I feel that abortion is something that each individual woman must choses for herself. Many woman have their own reasons ,it may be rape, incest, or young pregnancies (at the age of 12 or 13) no matter the situation it should be something the she can choses for herself in the private of her own home with her dignity. If abortion wasn't a choice I believe there would be a lot more cases of child abuse and negligence due to women that didn't want or feel the need to become mothers. I rather let woman that have these needs/feeling abort an embryo rather then kill a child once it born neither one is right in my mind but it the lesser of the two evils. Fertilization is a dangerous concept because you have three type of couple that usually use this method; One the couple who all they want is their very own baby there are financial equip to take the responsible of raising a child and can prove a wonderful home. Two the parent searching for the cure to fix the child the already have which i feel is the most dangerous. Type three would be your octo- mom someone who want to have multi baby to satisfy personal need not caring about the well being of the child/children. I do feel that there should be an screening process that you have to complete before undergoing this treatment. After reading these directive I feel that there are some objective like abortion that we can't/shouldn't have directives for, but then you have the issue dealing with Fertilization where I feel it is very necessary to give directives . I would have to say I'm torn.
As far as the subject of abortion goes with all of the controversy and the demise I believe that abortion is a personal choice that is given to women and should be a woman’s god given right. Regarding the circumstances in which one could conceive a child, if and when they decide the path they wish to follow whether abortion, adoption, or to keep the child is (the bottom line) their choice. I do not agree with the directives set forth by the USCCB because they don’t cover the most crucial issue of rape. The directives are set up the perfect marriage where a baby is not a problem but a gift. A baby is considered only allowed to be born into the diginity of marriage? A baby is no reason to get married and couples who usually have children before marriage are usually as happy as married couples with the debate over dignity. I believe that people can have children outside of marriage and it can be done with dignity. With the clause about the sanctity of life in which “from the moment of conception until death.” However, even though the directives lacks some directive as far as special circumstances go it includes and justifies the care of women also along with the care of the infant. The Church agrees that with the high rate of infant immortalities that the best possible care should be given to the mother and to the child she is going to bring into this world. This little clause in the directive I agree with fully because the only the best should and would be done for the mother in time of crisis. The directives main focus is the diginified marriage which they believe is the only way to have a baby. I don’t agree with this because you don’t have to be married to have a child. The only “responsible parenthood” would be through a married couple which is something that I don’t believe in. The directives also set forth the disapproval of contraceptives in which they state that contraceptives violate “inseparable connection willed by god…between the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive and procreative meaning.” I disagree with most in part because none of the directives bring about or mention the subject of rape in certain cases I believe it is reasonable to use contraceptives, however it a decision that should be used wisely and not just to get rid of what you might think is a small problem. Overall, I disagree with the directive set for by the USCCB because they don’t condone or sympathize with special circumstances and they believe that the only way to have a baby is through a dignified marriage which equals responsible parenthood. I believe that the Church stresses the importance of marriage way too much in matter of conception and that marriage should be determined by the parents. In sensitive cases such as rape contraceptives should be allowed to the vicitim of rape.
In the directives of part 4, I disagree with a number of things. I believe that if you want and are able to care of a child, you should be able to have the means to have a child. If in order to have a child you have to go through a normal conception, a surrogate mother, genetically implanted/ helped, adoption, etc… I think a person/s who wants a child should have one. Abortion is a touchy subject and many people have different opinions on it, every situation is different. People have a choice in what happens to them sometimes the choices they make do not turn out the way they want, I think people should take responsibility for their actions. I’m not saying that abortion is the new birth control but in some ways it is used to do the responsible thing, and for that I believe it should be aloud but it is that persons own choice. Now science and heath care are progressing every day and it is easier to get pregnant and stay healthy through out your pregnancy even if there are complications in the case of extrauterine pregnancy if the baby is healthy and can get strong enough to have surgery I believe that it should not be aborted. If there is a chance that the fetus can survive and the parent/s is willing, they should do what they can to save the baby. Counseling of any kind is good for any pregnancy purposes, abortion, genetic, PTSD, post-natal care etc… Parents should know that they have someone to turn to if something goes wrong or if they need help. If a person does not want to have child they should be able to do what they want in order not to have a child. I know that humans are suppose to reproduce to live on but not everyone has to reproduce there are plenty of people out there that do not want kids and they are taking the appropriate measures not to have one. In these directives, they do not permit abortion but for those who do not want kids or who are not ready for kids if they are able to use a contraceptive or sterilize themselves there would be fewer abortions. I say it is a good thing to have and they should teach more about it so that people do know and that when the time is right they can be happy with a child of their own on their own time.
The directives seem logical in their upholding of “sanctity of life”. It would be a difficult task to find anybody to argue that life is not precious and worthy of protection. The issue then becomes, when does one define life? Does quality of life become relevant at such early stages? The Catholic directives argue that life begins at conception. This view is consistent with a gradient view of viability, if we define viability as the beginning of life as progressive growth from this point will lead to a baby being born. The directives also allow for procedures to be performed that may result in the abortion of a pregnancy or with grave complications for the fetus if there is proportionate risk to the mother. What this means is, in cases of ectopic pregnancy for example, the life of the mother must be protected especially since the continued growth of the fetus will result in death of the mother and fetus. The directives also allow for life saving interventions to be performed on the mother that may endanger the growth of the fetus, subsequently ending its life. I agree with the church on both of these scenarios, however I do not agree on the disallowing of contraceptives to be used. I understand the logic that the goal of intercourse should be to produce a child, and efforts to dampen the likelihood of pregnancy go against God’s will, I quite simply don’t agree. If we as people have urges to perform certain acts, can it not be argued that our great creator in the sky did not implant these feelings? If so, then why? If the stance is taken that our primal urges to propagate our species are implanted by our creator, then is not the choice or thought to have an abortion not also implanted by the wise man in the clouds? If god has a plan for every human at the moment of creation, why not let a few serve as examples for the pious? The lady down the street has an abortion and suffers massive abdominal infection that becomes septic…that’s a bad time, but what if it influences the teenager the next house down to look into celibacy? Could this not be part of God’s plan? I also disagree with any argument that invokes God’s plan, as this can be easily retorted. In conclusion, I largely agree with the directives except when it comes to the absolute abolishment of abortion and use of contraceptives. With regards to medicine, I feel that autonomy rules above all so long as no harm is done to another. The difficult question becomes (especially abortion) what is causing harm to another? In this instance there is no definite argument and it seems best that we leave the decision to the person who ultimately receives the consequences (good or bad, emotional or physical, medical or psychological) of such a decision, that being the pregnant woman.
I disagree with the directives on this issue. I don’t completely think abortion is right, but I do think that a pregnant women should have that option. Abortion is not only an easy way out for some women, who are usually teenagers, but it could also be a positive life changing act. Abortion is not easy, but women who have been raped should not have to live with the result of a horrible experience. Adoption could be a an option as well, but I would think it would be much harder giving a baby up than terminating an undeveloped fetus. Also, we hear about mothers killing their newborn babies, throwing them in the trash, putting them in microwaves, and crazy stuff that should not be done. How much easier would it be for them to get an abortion, when a baby is still not fully developed than doing much more painful killings that are also illegal. I also disagree with the directives talking about fertilization and surrogate motherhood. As a woman, I would want to have children, and I understand that I or my husband might have problems conceiving. Fertilization or surrogate motherhood might be my best options, and they should not be prohibited by the church to a couple that wants to have a baby.
I am torn in the abortion issue. 90% of me is completely against abortion, but I do realize that there are many complicated and life threatening conditions in a pregnancy that would hurt the mother and in that sense I do see why an abortion would be necessary, or okay at least. But for those who were just thought they wouldnt get pregnant, I believe they should take responsibility for their own actions. I dont see why a person who is well aware of what causes pregnancy should be given the right to get rid of the pregnancy because they werent ready. Why not give the baby up for adoption? To me its a selfish act to abort a baby because you're not ready. There are many people in the world who are struggling to conceive or adopt. I know I was no where near ready to become a mother when I got pregnant. Financially, or emotionally. But abortion did not cross my mind for a second, I knew what i was doing and what could come of it and now that i have my daughter I would not change it for the world. These girls that are having abortions and are scared and not ready should consider that maybe this happened for a reason and it would change their life for the better. Im not rich, I wasnt married, I barely graduated from high school, I didnt have a stable job, I was immature, I wanted to party, I wasnt ready in no way for a baby, but I wasnt going to take the easy way out. I couldnt possibly imagine my life without her now, its no life if I did. I strongly disagree with the abolishment of contraceptives, surrogacy, and IVF. If any person wants to have a child but cannot conceive naturally, then I dont see why they shouldnt be able to use other means to become parents. I dont agree that 2 people need to be married to have a family to keep the dignity or procreation and I dont agree that a person needs to have a significant other to adopt or have a child either. I do think that any person who is trying to adopt, go throught with surrogacy, IVF, or any type of method to become a parent should go through some phsychiatric screening before they are approved.
