Question about the morality of a medical procedure

[catholictiger]

first let me say this I don’t know if this would be considered an abortion, because in this situation you are not terminating the pregnancy.

second I’m just asking this as kinda a hypothetical not as a this is actually happening to someone I know or me.

But anyway here is the question, I’m posing it though through a story real quick

A women Becomes pregnant and she goes to the Doctor and she finds out that she has twins. In the 3rd month of the pregnancy lets say she goes back to see how her twins are doing, and the Doctor tells her that there is a complication in your pregnancy, Both of these babies have a medical disorder we believe that could kill the babies before they come full term. But If we tie the tubes of one of the babies essentially killing off this baby, the other baby will have an large increased chance of surviving the pregnancy. So I suggest that you let one of these babies die to save the others. If you do not both will probably die.

So my question would it be morally wrong to let that one child die or deliberately kill that child in order to save the other child.

Please note I’m not asking about what would be the best thing for the patient to do in this situation, I’m just asking if someone was faced with this situation would it be morally wrong to pick the option that saves one instead of risking of losing both.

BTW if this where to occur to my wife If I get married, or a parishioner if I become a priest, I would first go to or suggest going to a pro life OGBYN, because I suspect many times pro choice OGBYNs will do what they can to save money instead of looking out for the lives of all humans involved.

If the chances are high enough to where its worth it to try to let both survive I think I would do that as well.

thoughts are appreciated.

note when responding please read my first two points.

thanks

 

[Trishie]

There aren’t any loopholes:
And you are in a seminary…it is even a fact that a man cannot be ordained if he has had any part in procuring an abortion.
I have bolded the answer to your question regarding tubal litigation causing death of a human life

Trust in God is the only recourse.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

Abortion
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73 My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75 God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:
"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80
. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights."81
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

 

[centurionguard]

There aren’t any loopholes:
And you are in a seminary…it is even a fact that a man cannot be ordained if he has had any part in procuring an abortion.
I have bolded the answer to your question regarding tubal litigation causing death of a human life

Trust in God is the only recourse.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

Abortion
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73 My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75 God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:
"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80
. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights."81
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

Beautiful

 

[Bluegoat]

The scenario here doesn’t really make sense, medically. It is hard to know what it means. Tie the tubes of the baby?

 

[catholictiger]

The scenario here doesn’t really make sense, medically. It is hard to know what it means. Tie the tubes of the baby?

I’ll make it simple you have to end the life of one baby in the womb to end the life of the other.

 

[catholictiger]

There aren’t any loopholes:
And you are in a seminary…it is even a fact that a man cannot be ordained if he has had any part in procuring an abortion.
I have bolded the answer to your question regarding tubal litigation causing death of a human life

Trust in God is the only recourse.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

Abortion
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73 My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75 God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:
"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80
. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights."81
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

I’m about to be in seminary yes, and I have never ever been a part of an abortion and would never consider being a part of an abortion, this just a hypothetical. I’m asking just for knowledge really.

edit: Question answered bellow

 

[Bluegoat]

I’ll make it simple you have to end the life of one baby in the womb to end the life of the other.

Then no, you can’t end the life of one to save the other.

A more difficult case might be: one twin has a disorder that can possibly be fixed by inter-uterine surgery. Without the surgery the twin will die. But the surgery has a chance of killing the healthy twin. What to do?

In that kind of case, I think the answer would be weighing the risks and prayer.

 

[catholictiger]

Then no, you can’t end the life of one to save the other.

A more difficult case might be: one twin has a disorder that can possibly be fixed by inter-uterine surgery. Without the surgery the twin will die. But the surgery has a chance of killing the healthy twin. What to do?

In that kind of case, I think the answer would be weighing the risks and prayer.

alright I had a feeling that would be that way, I hope you can see why this isn’t a simple issue.

 

[Rock_Happy]

… I suspect many times pro choice OGBYNs will do what they can to save money instead of looking out for the lives of all humans involved.

You might want to examine that prejudice. I think that most physicians would find it to be untrue and offensive.

