Read the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, Fourth Edition, Part Four - Issues in Care for the Beginning of Life. Are the directives ethical? Why or why not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(17)
-
▼
July
(14)
- Treatment of the Mentally Ill (PP13)
- Health Care Rationing (PP12)
- Health Care Reform (PP11)
- Alternative Medicine (PP10)
- Human Subjects Research (PP9)
- Animal Rights (PP8)
- Animal Rights Extremism (PP7)
- Forced Sterilization (PP6)
- Right to Refuse Treatment (PP5)
- Creating a Life to Save a Life (PP4)
- Roe v Wade (PP3)
- Care for the Beginning of Life (PP2)
- Care for the Dying (PP1)
- Welcome to PHI213
-
▼
July
(14)
About Me
- dsm
- Biostatistician, Biology and Philosophy Faculty, Lacrosse Addict
Posts
17 comments:
Care for the beginning of life
# 42
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. Moreover, the commercialization of such surrogacy denigrates the dignity of women, especially the poor.
I completely disagree with this because there are many families that could never have their own children without surrogacy. As long as all of the parties are aware of their obligations, there is no problem. In most states, it is already illegal to pay surrogates for their service, and without the women who put their bodies through the birthing process for someone else. Many families would not have the children they love now. Because of the laws set up now the surrogate has to pass mental exams before being allowed to become a surrogate, the woman’s dignity is considered and made a top priority.
#53
Direct sterilization of either men or women, whether permanent or temporary, is not permitted in a Catholic health care institution. Procedures that induce sterility are permitted when their direct effect is the cure or alleviation of a present and serious pathology and a simpler treatment is not available.
No one should be allowed to tell men or women when they are through with having their family. In addition, if they decide they do not want any more children, they should be allowed to do whatever they want or need to keep from having children they do not want or may not even be able to afford. Without some form of sterilization we would have a lot more children that would end up dumped on the system or women looking for other options that could end in more abortions or unwanted children. You have to look at the needs and wants of the men or women before an accidental pregnancy occurs. Not at the lives of children that would not even exist if their parents had the option.
#49) For a proportionate reason, labor may be induced after the fetus is viable.
From my understanding of this i do not agree that a labor may be induced after the fetus is viable i believe that every fetus will come out when its ready, there is a given day for everyone unless i would say if there is any complications during the pregnancy and the mother has to get induced for medical reasons for the baby and the mother. Other than that i believe let the pregnancy take its course and the fetus grow and when its time than its time and no one could put a stop to it. Give fetus a change no inducing unless medical reasons.
#53) Direct sterilization of either men or women, whether permanent or temporary, is not permitted in a Catholic health care institution. Procedures that induce sterility are permitted when their direct effect is the cure or alleviation of a present and serious pathology and a simpler treatment is not available.
My point of view is that all human being have the right to plan out their family and choose how many kids they want and how they want to raise them. If they want certain amount of kids they should not be judged or critized. I believe both parties should plan family depending on their financial whether they can or can not bring another human being to this early and support, love and care for. Everyone has the right so its best to let each individual to decide for themselves how many children they want to have and if they do not want any than there are different contraceptives that will help them and prevent couples for an unexpected pregnancy to where they rush and worry how things are going to go and how they will raise a child they were not ready for.
The Catholic Health Care System’s directives for the beginning of life contains subjects referring to prenatal and post natal treatment. There are two directives I would like to address that refer to prenatal treatment and use of contraceptives. Specifically these are directives 48 and 52.
Directive 48 states that extra uterine also called ectopic pregnancies may not be aborted. This coincides with directive 45 which prohibits abortion in any form. In the case of an ectopic pregnancy removing the fetus is usually the best option. The mother is in great danger if she continues with the pregnancy. The risks can be abdominal bleeding and damage to the reproductive organs among other things. Fetuses from ectopic pregnancies rarely survive. So I would say that this directive is completely unethical. To cause severe damage to a woman’s reproductive organs and possibly risk her life on the unlikely chance that the fetus will be viable is not ethical.
Directive 52 is based on the idea that intercourse should strictly be for reproductive means. The directive states that Catholic Health Institutions should not “promote or condone contraceptive practices.” Patients can be informed of natural family planning but natural family planning is not as effective as other forms of birth control. It would also be fine if the people that were under the care of the institution had intercourse for the soul purpose of reproduction. The reality is people will most likely continue to have intercourse without considering reproduction. If there is risk to a woman should she become pregnant it would be in her best interest to have the option of contraception. I feel that not informing a woman of her options and what choices she has regarding intercourse is not ethical. The woman may choose to abstain from intercourse or she may choose to use contraceptives. The choice however should ultimately be hers. If the institution deprives her of information to make a sound decision based on applicable information it is unethical.
