J
Just_Lurking
Guest
The size of the embryos would inevitably kill the 9 year old mother long before they become viable. Abortion by C-section is still a direct abortion if the fetus is not viable.
- Status
K
kage_ar
Guest
This is speculation. Many women who smaller than the average 9 year old successfully carry twins. I have dwarfism, and I know women who are very very tiny who are mothers. I myself carried to full term a baby who was born almost half as tall as I me. God is amazing how he protects babies and moms who are outside the “normal” size range.
I was speaking of delivery, not abortion.
J
Just_Lurking
Guest
It was the “speculation” of her doctors, who suffered excommunication as the result of the duty to give the best possible care for their patient. It’s not like she went into some Planned Parenthood clinic for a quickie abortion. Everyone concerned would have bent over backwards to save both the 9 year old mother and her unborn children had that been at all possible.
K
kage_ar
Guest
The doctors chose excommunication.
Many news reports say this mom doctor shopped to find doctors willing to abort.
This is in a developed country with modern medical care. These babies were never given a chance.
I understand how upsetting this case is. Remember, the Church will never value one person over the other. I am as valuable as a queen, you are as valuable as a Pope, and those babies are as valuable as your dearest friend.
S
Shin
Guest
RECIFE, BRAZIL, March 5, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) Excerpts
The law of God is above all human law," he said. “Therefore, when a human law, meaning a law promulgated by human legislators, is contrary to the law of God, this human law has no value.”
Abortion, he said, is “homicide against innocent life. We are talking about a silent holocaust, that kills a one million innocents in Brazil and fifty million in the world every year, a holocaust worse than the six million Jews, which we lament every year.”
The Archdiocese of Olinda and Recife was preparing to file a motion to prevent the abortion when news arrived that it had already been carried out.
The Archbishop’s decision to announce the excommunication, which is automatic under the Church’s law for those who participate in an abortion, was met with denunciations publicized by Brazil’s media, which is dominated by liberal ideologues. Among those quoted was Brazil’s pro-abortion health minister, Jose Gomes Temporao, who repeated the claim that the girl was at risk from the pregnancy.
However, an attorney for the Archdiocese, who was preparing to file a motion to stop the abortion when word came that it had already been done, told the media that “various specialists from Imip, which is a major hospital, say that she didn’t have a risk of dying. They could have waited longer.”
In an interview with ElPais.com yesterday, Sobrinho held firm.
"I’m not sorry. What I did was to declare the excommunication. It is my obligation to alert the people, so that they may fear the laws of God," he told the online publication.
“It’s a sad case, but the real problem is that the twins conceived were two innocent persons, who had the right to live and could not be eliminated,” said Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re in an interview with the Italian newspaper La Stampa.
Responding to attacks on the Archbishop of Olinda and Recife, who announced the excommunications, Battista Re said, “Life must always be protected, the attack on the Brazilian Church is unjustified.”
See Also: Vatican Cardinal and Bishops’ Conference Supports Excommunication
The law of God is above all human law," he said. “Therefore, when a human law, meaning a law promulgated by human legislators, is contrary to the law of God, this human law has no value.”
Abortion, he said, is “homicide against innocent life. We are talking about a silent holocaust, that kills a one million innocents in Brazil and fifty million in the world every year, a holocaust worse than the six million Jews, which we lament every year.”
The Archdiocese of Olinda and Recife was preparing to file a motion to prevent the abortion when news arrived that it had already been carried out.
The Archbishop’s decision to announce the excommunication, which is automatic under the Church’s law for those who participate in an abortion, was met with denunciations publicized by Brazil’s media, which is dominated by liberal ideologues. Among those quoted was Brazil’s pro-abortion health minister, Jose Gomes Temporao, who repeated the claim that the girl was at risk from the pregnancy.
However, an attorney for the Archdiocese, who was preparing to file a motion to stop the abortion when word came that it had already been done, told the media that “various specialists from Imip, which is a major hospital, say that she didn’t have a risk of dying. They could have waited longer.”
In an interview with ElPais.com yesterday, Sobrinho held firm.
"I’m not sorry. What I did was to declare the excommunication. It is my obligation to alert the people, so that they may fear the laws of God," he told the online publication.
“It’s a sad case, but the real problem is that the twins conceived were two innocent persons, who had the right to live and could not be eliminated,” said Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re in an interview with the Italian newspaper La Stampa.
Responding to attacks on the Archbishop of Olinda and Recife, who announced the excommunications, Battista Re said, “Life must always be protected, the attack on the Brazilian Church is unjustified.”
