What is the church's teaching on ectopic pregnancy?

[Lorarose]

Terri’s lifeline was a MACHINE

Terri Schiavo was not hooked up to any machines.
She did have a feeding tube inserted in her stomach that provided nutrition and hydration.

So…while no one beat her over the head, shot her, or strangled her to death, she was cut off from her source of hydration and nutrition.
Cutting her off from these necessities was just as directly responsible for her death as other means.

Compare that with an embryo which is connected to a placenta which is connected to the tube.
The embryo needs the placenta, and the placenta needs the tube.

It seems to me there is an attempt to distinguish directly “attacking” the embryo as opposed to directly “attacking” the source of life for the embryo.
Either way you look at it, no matter what is done is a direct act upon the embryo resulting in the embryo’s death.

If you were shut in a sealed off room, eventually you would run out of oxygen as well as being denied food and water.
No one may directly attack your body, but the act of isolating you in the room is just as much an attack on you as if someone had beat you.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Consecrated:

Not that this resolves the discussions going on here, but if you’re going to compare an emergency surgery on an ectopic pregnancy with Terri’s case, I think it’s important to keep in mind, that Terri’s lifeline was a MACHINE, the baby’s is a PERSON. This comparison completely fails because of that simple fact.

Observe:

1. Machine, Doctor and Terri going into room
2. Machine and Doctor come out of room, Terri is dead.

Rediculous? Yep.

Preserving the baby’s lifeline (i.e. Mama) at baby’s expense (however indirectly) has competely different theoligical implications than Terri’s case had… apples and nectarines here folks.

I like the way you present that, but let’s tweak the scenario a little bit and we’ll see how ridiculous it is.

First, disregarding Lorarose’s warning that it wasn’t a machine, let’s go ahead and use the machine for sake of comparison. I’ll change the name to Tina since we’re changing the facts to be less morbid.

a) Tina objectively has to die. Her continued existence poses a threat to the value of her estate, and that doesn’t set well with certain parties.

b) A doctor enters room with Tina and her machine.

c) The doctor is prohibited by court order from disconnecting Tina from the machine. The court has found that to do so would be murderous.

d) Doctor produces a sledgehammer and whacks the machine so that it quits working.

e) Cleanup crew removes the now inert Tina and machine from the room. Mission accomplished.

The reason I didn’t think of this before, is I was using the comparison of what type death will be suffered as opposed to showing the decision making process.

Alan