 

[catholictiger]

You might want to examine that prejudice. I think that most physicians would find it to be untrue and offensive.

yes I guess another way you would say it, is that because pro choice physicians don’t believe that the unborn is human, they would not take the same efforts to save the baby. I’m sure they would have their twisted reasons why they would do it, in this society I wouldn’t be surprised if money was one issue.

BTW this thread should be closed the question was answered.

 

[Rock_Happy]

yes I guess another way you would say it, is that because pro choice physicians don’t believe that the unborn is human, they would not take the same efforts to save the baby. I’m sure they would have their twisted reasons why they would do it, in this society I wouldn’t be surprised if money was one issue.

BTW this thread should be closed the question was answered.

based on my knowledge of the medical profession, your opinion on this matter bears little congruence to reality. where did you get these fantasies?

 

[catholictiger]

based on my knowledge of the medical profession, your opinion on this matter bears little congruence to reality. where did you get these fantasies?

the pro choice believe set is that they believe that the unborn isn’t human. So in a medical situation when the life of the mother and the unborn are at stake they wouldn’t even blink an eye before making a decision against the life of the unborn.

maybe I’m wrong about the money thing, but I am spot on above.

Just a question you say you are a Christian but are you pro life as well?

 

[Newbie2]

**the pro choice believe set is that they believe that the unborn isn’t human. **So in a medical situation when the life of the mother and the unborn are at stake they wouldn’t even blink an eye before making a decision against the life of the unborn.

maybe I’m wrong about the money thing, but I am spot on above.

Just a question you say you are a Christian but are you pro life as well?

While that is probably the case with most pro-choicers, there are some that will admit to the unborn being human but not having the same value as the “born”.

 

[catholictiger]

While that is probably the case with most pro-choicers, there are some that will admit to the unborn being human but not having the same value as the “born”.

that is correct as well

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

You might want to examine that prejudice. I think that most physicians would find it to be untrue and offensive.

:thumbsup:So too, might their patients.

I am in the final month of a complicated pregnancy. My daughter will be born with serious health conditions. The initial diagnosis was terrifying. My doctor believed she had little chance of living more that a few months. Since then we have been on a roller coaster of emotions and run the gamut of tests to find out what is wrong and what we can do-not because we were considering termination- we never did- but because when our little one is born she will need serous medical care, possibly immediate surgery, and we want the best possible care on hand for her. Even now, with a better prognosis, we expect our daughter will be facing a very difficult childhood with many, many dangerous surgeries.

Who has helped me the most?

My family is very pro-life. They have helped me get to appointments (every week), babysat my older daughter, prayed for me and cleaned my house.

My pastor is amazing. He, pastoring a huge parish, made time to meet with us to advise. He goes out of his way to make sure we know he is thinking about us and praying for us.

My friends have prayed- some with vigils and novenas.

My doctors- I have about half a dozen. I left one behind because he was not pro-choice but pro-abortion. He could not support my decision to carry the baby to term. He has been denounced by the rest, pro-choice all. They have gone miles out of the way to help me understand what will happen, what the baby and I will need and how to get the best care. They even asked if I had named my daughter so they could use her name, rather than more impersonal terms when discussing her prenatal care.

I have been meeting with two (pro-choice) genetic counselors. They have aggressively made sure that I have always had whatever I needed in support of my pregnancy. Thet connected me with the group Isaiah’s Promise. They call the doctors to coordinate visits, so I do not spend my whole life at the hospital. They call me directly with test results so I don’t have to wait. They meet with me and my husband to help us emotionally prepare. They backed my decision to leave the horrible doctor, and they shared my anger. They protect me from questions about termination (well they did early on) by telling the docs beforehand that I was not going to consider it, and they should go forward from that decision. I only had to answer the question once, maybe twice.

I am sick of the false idea that a pro-choice doctor or other medical professional cannot be a fierce advocate for the unborn. In my experience as a frightened pro-life mom, it is wholly unfair.

 

[catholictiger]

:thumbsup:So too, might their patients.