See Also: Vatican Cardinal and Bishops’ Conference Supports Excommunication
A
Amber2
Guest
If the child could not survive a pregnancy I do not understand how the right thing would be to let her die WITH the twins.
I also don’t understand how this differs from the fact that I would have died had I not had my child “aborted” due to ectopic pregnancy.
… Or am I ex-communicated now too???
I also don’t understand how this differs from the fact that I would have died had I not had my child “aborted” due to ectopic pregnancy.
… Or am I ex-communicated now too???
K
kage_ar
Guest
I also lost a child due to an ectopic pregnancy.If the child could not survive a pregnancy I do not understand how the right thing would be to let her die WITH the twins.
I also don’t understand how this differs from the fact that I would have died had I not had my child “aborted” due to ectopic pregnancy.
… Or am I ex-communicated now too???
When the ectopic pregnancy is discovered, there are two choices for surgery.
In the moral choice, the tube or a part of the tube is removed. The child is within that part of the tube, and the child does die, but, this is NOT a direct abortion.
In the immoral choice, drugs are used to “dissolve” the baby or the baby is “milked” from the tube. This IS a direct abortion, and would need to be absolved by your Priest.
A
Amber2
Guest
Why should the doctor remove my tube? Is that not mutilation? The thing that made me ill was the pregnancy and not my tube. Why not leave the tube and give me a fair chance to become a mother in the future???
Actually some of the tube had to be removed with the baby, but it would certainly not have helped me nor my child had more of the tube been removed than nescessary. I simply don’t understand that kind of reasoning:shrug:
By the way I would have felt a stronger desire to go to confession had I not done everything in my power to keep BOTH me and my child healthy!
Actually some of the tube had to be removed with the baby, but it would certainly not have helped me nor my child had more of the tube been removed than nescessary. I simply don’t understand that kind of reasoning:shrug:
By the way I would have felt a stronger desire to go to confession had I not done everything in my power to keep BOTH me and my child healthy!
K
kage_ar
Guest
We are called to always defend innocent life. To remove a healthy tube for no reason would be mutilitation, to remove a tube that has/will burst is a medically necessary procedure.
Father Vincent Serpa provided a good answer here:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=55211
"This is what the New Catholic Encyclopedia has to say:
“What is particularly noted in all cases of the discovery of a tubal pregnancy is that one is never permitted to remove or destroy the human fetus directly. The only legitimate surgical approach to any tubal pregnancy is based on the necessity of excising all or part of a seriously damaged fallopian tube in those circumstances in which the danger to the mother is already imminent and the chance for fetal survival is negligible.” (Vol. 5, pg. 88)"
And Jim Blackburn provides a good answer here:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=17307
“However, in the case you describe, the mother’s malfunctioning organ (fallopian tube, or a portion of it), may be morally removed to eliminate the risk to the mother. The intent here is to remove an organ that is about to rupture (no different than if a tumor was there).”
Both apologists advise to contact the National Catholic Bioethics Center: ncbcenter.org/home.html
B
Belgarion
Guest
If the operation itself was a direct effort to end the child’s life, then its considered a mortal sin if you agreed to do it, knowing the consequences.
However, if it couldn’t be avoided, and the operation was merely an effort to help save you, but the unfortunate (though indirect) effect of which was the death of your unborn child, then its not a mortal sin. Or even a venial sin, if I recall correctly.
Please keep in mind that the whole “condemn one to save my future” argument is immoral. No innocent life can be forsaken like that. Especially if its only to give yourself a better chance of conceiving another child. I imagine that women have two tubes and two ovaries for a reason, and partial removal of one of them doesn’t seem to render you unable to conceive more. Also, since BOTH operations would require the partial removal anyways, you are again looking at the intent of the matter.
You may not understand it, but I think the 2000 year old Church that was founded by Christ Himself understands the morality of the situation a little better than you do.
Once again, I’ll repeat.
To deliberately end an unborn child’s life is a mortal sin, and it is worthy of excommunication.
M
maryjk
Guest
Just so no one thinks that having one tube renders you unable to conceive, it doesn’t.
I have one tube and one ovary. And they are on different sides.
Yes, I have a left ovary and a right tube. And I have a son.:extrahappy:
P
Phemie
Guest
The egg had a GPS?Just so no one thinks that having one tube renders you unable to conceive, it doesn’t.
I have one tube and one ovary. And they are on different sides.
- Status