Coming from a divided family where my mother is Baptist and my father Catholic, I was taught to analyze and not just blindly follow. I believe after reading the article that the UCSSB contradicts itself in the directives listed in the article. I have listed a few examples from the article. In directive 38, it tells you to procreate within the marital union but if the union does not lead to procreation then you can seek assistance. Directly contradicting number 38, number 40 and 41 states that you cannot use outside donors from the marriage and you cannot use artificial fertilization because it separates procreation from the marital act. In addition, number 42 tells you that you cannot use surrogacy when number 38 tells you to get help conceiving babies. In number 52 Catholic health institutions cannot promote or condone contraceptives, but they teach you about methods in natural “ovulation cycle” family planning which is directly opposite of the first sentence. To determine whether they are ethical I have to separate personal and religious beliefs. The article goes against my personal ethical beliefs that is it a woman’s prerogative to make a choice. I find it difficult to accept that our society and legal systems requires a separation of church and state, but the church still requires a blind belief that I must procreate inside the sanctity of marriage. I am supporter of Roe v. Wade in that it is a woman’s right to make a decision what she does with her body.
I am really on the fence with these directives. Some of the directives laid out by the USCCB I agree with, but others I disagree with one-hundred percent. Therefore, I believe that most of the directives stated are not ethical. We live in a world where there is no perfect family or person. I may have interpreted the directives wrong, but it seems to me that the USCCB is basing these directives on the perfect family. Directive forty-two states “Because of the dignity of the child and of marriage, and because of the uniqueness of the mother-child relationship, participation in contracts or arrangements for surrogate motherhood is not permitted”. This, I do not agree with. According to the USCCB, your mother is someone who is biologically attached to you. I on the other hand believe that your mother is someone who cares for you, looks out for you, and gives you all the love in her heart. If the biological mother treats her child horribly, and an aunt treats her extremely better, I believe the aunt is more of a mother than the biological mother. Just because the child is not biologically hers, she can still be seen as the mother if she treats the child with love and care Another issue that can be brought up with this directive is Gestational Surrogacy which is when a fertilized egg is placed in the uterus of the surrogate. This may happen because of a variety of complications that the biological mother may face during pregnancy. The USCCB claims surrogacy is not permitted because of the “uniqueness of the mother-child relationship”. However, what is the uniqueness” of a child without a mother because she had failed to make it through giving birth to this child? It is much safer to have a surrogate mother give birth to the child. This way, a life gained is not one lost. Another topic that came up in these directives was abortion. Directive forty-five states “Abortion (that is, the directly intended termination of pregnancy before viability or the directly intended destruction of a viable fetus) is never permitted”. This is something that I do not agree. Yes abortion is something that no woman should go through, however, there are many factors that could influence the choice of abortion. A woman that has been raped should not have to live with looking at her child and seeing the face of the rapist. A child should be conceived in love. You must also think about the child. A child growing up asking about their father and how they met. This is something I could only imagine could be hard for a woman. You always have to think about the child. If a child is born into the world with a mother and father that cannot provide for them, what kind of life is that for a child. If the parents are not ready to have a child, they should not be having un protected sex anyway, but sometimes these things happen and the child should not have to suffer because of it. A child should grow up in the best environment possible to thrive. My father always says to me he wishes he had never brought my sister and myself into this world because it’s so crazy. My sister and myself have to right tools to get through this life, but a child born in poverty does not and will most like not survive in this crazy world.
However, there were some things I agreed on with the USCCB. Directive forty-four states “A Catholic health care institution should provide prenatal, obstetric, and postnatal services for mothers and their children in a manner consonant with its mission”. This I one-hundred percent agree with. There is no book in Barnes and Noble to tell mothers how to be a perfect mother. There is no guide to life for these woman. It is a great thing that I can only imagine for a mother to be able to go to someone for advise and/or help. If you are couple raising a child for the first time it could be difficult. Being a single mother raising children is extremely difficult. Knowing that you can go somewhere for help before, during, and after pregnancy takes a lot of your shoulders. After reading the directives, I believe they are not ethical, however, there are some that are in my opinion.
As I kept reading Part Four of the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services I was reminded of that famous phrase that says “one finger cannot block out the sun.” In my opinion, the directives provided by the USCCB are double-edged; disguised to appear ethical in most cases (bishops came up with them, after all), but only approvable of certain scenarios. At times, they also seem contradictory. Again, I found myself agreeing with some directives and disagreeing with others. I consider directives #38 and #39 ethical. It is only logical that assisted conception needs to be seen as an option when the act of sexual intercourse fails to conceive a child. Moreover, there are a number of directives that I find ethical (such as #44, #49, #50, and #51) although they’re not necessarily exclusive Catholic-oriented. I believe that most health care institutions in the world (or at least in first world countries) have the obligation of “providing prenatal, obstetric, and postnatal services for mothers and their children in a manner consonant with their mission.” It seems more of a human right despite the religious philosophy of the society. I disagree on the USCCB’s view of homologous and heterologous (directives #40 and #41) artificial fertilization. In these modern times we live in where advanced treatments and technologies are able to treat infertility and provide options for conception, to me it feels miraculous to know that an infertile wife or husband still has a chance of conceiving a baby. What I find ironic is that directive #43 encourages adoption if there is infertility in a marriage, and they stated that surrogate motherhood is not permitted on directive #42. Adoption is great but I think a couple would consider having a biological child if artificial fertilization offers a possibility. I want to conclude with my thoughts on abortion. Deliberate abortion is always a delicate subject to write about and even in the directives there are some doubts regarding the topic (like in #48). This ethical dilemma varies depending on the person, as well as to how they were educated, or what their experiences or moral beliefs are. As it is well known, the Church forbids abortions (directive #45), but I wonder what their thoughts are when abortion is necessary: say a girl was raped and there is no way for her to survive the childbirth. Some people consider an embryo (a developing organism) a living person while others do not. An embryo does not have a functional central nervous system. This CNS (when fully developed) is what makes us perceive sensations like suffering. I don’t encourage abortion but it’s best to do it (in the worst of cases) during the first weeks of pregnancy. Again, the directives are close-minded; they’re not interested in seeing all the aspects of the situation (just like with Randy Niedzielski’s case), instead they limit themselves to saying “this is forbidden as it contradicts the teachings of the Catholic religion.”
In reading the Ethical and Religious directives for the Catholic Health Care system regarding the issues for the beginning of life, the directives stated here are centralized around the sanctity of marriage and the sanctity of human life at the very beginning. In a perfect world these directives would be ethical in the sanctity of marriage, but in today’s world, what constitutes a marriage is no longer applicable. Today’s society accepts a variety of relationships which constitutes a couple. Because of this, I believe it is everyone’s own individual right to decide if they want to procreate and have a child. This right is not bound by marriage alone. To say otherwise is unethical. In the same regards, if a couple cannot have children naturally and must seek out other avenues to have a child, I believe this is their right and choice alone to make. Medical advances have made it possible by providing such opportunities like in vitro with or without donated sperm or eggs. To prohibit any opportunity to conceive would be unethical such as stated by directives #39, #40, and #41. If a woman is unable to carry a baby but chooses to use a surrogate, this is the choice of the woman and/or couple alone. Again medical advances have made this possible. No one has the right to say they can not choose to do this in order for them to have a child. This again would be unethical such as stated in directive #42. I agree that directives #42 and #43 to be ethical. If a couple cannot have children, they should be offered all options such as adoption or medical intervention. Counseling is also an important part of the decision making process couples face when making the best possible choice as to how they are going to have a child especially if medical intervention is necessary. I found directive #52 and #53 to be unethical. If a couple chooses to practice contraception through sterilization or other methods available today, it is that couples choice. It is the right of the man or woman to decide if they want to become sterile. This is their right over their own body and their own right to decide if they want to have children or not. To not have this choice is unethical. I also found directive #48 to unethical. In most cases if diagnosed with an extra uterine pregnancy, medical intervention is necessary to alleviate tremendous pain and prevent further internal damage to the woman. To provide such medical treatment would be considered necessary and ethical. An extra uterine pregnancy is not a viable pregnancy. In most cases it will terminate naturally but often resulting in damage to the woman with possible fertility problems in the future thus medical intervention is necessary. Lastly in addressing directive #45 on abortion, I find this directive to be unethical. This directive excludes so many different scenarios where one might feel that abortion is their only viable choice, such as a rape, incest, being an extremely young teenager. I believe the choice of abortion rest solely with the woman. It is her body and her choice to make in regards to her body. It is also the right of the woman to decide what she feels is in the best interest of that child. If it is the best interest of the child to not be born into this world then that is the choice for that woman to make alone. No one has the right to tell her otherwise. It is her decision alone to make and live with. The majority of these directives are integrated with the fundamental beliefs of the Catholic Church in regards to the sanctity of marriage, family, and the beginnings of human life which in turns makes them unethical because they do not apply to the majority of the population and their ability to procreate. These directives do not portray the greater good for the majority of people.
