Bishops Conferences Admit to Approving Abortifacient Drugs for Rape at Catholic Hospitals

The Catholic Medical Association, the largest professional organization of Catholic physicians in the U.S. is resolutely opposed to the use of the abortifacient morning after pill (also known as 'emergency contraception' or its generic name Plan B) in Catholic Hospitals because of its potential to cause abortions. Nevertheless, the Catholic Bishops of both Connecticut and Wisconsin and other states have publicly admitted that their Catholic hospitals are distributing such pills to rape victims.

In testimony before the Wisconsin Senate Committee last week, the Wisconsin Catholic Conference noted that Catholic hospitals were in fact already administering the morning after pill with the use of pregnancy tests. Kim Wadas, Associate Director for Health Care at the Conference, told the committee, "Catholic hospitals in Wisconsin can and do treat victims with emergency contraception." (see the full testimony here: http://www.wisconsin.nasccd.org/bins/wisconsin/content/pages... )

In a joint April 25 letter signed by the Bishops of Connecticut, Archbishop of Harford Henry Mansell, and Bishop of Bridgeport William Lori, the prelates state: "It is important to repeat that Connecticut's Catholic hospitals do provide emergency contraception." Later in the letter they add, "We would not object to passage of a statute that would require all hospitals to adopt protocols requiring the distribution of Plan B to sexual assault victims when medically appropriate." (see the letter at the Connecticut Catholic Conference website here: Bishops Letter to Legislative Leaders on S.B. 1343

LifeSiteNews.com has learned that some Catholic hospitals in Massachusetts, Colorado, New York, California, Washington also offer so-called 'emergency contraception' to some rape victims. The bishops of these dioceses believe they are allowing the use of emergency contraception only in cases where "appropriate testing" has determined that the woman is not pregnant and thus the pill, in halting ovulation may prevent a pregnancy occurring as a result of the rape. The science however does not definitively back up their hopes.

Medical evidence, accepted by the largest association of Catholic doctors in the United States, demonstrates that the pregnancy tests used cannot accurately detect a pregnancy at fertilization but only after implantation which takes more than a week after the new life is formed. A more stringent protocol known as the ovulation method used in some Catholic hospitals, seeks to determine if the patient has ovulated and if the test indicates she has not, the pills can be given. However, medical evidence demonstrates considerable doubt that even these tests can detect a potential fertilization in time to prevent an abortion caused by administration of the pill. (for a detailed look at this aspect of the medical evidence see here: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007_docs/UScatholichospitalsand...)

Even if such tests could accurately determine that ovulation has not yet occurred another difficulty exists. A study by Dr. Chris Kahlenborn in 2003 found that the pill only works to halt ovulation half the time. Thus fertilization may occur even after the pill is administered, and an abortion would result since in addition to stopping ovulation the pills act to weaken the lining of the uterus making implantation unsustainable. See Dr. Kahlenborn's study here: http://www.polycarp.org/postfertilization_polycarp_1.htm

Dr. Kathleen Raviele, the President-Elect of the Catholic Medical Association, told LifeSiteNews.com that the science is complex and "Bishops can't be expected to understand all of the medical nuances of this." She says however that the situation as it stands requires reassessment. "In everything we err on the side of life," she said and thus the administration of the morning after pill in Catholic hospitals is "not justified."
At its Annual Meeting in 2003, the Catholic Medical Association passed a resolution correcting theologians who have erroneously suggested that it would be legitimate for Catholic hospitals to provide "emergency contraception" to rape victims.

The Catholic doctors said that the term 'emergency contraception' is "a misnomer as it does not consistently prevent fertilization". The resolution concludes that the drug, "has the potential to prevent implantation whether given in the pre-ovulatory, ovulatory, or post-ovulatory phase, that it cannot be ethically employed by a Catholic physician or administered in a Catholic Hospital in cases of rape". Raviele added that the most common morning after pill currently in use, Plan B, has many negative side effects such as nausea and dizziness, and the medical literature is pointing to use of the abortion drug RU-486 as a replacement. "The next emergency contraceptive on the horizon is going to be a low dose of RU-486 since it has no side effects," she warned.

Dr. Kahlenborn, who, with two other physicians, did the study on the effect of the morning after pill told LifeSiteNews.com, no one knows for sure how the morning after pill works. Acting in an area of life and death in uncertainty, suggests Dr. Kahlenborn, is reckless. "The bishops who approve this are approving potential abortions," he said.
"You have the Catholic doctors telling you this and even Protestant doctors," said Kahlenborn speaking of the Catholic Medical Association and the two Protestant and Mormon physicians who co-authored the study on the morning after pill. "Who are the bishops listening to?," he asked rhetorically.

