Conscientious Objection

A survey conducted in the UK found that a growing number of med students believe that doctors should be able to refuse to provide treatment that they object to on moral, cultural, or religious grounds. An article The Guardian mentions procedures such as contraception, or treatment of someone who has overdosed on drugs or alcohol, but focuses primarily on abortion, which elicited the strongest response.

The survey found that:
- almost a third would not perform an abortion for a congenitally malformed foetus after 24 weeks
- a quarter would not perform an abortion for failed contraception before 24 weeks
- a fifth would not perform an abortion on a minor whose pregnancy was the result of rape

Research Dr. Sophie Strickland says "In light of increasing demand for abortions, these results may have implications for women's access to abortion services in the future."

The article goes on to describe how this has become an increasing worry in some health care circles in the UK. First off, obviously I think that's awesome - though of course, it would be better if the demand for abortions decreased along with the availability of abortion services. The scary part is what the pro-choicers have to say about this:

"Abortion is taught increasingly infrequently in medical school, and students may not be required to engage much with the reasons why a woman may find herself with an unwanted pregnancy and the distress this may cause. All of us involved in women's reproductive healthcare need to ensure that young doctors understand why women need abortions, and that this is a profession to be proud of." - Ann Furedi, chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service

"Once qualified as doctors, if all these respondents acted on their conscience and refused to perform certain procedures, in may become impossible for conscientious objectors to be accommodated in medicine." - Dr. Strickland

Now in the cases of the treatment of individuals who may die from overdosing on drugs, obviously doctors should be required to perform life-saving procedures. It is the purpose of a doctor to save lives, after all. But the article focuses primarily on anti-abortion views, and that is where these quotes become a little frightening.

Never mind that it is inconceivable to my mind how the abortion profession could be something to be proud of ...! How can anyone be proud of terminating pregnancies when the vast majority of abortions are performed on women and babies who are perfectly healthy? I don't see how anyone, pro-life or pro-choice, could think that that is a good thing, because to my mind it indicates that other options are not widely available to these women, who then feel like abortion is their only "choice".

But to suggest that doctors should be forced to perform a procedure that they believe kills a unique individual ... that is horrifying indeed.

We cannot pass on our sins ...

I just read this amazing opinion piece by Abby Johnson and I had to share it. Everyone should read this.

Abby Johnson: Abortion Doc Told Patient "I Will Take Your Sin"

The thing that horrifies me most about her story is that despite how obviously torn up and scared the woman was about her abortion, the doctor still went through with it. I still can't figure out how he could care enough to say "this is my sin, not yours", but not care enough to refuse to perform the so-called "treatment" that the woman was so conflicted over. You can't reverse an abortion. At the very least, you'd think that pro-choicers and abortion doctors would want their patients to be 100% sure that this was what they wanted - because once its done, they can't go back.

It's so sad.

Abortion to Save the Mother?

These are two amazing photos taken by a med student in India. The mother of this baby was diagnosed with cancer in her cervix, and had a hysterectomy as treatment. The baby was also removed as a result, and here he or she is, completely whole and absolutely beautiful. I was reading over the comments on the image and I wanted to clarify a few things, specifically comments along this vein:

"Yes, I'm not convinced abortion is a crime because, unlike you, I realise that not everything is black and white. Is this abortion a crime? That's what this is - the fetus has been aborted to save the Mother's life (albeit it as a side-effect of having the womb removed) - do we consider this a crime, or is the greater crime to allow the mother to die?" - Yottskry

"Pope Ratzinger will condemn to hell the mother, doctor, and all who participated in this sad, but necessary surgery. Her other ix children will continue to have the love and nurturing of a healthy mother. Perhaps that doesn't matter to the anti-abortion fanatics?" - Sirman42

So I guess the first thing we have to do here is properly define abortion. Is it simply defined as the ending of a pregnancy, regardless of the circumstances? This definition would include miscarriages, and procedures such as this one which inadvertently cause the baby's death. So obviously, if this is how abortion is defined, there are some instances where abortion is a morally acceptable or, at the very least, a morally neutral act. If, however, you define abortion as an act which is performed with the singular purpose of intentionally causing the death of the baby, then our opposition to abortion is hopefully easier to understand. In this case, the procedure that the mother went through would only be considered a hysterectomy, not an abortion. This is because the intention was not to kill the baby, and the action did not directly cause the baby's death. The baby died because the entire womb was surgically removed, not because a doctor dismembered the baby or burned the baby with a saline solution. If this was an abortion as pro-life Catholics define it (since I am a Catholic, that is who I can speak for), then the pictures of this baby would not look beautiful at all.