From personal experience in working with children with genetic disorders and the mentally handicap I would have to agree with number 54. Considering parenthood is something an individual can never fully plan for, In a case that a child has genetic defect one should get proper genetic counseling weather married or not. I believe one has to have great devotion and patients to be a parent who is willing to take on the responsibility and not give up on there child because of a genetic disorder, as well as those who choose to adopt. Married or not both parents should utilize the services of genetic counseling to there advantage and do everything possible to deal and treat there child as any other normal individual child. If an individual has the opportunity to predict if a child has a genetic disorder it might even be able to be corrected in some cases before the child is even born. With genetic counseling, this helps prepare the parents for better care of and decision of that child.
I disagree with number 53 because I believe a person should be able to choose if they want to be sterilized or not for there own personal reasons. The individual choosing to become sterilized may have other plans or beliefs for themselves and should be entitled to that. For example if a individual knows for sure there is life threatening condition in there or there spouses family that will be passed down to there children they may choose not to take that chance in having a child with that condition. With the exception, that the individual is choosing to do so on there own free will and are mentally competent as well of a certain age of childbearing years. With the economy and the way the world is why take the chance of having to bring in more children into it if you never wanted to. In this case, children can end up in a worse situation being the system or even neglectful parents hands because they are not fully prepared for being a parent and are not capable of raising a child. For those who want children and have a condition passed down adoption could always be an option and why not help the less fortunate or put our effort into other possibilities.
As for 52, I would have to disagree. I believe younger unmarried individuals are unaware of parenthood and responsible family planning therefore should be educated and counseled before hand. This could be more of an insight to make wiser choices when dealing with premarital sex as well as choosing to begin a family. If they were educated on the possibilities of family planning, they might be at more of an advantage of what to expect certain situations that may come up. For example like choosing to have children or not or even financial planning. I believe that it should actually be a requirement before individuals get or decide to get married I think more then not it may help to increase the length of the marriage rather then not completely knowing what to expect and rushing into something you have no idea about.
Yvette Ferguson
#48 In case of extrauterine pregnancy, no intervention is morally licit which constitutes a direct abortion. I believe that if a woman has an ectopic pregnancy she has the right to do what she has to do in order to preserve her life. This may take her to measures that lead up to or may include abortion. At any rate the risk that she faces is far too great to not take appropriate action.
For the Catholic to say this is morally illicit, because ultimately it is abortion, is short-sighted and close-minded. Here you have this expectant mother,who in her mind has already went through the emotions of becoming/being a mother only to find that her pregnancy is problematic. Now she has to deal with the shame because the Catholic church has said that it does not condone such measures.
This could also become suicide if she does nothing, is that morally licit in the sight of the Catholic church, to have her die in order to save face? Why should she be subject to any extra pressure?
There are so many stipulations, rules, and regulations that one would be afraid to breathe without offending or breaking some cardinal rule. Christ came to free mankind but the Catholic church puts mankind right back under bandage.
Leonel Martinez
PHI213
July 10, 2010
#45 #50 #53
In the issues of caring for life on the subject of abortion, is ethical to me. The act of abortion is an inconceivable and immoral act according to directive forty five in ethical and religious directives. But an unplanned pregnancy is a huge burden for a woman to carry especially alone. Abortion may seem like a selfish act for a woman t do, but when a pregnancy occurs at the wrong time in woman’s life, it can have a lifelong impact to her. There are several reasons why I see abortion ethical.
When teens and college students get pregnant there more likely not to finish their education and end up in dead end jobs. And also single women that become pregnant take a big hit in their financial status that some even get to the level of poverty. When that happens they then require state assistance, that it then impacts tax payers too. Taking a baby to the doctors and supporting a baby can become very expensive. And if a baby does not get good medical care during pregnancy it could also lead to complications for the baby and for the woman during birth.
Other reasons that can make a women commit abortion is they may already have a baby or several. Or they could be pressured by their partners to have an abortion and there could also be complications while the baby is still in the womb. Some women can also have health problems that if they had one, it could possibly kill them. There are other alternatives that the church may condone besides abortion. Adoption is another alternative that may work for some women. But for some the emotional detachment can be catastrophic for them. Women may start to think if their baby is happy or do they have good foster parents. And for those reasons I see abortion as a choice and as a right for women, for them to decide to have one if needed.
