A Child is Not a Disease

Ran across this story last night at the Idaho Statesman’s site. (My emphasis with underlining.)

PHOENIX — A nun and administrator at a Catholic hospital in Phoenix has been reassigned and rebuked by the local bishop for agreeing that a severely ill woman needed an abortion to survive.

Sister Margaret McBride was on an ethics committee that included doctors that consulted with a young woman who was 11 weeks pregnant late last year, The Arizona Republic newspaper reported on its website Saturday. The woman was suffering from a life-threatening condition that likely would have caused her death if she hadn’t had the abortion at St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center.

Hospital officials defended McBride’s actions but confirmed that she has been reassigned from her job as vice president of mission integration at the hospital. They said in a statement that saving the mother required that the fetus be aborted.

As I read the story, there was an apparent grave medical reason in which the mother’s life was in jeopardy – threatened medically, and the good sister was reassigned because apparently that bullshit about “in the interest of saving the mother’s life” is just that – bullshit.

The bishop of Phoenix, Thomas J. Olmsted, has indicated that the Catholic involved in this case has been “automatically excommunicated.”  Per the bishop:

“I am further concerned by the hospital’s statement that the termination of a human life was necessary to treat the mother’s underlying medical condition.

“An unborn child is not a disease. While medical professionals should certainly try to save a pregnant mother’s life, the means by which they do it can never be by directly killing her unborn child. The end does not justify the means.”

And I would venture that there are those who would argue that an 11 week-old fetus is not a child.  I’m just sick of the misogynistic crap falling out of the mouths of this assholes under the guise of so-called religious ethics.   There’s more information at the Arizona Republic site including this fascinating tidbit.

James J. Walter, professor of bioethics at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, a Catholic university, said that is a tough argument to make. He said a pregnancy may be terminated only in limited, indirect circumstances, such as uterine cancer, in which the cancer treatment takes the life of the fetus.

Catholic teaching, he said, is that a pregnancy cannot be terminated as a means to an end of saving the life of a mother who is suffering from a different condition.

Asked if the church position prefers the mother and child to die, rather than sparing the life of one of them, Walters said the hope is that both would survive.

“The hope is that both would survive.”  In other words the answer to the question posed is, “Yes.”
In looking for information on this case I also ran across this blog post.  It is illuminating to say the least from those who consider themselves the truest of Catholics unlike the likes of me.  Offsetting them is a bunch of less rabid folk at the Theologians Cafe if interested.

Of course – ‘this church of mine’ will sanction a nun who reaches an ethical conclusion to a medical dilemma and yet will declare (the Vatican) – and use as a legal defense – that bishops are not “their employees” so as to avoid responsibility for the behavior of certain priests indulging in pedophilia and being moved from parish to parish by said bishops.

Just wondering when the misogyny will ever end.


One Response

  1. Great point!!
    I would love to have about 10 kids!!
    But I don’t know if that will ever happen.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: