What is the Church's teaching on abortions for victims of incest and rape?

[Rence]

Rence: Thank you for again posting this. I’m sincerely trying to understand these particulars as it pertains to the Vatican statement released in response to Italian legislation passed in 2000.

Can anyone tell me if this statement from the Vatican was revised or clarified at a later date? The way I’m understanding it, the Catholic Health Facilities (and the USCCB) are in direct opposition to Rome regarding this interpretation. Help me to understand if I am wrong.

nccbuscc.org/bishops/directives.shtml
Issued by NCCB/USCC, June 15, 2001
Copyright © 2001, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Inc. All rights reserved.

I think I can help you to understand it. The morning after pill is taken to prevent ovulation from happening. The US Bishops directive to require the ovulation test covers the concerns the Vatican has laid out:

However, the woman who uses this kind of pill does so in the fear that she may be in her fertile period and therefore intends to cause the expulsion of a possible new conceptus; above all, it would be unrealistic to think that a woman, finding herself in the situation of wanting to use an emergency contraceptive, would be able to know exactly and opportunely her current state of fertility.

Indeed a woman who takes the morning after pill is in fear that she may be in her fertile period, or going into her fertile period, or might be so horrified by the truama she just experienced, that a possible pregnancy and possible disease is all she can think of. The morning after pill, if following the guidelines of the US Bishops, will prevent ovulation from happening. That’s why not only a pregnancy test is required, but the test to determine if she has or is ovulating. If she has not ovulated yet, the pill will prevent her from ovulating. In this way, the rape victim is acting in accordance to the guidelines.

And there has been no response from Rome opposing the directives of the US Bishops. And believe me, we’d hear about it if they did. The Vatican is not shy about what they oppose. I hope that helps
Does that help?

 

[Tigg]

nccbuscc.org/bishops/directives.shtml
Issued by NCCB/USCC, June 15, 2001
Copyright © 2001, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Inc. All rights reserved.

I think I can help you to understand it. The morning after pill is taken to prevent ovulation from happening. The US Bishops directive to require the ovulation test covers the concerns the Vatican has laid out:

Indeed a woman who takes the morning after pill is in fear that she may be in her fertile period, or going into her fertile period, or might be so horrified by the truama she just experienced, that a possible pregnancy and possible disease is all she can think of. The morning after pill, if following the guidelines of the US Bishops, will prevent ovulation from happening. That’s why not only a pregnancy test is required, but the test to determine if she has or is ovulating. If she has not ovulated yet, the pill will prevent her from ovulating. In this way, the rape victim is acting in accordance to the guidelines.

And there has been no response from Rome opposing the directives of the US Bishops. And believe me, we’d hear about it if they did. The Vatican is not shy about what they oppose. I hope that helps
Does that help?

Sorry to be such a pain about this, but it’s really important that we understand. Perhaps my confusion is in the way the pills work. I found this web site:

Two of the most commonly used emergency contraceptive (morning after pills) are Preven and Plan B. The websites for both of these drugs clearly indicate that each can work to prevent a “fertilized egg” (which is actually a newly formed human being) from implanting in the uterine wall:

morningafterpill.org/how-does-it-work.html

You were kind enough to forward the link from the USCCB, but according to their criteria, they do not specify which of these type pills may be taken, but only use the terminology “medications.”

**Part 3, #36 **A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault. If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum.

usccb.org/bishops/directives.shtml

You can see the big problem we have here. As far as the U.S. bishops, the USCCB, as a bureaucratic body, does not constitute the teaching magisterium of the Church (in and by themselves -) anything regarding morals must be in conjunction with the Holy See and universal teaching. As we well know, they have been disobedient to Rome on many other matters.

So again, I must ask, does anyone know if the posted Vatican document was later clarified or revised? Thank you any and all who care to straighten me out!

 

[Katie966]

Sorry to be such a pain about this, but it’s really important that we understand. Perhaps my confusion is in the way the pills work.

The key is in being able to determine whether the woman has ovulated or not. If she has not, the drug will keep it from occurring. This does not cause an abortion. This isn’t in opposition to the Vatican document, and in fact the document is addressing women who do not know their state of fertility:

However, the woman who uses this kind of pill does so in the fear that she may be in her fertile period and therefore intends to cause the expulsion of a possible new conceptus; above all, it would be unrealistic to think that a woman, finding herself in the situation of wanting to use an emergency contraceptive, would be able to know exactly and opportunely her current state of fertility.

