Colorado Abortionist works at Catholic Hospital

[Soutane]

Colorado Abortionist works at Catholic Hospital

By James Tillman

DURANGO, Colorado, June 2, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Dr. Richard Grossman earns his living delivering babies at the Catholic hospital Mercy Regional Medical Center (MRMC). But one day a week, he is paid to kill them at the Durango Planned Parenthood.

The abortionist’s work at a Catholic hospital has elicited outrage from local pro-lifers since at least 2007.

Michaela Dasteel, past director of the local pro-life organization LifeGuard, has written that a “Church that tolerates abortionists on staff in its hospitals is not a prophetic Church. It is a Church checkmated by the culture of death.”

LifeGuard says they have contacted the board of MRMC, which reportedly maintained that as long as Dr. Grossman abides by hospital rules, he has the right to work there. LifeSiteNews.com’s repeated attempts to reach MRMC for comment have not been answered as of press time.

Dasteel has pointed out that, in the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, directive 45 states that “Catholic health care institutions are not to provide abortion services, even based upon the principle of material cooperation.” Material cooperation is a term used in moral theology to indicate when one helps a person do a wrong act, although the help is not itself wrong.

The directive goes on to say that, “in this context, Catholic health care institutions need to be concerned about the danger of scandal in any association with abortion providers.”
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10060408.html

 

[kimmielittle]

Another Sister of Mercy

Originally founded in 1882 by the Sisters of Mercy, Mercy Regional Medical Center, a not-for-profit hospital, is part of the Catholic Health Initiatives health care system headquartered in Denver, Colorado.

mercydurango.org/

 

[Rence]

Can someone please explain to me why this case stands out as different? Doctors have privelidges in many hospitals at the same time. It is NOT unusual at all for a doctor to deliver babies in a Catholic hospital, but perform abortions in the non-Catholic hospital a few miles away. It is also not unusual at all to have a doctor perform urological procedures in a Catholic and non-Catholic hospital, but do the sterilizations at the non-Catholic hospital. What makes this particular doctor/hospital/situation different? Is there more to the story?

 

[kimmielittle]

It may not stand out as different. BUT it does signal a need to evaluate just what goes on in “Catholic Hospitals”.

AND according to recent news articles, I’d say it’s long overdo.

 

[Rence]

It may not stand out as different. BUT it does signal a need to evaluate just what goes on in “Catholic Hospitals”.

AND according to recent news articles, I’d say it’s long overdo.

Well, I would assume that if Catholic schools can make teachers sign “morality contracts” that Catholic hospitals could do the same. But then it would limit them as a health care facility in many ways, and they know this. That would be like only giving Catholic practitioners priviledges. Which they can do, if they want to. I have no problem with that, if that’s what they want to do. They should do that if that’s what they want to do.

Keep in mind Kimmie, the rules of the Church regarding abortion (especially when the woman’s life in danger) is not shared by many other religions. Most find abortion on demand abominable, but make exceptions for rape, incest and threat to the woman’s life. For example, it is not a teaching of the Jewish faith to let a woman pregnant woman die if her pregnancy is causing physiological demands on her body that are detrimental to her health. So if a hospital enforces this “morality clause” they would lose their Jewish healthcare providers, their protestant providers, etc. . They’d only hire practicing catholic providers.

Like I said, I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with that. I follow my doctors anyway, and most people do. But I can see why the Catholic hospitals haven’t done this. They would lose a lot and wouldn’t be able to provide the same care because they would lose a lot of their doctors.

 

[Elizabeth502]

But I can see why the Catholic hospitals haven’t done this. They would lose a lot and wouldn’t be able to provide the same care because they would lose a lot of their doctors.

I would think they would not be able to stay in the black if they did so. They would have to shut down if they insisted on specifically Catholic moral compliance. (Yes, you’re right, Rence; Jewish doctors do not hold the same views as Catholics when it comes to danger to the mother’s health, let alone death by default due to preference for the fetus.)

I’m not saying that they should or should not shut down, but only agreeing with what the financial and practical realities are. Another way around it would be specifically not to take emergencies (as intakes), but as you know better than I, any routine case – not to mention routine pregnancies – can become surprising emergencies. And once they’re in that stage, at your hospital, providers do have both a legal and an ethical responsibility to consider.

 

[kimmielittle]

Well, I would assume that if Catholic schools can make teachers sign “morality contracts” that Catholic hospitals could do the same. But then it would limit them as a health care facility in many ways, and they know this. That would be like only giving Catholic practitioners priviledges. Which they can do, if they want to. I have no problem with that, if that’s what they want to do. They should do that if that’s what they want to do.

