Came across the thread about an Irish woman who very nearly died because of the 8th amendment, and now that I stopped crying over it, I can post a link.
https://twitter.com/InHerIrishShoes/sta ... 5564466177In a nutshell, she was pregnant with twins when things went south around 16 weeks. For six days after her water broke, the twins still had heartbeat, but the doctors could do nothing except wait for them to die in utero and be spontaneously aborted. On day six, one twin died and was delivered but the placenta stayed inside. The other twin had a heartbeat for another week, and remained in utero while the placenta from the deceased twin rotted inside, making the mother septic. Which the doctors
knew was inevitable but could not interfere until her organs were shutting down and she was in the process of dying. So, two weeks of hell, of knowing her babies were slowly dying inside her, and that she could follow and leave her daughter an orphan, and then a week in the ICU and two more weeks of recovery.
Or, once the doctors agreed that they could not save the pregnancy, they could have induced labor immediately with minimum risk and quick recovery.
Will the new law ensure that the first scenario doesn't happen again?
For the record, I am absolutely in the "between the woman and her doctor" camp, on condition that the doctor at all times prioritizes mother's health over her pregnancy, and gives honest and accurate explanation of risks to women who choose to continue the pregnancy at all costs.
_________________

“It may help to understand human affairs to be clear that most of the great triumphs and tragedies of history are caused, not by people being fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, but by people being fundamentally people.”
- Terry Pratchett & Neil Gaiman,
Good Omens