Her Catechist must have been
 |
Posted on 05/18/2010 7:31:05 PM PDT by markomalley
A religious sister who was on a Catholic hospital panel that approved a direct abortion has excommunicated herself, the Diocese of Phoenix said on Tuesday. According to the diocese, Sr. Margaret McBride told Bishop Olmsted that she believed performing an abortion in a specific case from 2009 "was a morally good and allowable act according to Church teaching."
The abortion took place late last year at St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix. The mother was 11 weeks pregnant and was seriously ill with pulmonary hypertension, a condition worsened and possibly made fatal by pregnancy, according to the Washington Post.
An ethics committee which included doctors and hospital administrator Sr. Margaret McBride ruled that the abortion was necessary. Sr. McBride has been reassigned from her job as vice president of mission integration at the hospital.
In a Tuesday “Questions & Answers” document, the Diocese of Phoenix’s Office of Communications explained that Sr. McBride “held a position of authority at the hospital and was frequently consulted on ethical matters.”
The diocese stated that she was excommunicated because “she gave her consent that the abortion was a morally good and allowable act according to Church teaching. Furthermore, she admitted this directly to Bishop Olmsted. Since she gave her consent and encouraged an abortion she automatically excommunicated herself from the Church.”
The diocese added that canon law requires an excommunicated member of a religious community be dismissed from religious life unless his or her superior decides that dismissal is not completely necessary and that correction, restitution of justice and reparation of scandal can be sufficiently resolved in another way.
In addition, the diocese said that in this situation it was “clear” that St. Joseph’s Hospital was “not faithful to Catholic moral teaching” as outlined in the Ethical and Religious Directives (ERDs). Catholic Healthcare West, the hospital system of which St. Joseph’s is a part, has not followed the ERDs in at least one of their institutions, Chandler Regional Hospital.
According to the diocese, Bishop of Phoenix Thomas Olmsted is attempting to work with the hospital to help them fulfill requirements of self-identified Catholic institutions.
Her Catechist must have been
|
Sounds like the sister must have been watching too many network TV shows.
if the mother’s life was in fact in danger, then this is a moral gray area. These instances are not the same as elective abortions and should not be treated as such.
I would point out that no abortion is good, but unfortunately, in some instances, due to medical emergency, they can be nessecary to save the mother.
May the Lord pierce her heart with the truth.
On another thread dealing with this, someone posted a doctor's medical opinion that the pulmonary hypertension would only be an issue in the last trimester, and that both the mother and the child could easily have survived at that stage.
PULMONARY HYPERTENSION at EIGHT WEEKS?
Good Heavens! The news media was making it sound like she was at death’s door! Granted, a pregnancy under such circumstances is very risky, but at eight weeks, it’s hard to believe they had exhausted their options!
as I have no medical training, I would defer to doctor opinion on this. Obviously there were differences between doctors
But in the instance where lives are (potentially)endangered, I think the family should make the decision, and I cannot condemn them for choosing the “safe route”. I have never been and hopefully will never be in a situation like this.
if the mother dies, the baby would die too.
The fact is there are some instances, like ectopic pregnancies, where abortion is nessecary-—the baby will not survive and the mother will potentially be killed.
sometimes medical opinion is wrong-—in your case, for example. But will you force people to die to deliver babies? That is good if the mother will sacrifice herself, but I can’t see the law demanding it. And I can’t say I would do that if I was the father or a loved one of the woman in danger——I have never been in that situtation and I hope to never be.
According to the Catholic Church, abortion is always murder. Furthermore, in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, the removal of the fallopian tube is not abortion.
in treating an ectopic pregnancy, you are still killing the preborn. It is abortion in all but name.
also, in many cases, if the mother dies due to medical complications, the baby will die too. A baby at, say 11 weeks, cannot survive out of the womb.
I am not saying that I believe abortion is right-—I am saying in some rare situations it is excusable. There are real moral “gray areas” in some of these medical emergency cases. And I am a Catholic who would never want to be involved in an abortion for any reason. I would feel tremendous guilt for the rest of my life, even if the abortion was done to save the mother.
the “medical” treatment for this is to help mom carry the child until 28 weeks then deliver the kid.
Pulmonary problems usually don’t exacerbate until they hit the last trimester.
The critical difference is that you are intending to treat an illness; the death of the child is an undesired but unavoidable side effect.
Contrast this with an abortion procedure, where the object and intent of the procedure is to kill the child and remove her body from the womb, usually in bits and pieces.
And I am a Catholic who would never want to be involved in an abortion for any reason. I would feel tremendous guilt for the rest of my life, even if the abortion was done to save the mother.
It sounds to me like your conscience doesn't really believe that it is "excusable", then. People don't feel "tremendous guilt" over something that they truly believe is "excusable".
Exactly. Ectopic pregnancy is about the only medical condition that you cannot save the life of child and mother.
A better argument is this.
No treatment, child and mother die from ectopic pregnancy.
With treatment, you can save the life of the mother.
Exactly. I had this condition during all my four pregnancies, and twice I had a happy outcome, the other two times I miscarried. Three times I was treated, the first time nobody knew there was a problem, because I felt fine, yet I miscarried.
Even excellent medical treatment cannot guarantee a perfect outcome, and with my fourth child, I had a crisis during the delivery and nearly died myself. Yet — we both lived!
Later, when I became a nurse, I learned how many doctors refuse the ob gyn specialty due to the absolute intolerance for imperfection or risk in so many patients and the consequent sky-high malpractice insurance. I am convinced this demand for perfection is part of the rationale used to justify abortion, as well.
It is not a gray area.
Look up “Principle of Double Effect.”
You need to read up on the matter. You do not understand the moral principles involved.
Read the “Declaration on Procured Abortion,” from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. (1974)
Also, read the Catechism on the Fifth Commandment.
not true-—if a loved one was in mortal danger due to a pregnancy, I might support them in the decision (depending on the circumstances)-—but I would be very, very torn about it. I would have issues with it for a long time afterward.
I would have serious issues if I killed someone in war or if I was a police officer or if I had to for some other reason, even if I was protecting myself and others. The death of a human being for any reason is a very sad thing, because life is a precious gift from God and we shouldn’t be cavalier about it for any reason.
I am saying that there is a huge moral difference between an elective abortion and an abortion done because of serious medical circumstances.
I think I do understand the moral principles. Getting an abortion or performing one because someone simply doesn’t want a baby and getting one because there is a risk of death to the mother are not the same things. It is like the difference between killing someone in battle or in self defense and killing someone because they cut in front of you in a line at the bank.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.