Keep in mind Kimmie, the rules of the Church regarding abortion (especially when the woman’s life in danger) is not shared by many other religions. Most find abortion on demand abominable, but make exceptions for rape, incest and threat to the woman’s life. For example, it is not a teaching of the Jewish faith to let a woman pregnant woman die if her pregnancy is causing physiological demands on her body that are detrimental to her health. So if a hospital enforces this “morality clause” they would lose their Jewish healthcare providers, their protestant providers, etc. . They’d only hire practicing catholic providers.

Like I said, I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with that. I follow my doctors anyway, and most people do. But I can see why the Catholic hospitals haven’t done this. They would lose a lot and wouldn’t be able to provide the same care because they would lose a lot of their doctors.

Maybe, we could get them to call themselves “Holic Hospitals”

I think, that is where many of us have a problem…they seem to be using Catholic…to suggests they have Catholic Standards. In fact, the average patient would have no idea of just what standards are adhered to.

When we go to Catholic Church…we expect not to be preached to by some snake handler preacher.

 

[catharina]

Colorado Abortionist works at Catholic Hospital

By James Tillman

DURANGO, Colorado, June 2, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Dr. Richard Grossman earns his living delivering babies at the Catholic hospital Mercy Regional Medical Center (MRMC). But one day a week, he is paid to kill them at the Durango Planned Parenthood.

The abortionist’s work at a Catholic hospital has elicited outrage from local pro-lifers since at least 2007.

Michaela Dasteel, past director of the local pro-life organization LifeGuard, has written that a “Church that tolerates abortionists on staff in its hospitals is not a prophetic Church. It is a Church checkmated by the culture of death.”

LifeGuard says they have contacted the board of MRMC, which reportedly maintained that as long as Dr. Grossman abides by hospital rules, he has the right to work there. LifeSiteNews.com’s repeated attempts to reach MRMC for comment have not been answered as of press time.

Dasteel has pointed out that, in the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, directive 45 states that “Catholic health care institutions are not to provide abortion services, even based upon the principle of material cooperation.” Material cooperation is a term used in moral theology to indicate when one helps a person do a wrong act, although the help is not itself wrong.

The directive goes on to say that, “in this context, Catholic health care institutions need to be concerned about the danger of scandal in any association with abortion providers.”
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10060408.html

Soutane, as usual, many thanks to you for bringing this news to CA.

 

[catharina]

Maybe, we could get them to call themselves “Holic Hospitals”

I think, that is where many of us have a problem…they seem to be using Catholic…to suggests they have Catholic Standards. In fact, the average patient would have no idea of just what standards are adhered to.

When we go to Catholic Church…we expect not to be preached to by some snake handler preacher.

The Sisters of Mercy attempted this “blur” in Chicago in the most extreme way. At the time (the now-deceased) Cardinal Bernardin was bishop. The RSMs planned to merge with a secular hospital to provide “more” services. The Cardinal said ‘if you do that, you may no longer use the title of CATHOLIC hospital.’ It was an eleventh-hour stand-off that had been in the news for months. Over the final weekend before the “Monday merger,” the Sisters of Mercy blinked. The merger did not happen - all because of one bishop who held his ground re Church Teaching.

 

[kimmielittle]

The Sisters of Mercy attempted this “blur” in Chicago in the most extreme way. At the time (the now-deceased) Cardinal Bernardin was bishop. The RSMs planned to merge with a secular hospital to provide “more” services. The Cardinal said ‘if you do that, you may no longer use the title of CATHOLIC hospital.’ It was an eleventh-hour stand-off that had been in the news for months. Over the final weekend before the “Monday merger,” the Sisters of Mercy blinked. The merger did not happen - all because of one bishop who held his ground re Church Teaching.

Whoa!!! Good for the Bishop

This doctor is creating a scandal for the hospital…because he is a prominent figure who outspokenly / publicly embraces population control.

 

[Rence]

I would think they would not be able to stay in the black if they did so. They would have to shut down if they insisted on specifically Catholic moral compliance. (Yes, you’re right, Rence; Jewish doctors do not hold the same views as Catholics when it comes to danger to the mother’s health, let alone death by default due to preference for the fetus.)

Yes, they’d have a harder time staying afloat if they limited themselves like that.

