Savita Halappanavar Inquest

What sort of country do we live in?  What sort of deities do our doctors worship?

savita halappanavar

Less than a week after the Irish Medical Organisation voted down a proposal to permit abortion in cases where a woman is carrying a child with a fatal abnormality, we learn that Savita Halappanavar was allowed to die in misery and yet we have no idea why such an appalling ordeal was inflicted on this poor woman.

The child had no hope of living, and yet, for reasons as yet undisclosed, Savita was forced to endure two tortures.

The first torture was her knowledge that the baby had no hope of survival.  Savita, as a highly-qualified health professional — perhaps better qualified than many of those attending her — knew this fact full well.  Any mother in such circumstances knows the depths of despair, and Savita experienced a disaster worse than anyone involved in this shocking case, apart from her kind and decent husband, Praveen Halappanavar, a good and dignified man who tells only the truth.

The second torture was physical.  Savita was allowed to die slowly, in great pain, for fear the already-doomed child might somehow, miraculously, survive.

Isn’t it a wonderful thing to live in the most principled country the world has ever known?  Isn’t it a great comfort to know that we have the most principled (and the best-paid) doctors in the whole world?

What is it about Ireland that makes our doctors so much better than the rest of the world, so much wiser, so much more principled that our local best practice trumps the best practice of every other country in the entire world?

Aren’t our doctors great?  Aren’t we lucky to have the best doctors in the world and shouldn’t we be grateful to be paying them more than any other doctors anywhere in the entire world?

What on earth am I doing questioning their wisdom?



41 replies on “Savita Halappanavar Inquest”

I don’t agree with much that Luke “Ming” Flanagan has to say, however his comments concerning UCHG (unrelated to this case) struck a chord with me. He referred to it as “That dump of a hospital”. My own personal experience would support his observation. It is portrayed however as a “centre of excellence”. Of course it is or maybe it was (in the de Valera era)

We dont know yet who is telling the complete truth Bock.
Once laywers get involved truth can become the first victim.
and that lawyer that is representing the family reminds me of someone who Del Boy would have representing him.


It was said in the paper today that the abortion was granted

It is also noted by the Doctor that at they could not grant the abortion earlier due to Irish laws

Why are these laws in place andcould the time difference have saved Savitas life

Mark — There’s no reason to think Praveen Halappanavar is being anything but truthful. And so far, his lawyer has done a thorough job.

In the very early days after the news of this tragedy broke, Saveen called for a full public enquiry, this from a man who comes from a culture where public enquiries are almost unheard of , I wonder who was writing that script, and who has gained most from all the public enquiries held in this country over the past 25 years.
All that is needed here is for everyone one involved to tell the truth

What I don’t understand is why is it up to the doctors to make the decision? Whatever religious views they hold are theirs, and theirs alone, surely if this were to be challenged in a European court it would be found illegal?

The only people that should be consulted on this are the people of Ireland, not a small sample of doctors

Mark, maybe its because he is a highly educated individual who suffered a loss in Ireland

His home country has nothing to do with it

The midwife manager has now confirmed Praveen’s account of the Catholic country remark.

I think people are doubting him because they can’t understand the culture he comes from, where lying is not the default position.

Shivering and raised white cell count= broken radiator. Any good clinician in a teaching hospital could tell you that.

@Mark. Give a dog a bad name………….maybe you might enlighten us as to why the lawyer in question reminds you of someone who Del Boy would have representing him.

Mark, your comments here are nothing short of an attempt to blame the victim for something that I could only describe as the most shameful incidence to have occurred in a hospital in this country since the 1983 amendment.

It appears to me that Saveen Halippanavar has far more credibility than any of the medical staff involved in this instance. It has already been conceded by the HSE that medical nodes have been added to and massages up to two weeks after the the death of the poor man’s wife. We seem to be more concerned about covering our professional arses in this country than telling the truth.

In fact, as far as I’m concerned, Ms Burke (the midwife manager) actually displayed a certain amount of integrity by admitting her statement about Ireland being a “Catholic country”. That, at least took a bit of guts.

Oops, indeed, that’s what I get for copying and pasting.

Note to self: Try to avoid posting comments when my blood is up.

Thank you all for your posts re my earlier comment.
Firstly I still stand by my comment regarding the request for a public enquiry and as to who would benefit most from that. in the words of David Mc Williams “follow the money”. as to the the tragedy that has been visited on this family, words fail us all I think as to how we can express our horror at the litany of mistakes that were made.
And again I still say that all that is necessary for some closure here is that all involved tell the truth.
I do think that some of the comments made about the hospital and its staff are unfair and unhelpful, We are all human and we do err, sometimes with the most dreadful of results but no one allowed this beautiful woman to die intentionally,

Mark, although you are entittled to your opinion, I doubt it holds much weight with any one here.

