Is it immoral to abort a baby with no brain?

  • Thread starter Thread starter IzzyD
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

IzzyD

Guest
A friend of mine decided to terminate her baby after she was told that it had no brain. It would not have been able to survive outside of the womb and due to other complications was putting the mother in danger. Another friend aborted her baby because it had no heart. I am definitely not supporting abortion here but I wondered if it is necessarily immoral in situations where the baby will definitely die and may cause harm to the mother.
A seven year old boy’s twin brother had been living inside him all his life and was slowly killing him. When I asked about this article ( rense.com/general38/boy.htm ) I was told that it was not immoral to kill the baby growing inside the boy because it would probably have died and eventually killed him too. But surely this must apply also to a pregnant woman whose baby cannot survive but at the same time is endangering her life?
Just to reiterate I do NOT support abortion! But I am interested in what the Catholic Church teaches about this.
 
Contact the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia for extensive information on this question and other medial ethical questions (they are who CA staff refer to…)

The number is at the bottom of their website.
 
IzzyD said:
A friend of mine decided to terminate her baby after she was told that it had no brain. It would not have been able to survive outside of the womb and due to other complications was putting the mother in danger. Another friend aborted her baby because it had no heart. I am definitely not supporting abortion here but I wondered if it is necessarily immoral in situations where the baby will definitely die and may cause harm to the mother.
A seven year old boy’s twin brother had been living inside him all his life and was slowly killing him. When I asked about this article ( rense.com/general38/boy.htm ) I was told that it was not immoral to kill the baby growing inside the boy because it would probably have died and eventually killed him too. But surely this must apply also to a pregnant woman whose baby cannot survive but at the same time is endangering her life?
Just to reiterate I do NOT support abortion! But I am interested in what the Catholic Church teaches about this.
Click to expand...
As I noted in that thread, there is a difference between directly killing another human and performing a medical procedure necessary for the life of the mother which will also have the indirect result of the death of another human. There are procedures which are not abortion which will allow the mother to live and after which the child will end up dying but are still moral even though an abortion in such a case would still be immoral.
 
thewanderer said:
As I noted in that thread, there is a difference between directly killing another human and performing a medical procedure necessary for the life of the mother which will also have the indirect result of the death of another human. There are procedures which are not abortion which will allow the mother to live and after which the child will end up dying but are still moral even though an abortion in such a case would still be immoral.
Click to expand...
Oh very well put! That was similar to my thoughts but I had No idea how to put them into words. 👍
 
There was a case recently where a baby born with only a brain stem and no brain survived until he was 3, albeit with no way of expressing emotions, forming a personality or any other emotional capacities.
 
It would still be killing a living human being, so it seems to me that yes it would be immoral.
 
ConstantineTG said:
I don’t know. No heart, no brain, how can it even be viable even in the future weeks or months?
Click to expand...
Sometimes the tests that are done to look for this are not absolute, or the medical terminology is simplified for patients (because we’re all too dumb to know any better, of course. :rolleyes:) “No brain” may mean not having a specific part of the brain, or only so much matter, or only so much matter that is detectable.

Several years ago, a local newscaster here gave birth to a baby boy that she was told would not survive longer than a few minutes due to “not having a brain.” She and her husband were told to abort the baby and they refused. He is still alive today and his brain is growing, and his quality of life is much better than anyone could have hoped for. This will not be the case for every child diagnosed with this or a similar condition, but doctors do not know everything. The parents were prepared to spend only a few minutes with their baby boy if that was all he was destined for on this earth, but they were going to let God determine that for them.
 
Kouyate42 said:
There was a case recently where a baby born with only a brain stem and no brain survived until he was 3, albeit with no way of expressing emotions, forming a personality or any other emotional capacities.
Click to expand...
Yes, I have heard of that. But if a baby had no brain stems and no brain at all then I think we can safely say it would not live.
 
IzzyD said:
A friend of mine decided to terminate her baby after she was told that it had no brain. It would not have been able to survive outside of the womb and due to other complications was putting the mother in danger. Another friend aborted her baby because it had no heart. I am definitely not supporting abortion here but I wondered if it is necessarily immoral in situations where the baby will definitely die and may cause harm to the mother.
A seven year old boy’s twin brother had been living inside him all his life and was slowly killing him. When I asked about this article ( rense.com/general38/boy.htm ) I was told that it was not immoral to kill the baby growing inside the boy because it would probably have died and eventually killed him too. But surely this must apply also to a pregnant woman whose baby cannot survive but at the same time is endangering her life?
Just to reiterate I do NOT support abortion! But I am interested in what the Catholic Church teaches about this.
Click to expand...
The boy is not a woman! :eek: There is no comparison, he could not take it to term, the women on the other hand could.
And I have 1 question, How did the doctor arrive to the conclusion the baby had no brain?
Did they do an MRI of the woman while she was pregnant?

Why a brailess fetus put the mother at risk, seems a lot of a very nebulous claims.
If the baby fate was to die AFTER he was born then that was God’s will instead someone decided to play GOD. Period!
 
are you talking about *anencephaly?

babyfaithhope.blogspot.com/

*This little girl, who did end up passing away, was born with anencephaly and could have died at birth, as many babies with this condition do. However, she managed to live for three months. Of course, not all babies are the same.