I’m not saying that they should or should not shut down, but only agreeing with what the financial and practical realities are. Another way around it would be specifically not to take emergencies (as intakes), but as you know better than I, any routine case – not to mention routine pregnancies – can become surprising emergencies. And once they’re in that stage, at your hospital, providers do have both a legal and an ethical responsibility to consider.

Again, you’re right. A hospital can change it’s emergency-admitting status, and many do for various reasons. I worked at a Catholic hospital that changed from being a level one to a leve 2 because they didn’t have all the services available for emergencies. So they can change their status, that’s true and viable. It might even be a practical solution. But they’d still lose a lot of their providers if they implemented a “morality contract”.

But yes, things that may seem routine might turn into emergencies, again for various reasons. Then they’d be in the same situation as St. Joseph’s in Arizona, whereever their decision-making process takes them.

 

[Rence]

Whoa!!! Good for the Bishop

This doctor is creating a scandal for the hospital…because he is a prominent figure who outspokenly / publicly embraces population control.

Hospitals are trying all kinds of ways to meet the bottom line and stay in the black. One of the ways they can do this, A LOT of hospitals in Chicago (and other places too), is merging and forming networks of hospitals and satellites. There are a few in Chicago. One proposed merger in Chicago would have added a secular hospital to a network of Catholic hospitals. Cardinal Bernadin correctly point out that if they merged with the secular hospital, they couldn’t call themselves a Catholic network anymore because when/if they merged, they couldn’t dictate to the secular hospital what services they could and could not do based on religion. The Catholic network wisely, and prudently, declined to involve the secular hospital in the network.

This was a sensible conclusion to reach. It didn’t matter to the secular hospital beause they didn’t have the same criteria as the Catholic hospital network, which is driven by the rules of the Catholic Church. So it would have indeed blurred the lines in a few ways. First of all, a secular hospital performing abortions and sterilizations would be included it what can’t be called a Catholic hospital network anymore. Secondly, patients from the secular hospital would have expected the same services at the Catholic hospital because they were in the same network. It was a bad thing all the way around that would have caused more trouble than it’s worth, especially for the patients, which would affect the hospitals’ bottom line.

It was a business deal like any other. It’s uncomfortable to think of Catholic hospitals as businesses, but they are. They have to meet the bottom line as well. And if they don’t, they get closed down, bought out, etc. And they, like everyone else, try to find ways to raise money coming in, and limit money going out. I hope that makes sense.

 

[catharina]

Hospitals are trying all kinds of ways to meet the bottom line and stay in the black. One of the ways they can do this, A LOT of hospitals in Chicago (and other places too), is merging and forming networks of hospitals and satellites. There are a few in Chicago. One proposed merger in Chicago would have added a secular hospital to a network of Catholic hospitals. Cardinal Bernadin correctly point out that if they merged with the secular hospital, they couldn’t call themselves a Catholic network anymore because when/if they merged, they couldn’t dictate to the secular hospital what services they could and could not do based on religion. The Catholic network wisely, and prudently, declined to involve the secular hospital in the network.

This was a sensible conclusion to reach. It didn’t matter to the secular hospital beause they didn’t have the same criteria as the Catholic hospital network, which is driven by the rules of the Catholic Church. So it would have indeed blurred the lines in a few ways. First of all, a secular hospital performing abortions and sterilizations would be included it what can’t be called a Catholic hospital network anymore. Secondly, patients from the secular hospital would have expected the same services at the Catholic hospital because they were in the same network. It was a bad thing all the way around that would have caused more trouble than it’s worth, especially for the patients, which would affect the hospitals’ bottom line.

It was a business deal like any other. It’s uncomfortable to think of Catholic hospitals as businesses, but they are. They have to meet the bottom line as well. And if they don’t, they get closed down, bought out, etc. And they, like everyone else, try to find ways to raise money coming in, and limit money going out. I hope that makes sense.

Yet the Sisters of Mercy knew all of this (as did the entire City of Chicago), well in advance of the propsed merger. There was endless coverage of the story. The sisters caved in to Cardinals’ insistence only at the eleventh hour.

Another enormous scandal averted.

 

[Soutane]

Soutane, as usual, many thanks to you for bringing this news to CA.

