Dr. Gerard M. Nadal goes over the medical and ethical aspects of the abortion approved by Sister McBride at St. Joseph’s Hospital which in part led to Bishop Olmsted disallowing the use of Catholic for this hospital.

Supporters of Sister McBride have been trying to obfuscate the issue by saying the abortion was allowable under double-effect. Though you also certainly get the idea that her supporters are favorable to abortion in pretty much all circumstances.

In essence the principle states that a lifesaving procedure that cannot be delayed, such as the removal of a cancerous uterus before the baby can be taken in a Cesarean section at viability (~25 weeks gestation), is permissible so long as the death of the baby is the indirect and unintended effect. The life-saving treatment and resolution of a disease with immediate lethal consequence if no treatment is rendered is the good effect. The unintended death of the baby is the bad, or second (double) effect.

Such circumstances are extremely rare, given how early a baby can be delivered before full term at 40 weeks. The mother’s life must be in immediate danger and the treatment of her disease, which would also result in the death of the baby, cannot be forestalled. The case at Saint Joseph’s did not rise to the level of Double-Effect, as the baby was the sole target of intervention.

It does not take a Doctorate in Theology to know that you can never do a direct evil to justify some apparent good. His next paragraph really surprised me, with my emphasis.

While the assessment on the part of physicians was dire, no treatment of the disease was even attempted. There are several medications that can be employed to attempt a reduction in the severity of the disease, none of which appear to have been dispensed in this case. From that point on, the actions of the hospital and Sister McBride pointed toward more than an isolated and extreme case where the decision to abort could have been simply dismissed as one bad judgment call.

The other argument supporters of this action have taken is that to be pro-life means to save the mother. That no attempt was made to to reduce the severity of her Pulmonary hypertension is rather shocking – though not as shocking as the resulting abortion. True Catholic medicine would take a both/and approach to try to save both the mother and the child. Putting the mother versus the child is pure evil.

Sister McBride did not even resort to a wink-wink of telling the parents to go to another hospital for the abortion. She was set on St. Joseph’s hospital doing it. That recommendation would also have been an evil act, it just demonstrates the mindset behind this decision. It was not the case of a Sister making a difficult decision, but of a Catholic Religious with a Culture of Death agenda.

There are several hospitals within a three-mile radius of Saint Joseph’s, some mere blocks away, where this woman’s husband could have taken her for the recommended abortion. They were no more than ten minutes from any number of facilities that would have performed the abortion, if that was what the couple wanted. All reports of the incident indicate that at no point was the couple told that Saint Joseph’s does not target babies for death as a means of treating a disease. Again, no evidence has surfaced that the physicians attempted to treat her medically.

I would recommend you read all of Dr. Nadal’s post along with subscribing to his fine blog if you don’t already do so.

Via Michelle Malkin

On Wednesday, the ACLU sent a letter to federal health officials urging the government to force Catholic hospitals in the U.S. to perform abortions in violation of their core moral commitment to protecting the lives of the unborn. They’re counting on sympathetic Obama rationing czar Donald Berwick — a recess appointee whose radical views on wealth and health redistribution were never vetted by Congress — to dictate which religious principles hospital operators can and cannot follow.
The ACLU reiterated its call for a federal probe — read: fishing expedition — of Catholic hospitals nationwide that refuse to provide “emergency” contraception and abortions to women. In practice, of course, every request for abortion is an “emergency” to the left.

The Catholic Church makes clear that it is morally permissible under certain circumstances to treat directly the cause of the mother’s medical condition, even if those efforts unintentionally and indirectly cost the baby’s life. But Catholic health providers must never directly trade one life for another.

Civil liberties activists have a particular vendetta against devout Phoenix Catholic Bishop Thomas Olmsted, who recently revoked the Catholic status of a rogue hospital that performed several direct abortions, provided birth control pills and presided over sterilizations against the church’s ethical and religious directives for health care. “It would be unfaithful to pretend the institution is still Catholic,” Olmsted concluded.

“The dioceses cannot be permitted to dictate who lives and who dies in Catholic-owned hospitals,” the ACLU’s lawyers fumed in response.

Yeah how dare the Bishop trump the Federal government in deciding who lives and who dies. I mean how could a bishop have the authority to determine what is murder? The government has such a good track record in the department of ethics.

* Rather odd though to call a bishop “devout” in what is really a nod to saying the Bishop is faithful to the Church.

If the abortion lobby gets its way, faithful Catholic hospitals and Catholic medical professionals who follow their consciences and adhere to canon law could see their federal funding yanked. And radical social engineers may well force the shutdown of countless Catholic hospitals at a time when Obamacare costs and consequences are already wreaking havoc on the health industry.
Fewer jobs, less access to health care, less freedom and more lives lost: Merry Christmas from the ACLU.

Yes, great timing on the part of the ACLU – but what do you expect from opportunists seeking to make hay of Bishop Ohmsted’s decision. The left is totally riled up about his decision. They hate the Catholic Church yet are upset when a bishop pulls the use of Catholic from a hospital.

Here is one lovely comment I got from an Ellen who uses Verizon in Ashburn, Va.

Meanwhile, pedophile priests remain unexcommunicated and protected by the SAME bishop from police and their victims! May the bishop’s supporters die from the same deadly childbirths in their own lives to get a clue.

Can’t you feel the love? Plus when you don’t have a real argument bring up abusive priests – the race card for dissenters. Doesn’t matter that Bishop Olmsted came into a diocese with previous problems with abuse and did an excellent job of cleaning up the mess and reaching out to the victims. As for excommunication of abusive priests, they are already removed from the clerical state which is effectively permanent. Excommunications are a medicinal remedy and are lifted once a person repents. But making these points doesn’t matter to someone that wants you to die to get a clue. That you can never commit evil to do good is lost on a commenter of this type.