I do not believe the directives listed within this site are an issue. The Catholic Church is merely setting guidelines for their private healthcare facilities. When going to a private healthcare provider, patient's must realize that a private facility may have rules and regulations out of the norm when compared to public facilities. Within private facilities, the governing board (in this case, the Bishops overseeing the welfare of there Catholic hospitals) has the final say on all ethical issues that occur within their hospital. These views may or may not be the same views of the patient being treated. Asking whether or not a private facility has a right to abide by their own rules seems redundant. Asking a patient whether or not they are willing to abide by the facilities rules to receive treatment, however, may be a better route.
The Catholic Church has implemented its own views on the sanctity and preservation of life within the walls of their hospitals. As long as their views are being expressed within their own facilities, outside forces truly have no right to interfere. Patients should take the views of these private hospitals in to consideration before seeking medical treatment with them.
If, however, the Church is interfering with a patient's healthcare choices outside of their own hospitals, it is then that we run into an issue. Hundreds of different view points with a hundred variations of those view points will never allow for one governing body to decide what is best for everyone. Offering multiple, safe options for many view points may be the most ethical move our government could make.
In general, I agree with most of the directives on this issue. However, there are two directives that I disagree. The directive that bans surrogate mother and fertilization is not right. I think that every married couple wants to have children. However, if a husband or wife is sterile they should have an option of fertilization or surrogate mother, so that they can have children of their own. A child is really important factor in a family. Married couple who has children is more likely to have a longer marriage than couple that does not have any child. I think the church should not ban fertilization and surrogate mother because it might affect the marriage. In addition, I also disagree with the directive that bans abortion. From my perspective, I think abortion is not right. However, there are many reasons that women seek abortion. They may be a victim of rape, incest, or they may have health problems. The second reason is that women have the right to decide whether or not they should keep their children. That is the basic right of human. The third reason is that many women know that even they keep their children; they cannot support their children in the future. Because of that, I think it is better for them to abort their children when it is still just a fetus. The last reason is that even abortion is banned, thousands of women could still have illegal abortion, and it would be more dangerous to their health. Statistic shows that many women have died every year because of the inflammation from illegal abortion.
Abortion is a very sensitive and debated topic. Many people believe that life begins at conception, while others believe that it begins when the fetus first has a heart beat. Then there are those that are pro-life, pro-choice, and some that fall in a between category. I for one am in them middle and believe that women have the rights to their own bodies, and I agree that couples should be aloud to find alternate means of conception. There are many directives form the Catholic Health Care Service that I disagree with, the first one being directive 45. It states, “Abortion (that is, the directly intended termination of pregnancy before viability or the directly intended destruction of a viable fetus) is never permitted.” What about women who are forced into sexual acts unwillingly? It is not fair for a woman to be forced to drastically alter her life because of something she never had a choice in. To add to that, you hear stories all the time about very young girls becoming pregnant due to heinous crimes such as rape, these girls can range from the ages of sixteen to even thirteen years old! They are still children in their own right, and should not be forced to endure a pregnancy at such a young age. Secondly, another directive I don’t agree with is directive 40. It states, “Heterologous fertilization (that is, any technique used to achieve conception by the use of gametes coming from at least one donor other than the spouses) is prohibited because it is contrary to the covenant of marriage, the unity of the spouses, and the dignity proper to parents and the child” I don’t agree with this directive because a married couple should have the right to achieve conception from an outside donor. To add to that, more often then not the couple is infertile because of one of the partners, not both. So it seems almost as if the Catholic Church seeks to punish the couple due to the failure of one’s sex organs. I believe that if a married couple wants to have children and fail to do so through what is deemed “the right way”, they should be able to explore other options with out any outside scuritization. Lastly, another directive that I do not agree with is directive 48. This directive states, “In case of an extrauterine pregnancy, no intervention is morally licit which constitutes a direct abortion.” This directive seems to infer that the baby’s health and well-being is more important than the mother who is caring it. Take egtopic pregnancies for example, these are pregnancies where the fetus grows outside of the uterus and in the pelvic cavity of the woman. These pregnancies can lead to several health issues, due to the fact that the fetus attaches to surrounding tissues. In this type of pregnancy the fetus can divert the blood supply to itself rather than the surrounding areas, and then tissue necrosis is likely to occur. Along with the numerous health risks there is a great chance of ultimately losing the child in the end. There are other complications, like Preeclampsia for instance, here the woman’s blood pressure rises to a dangerous level during pregnancy, and vital organs like the liver and kidneys are susceptible to irreversible damage. Carrying a child, with health complications like these, is simply not a reasonable request. In all circumstances the mother’s health and well-being should be the number one priority. In the end, pregnancy is something that should be enjoyed at the right time, with the right environment. On the other hand, women who are sexually assaulted or raped should not be forced to keep the pregnancy. These women should have the choice of abortion; they should be aloud to have children, and start that chapter of their lives when they are ready. Finally, I do agree that abortion should not be used as a means of birth control; ultimately other means of birth control should be encouraged to women. All in all, I believe that no one has the right to dictate to a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body.
The Catholic Churches rules set for the prevention of pregnancy and abortion were made for people to live in accordance with the moral codes of the church. Some of these moral codes do not consider special circumstances. Mentally ill patients, rape victims, and parents with more children than they can care for are special circumstances.
A parent with certain mental issues cannot provide the necessary care for any child. A child being introduced into an unsafe home environment goes against my personal morals. Rape victims who become pregnant are offered counseling, but no amount of counseling can make a parent properly take care of a child they do not want. Parents who already have children they are unable to care for is also a special circumstance. If children in the home are being neglected, it is immoral to bring another child into the same situation. The issues of fertilization and sterilization are also moral rules made by the church. Sterilization should be considered if there are special circumstances. Some mentally ill parents should be considered for sterilization with their consent. It is immoral to allow mentally ill people to reproduce without knowing the duties of being a parent. Counseling for a mentally ill person surely cannot be fully comprehended. If a person is infertile, they should be allowed to undergo fertilization treatments in order to produce a child. These people should be evaluated to determine if they are fully capable of parenting a child. All of these rules made by the Catholic Church do not consider the personal morals of the people they affect. Individuals should have the choice to consider their own personal morals in making a decision about abortion, fertilization, and sterilization. The counseling provided by the church should be used by people trying to make these kinds of decisions, but people should make their own informed decisions based on personal morals.