In directive fifty it says that prenatal diagnosis is only permitted for health wise decision for the baby. But I believe it should be done for varies reasons. A lot of parents approve of prenatal diagnose because they would not to bring life into this world if it is just to suffer. In the second trimester tests can be done to diagnose the baby if it’s healthy or if it will be born with abnormalities. And this procedure may also be very helpful for single women, especially if they do not want to raise a child by themselves that has complications. Some babies are sometimes born with a disease that lets them only live a couple of hours and others several days while suffering, and that ordeal can sometimes be too much for some parents. Or other parents may not want to raise a child when diagnosed with Down syndrome. Because they may not want to worry about the burden of who’s going to care for the child, when they are gone or if something is to happen to them.
In directive fifty three on the subject of sterilization, a man and woman should have the right to permanent or temporally sterilization, even if it does not involve any life threatening illnesses. If a woman does not want to have children in her twenties and wants to wait till her thirties, she should have the right to use temporary contraceptive. Or if a man and a woman choose never to have offspring’s and decide to get permanent sterilization, it should be accepted by the church. They probably don’t want to have any for their own personnel reasons but they may still want to have a healthy active life. Some people might even meet there spouse down the line and they could already have children, and they may not want to have anymore.
Directive #42 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. Moreover, the
commercialization of such surrogacy denigrates the dignity of women, especially the
poor.” Religion(s) is/are entitled to an opinion and to define the mores and ways in which their parishioners should act. I can see/understand the Catholic Church’s stand here and why they believe it is an ethical approach to surrogacy. However, I disagree that this directive is the only acceptable and ethical approach. I believe it is fine for a religion to say what they believe is right for them, however I do not believe it is correct for a religion to dictate what is right for all people. I do not believe that entering into a surrogate contract is immoral. Additionally, I do not believe it to be correct for the Catholic Church to label one as a sinner or immoral if they choose to be a surrogate mother or have a child through surrogacy. There can be many difficulties with adoption and because of these surrogacy should be considered a responsible option. For example, I know a couple who have been in lawsuits or the custody of their baby because post adoption the parents (separately) changed their minds. Ultimately the state sided with the adoptive parents, however they fear, to some degree, that it is not completely over concerning custody. Because surrogacy can use the gametes of both parents (if desired) that it is a direct way around any custody challenges post birth. While the woman who carries the child may have some claim (monetary reimbursement) to the process, she cannot make claims for biological reasons. The last part of the directive (exploitation of poor women) is difficult to address, and I see why the Catholic Church uses it as an argument against surrogacy. However, I can also see how one may feel as though it is a blessing or honor to be able to provide a child to a couple who otherwise can not. It also states that surrogacy denigrates women, which I completely disagree with. Again, I feel this way because some women may feel blessed/honored to be able to bring a baby into the world (regardless if it is for some one else.)
Directive #48 states: “In case of extrauterine pregnancy, no intervention is morally licit which constitutes a direct abortion.” I completely disagree with the reasoning of this directive. I do agree at some point the fetus does gain enough of an interest to be considered, however I would never say that the fetus’s interest ever outweighs the mother’s interest. The Catholic Church here is essentially saying that starting at the point/time of conception, that the mother and fetus share equal interest. Also, that neither one’s health/safety takes precedent over the other. I feel the mother’s life or interest, is far greater than the fetus’s. I believe this because the mother already has obligations to this world that the fetus does not. For example(s), the mother may already have other child(ren) that she has the responsibility to care for, she may be married, she could be donating marrow, or she may have only car/rent payments to make. However, the mere fact that she has responsibilities and the fetus does not, to me, give her health precedent. Regarding this directive and extrauterine pregnancy(s), which is a fatal situation for both, the Church’s reasoning here is incorrect. To do nothing is to let both die, and to try a medical procedure to remove the fetus from the non-viable location and move to the uterus will kill the fetus. Of course an ethics committee at a Catholic hospital could play semantics, and say that they are allowing a procedure(s) like removing excess fluid or transplanting the embryo the to uterine wall. However, they would know that they were being deceptive in that those procedures have the same result for a fetus as an abortion does.
I believe that directive number 49 is partially ethical. With that being said, if the fetus is viable and if it’s in danger or if the mother is in danger; then inducing of the pregnancy should be fine. I personally believe that labor should never be induced, only if the mother or child is in danger for dying or at risk for health problems and etc. I think that pregnancy should never be rushed, even if the pregnancy has lasted more than the expected due date.