 

[Tigg]

The key is in being able to determine whether the woman has ovulated or not. If she has not, the drug will keep it from occurring. This does not cause an abortion. This isn’t in opposition to the Vatican document, and in fact the document is addressing women who do not know their state of fertility:

Oh, dud! There is a definitive test to indicate if ovulation has or has not occurred… now of course, the question remains…is this test always administered first? Especially in light of the language the bishops have used…“ought to.” (Sorry…I’m such a suspicious person!)

 

[Rence]

You can see the big problem we have here. As far as the U.S. bishops, the USCCB, as a bureaucratic body, does not constitute the teaching magisterium of the Church (in and by themselves -) anything regarding morals must be in conjunction with the Holy See and universal teaching. As we well know, they have been disobedient to Rome on many other matters.

No, I don’t see the big problem, but I do understand you have concerns. The USCCB has the authority to lead us and guide us and has the authority to put out statements for us to use as guidelines. They are part of the teaching body of the Church. So it’s totally fine by me that you don’t give them any credence, but as for me, that’s their job and I’ll go with that.

Plus, I don’t see a conflict in their guidelines. If your test shows you haven’t ovulated yet, then you’re not doing anything contrary to Catholic teaching to take plan b to make sure you don’t ovulate afterwards. But it’s okay that you do see a conflict. You have to be right with YOU. You have to live with you and your decisions. I hope you find the answers you need

 

[Rence]

Oh, dud! There is a definitive test to indicate if ovulation has or has not occurred… now of course, the question remains…is this test always administered first? Especially in light of the language the bishops have used…“ought to.” (Sorry…I’m such a suspicious person!)

In Catholic institutions the ovulation test is supposed to be administered first. In non-Catholic institutions it may not be available, of course (they’re not Catholic after all, they don’t follow Catholic guidelines) depending on the institution. IIRC it’s standard practice to at least do the pregnancy test everywhere. The article written in my first post said that if the test wasn’t available and there was reasonable doubt that the woman has not ovulated, or is not ovulating, that the woman should be given the plan b to prevent ovulation from occuring.

But again, you have to live with you. Personally, I wouldn’t bother with anything more than the pregnancy test, but that’s just me. And I’d never try to pass that off as a Catholic teaching. Again, that’s just me.

 

[Tigg]

The USCCB has the authority to lead us and guide us and has the authority to put out statements for us to use as guidelines. They are part of the teaching body of the Church.

Here is clarification on the role of episcopal conferences such as the USCCB and I only post this for information, because as we well know, in todays world, even the bishops disagree:

We must not forget that episcopal conferences have no theological basis, they do not belong to the structure of the Church as willed by Christ, that cannot be eliminated; they have only a practical, concrete function…The collective, therefore, does not substitute for the persons of the bishops, who are the authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the faithful entrusted to their care…No episcopal conference as such, has a teaching mission; its documents have no weight of their own save that given to them by individual bishops…it must once again become clear that in each diocese there is only one shepherd and teacher of the faith in communion with the other pastors and teachers and with the Vicar of Christ.

 Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the Ratzinger Report (1985, and affirmed in Apostolos Suos in 1998 by Pope John Paul II.)

And here:

Successors of the Apostles, the Bishops of the particular Churches throughout the world form the College of Bishops. Individual bishops have charge of a particular diocese. Together as a group the Bishops may exercise power over the Universal Church by coming together in an ecumenical council (such as Vatican II). However, even ecumenical council’s must be recognised and agreed to by the Successor of Peter to be valid. To the extent that the College of Bishops is not united with its head, the Pope, then it has no authority at all.

catholic-pages.com/church/hierarchy.asp

If we could hear one united voice from the episcopate, in union with Rome, there would not be such confusion.

Thank you, Rence for your informative posts.