I don’t believe that anyone is ever truly ready financially, emotionally or otherwise to bring a child into the world. You just never know what challenges you may face as a parent and there is absolutely no way to prepare for life’s events. That being said I am completely against using abortion as birth control. It is no secret that having intercourse with someone of the opposite sex has a strong likelihood of producing a child. Even with the use of birth control, your run the risk of pregnancy. If you are not ready to take on the responsibilities of parenthood, you should not be having a relationship that can produce a child. I believe that at conception the most precious, delicate life has begun. This life completely depends on the mother for protection. I believe that a mother is responsible for protecting that child at all cost inside or outside of her body. A child is completely reliant on its mother form the time of conception until that child is able to care for itself. I also believe the father has the same responsibility protect his child. Danielle said “…I think people should take responsibility for their actions”. I completely agree. If you cause a car accident don’t you have to stick around and take responsibility for your mistake? You don’t get to drive away and say, well I didn’t mean to, can’t this just go away? If you fail a class, you can’t say I showed up everyday can’t I have an A? You can’t have a sexual relationship and you get pregnant, you don’t get to say “oops, I didn’t mean to, can’t this just go away?” I do not think that aborting a child because you are not ready to have one is a responsible choice. In fact, I believe just the opposite, it is the most irresponsible thing a person can do. I understand that in the case of incest and rape that difficult decisions need to be made. Under these circumstance, I am not sure which is more cruel, to bring a child into the world- even if just to give that child up of adoption, or to end the life of that child before it even has the opportunity to begin. My very dear friend made the choice to give birth to her child conceived by rape. She gave her first born child, a son up for adoption 10 years ago. She has no regrets for her choice. However, I met women that made the choice to abort an unwanted pregnancy and has not been able to have other children. She often wonders if she made the right choice. I do believe that under the circumstances of rape and incest, a woman should have the right to make the choice she feels is best for her. I appreciate that the Catholic Church has given provisions to offer support for women that make the choice for abortion, even though it goes against their beliefs and they choose not to participate in it. I agree that intercourse should be between a husband and wife. How refreshing it is to see a husband and wife starting a family. Although, I disagree with Catholic Church’s directives on birth control. I feel that a husband and wife should be allowed to decided when they feel it is the right time, if ever, to bring children into their lives and how many. Keeping in mind that birth control is never 100%. I have heard the comments “that we live in different times”. I don’t think that any church should change their beliefs or practices, because a percentage of the population is choosing not to follow those teachings. I personally believe that if you do not agree with the guidelines of the Catholic Church and their directives at their hospitals, then you should pick a hospital that has the same ethical and moral standards that you choose to live your life by. Here in Phoenix we have lots of choices in hospitals.
In regards to part four in the issues of Care for the Beginning of Life. The Catholic Ministry I believe brings up several hypocritical directives. First of all, I believe in abortion. In cases such as rape, pre-teen pregnancy or if medical complications for both mother and baby has threatens either one of their lives, the women should have the right to make that decision.
Also in #40 regarding “Heterologous Fertilization” or in other words “In Vitro Fertilization” has many controversies. In many ways they are saying if this baby is conceived in any other way other than through intercourse, it is not the fruit of the marriage. They say this “creates great danger to the unity of the marriage and to the dignity of the child.” But what if, a women has conceived a child violently through rape, which is not her spouse, does this make it ok for her to continue with a pregnancy that started from the being from hate? Again, women should have the right to make that decision if she wants to terminate a pregnancy or use another method to get pregnant. Some couples are not able to have children and with the technology of medicine we have given couples an opportunity to get pregnant and have a child when they are ready to have a family.
I do believe though that abortion should not be abused. There are other forms of birth control available that should be given to women to educate them through plan parenthoods or other women awareness facilities. Also, fertilization has gone too far in some cases where women are having multiply birth of 6-8 babies at one time. This is definitely not realistic, and cannot be healthy for everyone in concern.
My overall feeling about the directives dealing with infertility, abortion, contraceptives, and surrogate mother issues is that of somewhat mixed. But overall I tend to disagree with the majority of them even though there are a few that I believe to be ethical. The abortion directives I disagree with due to the fact that I don’t believe GOD has come down and told anyone that abortion is a sin. I don’t think it’s ethical to impose ones moral beliefs on others. No one has the right to judge the “sin” of any other person I believe that is GODs job. There are real legitimate reasons as to why a woman would even decide to have an abortion. No one wishes to have to be in a position to have to choose between life and death. However under certain circumstance I feel it is ok. When a woman is raped, a victim of incest, if a woman is sick with a terminal illness, a woman addicted to hard core narcotics, or for just whatever the reason may be that the woman chooses to abort her child. As long as the woman is not using abortion as a form of birth control or she is not being forced into having the abortion, I don’t see what the problem is. In the end, it’s the woman who has to face whatever consequence GOD has, if any. I also disagree with the directives dealing with issues with infertility. Again I don’t remember when GOD came down and gave us book dealing strictly on how he intended for us to procreate whether it be sexually or with help by a physician. There are many causes of infertility like some general health and lifestyle issues, and over exposure to certain environmental elements. These causes are mostly likely not due to genetics so therefore not likely due to the will of GOD. The directives dealing with contraceptives I believe are unethical because I feel it’s the couple’s choice on the type of contraceptive they choose to use in order to prevent pregnancy. Ultimately the couple is responsible for the choices they make and again GOD is the only judge. The directives I agree with are mainly dealing with the Catholic Health Care Institutes policies for treatment, counseling, spiritual care and medical care for mothers and their children. I also agree with directive 47 stating that in case of any medical conditions that may jeopardize the mother’s life an abortion may be deemed necessary. In the directives pertaining to surrogate motherhood I also agree with. I feel that surrogate motherhood is taking the whole situation too far. I believe at this point adoption should really become an option. Due to the fact of potential drama with the surrogate mother. Like her emotional attachment that could develop while carrying the child. I can see a situation like turning sour.
From my perspective, I think that there is something that the government should do to change the healthcare system in the U.S. Therefore, I totally agree with the healthcare reform. However, there are many huge ethical issues that still need to be considered. There are three important ethical issues that we should be aware of: illegal immigration, mandatory insurance, and government takeover. First, there are many illegal immigrants who come to the U.S. every day to get free healthcare access. It provokes a question: “Is it a right or privilege for a human to get access to healthcare?” Many Americans think that it is not right for illegal immigrants to get free healthcare in the U.S. The reason is because they don’t live here, and did not contribute anything to our society, so why should we pay for them? In addition, by crossing the U.S.-Mexico border, they break the law and should be punished by that action. I have thought about those reasons for a long time, but I think that a human life is much more important than money or any other reason. In addition, I do believe that everyone in this world would do everything in their power to help a dying patient. This is a moral issue. During the speech, President Obama said that his plan will not pay for illegal immigrants. This statement brings up many questions. What should doctors and nurses do if there is a dying illegal immigrant who comes to their hospital? Should they help the patient or not? If they decide to give the patient treatment, whose would pay for the bill since the government would not pay? I think that the government should be clearer about this. Second, if this bill passes, everyone in this country will be required to buy insurance. This is a big ethical issue. Everyone in our country knows that America is a liberal country, and we have our freedom. Government cannot force citizens to buy health insurance. We are adults, and we know what we need to do. In addition, by requiring everyone to have health insurance, the government breaks its own Constitution. I think that it is a good idea for everyone to have health insurance, but we all have our freedom. Therefore, the government should not require us to all have insurance. Third, there is a big debate going on concerning about the fact that government may eventually take over the entire healthcare system. This is not just a mere healthcare reform. This is also about politics. Many people are concerned that if this bill is passed, private insurance companies would be wiped out. If it is true, it would affect the U.S. economy tremendously. There would be fewer jobs since the private insurance companies create many jobs. Finally, I believe that our current healthcare system must be changed as soon as possible because there is a huge problem in this system. However, the government should consider this carefully before implementing healthcare reform. I think the best thing the government should do now is to work on the ethical questions, so that the plan can become clearer.
The Catholic Church has to be one of the strictest institutions of Religion since the beginning of religion. However, they are also the most consistent when it comes to the subjects concerning the beginning of life, and the end of life. As far as the directives, I agree with some of them like the use of surrogate mentioned in directive 39; the mother child relationship is a special relationship. As women we have a maternal instinct so to ask someone to have a baby and when the baby is born to just give it up and walk away like nothing is missing or wrong is impossible. There are normal bonding stages between the mother and the unborn child that take place as the pregnancy progresses. The first trimester you are happy and sharing the good news with everyone who will listen, the baby shares your blood, and nutrients. The second trimester you start to show, feel the baby move, find out if it’s a boy or a girl and by the third trimester you start buying books on how to care for the baby, baby names, breastfeeding and of course the father and soon to be grand parents speak to your belly then they look up and say how you doing. I think it’s cruel to ask a woman to give up a child after the nine months of bonding. Furthermore, the surrogate mother may not live up to her end of the deal or give the baby up only to turn around and sue for parental rights. I also agree with directive 47; which states it’s okay to have a chemical abortion to save the mothers’ life even if the child is viable. I do not agree with directive 50; the women or parents of the unborn child should be able to choose to have or abort a fetus if they know it will be born with a birth defect, why make a child live with a horrible defect or a parent watch their child suffer. One of the directives for death and dying stress that unnecessary burdens should not be put on the family including expenses, in my view directive 50 contradicts the unnecessary burden statement. A child born with birth defects incurs substantial medical bills throughout their life which could be an unnessacery burden depending on the social status of the parents.