The Catholic Health Association is an association led by theologians which advises the bishops on such matters and it approves of the limited use of the morning after pill in Catholic hospitals for rape victims. Dr. Kahlenborn wondered about reliance on theologians for opinion on medical science rather than on medical doctors. "Basically saying your theologians are smarter than all the doctors out there," he said. Given the complexities involved, Dr. Kahlenborn suggested that a new Vatican intervention would be required to clear up the situation. "The only way I really think its going to change is if the Vatican does something," he concluded.

To politely request that the Pontifical Academy for Life clarify the situation write:
pav@acdlife.va

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
US Catholic Bishops in Wisconsin and Connecticut Drop Opposition to Abortion-Causing Emergency Contraception
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/apr/07043003.html

Emergency contraception: What the words mean

Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.

2 March 2005

The following column appeared in The Denver Post on Feb. 8.

Representative Fran Coleman recently criticized the Catholic Church for “preaching” to her because, although she is Catholic, she represents people of all faiths. She took issue with Catholic resistance to portions of HB 05-1042, which would require hospitals in the state to provide emergency contraception for women who are raped.

Rape is a brutal, ugly and inexcusable form of violence. Rep. Coleman’s feelings are understandable. She is a legislator of proven service and character. She is right in seeking immediate medical intervention for women who suffer rape. While conception from rape is rare, it does happen, and Catholic teaching supports the right of rape victims to defend themselves against potential conception.

Genuine emergency contraception — i.e., steps to prevent ovulation following a rape — poses no problem for Catholics. The Church and her health-care institutions already allow for this as an act of defense against violent sexual assault.

But HB 05-1042, as it currently stands, has serious flaws that should cause any thoughtful person to stop and reflect.

“Emergency contraception” is one of those expressions that sounds compelling but easily gets twisted. HB 05-1042 does a bad job of defining it. Medical science traditionally saw fertilization of a woman’s egg — not implantation in the uterine wall — as the beginning of pregnancy and life itself. The abortion lobby, of course, worked hard to change that.

If the hormonal agents used in emergency contraception are intended to suppress ovulation, and if they’re applied at a point in a victim’s cycle where they truly can prevent ovulation, Catholics can support their use.

But many backers of emergency contraception intend much more than simply blocking conception. They define it to include methods that are abortifacient — in other words, that kill the fertilized egg after pregnancy has begun by preventing it from implanting in the uterine wall.

For Catholics and Catholic hospitals, this creates a grave moral problem. The size of an unborn human life doesn’t matter; the scientific fact that a human life has begun, does. Once conception occurs, two sets of rights must be protected: the woman unjustly violated, and the innocent life who results. To the degree that supporters of “emergency contraception” obscure this fact, as many often do, they act dishonestly.

HB 05-1042 describes emergency contraception as “any drug approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration that prevents pregnancy after sexual intercourse, including but not limited to contraceptive pills.” But the bill should also state that, for purposes of informed consent, the health-care facility must inform the patient of what the “drug” is, and what it does.

A victim of sexual assault surely has the right to know what is being administered to her and what its potential effects are. She should not be victimized again by health-care professionals who withhold informed consent from her because she hasn’t been told about the actual effects of the chemicals introduced into her body.

Another concern is this: If the victim has recently been sexually intimate with her husband — roughly within the previous four days — she could have her husband’s and her own newly conceived child making its way to the womb and inadvertently prevent it from implanting. If so, there would now be, in a sense, multiple victims: the woman suffering from the original assault, a mother and father deprived of their child, and the newly conceived child whose life is ended.

Catholic hospitals want to offer sexual assault victims the facts needed for full informed consent. We believe it’s sometimes necessary to perform medical tests to determine the right course of action to conform to sound medical judgment. We don’t want to refer out for procedures we consider immoral, and HB 05-1042 would require that in an unprecedented way.

At a minimum, Catholic hospitals — which provide their services based on moral and religious convictions about the dignity of the human person — should not be obligated to perform or refer for procedures which violate Catholic teaching. This doesn’t involve “preaching” to anybody. It involves fidelity to principle and conscience — the same principles and conscience that animate Catholic service to the poor.

Coloradans owe rape victims our compassion and immediate support. In providing that support, methods matter. A good end, no matter how urgent, cannot justify bad means. The responsibility of adult citizens is to think carefully about complicated issues and choose the right course. HB 05-1042 is a well-intentioned piece of legislation. What it needs now is the clarity of deeper moral and scientific reflection, and room for people and institutions to remain true to their consciences in responding.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.