Usually doctors are all morbid and negative and say its better “not to let the *‘fetus’ suffer” (meaning at birth) when it comes to certain “defects”. But there are also those who carry to term and hold their babies and say goodbye. if that is possible, then the 2nd option is much better. And the first option is NOT preferred.

^they use fetus in a derogatory form here…its better to say baby.

What they don’t understand is that the little baby DOES suffer when he or she is torn apart during the abortion.
 
Although this may seem to be a dilemma, if we hold to the position that every child has the natural right to achieve at least some of their potential, then we can see that, no matter how long or short a life, even one of a few minutes, the potential has been achieved. The child can be loved, held, and grieved over. This human drama is reflected supernaturally. S/he can be baptized, adding to the body of the faithful, before being returned to God at His behest.
 
IzzyD said:
Yes, I have heard of that. But if a baby had no brain stems and no brain at all then I think we can safely say it would not live.
Click to expand...
In which case you can surgically remove the child for the sake of saving the mothers life, as you can in any case where a pregnancy is a direct threat to the life of the mother, whether or not the baby has a chance of survival. You still cannot directly and intentionally kill the child. Removing the child from the womb even though it will not be able to live outside the mothers body is not directly killing the child, it is merely protecting the mothers life. Any abortion is an act which directly kills the child.

Let me pose the question to you this way, imagine a scenario where a 12 yr old has a deadly contagious disease and is living in a community which is capable of recognizing the disease before it becomes contagious but is not capable of taking care of the child once contagious without becoming infected with the same deadly illness. Once the community determines that a child has this disease, would it be permissable for them to inject poison into the child to prevent the deadly disease from catching on, or should they instead simply do the best they can to ensure that the child can live as comfortably as possible for the rest of his life in a cave somewhere far away from the community? In the one case they would be directly killing an innocent child, in the other they would be protecting their own lives while at the same time doing the best they can for the poor child. Do you really think the first scenario would be moral?
 
=IzzyD;9989291]A friend of mine decided to terminate her baby after she was told that it had no brain. It would not have been able to survive outside of the womb and due to other complications was putting the mother in danger. Another friend aborted her baby because it had no heart. I am definitely not supporting abortion here but I wondered if it is necessarily immoral in situations where the baby will definitely die and may cause harm to the mother.
A seven year old boy’s twin brother had been living inside him all his life and was slowly killing him. When I asked about this article ( rense.com/general38/boy.htm ) I was told that it was not immoral to kill the baby growing inside the boy because it would probably have died and eventually killed him too. But surely this must apply also to a pregnant woman whose baby cannot survive but at the same time is endangering her life?
Just to reiterate I do NOT support abortion! But I am interested in what the Catholic Church teaches about this.
Click to expand...
Yes!

God is charge and murder is always murder.
 
silicasandra said:
Sometimes the tests that are done to look for this are not absolute, or the medical terminology is simplified for patients (because we’re all too dumb to know any better, of course. :rolleyes:) “No brain” may mean not having a specific part of the brain, or only so much matter, or only so much matter that is detectable.

Several years ago, a local newscaster here gave birth to a baby boy that she was told would not survive longer than a few minutes due to “not having a brain.” She and her husband were told to abort the baby and they refused. He is still alive today and his brain is growing, and his quality of life is much better than anyone could have hoped for. This will not be the case for every child diagnosed with this or a similar condition, but doctors do not know everything. The parents were prepared to spend only a few minutes with their baby boy if that was all he was destined for on this earth, but they were going to let God determine that for them.
Click to expand...
Good point. I guess it is best to consult a few doctors on this issue to know what is indeed viable or not.
 
Socrates1889 said:
Oh very well put! That was similar to my thoughts but I had No idea how to put them into words. 👍
Click to expand...
+1
Since they’re so sure the baby won’t survive why can’t they just take the baby out and give her/him medication as much as they could and let her/him go with dignity? Being baptized, have the family saying goodbye …etc. Its always hard to say goodbye but its much better to do it that way than using abortion.
 
IzzyD said:
A friend of mine decided to terminate her baby after she was told that it had no brain. It would not have been able to survive outside of the womb and due to other complications was putting the mother in danger. Another friend aborted her baby because it had no heart. I am definitely not supporting abortion here but I wondered if it is necessarily immoral in situations where the baby will definitely die and may cause harm to the mother.
A seven year old boy’s twin brother had been living inside him all his life and was slowly killing him. When I asked about this article ( rense.com/general38/boy.htm ) I was told that it was not immoral to kill the baby growing inside the boy because it would probably have died and eventually killed him too. But surely this must apply also to a pregnant woman whose baby cannot survive but at the same time is endangering her life?
Just to reiterate I do NOT support abortion! But I am interested in what the Catholic Church teaches about this.
Click to expand...
How do you know what they were told was accurate or even what they told you was true.
a developing baby missing brains and hearts would probably miscarry. The baby could not develop with a heart. Are you sure that the excuses they told you are honest?
 
Gods will be done. Carry the child to term, if the child, or mother and child dies, it is Gods will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top