide a link, it would be interesting.

There are two pertinent issues in this case. One is 'medical misadventure', that is failures in her treatment. The other is the abortion law.
The abortion law in Ireland allows for termination when a mother's life is in danger.
The medical team did not detect the threat to the mother's life.
Therefore a termination was not performed.

However, and this is the crux of the matter, the medical team, did know that the child was not going to survive, that miscarriage was inevitable and yet when the mother and father, requested that birth be induced, doctorrs felt unable to proceed simply on that basis due to the foetal heartbeat being present, as it would have been 'abortion on demand' and against the law.

Inducing the birth would not in itself have saved her life, but once the child had been delivered, it might have been more obvious to the medical team that the mother's pain was the result of something other than the miscarriage. She arrived in hospital on the Saturday having already been ill for two days, but the child did not die until the Wednesday. So for all those days her infection was taking greater hold till it reached a point of no return. If the law were different and the hospital had been able to induce birth on the night she arrived in hospital,who knows? And that's the point.

The coroner in the subsequent inquiry recommended that the law be reformed to provide additional clarification. If the abortion law were not an issue in the case, the coroner would not have felt it necessary to make that recommendation.

Finally and take note, the results of the subsequent inquiry by the Health Service, concluded that

'The interpretation of the law related to lawful termination in Ireland is considered to have been a material contributory factor'


And there's an example of the disrespect shown towards a woman who is herself a mother. Roz is a mother of two children whom she has carried through pregnancy, given birth to, loved, protected, nurtured and cared for to young adulthood and for most of that time, without the support of their father. She is far better placed than you to discuss this issue. She knows what it is to be a mother and to have the life of a child grow within her and love it even before it is born.

The huge stumbling block in this debate is that a man can never know what it feels like to be a woman and to be pregnant. There are not many women who trot off happily without a care in the world to casually abort their child. There are not many women who treat abortion as a form of contraception. There are a few nut jobs (Sinead O'Connor springs to mind with her three abortions is it?) but they are very much the exception. Abortion is an exceptional and last resort for most women. I, like the majority of normal women, would be horrifed and disgusted to see a world where abortion was treated as a casual thing that wasn't a big deal. It is. That's why most women carry on with their unplanned pregnancy and have the child anyway.


As for that crude, sarcastic comment about severely deformed or disabled children........

Have you ever spent time around the parents of a severely disabled child? And seen the love and devotion and suffering of those parents? Mothers do not abort disabled children because they are an incovenience. Have you reflected at all on the shock, the grief, the fear that a woman experiences when she's told that her child, the child that she has possibly longed for and planned for with her partner, will be born severely disabled. And whether she terminates the pregnancy or goes ahead, her life and the life of the father, will be permanently marked by that tragedy. I don't think any mother or father can ever get over it. You demonstrate such a total lack of empathy, compassion or understanding of human beings that you're simply unfit to be debating this topic. You're entitled to your views of course but you're not actually capable of engaging in any meaningful debate on the topic.

could you point out where I said that please?
oh no, you cannot, because it was you that said it, not me.

If I had my way, rape* would be a capital offense and abortion of rape-induced pregnancy would be all but mandatory.

*real rape, not the weird fantasy versions now peddaled by feminists

so if I am in bed with a man, and he asks me for anal, and I say no, but he does it anyway at great pain to myself, is that not rape?

Trust me it is not a ******* fantasy.

Do you want him to die? Do you want him to go to prison? Do you still want a relationship with him? Those are all relevant questions that are thrown under the bus in the current climate.

There are degrees of sexual... assault. From stranger violent rape (should be capital crime) to someone overstepping relationship boundaries. The feminist fantasy is that there is no difference between a criminal dragging a woman into the bushes and raping her and your scenario and a young woman who wishes she hadn't had that third gin and tonic and woken up next to the guy she now kind of wishes she hadn't had sex with.

i know. But I see their point. It is not so long since it was not possible to be raped by your husband, according to the courts.

Your third example does not happen half as often as people would like to think, in fact not half as often as men get away with rape.

And trust me it is not a 'fantasy'

What people don't willingly have sex and then regret it afterward? I thought that was a more or less universal experience (not a problem if it's happened a time or two, a major problem if its a normal occurence).