I strongly believe that directive number 54 is ethical. I myself have a child with extreme disabilities. Going outside of the hospital without out any kind of counseling/support/education on that child’s “genetic defect,” can cause a couple or parent a lot of stress, anxiety and it can be quite scary. If the couple was given counseling on parenting for that child with the genetic defect, then the couple has a better chance of knowing what kind of services are out there that can help them, what to prepare for in the future, how to give that child the best quality of life and etc. Counseling can give that couple more hope and it just might be what they needed to hear. Not everyone knows that there’s services or even know what kind of services that are offer for children with genetic defects. It takes a lot of responsibility and patients to raise a child with genetic disorders. Not everyone is up for the challenge. The counseling can help prepare that couple or parent (single parent) for what’s to come. It’s not at all easy and if need be, then maybe talk of adoption or some kind of a plan could be discussed during the counseling session. It would be unfair to the child considering the limitations, to go to a couple or parent who wasn’t up for the challenge.
Directive 45.
In 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”. I for one do not agree with this. Yes, I believe abortion is something that no woman should go through, although there are some things that happen that lead in following through with an 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. I understand that in the case of incest and rape that difficult decisions need to be made. Under these circumstances, I am not sure which is crueler…to give that child up for adoption, or to end the life of that child before it even has the opportunity to begin. I do agree that abortion should not be used as a means of birth control; other means of birth control should be encouraged to women. I believe that no one has the right to dictate to a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body.
Directive 52 & 53.
After reading directive 52 and 53 I found them both to be unethical. I think that if a couple chooses to practice contraception through sterilization or other methods that are available in our society today; it is of the couple’s decision to choose what’s in their best interest. It is the right of the man or woman to decide if they want to become sterile. I don’t believe the couple should be told when to start a family.
Yvette Ferguson
#49 For proportionate reason, labor may be induced after the fetus is viable. This is a life threatening situation for the fetus and the mother.
I agree with this but, this does make one wonder what if the fetus could not live on its own, what then? Would the woman be obligated to still carry the fetus further into term and risk her life? More often than not there are complications in pregnancy and women are put under the microscope/judged for a life threatening decision.
Should the Catholic church have that authority or that much power to say whose life is more important? Every situation is unique and what may work for one, may not work for the other. This is a situation that should be handled without prejudice. There is no wrong in this situation the mother is already in a stressful situation. The fetus is in danger action needs to be taken immediately to preserve the mother's life.
Directive #48 states, “In case of extrauterine pregnancy, no intervention is morally licit which constitutes a direct abortion.” I disagree with this for the main reason that it can be extremely dangerous to the mother’s health to maintain and sustain an extrauterine pregnancy. In a case where the mother will not survive due to rupturing of a Fallopian tube and bleeding out, I think it is unethical not to abort such a pregnancy because the health of the mother outweighs the risks needed to be taken to bring an extrauterine pregnancy to term. With rare exceptions, ectopic pregnancies are not viable. Without intervention, the mother can bleed out, become sterile, and/or ultimately die.
Directive #53 states, “Direct sterilization of either men or women, whether permanent or temporary, is not permitted in a Catholic health care institution. Procedures that induce sterility are permitted when their direct effect is the cure or alleviation of a present and serious pathology and a simpler treatment is not available.” I find this directive unethical for a few reasons. If someone is a carrier and/or at risk of passing on a potentially harmful gene (i.e. breast cancer gene) to a child, I think it should be his or choice to use birth control and/or get directly sterilized to prevent this from happening. Also, I find this true if a couple has the number of children they want and do not wish to add any more children to their family. After achieving the desired size their own family, they should have the right to a normal sex life without having to worry about the burden of perhaps conceiving another child. People in this country have the right to plan their family size. I find it unethical for the Catholic Church to impose religious, sometimes judgmental views governing how large someone’s household should be.