I will pose this question to you, If your Wife/Sister/Mother was denied a potentially life saving abortion, how would you react?

A. Would you say it is not intentional?

B. Would you call for an inquiry and take legal action based on the word of a lawyer solicitor?

C.Would you already know to take legal action seen as you are Irish and not Indian, thus negating the need for a legal representative of Del Boy?

D. A N Other?

If most of you are in agreement with Backtowork that my opinion is of no value than i shall desist from further comment

could you answer my question though?

I am of the opinion that your comment holds racist and sinister undertones and would appreciate clarification

This case to me underlines how international embarassment speeds things up. If it happened to an Irish couple, I wonder what stage it would be at now? Taking on this state (this so-called Republic) is an ordeal not to be taken lightly, they wear you down and throw everything at you, citizen.

Actually as to being racist, nothing could be further from the truth. but can you imagine how vulnerable you or I would be if this horror was visited on us in a strange country with no family support, That is why I raised the issue regarding who was writing the script in those early days. It certainly was not a man who was grieving for a beautiful wife and very much wanted baby.
As to answering your question. There is no doubt but this lady should have been provided with treatment which would have ensured the best possible outcome for her, regardless of what effect this would have had on her baby.
It now seems to be emerging that if the clinical side of her care was up to par. a termination would have taked place much earlier. If it was my wife sister daughter, i honestly do not believe that I would be as forgiving as this gentle kind man.
As to being a coward, are we not all cowards on these sites where we hide behind names like Tonye, Mark, Bock etc

Mark, you definately removed the sinister side of my quote, thank you

Still I feel that Praveen’s legal representative has very little to do with the facts of this case, nor do I feel it is relevant if public inquirys are common place in his home country

What is relevant is the man lost his wife in Ireland and the cause of this tradgedy needs to be outlined to the public

Would a doctor not deliberately vote down abortion intervention, knowing that his/her job is subject to the presence of a bishop on his/her hospital’s board of management. Would like to know was it an open or a secret ballot by the IMO. There seems to be clergy or nuns on every B.O.M, much like the schools!

I think Savita died due to a lack of common sense and good medical practice coupled with “SYSTEM FAILURES” whatever that means.

According to expert witness Peter Boylan yesterday, the team had to wait for sepsis to occur before they could legally intervene. However, he also seemed to contradict the view of Dr Catherine Astbury, who told the inquest that the risk of death must be greater than fofty-fifty.

Bock, were all the signs there that it was about to occur?

As in were they actually waiting for Savita’s health to decline further before they operated? Knowing that sepsis was most likely going to kick in

I’m no expert on these things, but it appears that in Savita’s condition, sepsis was very likely. However, as it hadn’t yet developed, the doctors felt legally unable to do anything.

I suppose what I was really trying to say was, if Savita had a greater than 50-50 chance of of developing sepsis

Should that of been enough

I am of course talking on a common sense level and not a legal stand point

Heres hoping that common sense can prevail for a change

If you see a car going on fire with a child in the back seat, would you wait until the fire reaches the back seat before attempting to rescue the child, or would you make a common sense decision that the fire is highly likely to reach the back seat so now would be a good time to rescue the child. The child in this case being beautiful Saveen.

Freaked, so ill go again

If they had to wait due to legal reasons, who do you think had the most influence on the voters when this law was passed

Sorry Bock

I was of the understanding that an expert witness had said that Savitas life could have been saved with an illegal abortion

I presumed this was due to the 1983 ammendment to the 1861 offences against the persons act

It’s not clear that it would have been illegal, but doctors are understandably afraid of prosecution. This could be resolved by legislation following the X case referendum, and hopefully the government will follow through on its commitment to pass such a law.

Thats just what I took from the weeks news

Todays recommendations

Number 1 beng the most important

•The Medical Council should say exactly when a doctor can intervene to save the life of a mother, which will remove doubt or fear from the doctor and also reassure the public;
•Blood samples are properly followed up;
•Protocol in the management of sepsis and guidelines introduced for all medical personal;
•Proper communication between staff with dedicated handover set aside on change of shift;
•Protocol for dealing with sepsis to be written by microbiology departments;
•Modified early warning score charts to be adopted by all staff;
•Early and effective communication with patients and their relatives when they are being cared for in hospital to ensure treatment plan is understood;
•Medical notes and nursing notes to be kept separately;
•No additions or amendments to be made to the medical notes of the dead person who is the subject of an inquiry.

Was there not one person in that hospital to step forward and demand the
end to this woman’s torture, that’s really scary, that’s brain washing at it’s
very height.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.