 

[Rence]

Here is clarification on the role of episcopal conferences such as the USCCB and I only post this for information, because as we well know, in todays world, even the bishops disagree:

And here:

Successors of the Apostles, the Bishops of the particular Churches throughout the world form the College of Bishops. Individual bishops have charge of a particular diocese. Together as a group the Bishops may exercise power over the Universal Church by coming together in an ecumenical council (such as Vatican II). However, even ecumenical council’s must be recognised and agreed to by the Successor of Peter to be valid. To the extent that the College of Bishops is not united with its head, the Pope, then it has no authority at all.

catholic-pages.com/church/hierarchy.asp

If we could hear one united voice from the episcopate, in union with Rome, there would not be such confusion.

Thank you, Rence for your informative posts.

Hmm…then we don’t have to listen to them at all? That’s not how I was taught and that’s not how I was raised, but we’re all different

 

[centurionguard]

please ask your friends who support abortion for women who conceive as the result of rape or incest how they expect a second violent assault to heal the first one? and also why they imagine the deliberate murder of the rape victim’s innocent child will assist her own healing in any way.

Correct me if I’m wrong here; but it would seem nobody here has picked up the gist of what you just stated above.

Your valid statement would also nullify (“some points”) made at this site: catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0566.html

Given the severe psychological stigma and trauma in what immediately follows in the painful aftermath of rape. I have to ask is a woman, teenager, or child of incest in full sane mind to make any real moral judgments about her moral obligation to keep the infant child she now carries in her womb after rape? My first obvious answer would be unequivocally No!

Any secular hospital would immediately offer a female rape or incest patient drugs to eradicate the possible pregnancy in the womb.

No doubt things are very different in a Catholic Hospital under the same scenario.
At best one can only hope from a Catholic prospective that a female rape or incest victim is either Catholic or from another Christian faith to offer compassionate moral support and plead to the victims moral sensibilities to carry the innocent child to term.

Indeed; why make a second assault on an innocent precious life, with the illusion thinking it will lessen the first traumatic assault.

My final hope is that the drive to save an innocent unborn life in a traumatized victim of rape is also just as responsible to mainstay the psychological well-being of victim in a Catholic or Christian setting instead of the victim being subjected to secular psychotherapy which is not always credible.

Peace
Chris

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

Before someone makes a very grave error (if not already).

This is what The Catholic Church teaches:

From The Catechism Of The Catholic Church which is from The Magisterium:

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.74
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.75

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,"76 "by the very commission of the offense,"77 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.78 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."79

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined… 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."80

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.

Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual…
It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."81

2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival."82 "It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material."83 "Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity"84 which are unique and unrepeatable.

Source: vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P7Z.HTM

 

[Rence]

Before someone makes a very grave error (if not already).

This is what The Catholic Church teaches:

From The Catechism Of The Catholic Church which is from The Magisterium:

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.74
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.75

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,"76 "by the very commission of the offense,"77 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.78 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."79

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined… 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."80

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.

Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual…
It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."81

2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival."82 "It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material."83 "Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity"84 which are unique and unrepeatable.

Source: vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P7Z.HTM

Right, that’s all correct Church teaching. But the US Bishops support preventing a conception, not destroying a conception. They are not in conflict with any Church teaching.

 

[centurionguard]

Right, that’s all correct Church teaching. But the US Bishops support preventing a conception, not destroying a conception. They are not in conflict with any Church teaching.

But the US Bishops support preventing a conception, not destroying a conception

At first look at this statement it stands out as contradictory.

Preventing contraception in what manner?

Respectfully; please explain how a female victim who is unavoidably raped, can morally avoid immediate contraception.

The only way I can see avoiding immediate pregnancy is if the female rape victim isn’t in her (full) ovulation period.

Peace
Chris

 

[Rence]

At first look at this statement it stands out as contradictory.

Preventing contraception in what manner?

Well, first of all, I said preventing conception…not contraception. And I meant prevent destroying what was already conceived. And the manner in which it is done is by taking plan b, which delays ovulation. If there is no ovulation, there is no egg, therefore, there is nothing there to fertilize…

Respectfully; please explain how a female victim who is unavoidably raped, can morally avoid immediate contraception.