You are very welcome.I would not feel comfortable with Dr Mengele delivering my wifes baby Knowing that the next day he’ll turn another woman’s child into .bloody hamburger.Being Jewish does not excuse murder and Jews of ALL people should
understand that it IS murder
There is no difference between gassing a helpless Jewish child and murdering a preborn child.Dr’s who do this are just as culpable as the faceless Nazi who dropped Zyklon B(AN INSECTICID E ),into a room filled with screaming Jewish women and babies.I wouldn’t let the monsters hands touch my wife or my child.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Being Jewish does not excuse murder and Jews of ALL people should understand that it IS murder

Again, the Jewish moral code works differently than the Catholic moral code: different assumptions, definitions, contexts, and without reference to an institutional seat of authority. You’re free not to like their moral constructs, just not free to misrepresent what it is and what it is not. Without going into the erudite texts and language, I’ll sum it up by saying that even the most traditional and conservative schools of Jewish thought uphold born life over unborn life if the born life is threatened with extinction.

 

[Soutane]

Again, the Jewish moral code works differently than the Catholic moral code: different assumptions, definitions, contexts, and without reference to an institutional seat of authority. You’re free not to like their moral constructs, just not free to misrepresent what it is and what it is not. Without going into the erudite texts and language, I’ll sum it up by saying that even the most traditional and conservative schools of Jewish thought uphold born life over unborn life if the born life is threatened with extinction.

“Church that tolerates abortionists on staff in its hospitals is not a prophetic Church. It is a Church checkmated by the culture of death.”
Then let him work in a Jewish hospital,or a non-denominational one.There cannot be a plethora of truths only One.I,m sure the man who murdered the jews did it clinically and without malice in his heart-they just weren’t human to him.And why bring in an either/or scenario into abortion.A woman,s life is very rarely at risk during pregnancy-her convenience usually is.I misrepresent nothing…,and I resent your implication that * am doing so-perhaps you have a distaste for the imagry I employed but ultimately murder is murder,not for some but for all.*

 

[ALLGIRLS]

Ok, so Jews are ok w/ abortion if it’s to save the life of the mother. Fine, that’s their belief. Yet one more reason (besides the whole Jesus thing) that I’ll never be Jewish.

So, how many planned parenthood abortions are to save the life of the mother? I’m willing to bet NONE. (A woman who’s going to die if she remains pregnant would most likely have an abortion at a hospital, not an abortion mill).

So this doctor being Jewish does not excuse his “secondary” employment. This is scandalous. He’s working at an ABORTION CLINIC! That is totally not the same as having privileges at a nonCatholic hospital where procedures contrary to Church teaching may be performed. The sole purpose of that clinic is abortions, the sole purpose of that “doctor” working there is to perform them. He needs to be fired (from the Catholic Hospital). He can get a job at a nonCatholic hospital where this won’t be a scandal if he reallly needs that secondary income (from the abortion clinic). Of course, the best thing would be that he repent and stop killing babies altogether.

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[Rence]

The best thing to do is have Catholic hospitals only hire Catholic doctors and staff. That’s what they should do — instead of trying to make other religions and cultures conform to teachings that are solely Catholic teachings

 

[Elizabeth502]

I resent your implication that I am doing so-perhaps you have a distaste for the imagry I employed but ultimately murder is murder,not for some but for all.

I’m sorry that you resent that I have restated that Jews have a different moral framework than Catholics. That has nothing to do with whether or not a Jewish doctor should or should not be performing elective, non-emergency abortions at a Catholic hospital or at a Planned Parenthood facility. I certainly did not mean to conflate these two issues, but indeed you have conflated them (again). No, in Hebrew “kill” is a different verb than “murder.” To you, all killing of unborn life is murder. Not to Jews. Depends on the extenuating circumtances. It is not casually regarded, but the same assumptions and definitions that Catholics have are not true for Jews.

 

[ALLGIRLS]

I’m sorry that you resent that I have restated that Jews have a different moral framework than Catholics. That has nothing to do with whether or not a Jewish doctor should or should not be performing elective, non-emergency abortions at a Catholic hospital or at a Planned Parenthood facility. I certainly did not mean to conflate these two issues, but indeed you have conflated them (again). No, in Hebrew “kill” is a different verb than “murder.” To you, all killing of unborn life is murder. Not to Jews. Depends on the extenuating circumtances. It is not casually regarded, but the same assumptions and definitions that Catholics have are not true for Jews.

So, once again, why does this make it ok for him to be performing ELECTIVE, NONEMERGENCY abortions at a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic, and at the same time taking money from a Catholic hospital? Is this the justification that he’s using “I’m Jewish and we have a different moral framework?” I don’t care if he’s an Atheist who believes children until the age of 5 are parasites who can be killed at their parents’ wills (like Peter Singer), he should be fired.

In Christ,

Ellen