I feel that directives 38-42 are unethical, because all place such constraints on the couples’ pursuit of recent technologies, that without such constraints such procedures would allow couples whom cannot conceive on their own. Directives 38 & 41 are unethical because they deny couples the opportunities for in-vitro fertilization even when the gametes come from each member of the married couple simply because this method "substitutes for the marital act itself." Directive 39 is unethical because again it prohibits the creation and placement of embryos created by means other than sexual intercourse and creation of more embryos than will be used and may be destroyed; however, the question here is when those in question perceive that life has occurred, conception versus viability. My issue with directive 40 is that it does not allow a couple to conceive in the event that one is infertile and a donor gamete is used in the process. I acknowledge that because conception must be achieved through sexual intercourse that this may lead to adultery because the couple is unable to use other methods of conception; however, in directive 43, adoption is listed as an option to a couple that is unable to conceive. Directive 40 cites dignity of the parents and child as a reason for not allowing donated gametes; however, in adoption where neither of the parents are biologically related to the child, would the child's dignity still not be at question? Directive 42 cites that the "uniqueness of the mother-child relationship," may be adversely effected by use of a surrogate; however, in directive 43 the directive points out adoption as an alternative for couples whom are unable to conceive; are we lead to believe that the dignity of a child delivered by a surrogate mother would suffer more adversely than an adopted child? It seems to me that directives 38-42 are misleading in that they portray that couples who cannot conceive a child naturally through means of sexual intercourse have options regarding conception, when the reality is that no options exist because all directives stipulate that conception must occur as a result of the "marital act," (sexual intercourse). Moreover, infertility is grounds for divorce in many religions to include Judaism and Islam, so, would divorce be a superior option over assisted conception methods?
"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. Moreover, the commercialization of such surrogacy denigrates the dignity of women, especially the poor." I think that this directive is unethical and that there should be empathy and understanding shown to childless couples. According to the beliefs of the Catholic Church, individuals were brought into this world to replenish and multiply. But how will an infertile couple be able to do that, unless it is by in-vitro or surrogacy. The church is also concerned with the commercialism of surrogacy and I fully support that a child should not be purchased as an accessory would. But to pay for the surrogates time, medical and living expenses during the pregnancy to ensure that a child is born healthy would seem like logical expenses to occur during any pregnancy. In the case of surrogate/adoptive parent relationships this cost would ensure that the pregnancy goes smoothly, the child remains healthy and that the birth mother remains healthy enough to produce her own children if she should desire in the future.
In the case that babies could be outsourced to other countries and poorer women targeted, I do not think that the situation would be ethical. To prey upon the poor in underdeveloped countries and ask them to carry a child of parents in a wealthy family, would definitely dehumanize the surrogate mother and exploit her reproductive organs.
"A Catholic health care institution that provides treatment for infertility should offer not only technical assistance to infertile couples but also should help couples pursue other solutions (e.g., counseling, adoption)." This seems to be contradictory. As the Catholic Church will approve the use of adoption, they will not approve the test tube conception of a couples own child. It would seem that a child that was wanted by a loving couple who could not physically procreate would be considered the same as a child that was conceived by non-intimate means.
Andrea Gracia
40. “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.28”
I think directive 40 is unethical and just wrong. There are so many couples that cannot naturally conceive children. I don’t think it should be wrong for them to have a donor make their dream of having children a reality. Every man and woman should have the right to have children, if they want to have children. Adoption is always an option but every woman has the right to have the amazing feeling of pregnancy, the incredible feeling of having your baby grown inside of you, and know that you gave that baby life. If both the husband and wife agree with having a donor to help conceive a baby for them then no one else should have a saying in that decision.
53. “Direct sterilization of either men or women, whether permanent or temporary, is not permitted in a Catholic health care institution. Procedures that induce sterility are permitted when their direct effect is the cure or alleviation of a present and serious pathology and a simpler treatment is not available.34
I don’t agree with directive 53, I think it is unethical. Men or women should have the right to become sterile if they chose to. It is a way better alternative to abortion. If a man or woman knows that they do not want children or any more children then it is better to have a sure way that they won’t end up with a surprise and unplanned pregnancy. There are many reasons why someone may chose to become sterile, sometimes financially they can’t have any more kids, or they already have kids and just don’t want anymore. I understand many people think God chooses and is the one who sends us our babies, but we can’t leave everything up to God. Woman can’t be just popping babies out because “God sent them”. It is the woman or mans decision of what type of contraception to use, and sterilization is one of the most effective ones, so I think it’s the best.
49. “For a proportionate reason, labor may be induced after the fetus is viable”
I do agree with directive 49 and think it is ethical. There are many reasons why pregnant women may be induced, sometimes it is for the safety or the mom or the baby, or for self fish people like me :p just because I couldn’t wait for labor any longer haha. But I only chose to because my baby was big and healthy enough, and at the end it ended up kicking my butt because she would not come out and I had to have a c-section. But inductions are very important in some cases to save the baby or moms life. There are times where the baby is under too much stress and starts having problems or when the mom is past her due date and she needs a way to start contractions to go in to labor.
Post a Comment