Here, I’ll let the US Bishops do that, taken from their directives:

nccbuscc.org/bishops/directives.shtml

A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault. If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum.19

The Church allows the use of the morning after pill, in the case of rape, in the emergency room after a rape, if two conditions are met: 1) the woman must test negative for pregnancy to ensure she wasn’t already pregnant prior to the attack 2) must not have ovulated. The morning after pill when used in this way, is preventing a conception from taking place, not destroying an already-fertilized egg.

If this has not been done, or if it has been done but the woman is pregnant anyway, the Church forbids any further action other than progression of the pregnancy.

catholiceducation.org/art…on/re0566.html

The woman who is a victim of rape has the moral right to prevent the pregnancy for the following reasons: First, the rapist (including his sperm) is an unjust aggressor who has violated the woman’s dignity. Second, rape is an act of force and violence, unlike the conjugal love in marriage whereby both spouses give freely of themselves in an act of unitive and procreative love. Third, the woman is not responsible for the action, and thereby has the right to prevent the pregnancy. (Please note that for these three reasons, this guidance does not violate the Church’ s teaching regarding contraception as expressed in Humanae Vitae, which, because of the free-giving between spouses, stated, "Each and every marriage act must remain open to the transmission of life (no. 11).)

In preventing pregnancy, most rape treatment protocols recommend anti-fertility drugs to be administered within 72 hours and over a period of several days. These drugs, such as Ovral, inhibit ovulation. However, some contraceptives may also affect the endometrium of the uterus, causing the expulsion of a conceived ovum. This latter effect is problematical.

…

The Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Facilities state, “Abortion, that is the directly intended termination of pregnancy before viability, is never permitted nor is the directly intended destruction of a viable fetus. Every procedure whose sole immediate effect is the termination of pregnancy before viability is an abortion, which, in its moral context, includes the interval between conception and implantation of the embryo” (no. 12). Therefore, abortifacients — those drugs which would cause the expulsion of a conceived ovum — are morally wrong.

Therefore, before administering contraceptives to a rape victim, health care providers must ascertain first her medical history (including menstrual history, recent sexual activity, and contraceptive usage). A pregnancy test should be performed. If she is not pregnant but her medical history suggests the possibility that ovulation may have occurred, then health care providers ought to administer a Luteinizing Hormone urine dip test or a progesterone blood level test. These tests would indicate if ovulation has indeed occurred and thereby a child was possibly conceived. If these tests are not available in a timely way or at all, treatment should proceed as long as there is a reasonable doubt that ovulation has occurred.

Here again is a key point. If there is a reasonable doubt that ovulation has taken place, the right of the woman to prevent the pregnancy should be favored, even if this unknowingly and unintentionally expels a conceived ovum. However, if there is certainty that ovulation has occurred and conception may have taken place, then the child has the right to life and the mother must not risk an abortion from the antifertility drugs.

I hope that answers your questions Chris.

 

[centurionguard]

Well, first of all, I said preventing conception…not contraception. And I meant prevent destroying what was already conceived. And the manner in which it is done is by taking plan b, which delays ovulation. If there is no ovulation, there is no egg, therefore, there is nothing there to fertilize…

Here, I’ll let the US Bishops do that, taken from their directives:

**The Church allows the use of the morning after pill, in the case of rape, in the emergency room after a rape, if two conditions are met: 1) the woman must test negative for pregnancy to ensure she wasn’t already pregnant prior to the attack 2) must not have ovulated. The morning after pill when used in this way, is preventing a conception from taking place, not destroying an already-fertilized egg.

It does. Thank You. Sorry for the lingo mix up. I meant conception.

Peace
Chris

 

[Tigg]

Hmm…then we don’t have to listen to them at all? That’s not how I was taught and that’s not how I was raised, but we’re all different

I, in no way said that - only that in matters of faith and morals, the USCCB is not an authoritative body and cannot issue edicts or define doctrine of it’s own accord without being in perfect conformity with the universal Church. Each bishop has authority in his own diocese, but is still ultimately responsible to the pope. Collectively, a bishops’ conference is more of a coordinating body which assures that each diocese within the U.S. is run in a consistent manner. When Bishop Martino made his famous statement, “The USCCB doesn’t speak for me,” he was well within his rights to do so, as long as he was not being disobedient to the pope. Each individual bishop may accept or reject legislation coming from the collective body. That’s how the hierarchy of the Church works.

