Pregnancy and fetus: religious dogma meets law and medicine

It was only a couple of months ago, a pregnant woman, who was less than halfway through the gestation period, suffered a miscarriage.  Even though it was clear that the fetus would not develop into a full-grown child, and even though the mother and the father explicitly preferred an abortion, the hospital staff refused to carry it out.  Over the next few days, the mother developed multiple problems that led to several organs failing, which, in turn, killed her.

It was a multinational story as well: the mother, Savita Halappanavar--a dentist herself--and her husband, were legal residents in Ireland, after immigrating from India.  The Irish law prevented the medical personnel from carrying out the abortion.  The law itself being a reflection of the strong Catholic traditions.  As Katha Pollitt wrote in the Nation:

This was not a case of choosing between the fetus and the woman—the seventeen-week fetus was doomed, and nothing could have saved it. But it still had a heartbeat, and abortion is banned in Ireland.

Pollitt quoted the husband's report:

“The doctor told us the cervix was fully dilated, amniotic fluid was leaking and unfortunately the baby wouldn’t survive.” The doctor, he says, said it should be over in a few hours. There followed three days, he says, of the foetal heartbeat being checked several times a day.
“Savita was really in agony. She was very upset, but she accepted she was losing the baby. When the consultant came on the ward rounds on Monday morning Savita asked if they could not save the baby could they induce to end the pregnancy. The consultant said, ‘As long as there is a foetal heartbeat we can’t do anything.’
“Again on Tuesday morning, the ward rounds and the same discussion. The consultant said it was the law, that this is a Catholic country. Savita [a Hindu] said: ‘I am neither Irish nor Catholic’ but they said there was nothing they could do.”

Now, here in the US, a Catholic hospital is claiming that a fetus is not a person.  Yep, a Catholic hospital, where one might expect an argument that a fetus is a person whose life is valuable--as they have when it came to various medical insurance controversies.

So, why would a Catholic hospital deny that personhood to a fetus?  "because there is money at stake."

There is a real tragedy at the heart of this lawsuit. As reported in the Colorado Independent:

Lori Stodghill was 31-years old, seven-months pregnant with twin boys and feeling sick when she arrived at St. Thomas More hospital in Cañon City on New Year’s Day 2006. She was vomiting and short of breath and she passed out as she was being wheeled into an examination room. Medical staff tried to resuscitate her but, as became clear only later, a main artery feeding her lungs was clogged and the clog led to a massive heart attack. Stodghill’s obstetrician, Dr. Pelham Staples, who also happened to be the obstetrician on call for emergencies that night, never answered a page. His patient died at the hospital less than an hour after she arrived and her twins died in her womb.

Stodghill’s husband Jeremy, a prison guard, filed a wrongful-death lawsuit arguing Staples should have made it to the hospital sooner, or at least instructed the emergency room staff to perform a caesarian-section. An expert testifying on the case believes the procedure likely would not have saved the mother, but may have saved the twins.
Which is why Stodghill didn’t just name his wife in the suit, but also the two unborn fetuses.

Yep, a Catholic hospital did a complete flip-flop all because of the huge amount of liability that it can then avoid under the law.

But when it came to mounting a defense in the Stodghill case, Catholic Health’s lawyers effectively turned the Church directives on their head. Catholic organizations have for decades fought to change federal and state laws that fail to protect “unborn persons,” and Catholic Health’s lawyers in this case had the chance to set precedent bolstering anti-abortion legal arguments. Instead, they are arguing state law protects doctors from liability concerning unborn fetuses on grounds that those fetuses are not persons with legal rights.As Jason Langley, an attorney with Denver-based Kennedy Childs, argued in one of the briefs he filed for the defense, the court “should not overturn the long-standing rule in Colorado that the term ‘person,’ as is used in the Wrongful Death Act, encompasses only individuals born alive. Colorado state courts define ‘person’ under the Act to include only those born alive. Therefore Plaintiffs cannot maintain wrongful death claims based on two unborn fetuses.”

The Catholic Health attorneys have so far won decisions from Fremont County District Court, but Stodghill’s lawyers have appealed the case to the state Supreme Court, where it is still being considered.

As the Irish and Colorado cases make it abundantly clear, medical practice is methodical and not faith-based, making is possible to cross-check whether appropriate steps were reasonably followed.  Overlaying faith, which is not subject to any scientific method, on a process and practice that is very much based on the scientific method will effectively kill people.

I don't get all these anti-abortion nutcases.  If they can allow fertility clinics to freely operate, where science clearly demonstrates that the semen and eggs are material objects that can be brought together to create an embryo, where is the magic of life of the unborn being divine?