I am in the final month of a complicated pregnancy. My daughter will be born with serious health conditions. The initial diagnosis was terrifying. My doctor believed she had little chance of living more that a few months. Since then we have been on a roller coaster of emotions and run the gamut of tests to find out what is wrong and what we can do-not because we were considering termination- we never did- but because when our little one is born she will need serous medical care, possibly immediate surgery, and we want the best possible care on hand for her. Even now, with a better prognosis, we expect our daughter will be facing a very difficult childhood with many, many dangerous surgeries.

Who has helped me the most?

My family is very pro-life. They have helped me get to appointments (every week), babysat my older daughter, prayed for me and cleaned my house.

My pastor is amazing. He, pastoring a huge parish, made time to meet with us to advise. He goes out of his way to make sure we know he is thinking about us and praying for us.

My friends have prayed- some with vigils and novenas.

My doctors- I have about half a dozen. I left one behind because he was not pro-choice but pro-abortion. He could not support my decision to carry the baby to term. He has been denounced by the rest, pro-choice all. They have gone miles out of the way to help me understand what will happen, what the baby and I will need and how to get the best care. They even asked if I had named my daughter so they could use her name, rather than more impersonal terms when discussing her prenatal care.

I have been meeting with two (pro-choice) genetic counselors. They have aggressively made sure that I have always had whatever I needed in support of my pregnancy. Thet connected me with the group Isaiah’s Promise. They call the doctors to coordinate visits, so I do not spend my whole life at the hospital. They call me directly with test results so I don’t have to wait. They meet with me and my husband to help us emotionally prepare. They backed my decision to leave the horrible doctor, and they shared my anger. They protect me from questions about termination (well they did early on) by telling the docs beforehand that I was not going to consider it, and they should go forward from that decision. I only had to answer the question once, maybe twice.

I am sick of the false idea that a pro-choice doctor or other medical professional cannot be a fierce advocate for the unborn. In my experience as a frightened pro-life mom, it is wholly unfair.

thanks for the story, sorry for making this assumption

I will be praying for you as well.

 

[catharina]

first let me say this I don’t know if this would be considered an abortion, because in this situation you are not terminating the pregnancy. Removing the supply of nutrients to a developing fetus is definitely ABORTION.

**second I’m just asking this as kinda a hypothetical not as a this is actually happening to someone I know or me. But anyway here is the question, I’m posing it though through a story real quick. ** Irrelevant point re your “involvement” or lack thereof.

A women Becomes pregnant and she goes to the Doctor and she finds out that she has twins. In the 3rd month of the pregnancy lets say she goes back to see how her twins are doing, and the Doctor tells her that there is a complication in your pregnancy, Both of these babies have a medical disorder we believe that could kill the babies before they come full term. But If we tie the tubes of one of the babies essentially killing off this baby, the other baby will have an large increased chance of surviving the pregnancy. So I suggest that you let one of these babies die to save the others. If you do not both will probably die.

So my question would it be morally wrong to let that one child die or deliberately kill that child in order to save the other child.

Please note I’m not asking about what would be the best thing for the patient to do in this situation, **I’m just asking if someone was faced with this situation would it be morally wrong to pick the option that saves one instead of risking of losing both. ** Such an action would constitute the murder of a living being (ABORTION).

BTW if this where to occur to my wife If I get married, or a parishioner if I become a priest, I would first go to or suggest going to a pro life OGBYN, because I suspect many times pro choice OGBYNs will do what they can to save money instead of looking out for the lives of all humans involved.

If the chances are high enough to where its worth it to try to let both survive I think I would do that as well.

thoughts are appreciated.

note when responding please read my first two points.

thanks

 

[catharina]

The scenario here doesn’t really make sense, medically. It is hard to know what it means. Tie the tubes of the baby?

My guess is he meant something like
in-utero surgery to cut the umbilical cord of one twin.
In any event, he seems to be asking ‘is this form of abortion ok?’
Nauseating idea.

Killing is killing.
Murder is murder.

 

[catholictiger]

**the question of this thread has been answered **

 

[catharina]

**the question of this thread has been answered, **

**so thanks to all, I hope.

… and you’re very welcome.
Come on Catholic tiger, give us a break.**