Abortion: It’s a choice that if left
unrepented can make your life a
living hell that never ends.
Posted on 09/14/2004 2:12:44 PM PDT by AskStPhilomena
The news was a real bummer. A reporter named Tom Szyszkiewicz, who writes for the Catholic publications Our Sunday Visitor and the National Catholic Register, was calling to tell me he had discovered two Catholic hospital systems were committing the induced labor abortion procedure - live birth abortion - on handicapped babies.
The bad news warped to bizarre when Szyszkiewicz said these hospitals were waiting until babies were 23 to 26 weeks gestation before aborting them, i.e., until they were of viable age, so they could say these weren’t abortions at all but simply labor inductions and, thus, sanctioned by the Catholic Church.
That’s crazy, I thought. Most hospitals I’m aware of that commit LBA do just the opposite: They make sure to abort babies before 23 weeks - the most recent viability cut-off date according to the American Heart Association and American Academy of Pediatrics - to avoid the ethical and legal dilemmas of deciding whether to resuscitate a baby they just tried to kill.
The Catholic hospitals’ abortion strategy seemed even more risky when taking the Born Alive Infants Protection Act into account. It states that live born babies, no matter what their gestational age or circumstances of birth, are “persons.” According to the 14th Amendment, “persons” born in the U.S. are automatic citizens who cannot be “deprive[d]… of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor den[ied[… equal protection of the laws.”
This means live aborted babies can’t be cast aside to die in hospital soiled utility rooms, or drowned in buckets of water, or sealed to suffocate in biohazard bags. They must be medically assessed and cared for just like wanted babies.
Last week I contacted both hospital systems to make sure I wasn’t missing something. I wasn’t.
Loyola Health System in Chicago, and Providence Health System on the west coast and Alaska, both commit live birth abortion.
But they don’t like the word, “abortion.” They call what they do, “early induction of labor.”
Webster’s Dictionary defines abortion as, “the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus.”
So now “termination of pregnancy” is called “early induction of labor.” Euphemisms, what would abortion proponents do without them?
Other Catholic hospitals may also be involved. Szyszkiewicz reported in the March 7, 2004, Our Sunday Visitor that Providence is the 10th largest U.S. Catholic health system, and, “spokespersons for the other nine… were either vague about their hospitals’ practices or did not return calls.”
Loyola and Providence say they are acting in accordance with the 2001 U.S. Bishops’ Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services that states, “For proportionate reason, labor may be induced after the fetus is viable.”
Theologian James LaGrye from the bishops’ doctrinal office said the term “proportionate” is used “for situations in which some grave risk would be incurred if an action were not taken to avoid it,” wrote Szyszkiewicz, who added, “LaGrye said the mental health of the mother ‘is a reason’ to perform early induction.”
In addition to having “mental health” concerns, Fr. Jack O’Callahan, staff ethicist at Loyola, said they are trying “to ward off the physical complications of bringing to term a child who is not going to live anyway.”
To be frank, LaGrye is a psychobabbling fraud to the faith, and Fr. O’Callahan is a crackpot. Euthanizing one’s handicapped child is not the solution to maintaining mental health, nor do handicapped babies normally spread voodoo vibes to make their mothers sick.
What about the physical and mental complications of abortion?
Even fatally ill babies, left to develop until term, give their mothers the gift of lowering their risk of breast cancer. Contrarily, mothers who abort dramatically increase their risk.
Aborting mothers also stand a much greater chance of ending up in hospital high-risk maternity departments next time they get pregnant. Their forcibly stretched cervixes will have difficulty keeping subsequent babies inside until full term.
But I digress.
The August 19 New England Journal of Medicine reported that the smallest known surviving preemie just celebrated her 15th birthday.
In 1989, Madeline Mann was born at Loyola Hospital at 27 weeks, weighing 9.9 ounces. She is now a violin playing, rollerblading, high school honor student.
Doctors at Loyola delivered Madeline early by caesarean section after determining she might fare better in their care than in her mother’s uterus.
Oh, the irony.
Abortion: It’s a choice that if left
unrepented can make your life a
living hell that never ends.
It's way past time for you to tone down your remarks.
Beyond horrible. At least the murderers at the school in Beslan weren't pretending that they were assisting anyone's mental health.
The murder of babies as described in the article is due to selfishness being promoted as a virtue and a good reason d'etre. Add to the general self-centeredness the normalization of what used to be called "illicit sex" and voila - dead babies.
When sex is held to be only permissable within the bonds of holy matrimony, and family loyalty, responsibility and unconditional love are held to be of much more worth than selfish pleasure, there are very few dead babies. With or without laws.
Of course, I am 100% in support of overturning RvW.
I would have to say yes.
http://www.priestsforlife.org is an international effort with contacts in most every major city in America. They have 60 full time employees, and are constantly recieving info from parishes/dioceses across the country.
Sadly they serve at the discretion of the bishops and must tread lightly so as not to cross the libs.
This article may interest you...
http://www.olrl.org/misc/respect.shtml
I don't know if it's possible to do a kidney transplant in Potter's syndrome.
For destroyed kidneys from hydronephrosis, you can shunt them in utero (Senator Santorum's wife had the surgery done to try to save her child...alas, she developed infection and the child died).
Is the in utero shunt a new procedure?
My 2 year old has severe hydronephrosis. His right kidney had atrophied to non-existance and was born with perhaps 1/3 of his left kidney, all due to a post ureter valve blockage. His condition was known perhaps halfway through the pregnancy. It has been explained to me that this was the bare minimum necessary kidney function. After he was born (less than a week after relese from the hospital) he was operated on to remove the blockage. He has been on a steady supply of antibiotics and bladder wall softener since then. Fortunatley he is showing signs of gaining some kidney function with some minor reduction of the hydronephrosis.
The in utero shunt was never offered as an option to us. Is it new, too risky, not covered by insurance, or were my doctors at fault for not offering this option?
Then what you witnessed was malpractice, not abortion... unless you suspect the whole thing was a setup to skirt around an abortion prohibition, which would be a pretty strong charge to make.
At the same source, you will find Jill Stanek's response....
Domenico,
I wrote the story you are disparaging. My column was absolutely true. In response to your post:
1) I said in my column we were talking about babies with fatal handicaps. What difference does listing a specific handicap make? What is your point?
2) These handicapped babies are delivered 15-17 weeks early specifically so they will die 15-17 weeks earlier than if they had been left alone. The rationale is for a mother’s “mental health” and, as Fr. O’Callahan of Loyola said, “to ward off the physical complications of bringing to term a child who is not going to live anyway.”
“Ward off.” There is no health problem. There is just a concern about a potential health problem. This is a smoke screen to make what they’re doing more tolerable. 99% of the time it would be ridiculous to assert that handicapped babies somehow make their mothers sick, just as it would be ridiculous to assert healthy babies make their mothers sick. Think about it. How can a baby with no brain make her mother sick?
3) You are wrong as to the reason these babies die. They die at the hand of men. Had they been left alone and delivered naturally, they would have died naturally. in God’s time.
These handicapped babies are being euthanized. The analogy is identical to hospice. Are you saying you would agree to deprive your dying grandmother of oxygen, food, and hydration to speed up her death? That is exactly what is being done to these babies.
4) The purpose of the delivery is indeed to kill the child. Why else? It is NOT misleading to call this procedure an abortion. The definition of abortion is: “the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, rsulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus,” according to Webster’s.
Absolutley agreed. You are 100% correct!!!!!!
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.