Posts
20 comments:
I feel that abortion is something that each individual woman must choses for herself. Many woman have their own reasons ,it may be rape, incest, or young pregnancies (at the age of 12 or 13) no matter the situation it should be something the she can choses for herself in the private of her own home with her dignity. If abortion wasn't a choice I believe there would be a lot more cases of child abuse and negligence due to women that didn't want or feel the need to become mothers. I rather let woman that have these needs/feeling abort an embryo rather then kill a child once it born neither one is right in my mind but it the lesser of the two evils.
Fertilization is a dangerous concept because you have three type of couple that usually use this method; One the couple who all they want is their very own baby there are financial equip to take the responsible of raising a child and can prove a wonderful home. Two the parent searching for the cure to fix the child the already have which i feel is the most dangerous. Type three would be your octo- mom someone who want to have multi baby to satisfy personal need not caring about the well being of the child/children. I do feel that there should be an screening process that you have to complete before undergoing this treatment.
After reading these directive I feel that there are some objective like abortion that we can't/shouldn't have directives for, but then you have the issue dealing with Fertilization where I feel it is very necessary to give directives . I would have to say I'm torn.
As far as the subject of abortion goes with all of the controversy and the demise I believe that abortion is a personal choice that is given to women and should be a woman’s god given right. Regarding the circumstances in which one could conceive a child, if and when they decide the path they wish to follow whether abortion, adoption, or to keep the child is (the bottom line) their choice. I do not agree with the directives set forth by the USCCB because they don’t cover the most crucial issue of rape.
The directives are set up the perfect marriage where a baby is not a problem but a gift. A baby is considered only allowed to be born into the diginity of marriage? A baby is no reason to get married and couples who usually have children before marriage are usually as happy as married couples with the debate over dignity. I believe that people can have children outside of marriage and it can be done with dignity. With the clause about the sanctity of life in which “from the moment of conception until death.”
However, even though the directives lacks some directive as far as special circumstances go it includes and justifies the care of women also along with the care of the infant. The Church agrees that with the high rate of infant immortalities that the best possible care should be given to the mother and to the child she is going to bring into this world. This little clause in the directive I agree with fully because the only the best should and would be done for the mother in time of crisis.
The directives main focus is the diginified marriage which they believe is the only way to have a baby. I don’t agree with this because you don’t have to be married to have a child. The only “responsible parenthood” would be through a married couple which is something that I don’t believe in. The directives also set forth the disapproval of contraceptives in which they state that contraceptives violate “inseparable connection willed by god…between the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive and procreative meaning.” I disagree with most in part because none of the directives bring about or mention the subject of rape in certain cases I believe it is reasonable to use contraceptives, however it a decision that should be used wisely and not just to get rid of what you might think is a small problem.
Overall, I disagree with the directive set for by the USCCB because they don’t condone or sympathize with special circumstances and they believe that the only way to have a baby is through a dignified marriage which equals responsible parenthood. I believe that the Church stresses the importance of marriage way too much in matter of conception and that marriage should be determined by the parents. In sensitive cases such as rape contraceptives should be allowed to the vicitim of rape.
In the directives of part 4, I disagree with a number of things. I believe that if you want and are able to care of a child, you should be able to have the means to have a child. If in order to have a child you have to go through a normal conception, a surrogate mother, genetically implanted/ helped, adoption, etc… I think a person/s who wants a child should have one. Abortion is a touchy subject and many people have different opinions on it, every situation is different. People have a choice in what happens to them sometimes the choices they make do not turn out the way they want, I think people should take responsibility for their actions. I’m not saying that abortion is the new birth control but in some ways it is used to do the responsible thing, and for that I believe it should be aloud but it is that persons own choice.
Now science and heath care are progressing every day and it is easier to get pregnant and stay healthy through out your pregnancy even if there are complications in the case of extrauterine pregnancy if the baby is healthy and can get strong enough to have surgery I believe that it should not be aborted. If there is a chance that the fetus can survive and the parent/s is willing, they should do what they can to save the baby. Counseling of any kind is good for any pregnancy purposes, abortion, genetic, PTSD, post-natal care etc… Parents should know that they have someone to turn to if something goes wrong or if they need help.
If a person does not want to have child they should be able to do what they want in order not to have a child. I know that humans are suppose to reproduce to live on but not everyone has to reproduce there are plenty of people out there that do not want kids and they are taking the appropriate measures not to have one. In these directives, they do not permit abortion but for those who do not want kids or who are not ready for kids if they are able to use a contraceptive or sterilize themselves there would be fewer abortions. I say it is a good thing to have and they should teach more about it so that people do know and that when the time is right they can be happy with a child of their own on their own time.
The directives seem logical in their upholding of “sanctity of life”. It would be a difficult task to find anybody to argue that life is not precious and worthy of protection. The issue then becomes, when does one define life? Does quality of life become relevant at such early stages? The Catholic directives argue that life begins at conception. This view is consistent with a gradient view of viability, if we define viability as the beginning of life as progressive growth from this point will lead to a baby being born. The directives also allow for procedures to be performed that may result in the abortion of a pregnancy or with grave complications for the fetus if there is proportionate risk to the mother. What this means is, in cases of ectopic pregnancy for example, the life of the mother must be protected especially since the continued growth of the fetus will result in death of the mother and fetus. The directives also allow for life saving interventions to be performed on the mother that may endanger the growth of the fetus, subsequently ending its life.
I agree with the church on both of these scenarios, however I do not agree on the disallowing of contraceptives to be used. I understand the logic that the goal of intercourse should be to produce a child, and efforts to dampen the likelihood of pregnancy go against God’s will, I quite simply don’t agree. If we as people have urges to perform certain acts, can it not be argued that our great creator in the sky did not implant these feelings? If so, then why? If the stance is taken that our primal urges to propagate our species are implanted by our creator, then is not the choice or thought to have an abortion not also implanted by the wise man in the clouds? If god has a plan for every human at the moment of creation, why not let a few serve as examples for the pious? The lady down the street has an abortion and suffers massive abdominal infection that becomes septic…that’s a bad time, but what if it influences the teenager the next house down to look into celibacy? Could this not be part of God’s plan? I also disagree with any argument that invokes God’s plan, as this can be easily retorted.
In conclusion, I largely agree with the directives except when it comes to the absolute abolishment of abortion and use of contraceptives. With regards to medicine, I feel that autonomy rules above all so long as no harm is done to another. The difficult question becomes (especially abortion) what is causing harm to another? In this instance there is no definite argument and it seems best that we leave the decision to the person who ultimately receives the consequences (good or bad, emotional or physical, medical or psychological) of such a decision, that being the pregnant woman.
I disagree with the directives on this issue. I don’t completely think abortion is right, but I do think that a pregnant women should have that option. Abortion is not only an easy way out for some women, who are usually teenagers, but it could also be a positive life changing act. Abortion is not easy, but women who have been raped should not have to live with the result of a horrible experience. Adoption could be a an option as well, but I would think it would be much harder giving a baby up than terminating an undeveloped fetus. Also, we hear about mothers killing their newborn babies, throwing them in the trash, putting them in microwaves, and crazy stuff that should not be done. How much easier would it be for them to get an abortion, when a baby is still not fully developed than doing much more painful killings that are also illegal. I also disagree with the directives talking about fertilization and surrogate motherhood. As a woman, I would want to have children, and I understand that I or my husband might have problems conceiving. Fertilization or surrogate motherhood might be my best options, and they should not be prohibited by the church to a couple that wants to have a baby.
I am torn in the abortion issue. 90% of me is completely against abortion, but I do realize that there are many complicated and life threatening conditions in a pregnancy that would hurt the mother and in that sense I do see why an abortion would be necessary, or okay at least. But for those who were just thought they wouldnt get pregnant, I believe they should take responsibility for their own actions. I dont see why a person who is well aware of what causes pregnancy should be given the right to get rid of the pregnancy because they werent ready. Why not give the baby up for adoption? To me its a selfish act to abort a baby because you're not ready. There are many people in the world who are struggling to conceive or adopt.
I know I was no where near ready to become a mother when I got pregnant. Financially, or emotionally. But abortion did not cross my mind for a second, I knew what i was doing and what could come of it and now that i have my daughter I would not change it for the world. These girls that are having abortions and are scared and not ready should consider that maybe this happened for a reason and it would change their life for the better. Im not rich, I wasnt married, I barely graduated from high school, I didnt have a stable job, I was immature, I wanted to party, I wasnt ready in no way for a baby, but I wasnt going to take the easy way out. I couldnt possibly imagine my life without her now, its no life if I did.