So, to address the first comment. If you define abortion as the intentional killing of a baby, yes it is a black and white issue because it is always wrong to intentionally kill someone. That is not what happened here. The baby died as a side-affect of the mother's treatment, NOT because it was aborted. And anyway, a hysterectomy is not included as an abortion procedure on any abortion websites I've read.

To address the second comment, Pope Benedict would not condemn this woman, her doctor, or anyone involved in the procedure, to hell, because they did not intentionally kill a baby. They treated the mother's illness. And sadly and very regrettably, the baby died as a result. As long as the intention is not to kill the baby, this is allowed in Catholic teaching. We are against elective abortion. We are against abortions which tear apart the baby's body, or burn it until it dies ... we are not against performing standard, life-saving medical procedures, when the procedure is one that would be used in the case of both a pregnant or non-pregnant woman and when the procedure does not intentionally cause the death of the baby. We are for doing everything possible to save the mother AND the baby, but we recognize that sometimes, it isn't always possible to save both.

Hope that clarifies the issue for all the pro-choice people who might come across this. It is extremely frustrating when people misunderstand your position, and are against it without really knowing what the position is. It happens all the time with Catholic teachings, and it happens all the time to pro-lifers. That's where ignorant statements about the Pope condemning people to hell come from. Incidentally, the Pope cannot condemn people to hell anyways. In fact, the Catholic church has never decisively stated that anyone is in hell, because no one can know the state of someone's soul before they die. Only God does. :)

I'd like to end this post with another quote from the comments.

"what nobody notices is that the foetus we are looking at has just died, or is dying, from hypoxia. not a very pleasant way to go. i have no issue with the reason the abortion was performed, or the fact that it was, but just wish to point out that entities in situations that make them photographable, and that look pretty and fascinating may be suffering, unbeknownst to us because we can't recognise the signs" - restiform body

I don't agree with everything restiform body said, but it is important to remember that while the photos of this baby are beautiful, the baby is dying, and we should acknowledge that.

Update 29/03/2012:
Hi Everyone. I noticed that this is a really popular post, so I thought I'd make a small addition. I talk above about how this photo would not look beautiful if it had been a typical elective abortion procedure. To contrast the above photo, I thought I would show you all some pictures of babies who have been aborted, according to the definition I use above. Here is a video called Created Equal. I warn you, it is VERY graphic (and I have not checked if the images and videos have been verified by a doctor - but they seem consistent with images I have seen which have been medically verified - but of course I am not in the medical field so I cannot say with any certainty whether this is actually the case or not). So watch it if you feel you can (and take it with a tiny grain of salt). I burst into tears halfway through and probably won't ever see it again if I can help it.

Update 25/08/12:
Here is an excellent post by Abolitionist Society of Oklahoma that explores this issue in a very logical framework (I encourage you to read through the whole thing!):
Abortion and the Life of the Mother 

10 Reasons to be Pro-life

1. The right to life trumps every other right, since you can't have rights if you're dead.

2. Women often feel that they have no choice but to abort - where are their options? No one should feel that it is too difficult to have a baby.

3. No one can look at pictures or videos of abortions and not feel uncomfortable about the practice.

4. Life begins at conception - and personhood begins when life begins. Insisting otherwise simply imposes subjective ideas on the status of our fellow human beings.

5. Women who choose to go through with their pregnancy are looked down upon because they could have had it easier if they chose an abortion - like that's really being pro-choice.

6. Abortion survivors, and other children whose mothers wanted to abort them, should never feel like they shouldn't have been born.