 

[larsenl1]

i don’t know. my sister is pregnant and from day one my mom was saying “the baby this” and “the baby that”. so she recognized it from day 1 as a baby and not just a bunch of cells. i think i’m going to get that book “Unplanned” for my mom. its about about that Planned Parenthood director who became pro-life.

when we discuss social issues, she is always opposite of me. i’m pro-life, she’s pro-choice. i voted against same sex marriage, she voted for it. i don’t believe that homosexual relationships should be allowed to adopt, she does. then when my sister finds out and gets in on the conversation, and at times has told me that my views are ****** (but used a more explicit word for it). ugh i’ll just keep praying to God that he’ll reach them.

You are in a difficult position. Pray persistently. God Bless You.

 

[RazzsMom]

I am an RN in a hospital (though not a Catholic one). Many hospitals have specially-educated RNs who work with rape and incest victims when they come into the ER. They are trained to ask the very questions that a Catholic would need to be asked which would keep her in proper standing with the Church teachings as described in this thread. The FIRST thng a female should do is report to the ER and ask for that type of trained RN if there is one in the particular hospital. I was very encouraged that my hospital trained the sexual assault RNs to ask the right questions to adhere to Catholic teaching.

BTW - although it does not make the affected victims feel better, it is a fact that the percentage of females who conceive after such trauma as incest or rape is very low. It has to do with the stress hormones affecting and preventing implantation.

And to the OP - I will keep you in prayer. Your situation is very hard. I, too, deal with such thoughts and beliefs in my family - though not in my immediate one but by marriage. My DIL brother is gay and “married” and the sae DIL mom is a professed “Pagan”…

 

[dje101]

You are in a difficult position. Pray persistently. God Bless You.

I noticed that when you quoted my post, you used ***** instead of the word that I actually used. I was raised that that word was not a cuss word and have used it all my life to replace much more foul language. Was that word offensive or against the rules for CAF? I just need to know so that I don’t make the same mistake again. Thanks!

 

[centurionguard]

I am an RN in a hospital (though not a Catholic one). Many hospitals have specially-educated RNs who work with rape and incest victims when they come into the ER. They are trained to ask the very questions that a Catholic would need to be asked which would keep her in proper standing with the Church teachings as described in this thread. The FIRST thing a female should do is report to the ER and ask for that type of trained RN if there is one in the particular hospital. I was very encouraged that my hospital trained the sexual assault RNs to ask the right questions to adhere to Catholic teaching.

BTW - although it does not make the affected victims feel better, it is a fact that the percentage of females who conceive after such trauma as incest or rape is very low. It has to do with the stress hormones affecting and preventing implantation.

And to the OP - I will keep you in prayer. Your situation is very hard. I, too, deal with such thoughts and beliefs in my family - though not in my immediate one but by marriage. My DIL brother is gay and “married” and the sage DIL mom is a professed “Pagan”…

…

No disrespect; but I wasn’t aware that specially trained S.A.N.E. Sexual. Assault. Nurse. Examiner. Nurses were that sensitive to Catholic Moral issues in a secular private, municipal, state, provincial or federally funded hospital. Particularly when it comes to female rape victims. From much validated resources from which I have read, hospital protocol for female rape victims concentrates primarily on collecting evidence for possible criminal charges against a possible assailant.

Every other concern the victim could possibly have, given the immediate mind-numbing stigma often makes other pertinent concerns fall away in less important succession.

Peace
Chris

 

[Rence]

No disrespect; but I wasn’t aware that specially trained S.A.N.E. Sexual. Assault. Nurse. Examiner. Nurses were that sensitive to Catholic Moral issues in a secular private, municipal, state, provincial or federally funded hospital.
Particularly when it comes to female rape victims. From much validated resources from which I have read, hospital protocol for female rape victims concentrates primarily on collecting evidence for possible criminal charges against a possible assailant.

Every other concern the victim could possibly have, given the immediate mind-numbing stigma often makes other pertinent concerns fall away in less important succession.
Peace
Chris

Yes Chris, that’s part of a SANE’s training, and not just Catholics…they are trained to be aware of and sensitive to other religions like Muslims, Jews, etc. And other cultures as well. Yes, there is a strong emphasis on collecting evidence, but this is part of their training as well.