I strongly disagree with the abolishment of contraceptives, surrogacy, and IVF. If any person wants to have a child but cannot conceive naturally, then I dont see why they shouldnt be able to use other means to become parents. I dont agree that 2 people need to be married to have a family to keep the dignity or procreation and I dont agree that a person needs to have a significant other to adopt or have a child either. I do think that any person who is trying to adopt, go throught with surrogacy, IVF, or any type of method to become a parent should go through some phsychiatric screening before they are approved.
Coming from a divided family where my mother is Baptist and my father Catholic, I was taught to analyze and not just blindly follow. I believe after reading the article that the UCSSB contradicts itself in the directives listed in the article. I have listed a few examples from the article. In directive 38, it tells you to procreate within the marital union but if the union does not lead to procreation then you can seek assistance. Directly contradicting number 38, number 40 and 41 states that you cannot use outside donors from the marriage and you cannot use artificial fertilization because it separates procreation from the marital act. In addition, number 42 tells you that you cannot use surrogacy when number 38 tells you to get help conceiving babies. In number 52 Catholic health institutions cannot promote or condone contraceptives, but they teach you about methods in natural “ovulation cycle” family planning which is directly opposite of the first sentence. To determine whether they are ethical I have to separate personal and religious beliefs. The article goes against my personal ethical beliefs that is it a woman’s prerogative to make a choice. I find it difficult to accept that our society and legal systems requires a separation of church and state, but the church still requires a blind belief that I must procreate inside the sanctity of marriage. I am supporter of Roe v. Wade in that it is a woman’s right to make a decision what she does with her body.
I am really on the fence with these directives. Some of the directives laid out by the USCCB I agree with, but others I disagree with one-hundred percent. Therefore, I believe that most of the directives stated are not ethical.
We live in a world where there is no perfect family or person. I may have interpreted the directives wrong, but it seems to me that the USCCB is basing these directives on the perfect family. Directive forty-two states “Because of the dignity of the child and of marriage, and because of the uniqueness of the mother-child relationship, participation in contracts or arrangements for surrogate motherhood is not permitted”. This, I do not agree with. According to the USCCB, your mother is someone who is biologically attached to you. I on the other hand believe that your mother is someone who cares for you, looks out for you, and gives you all the love in her heart. If the biological mother treats her child horribly, and an aunt treats her extremely better, I believe the aunt is more of a mother than the biological mother. Just because the child is not biologically hers, she can still be seen as the mother if she treats the child with love and care Another issue that can be brought up with this directive is Gestational Surrogacy which is when a fertilized egg is placed in the uterus of the surrogate. This may happen because of a variety of complications that the biological mother may face during pregnancy. The USCCB claims surrogacy is not permitted because of the “uniqueness of the mother-child relationship”. However, what is the uniqueness” of a child without a mother because she had failed to make it through giving birth to this child? It is much safer to have a surrogate mother give birth to the child. This way, a life gained is not one lost.
Another topic that came up in these directives was abortion. Directive forty-five states “Abortion (that is, the directly intended termination of pregnancy before viability or the directly intended destruction of a viable fetus) is never permitted”. This is something that I do not agree. Yes abortion is something that no woman should go through, however, there are many factors that could influence the choice of abortion. A woman that has been raped should not have to live with looking at her child and seeing the face of the rapist. A child should be conceived in love. You must also think about the child. A child growing up asking about their father and how they met. This is something I could only imagine could be hard for a woman. You always have to think about the child. If a child is born into the world with a mother and father that cannot provide for them, what kind of life is that for a child. If the parents are not ready to have a child, they should not be having un protected sex anyway, but sometimes these things happen and the child should not have to suffer because of it. A child should grow up in the best environment possible to thrive. My father always says to me he wishes he had never brought my sister and myself into this world because it’s so crazy. My sister and myself have to right tools to get through this life, but a child born in poverty does not and will most like not survive in this crazy world.
Continued...
However, there were some things I agreed on with the USCCB. Directive forty-four states “A Catholic health care institution should provide prenatal, obstetric, and postnatal services for mothers and their children in a manner consonant with its mission”. This I one-hundred percent agree with. There is no book in Barnes and Noble to tell mothers how to be a perfect mother. There is no guide to life for these woman. It is a great thing that I can only imagine for a mother to be able to go to someone for advise and/or help. If you are couple raising a child for the first time it could be difficult. Being a single mother raising children is extremely difficult. Knowing that you can go somewhere for help before, during, and after pregnancy takes a lot of your shoulders.
After reading the directives, I believe they are not ethical, however, there are some that are in my opinion.
As I kept reading Part Four of the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services I was reminded of that famous phrase that says “one finger cannot block out the sun.” In my opinion, the directives provided by the USCCB are double-edged; disguised to appear ethical in most cases (bishops came up with them, after all), but only approvable of certain scenarios. At times, they also seem contradictory. Again, I found myself agreeing with some directives and disagreeing with others.
I consider directives #38 and #39 ethical. It is only logical that assisted conception needs to be seen as an option when the act of sexual intercourse fails to conceive a child. Moreover, there are a number of directives that I find ethical (such as #44, #49, #50, and #51) although they’re not necessarily exclusive Catholic-oriented. I believe that most health care institutions in the world (or at least in first world countries) have the obligation of “providing prenatal, obstetric, and postnatal services for mothers and their children in a manner consonant with their mission.” It seems more of a human right despite the religious philosophy of the society.
I disagree on the USCCB’s view of homologous and heterologous (directives #40 and #41) artificial fertilization. In these modern times we live in where advanced treatments and technologies are able to treat infertility and provide options for conception, to me it feels miraculous to know that an infertile wife or husband still has a chance of conceiving a baby. What I find ironic is that directive #43 encourages adoption if there is infertility in a marriage, and they stated that surrogate motherhood is not permitted on directive #42. Adoption is great but I think a couple would consider having a biological child if artificial fertilization offers a possibility.
I want to conclude with my thoughts on abortion. Deliberate abortion is always a delicate subject to write about and even in the directives there are some doubts regarding the topic (like in #48). This ethical dilemma varies depending on the person, as well as to how they were educated, or what their experiences or moral beliefs are. As it is well known, the Church forbids abortions (directive #45), but I wonder what their thoughts are when abortion is necessary: say a girl was raped and there is no way for her to survive the childbirth. Some people consider an embryo (a developing organism) a living person while others do not. An embryo does not have a functional central nervous system. This CNS (when fully developed) is what makes us perceive sensations like suffering. I don’t encourage abortion but it’s best to do it (in the worst of cases) during the first weeks of pregnancy. Again, the directives are close-minded; they’re not interested in seeing all the aspects of the situation (just like with Randy Niedzielski’s case), instead they limit themselves to saying “this is forbidden as it contradicts the teachings of the Catholic religion.”
In reading the Ethical and Religious directives for the Catholic Health Care system regarding the issues for the beginning of life, the directives stated here are centralized around the sanctity of marriage and the sanctity of human life at the very beginning. In a perfect world these directives would be ethical in the sanctity of marriage, but in today’s world, what constitutes a marriage is no longer applicable. Today’s society accepts a variety of relationships which constitutes a couple. Because of this, I believe it is everyone’s own individual right to decide if they want to procreate and have a child. This right is not bound by marriage alone. To say otherwise is unethical. In the same regards, if a couple cannot have children naturally and must seek out other avenues to have a child, I believe this is their right and choice alone to make. Medical advances have made it possible by providing such opportunities like in vitro with or without donated sperm or eggs. To prohibit any opportunity to conceive would be unethical such as stated by directives #39, #40, and #41. If a woman is unable to carry a baby but chooses to use a surrogate, this is the choice of the woman and/or couple alone. Again medical advances have made this possible. No one has the right to say they can not choose to do this in order for them to have a child. This again would be unethical such as stated in directive #42. I agree that directives #42 and #43 to be ethical. If a couple cannot have children, they should be offered all options such as adoption or medical intervention. Counseling is also an important part of the decision making process couples face when making the best possible choice as to how they are going to have a child especially if medical intervention is necessary. I found directive #52 and #53 to be unethical. If a couple chooses to practice contraception through sterilization or other methods available today, it is that couples choice. It is the right of the man or woman to decide if they want to become sterile. This is their right over their own body and their own right to decide if they want to have children or not. To not have this choice is unethical. I also found directive #48 to unethical. In most cases if diagnosed with an extra uterine pregnancy, medical intervention is necessary to alleviate tremendous pain and prevent further internal damage to the woman. To provide such medical treatment would be considered necessary and ethical. An extra uterine pregnancy is not a viable pregnancy. In most cases it will terminate naturally but often resulting in damage to the woman with possible fertility problems in the future thus medical intervention is necessary. Lastly in addressing directive #45 on abortion, I find this directive to be unethical. This directive excludes so many different scenarios where one might feel that abortion is their only viable choice, such as a rape, incest, being an extremely young teenager. I believe the choice of abortion rest solely with the woman. It is her body and her choice to make in regards to her body. It is also the right of the woman to decide what she feels is in the best interest of that child. If it is the best interest of the child to not be born into this world then that is the choice for that woman to make alone. No one has the right to tell her otherwise. It is her decision alone to make and live with. The majority of these directives are integrated with the fundamental beliefs of the Catholic Church in regards to the sanctity of marriage, family, and the beginnings of human life which in turns makes them unethical because they do not apply to the majority of the population and their ability to procreate. These directives do not portray the greater good for the majority of people.