7. Fathers have no control over the fate of their children if the mothers decide to "terminate" them, and that is not fair.

8. Abortions aren't the simple, painless medical procedures that some pro-choicers make them out to be.

9. Everyone deserves to have their chance at life protected - even those who are handicapped, unwanted, or  inconvenient, and especially those who are helpless and voiceless.

10. Being pro-life is being pro-women - pregnancy is a natural, beautiful fact of life, and something only women can do! It is not a disease, and it doesn't need to be "cured". It is an amazing gift.

What are your reasons?

Reaching Out

I haven't written for awhile, simply because I've been having one of those weeks where you constantly feel stressed out, but looking back, you can't really figure out what was bothering you. At least its finally Friday, and I can start this new week fresh :)

I've been thinking a lot about some pro-life outreach issues. How to explain why the unborn are valuable and deserve the same right to life that every born person has. How to discuss abortion issues in a civil and informative way. How to be a witness to life everyday with friends and family without causing conflict between people.

Even though it shouldn't be, sometimes being a witness to life seems like such a challenge. It can be so easy to slip into an apathetic mindset, because this is such a big issue. It doesn't seem appropriate to discuss abortion with family / friends / boyfriends / children / etc... and sometimes it gets to the point where it is really hard to talk about abortion at all.

I am currently at that point in a lot of my relationships. Discussing abortion is such a terrifying thing to do because I don't want to learn something about the people I care about that will lower my opinion of them. Sometimes it is so much easier to just live in ignorance. And then there is the fear of what others with think of me when they find out that I am pro-life in all circumstances. Will they be willing to talk about my views, to consider my reasoning fairly, and to do their own research into being pro-life? Or will they just dismiss my ideas as the convictions of a religious nut who is incapable of thinking for herself? Its difficult to even post pro-life stories on Facebook because I don't want to start flame-wars.

But it always helps to remember that this is exactly how the pro-choice/pro-abortion side will shut us down. By silencing our voices and dismissing our ideas, and influencing the culture around us until it is too late to do anything about it. So always remember, by keeping silent we are helping abortion remain legal.

Besides, isn't the life of at least one baby worth our discomfort?

Seeing Hope (3)

This is an amazing report on prenatal surgery for spina bifida:

http://www.npr.org/2011/07/11/137712436/a-prenatal-surgery-for-spina-bifida-comes-of-age

How anyone could believe that the unborn aren't human after reading about this is beyond me. I mean, a single surgery done before birth can have such an amazing affect on the rest of the baby's life! If the unborn are not truly alive, then why does the prenatal phase have such an impact on "actual" (i.e.: postnatal) life?

How to be best friends with a pro-choicer

One of my oldest and closest friends is about as pro-choice as you can be. She is also one of the only people who I've ever managed to have a civil discussion on abortion with. This is probably because we both hate conflict.

The last time we talked about abortion she agreed that an abortion decision should not just involve the mother - but also necessarily involves the father and the child in the womb. She did not deny the dangers of having an abortion (i.e.: infertility, infection, even death), or the fact that a fetus can feel pain. She even found it very difficult to answer the humanity/personhood arguments against abortion (in fact, every time we've discussed abortion she's changed the subject at that point). But in spite all of this, she firmly believes that abortion-on-demand is a good thing. Her reasoning behind this?  It would not be fair to "impose her ideas of abortion on others".

Most pro-choicers I know also follow this line of reasoning.

I find it hard to understand how people who are otherwise strong, smart, and eager to impact the world around them, can have such a laissez-faire approach to the abortion debate. My friend, especially, is a mystery. She's a bit of a socialist, and is eager to have government mandate, require, and involve itself in so many issues - except for abortion.

I find it hard to understand, but I don't find it at all difficult to be friends with her. We share so many interests and hobbies, and like so many, she is simply blinded by the culture around her. I'm probably one of the few people she is close to who challenges her world view in any way.

I also happen to hope that eventually she'll come around and be mostly pro-life. The funny thing is, I'm sure she thinks the same thing about me - that I'll eventually come around and be pro-choice.

(don't worry, that will never happen!)