I do not believe the directives listed within this site are an issue. The Catholic Church is merely setting guidelines for their private healthcare facilities. When going to a private healthcare provider, patient's must realize that a private facility may have rules and regulations out of the norm when compared to public facilities. Within private facilities, the governing board (in this case, the Bishops overseeing the welfare of there Catholic hospitals) has the final say on all ethical issues that occur within their hospital. These views may or may not be the same views of the patient being treated. Asking whether or not a private facility has a right to abide by their own rules seems redundant. Asking a patient whether or not they are willing to abide by the facilities rules to receive treatment, however, may be a better route.
The Catholic Church has implemented its own views on the sanctity and preservation of life within the walls of their hospitals. As long as their views are being expressed within their own facilities, outside forces truly have no right to interfere. Patients should take the views of these private hospitals in to consideration before seeking medical treatment with them.
If, however, the Church is interfering with a patient's healthcare choices outside of their own hospitals, it is then that we run into an issue. Hundreds of different view points with a hundred variations of those view points will never allow for one governing body to decide what is best for everyone. Offering multiple, safe options for many view points may be the most ethical move our government could make.
In general, I agree with most of the directives on this issue. However, there are two directives that I disagree. The directive that bans surrogate mother and fertilization is not right. I think that every married couple wants to have children. However, if a husband or wife is sterile they should have an option of fertilization or surrogate mother, so that they can have children of their own. A child is really important factor in a family. Married couple who has children is more likely to have a longer marriage than couple that does not have any child. I think the church should not ban fertilization and surrogate mother because it might affect the marriage. In addition, I also disagree with the directive that bans abortion. From my perspective, I think abortion is not right. However, there are many reasons that women seek abortion. They may be a victim of rape, incest, or they may have health problems. The second reason is that women have the right to decide whether or not they should keep their children. That is the basic right of human. The third reason is that many women know that even they keep their children; they cannot support their children in the future. Because of that, I think it is better for them to abort their children when it is still just a fetus. The last reason is that even abortion is banned, thousands of women could still have illegal abortion, and it would be more dangerous to their health. Statistic shows that many women have died every year because of the inflammation from illegal abortion.
Abortion is a very sensitive and debated topic. Many people believe that life begins at conception, while others believe that it begins when the fetus first has a heart beat. Then there are those that are pro-life, pro-choice, and some that fall in a between category. I for one am in them middle and believe that women have the rights to their own bodies, and I agree that couples should be aloud to find alternate means of conception.
There are many directives form the Catholic Health Care Service that I disagree with, the first one being directive 45. It states, “Abortion (that is, the directly intended termination of pregnancy before viability or the directly intended destruction of a viable fetus) is never permitted.” What about women who are forced into sexual acts unwillingly? It is not fair for a woman to be forced to drastically alter her life because of something she never had a choice in. To add to that, you hear stories all the time about very young girls becoming pregnant due to heinous crimes such as rape, these girls can range from the ages of sixteen to even thirteen years old! They are still children in their own right, and should not be forced to endure a pregnancy at such a young age.
Secondly, another directive I don’t agree with is directive 40. It states, “Heterologous fertilization (that is, any technique used to achieve conception by the use of gametes coming from at least one donor other than the spouses) is prohibited because it is contrary to the covenant of marriage, the unity of the spouses, and the dignity proper to parents and the child” I don’t agree with this directive because a married couple should have the right to achieve conception from an outside donor. To add to that, more often then not the couple is infertile because of one of the partners, not both. So it seems almost as if the Catholic Church seeks to punish the couple due to the failure of one’s sex organs. I believe that if a married couple wants to have children and fail to do so through what is deemed “the right way”, they should be able to explore other options with out any outside scuritization.
Lastly, another directive that I do not agree with is directive 48. This directive states, “In case of an extrauterine pregnancy, no intervention is morally licit which constitutes a direct abortion.” This directive seems to infer that the baby’s health and well-being is more important than the mother who is caring it. Take egtopic pregnancies for example, these are pregnancies where the fetus grows outside of the uterus and in the pelvic cavity of the woman. These pregnancies can lead to several health issues, due to the fact that the fetus attaches to surrounding tissues. In this type of pregnancy the fetus can divert the blood supply to itself rather than the surrounding areas, and then tissue necrosis is likely to occur. Along with the numerous health risks there is a great chance of ultimately losing the child in the end. There are other complications, like Preeclampsia for instance, here the woman’s blood pressure rises to a dangerous level during pregnancy, and vital organs like the liver and kidneys are susceptible to irreversible damage. Carrying a child, with health complications like these, is simply not a reasonable request. In all circumstances the mother’s health and well-being should be the number one priority.
In the end, pregnancy is something that should be enjoyed at the right time, with the right environment. On the other hand, women who are sexually assaulted or raped should not be forced to keep the pregnancy. These women should have the choice of abortion; they should be aloud to have children, and start that chapter of their lives when they are ready. Finally, I do agree that abortion should not be used as a means of birth control; ultimately other means of birth control should be encouraged to women. All in all, I believe that no one has the right to dictate to a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body.
The Catholic Churches rules set for the prevention of pregnancy and abortion were made for people to live in accordance with the moral codes of the church. Some of these moral codes do not consider special circumstances. Mentally ill patients, rape victims, and parents with more children than they can care for are special circumstances.
A parent with certain mental issues cannot provide the necessary care for any child. A child being introduced into an unsafe home environment goes against my personal morals. Rape victims who become pregnant are offered counseling, but no amount of counseling can make a parent properly take care of a child they do not want. Parents who already have children they are unable to care for is also a special circumstance. If children in the home are being neglected, it is immoral to bring another child into the same situation.
The issues of fertilization and sterilization are also moral rules made by the church. Sterilization should be considered if there are special circumstances. Some mentally ill parents should be considered for sterilization with their consent. It is immoral to allow mentally ill people to reproduce without knowing the duties of being a parent. Counseling for a mentally ill person surely cannot be fully comprehended.
If a person is infertile, they should be allowed to undergo fertilization treatments in order to produce a child. These people should be evaluated to determine if they are fully capable of parenting a child.
All of these rules made by the Catholic Church do not consider the personal morals of the people they affect. Individuals should have the choice to consider their own personal morals in making a decision about abortion, fertilization, and sterilization. The counseling provided by the church should be used by people trying to make these kinds of decisions, but people should make their own informed decisions based on personal morals.
I don’t believe that anyone is ever truly ready financially, emotionally or otherwise to bring a child into the world. You just never know what challenges you may face as a parent and there is absolutely no way to prepare for life’s events. That being said I am completely against using abortion as birth control. It is no secret that having intercourse with someone of the opposite sex has a strong likelihood of producing a child. Even with the use of birth control, your run the risk of pregnancy. If you are not ready to take on the responsibilities of parenthood, you should not be having a relationship that can produce a child. I believe that at conception the most precious, delicate life has begun. This life completely depends on the mother for protection. I believe that a mother is responsible for protecting that child at all cost inside or outside of her body. A child is completely reliant on its mother form the time of conception until that child is able to care for itself. I also believe the father has the same responsibility protect his child. Danielle said “…I think people should take responsibility for their actions”. I completely agree. If you cause a car accident don’t you have to stick around and take responsibility for your mistake? You don’t get to drive away and say, well I didn’t mean to, can’t this just go away? If you fail a class, you can’t say I showed up everyday can’t I have an A? You can’t have a sexual relationship and you get pregnant, you don’t get to say “oops, I didn’t mean to, can’t this just go away?” I do not think that aborting a child because you are not ready to have one is a responsible choice. In fact, I believe just the opposite, it is the most irresponsible thing a person can do.
I understand that in the case of incest and rape that difficult decisions need to be made. Under these circumstance, I am not sure which is more cruel, to bring a child into the world- even if just to give that child up of adoption, or to end the life of that child before it even has the opportunity to begin. My very dear friend made the choice to give birth to her child conceived by rape. She gave her first born child, a son up for adoption 10 years ago. She has no regrets for her choice. However, I met women that made the choice to abort an unwanted pregnancy and has not been able to have other children. She often wonders if she made the right choice. I do believe that under the circumstances of rape and incest, a woman should have the right to make the choice she feels is best for her. I appreciate that the Catholic Church has given provisions to offer support for women that make the choice for abortion, even though it goes against their beliefs and they choose not to participate in it.
I agree that intercourse should be between a husband and wife. How refreshing it is to see a husband and wife starting a family. Although, I disagree with Catholic Church’s directives on birth control. I feel that a husband and wife should be allowed to decided when they feel it is the right time, if ever, to bring children into their lives and how many. Keeping in mind that birth control is never 100%. I have heard the comments “that we live in different times”. I don’t think that any church should change their beliefs or practices, because a percentage of the population is choosing not to follow those teachings. I personally believe that if you do not agree with the guidelines of the Catholic Church and their directives at their hospitals, then you should pick a hospital that has the same ethical and moral standards that you choose to live your life by. Here in Phoenix we have lots of choices in hospitals.
In regards to part four in the issues of Care for the Beginning of Life. The Catholic Ministry I believe brings up several hypocritical directives. First of all, I believe in abortion. In cases such as rape, pre-teen pregnancy or if medical complications for both mother and baby has threatens either one of their lives, the women should have the right to make that decision.
Also in #40 regarding “Heterologous Fertilization” or in other words “In Vitro Fertilization” has many controversies. In many ways they are saying if this baby is conceived in any other way other than through intercourse, it is not the fruit of the marriage. They say this “creates great danger to the unity of the marriage and to the dignity of the child.” But what if, a women has conceived a child violently through rape, which is not her spouse, does this make it ok for her to continue with a pregnancy that started from the being from hate? Again, women should have the right to make that decision if she wants to terminate a pregnancy or use another method to get pregnant. Some couples are not able to have children and with the technology of medicine we have given couples an opportunity to get pregnant and have a child when they are ready to have a family.
I do believe though that abortion should not be abused. There are other forms of birth control available that should be given to women to educate them through plan parenthoods or other women awareness facilities. Also, fertilization has gone too far in some cases where women are having multiply birth of 6-8 babies at one time. This is definitely not realistic, and cannot be healthy for everyone in concern.
My overall feeling about the directives dealing with infertility, abortion, contraceptives, and surrogate mother issues is that of somewhat mixed. But overall I tend to disagree with the majority of them even though there are a few that I believe to be ethical.
The abortion directives I disagree with due to the fact that I don’t believe GOD has come down and told anyone that abortion is a sin. I don’t think it’s ethical to impose ones moral beliefs on others. No one has the right to judge the “sin” of any other person I believe that is GODs job. There are real legitimate reasons as to why a woman would even decide to have an abortion. No one wishes to have to be in a position to have to choose between life and death. However under certain circumstance I feel it is ok. When a woman is raped, a victim of incest, if a woman is sick with a terminal illness, a woman addicted to hard core narcotics, or for just whatever the reason may be that the woman chooses to abort her child. As long as the woman is not using abortion as a form of birth control or she is not being forced into having the abortion, I don’t see what the problem is. In the end, it’s the woman who has to face whatever consequence GOD has, if any.
I also disagree with the directives dealing with issues with infertility. Again I don’t remember when GOD came down and gave us book dealing strictly on how he intended for us to procreate whether it be sexually or with help by a physician. There are many causes of infertility like some general health and lifestyle issues, and over exposure to certain environmental elements. These causes are mostly likely not due to genetics so therefore not likely due to the will of GOD. The directives dealing with contraceptives I believe are unethical because I feel it’s the couple’s choice on the type of contraceptive they choose to use in order to prevent pregnancy. Ultimately the couple is responsible for the choices they make and again GOD is the only judge.
The directives I agree with are mainly dealing with the Catholic Health Care Institutes policies for treatment, counseling, spiritual care and medical care for mothers and their children. I also agree with directive 47 stating that in case of any medical conditions that may jeopardize the mother’s life an abortion may be deemed necessary. In the directives pertaining to surrogate motherhood I also agree with. I feel that surrogate motherhood is taking the whole situation too far. I believe at this point adoption should really become an option. Due to the fact of potential drama with the surrogate mother. Like her emotional attachment that could develop while carrying the child. I can see a situation like turning sour.
From my perspective, I think that there is something that the government should do to change the healthcare system in the U.S. Therefore, I totally agree with the healthcare reform. However, there are many huge ethical issues that still need to be considered. There are three important ethical issues that we should be aware of: illegal immigration, mandatory insurance, and government takeover. First, there are many illegal immigrants who come to the U.S. every day to get free healthcare access. It provokes a question: “Is it a right or privilege for a human to get access to healthcare?” Many Americans think that it is not right for illegal immigrants to get free healthcare in the U.S. The reason is because they don’t live here, and did not contribute anything to our society, so why should we pay for them? In addition, by crossing the U.S.-Mexico border, they break the law and should be punished by that action. I have thought about those reasons for a long time, but I think that a human life is much more important than money or any other reason. In addition, I do believe that everyone in this world would do everything in their power to help a dying patient. This is a moral issue. During the speech, President Obama said that his plan will not pay for illegal immigrants. This statement brings up many questions. What should doctors and nurses do if there is a dying illegal immigrant who comes to their hospital? Should they help the patient or not? If they decide to give the patient treatment, whose would pay for the bill since the government would not pay? I think that the government should be clearer about this. Second, if this bill passes, everyone in this country will be required to buy insurance. This is a big ethical issue. Everyone in our country knows that America is a liberal country, and we have our freedom. Government cannot force citizens to buy health insurance. We are adults, and we know what we need to do. In addition, by requiring everyone to have health insurance, the government breaks its own Constitution. I think that it is a good idea for everyone to have health insurance, but we all have our freedom. Therefore, the government should not require us to all have insurance. Third, there is a big debate going on concerning about the fact that government may eventually take over the entire healthcare system. This is not just a mere healthcare reform. This is also about politics. Many people are concerned that if this bill is passed, private insurance companies would be wiped out. If it is true, it would affect the U.S. economy tremendously. There would be fewer jobs since the private insurance companies create many jobs. Finally, I believe that our current healthcare system must be changed as soon as possible because there is a huge problem in this system. However, the government should consider this carefully before implementing healthcare reform. I think the best thing the government should do now is to work on the ethical questions, so that the plan can become clearer.
The Catholic Church has to be one of the strictest institutions of Religion since the beginning of religion. However, they are also the most consistent when it comes to the subjects concerning the beginning of life, and the end of life.
As far as the directives, I agree with some of them like the use of surrogate mentioned in directive 39; the mother child relationship is a special relationship. As women we have a maternal instinct so to ask someone to have a baby and when the baby is born to just give it up and walk away like nothing is missing or wrong is impossible. There are normal bonding stages between the mother and the unborn child that take place as the pregnancy progresses. The first trimester you are happy and sharing the good news with everyone who will listen, the baby shares your blood, and nutrients. The second trimester you start to show, feel the baby move, find out if it’s a boy or a girl and by the third trimester you start buying books on how to care for the baby, baby names, breastfeeding and of course the father and soon to be grand parents speak to your belly then they look up and say how you doing. I think it’s cruel to ask a woman to give up a child after the nine months of bonding. Furthermore, the surrogate mother may not live up to her end of the deal or give the baby up only to turn around and sue for parental rights. I also agree with directive 47; which states it’s okay to have a chemical abortion to save the mothers’ life even if the child is viable. I do not agree with directive 50; the women or parents of the unborn child should be able to choose to have or abort a fetus if they know it will be born with a birth defect, why make a child live with a horrible defect or a parent watch their child suffer. One of the directives for death and dying stress that unnecessary burdens should not be put on the family including expenses, in my view directive 50 contradicts the unnecessary burden statement. A child born with birth defects incurs substantial medical bills throughout their life which could be an unnessacery burden depending on the social status of the parents.
Post a Comment