Poll: Rape and Abortion - The Catholic Viewpoint

[nyj]

Ok. I'm being taken to task on another board in this forum because I refuse to relent on my position that abortion, under any circumstances is acceptable.

The example currently being used is that of a raped and now pregnant nine year old. Most everyone thinks it's quite alright to terminate the unborn child in this instance, rather than endanger the nine year old.

My question though is: Save her from what danger? The danger of giving birth? Even a past director of Planned Parenthood admits that there are no situations today where an abortion is necessary to save and prolong the life of the mother. I've read many an article that talks about ten year olds taking a pregnancy full term. I'm sure everyone has heard of the couple who were 4 MONTHS premature and their children survived and appear to be able to begin living a normal life.

I say take the pregnancy as close to full-term as possible, deliver and put up for adoption. It's a tragic situation, one I would wish on no one, but taking a life to "correct another evil" should not be an option for the Christian.

Nevermind the fact that I think in most all circumstances it would be gross negligence on the part of the parents for their child to be raped in the first place, I'd like to focus on just the issue of the child and the potential abortion.

If you were the parent in this situation, what would you choose?

 

[VOW]

To NYJ:

Seriously, I think it would depend on the child. Some girls at nine have a physically mature body. Some do not; just because the girl is menstruating at that age doesn't mean her body is ready to carry a baby. She still has a LOT of growing to do, and unless you can insure she will abide by a proper diet, you are risking her bone and teeth development.

Is she emotionally capable of caring for herself during a pregnancy?

A woman who is raped, whatever the age, needs immediate counseling. Can she survive the incredible, emotional upheaval of not only the pregnancy itself, but knowing it is the product of such a violation?

NYJ, in the perfect set of circumstances, a good marriage, a supportive husband, a caring family, a good doctor, pregnancy is stressful. If you add health problems to that, you complicate matters. If you add psychological problems to it, you magnify everything.

I watched a talk show where a woman had been raped and became pregnant. Her rapist was captured, convicted, and sentenced to prison. She gave the child up for adoption. When the child turned 18, she expressed an interest in contacting her birth mother. The birth mother considered it, until she found out the girl also wanted to contact the birth FATHER. The girl understood that she was the result of a rape, and that her father was in prison. But the birth mother was horribly traumatized by the IDEA that the girl wanted to contact the man who had assaulted her mother. The woman feared that somehow, the man would eventually be able to find her again, and she was completely paralyzed by the idea.

I'm not in a place to decide. All I can say is that the potential mother needs a great deal of counseling, prayer, and incredibly loving support.


Peace be with you,
~VOW

 

[Chris†opher Paul]

It would truly be horrible to be in that situation, but I think it comes down to the fact of an abortion being murder in any case.

 

[Miss Shelby]

Originally posted by nyj

If you were the parent in this situation, what would you choose?

Good Heavens, can you think of a tougher question?  I can honestly say that I haven't the slightest clue what I would do as a parent in this situation.

Michelle

 

[VOW]

To Souljah:

I can't make the singular determination of "murder" when you are jeopardizing the emotional and physical health of a child. The nine-year-old body is simply not physically capable of carrying a healthy pregnancy to term. The risk of prematurity is horrendously increased the younger the mother's age.

The EMOTIONAL violation of a rape is beyond understanding, and asking someone to live every single moment reliving the violation while pregnant is something I don't want to be responsible for. Pardon my sexist reasoning, but this is one case where I don't think a man could really grasp the severity of the situation.

I've been pregnant twice; both times, the babies were very wanted. And it was ROUGH. I was under a great deal of emotional stress for the first pregnancy, and I was put on bed rest for the last month.


Peace be with you,
~VOW

 

[nyj]

Originally posted by VOW

Seriously, I think it would depend on the child.

If it depends on the child, why hasn't the Church made this distinction?

As far as the Church is concerned, abortion is wrong, unequivocally.

Or is this a case of a group of men thinking they know what's best for women?

 

[nyj]

Originally posted by VOW

The risk of prematurity is horrendously increased the younger the mother's age.

This however should play no role in the decision making process of whether or not an abortion should be performed, not to mention that it doesn't address the morality of the decision as well.

A child born one month premature is no longer a problem for medicine, same goes for a two month premature child. Heck, children are being born four months premature now, surviving and growing up without any detrimental side-effects.

 

[VOW]

To NYJ:

Don't EVER make a blanket statement that one-month prematurity is not a problem! You need to go check out some stats!

The complications of prematurity are far too many to list here, but one of the major ones is the development of the lungs. The tissues have not had enough time to develop fully, and the child does not get enough oxygen. The NICU can increase the percentage of oxygen to 100%, after that, the PRESSURE is increased, to try to get enough oxygen in the baby. Eventually it can reach a point where the pressure is so high, the baby's lungs rupture.

Preemies have a problem with bleeding, too. Everything can be progressing nicely, and then the baby can develop an intracranial bleed. After that, nothing can be done, and the child will most likely die. Should the child survive, there will be massive brain damage, resulting in retardation and/or cerebral palsy.

With each week of prematurity increases the risks to the baby. For each success story touted in the media, who knows how many parents are faced with heartbreak?

A co-worker lost a child about a year ago. She delivered premature twins, and the larger baby, who started out so well, died from an intracranial bleed.

The younger the mother, the greater the risks for pre-eclampsia, and full-blown toxemia. The blood pressure increases and increases, which can cause a stroke or death to the mother. The only guaranteed treatment is immediate delivery.

I delivered my son five weeks early. He was rushed to NICU from the delivery room because his lungs were full of fluid. If you are familiar with Apgar scores, he was only a "4" at birth. Since he weighed over eight pounds, it wasn't SIZE that affected him, it was DEVELOPMENT.

He also stayed orange for the first four months. He was subjected to countless tests for his liver development, and when the jaundice later resolved itself, it was simply attributed to his prematurity.

A baby belongs in the womb for nine months. Modern medicine has made great progress in the handling of prematurity, but it can no way even come close to the original plan of God.



Peace,
~VOW

 

[Chris†opher Paul]

VOW-

Perhaps I couldnt understand it fully, but I ask you, which do you KILL...the baby or the nine year old?

Shouldn't we leave it up to the Lord?

 

[VOW]

To Souljah:

My point is that you could very well end up killing BOTH the baby and the nine-year-old!

That's why I cannot make a blanket pronouncement. This is something you can't make a single statement and expect it to apply. Did you know that nine-year-olds can and do commit suicide?

Who is going to stay with that nine-year-old 24/7, to tell her she can't go rollerblading, or ride her bicycle with no hands on the handlebars, or tell her to eat all her vegetables and give up soda pop? Who is going to watch her to see if she suffers a convulsion?

This is a ROUGH question, with a tremendous amount of REALITY to consider.


Peace,
~VOW

 

[nyj]

Originally posted by VOW

Don't EVER make a blanket statement that one-month prematurity is not a problem! You need to go check out some stats!

I have checked out the statistics, and I'm familiar with the developments in the medical field as it pertains to premature births. While it is not without it's risks, prematurity does not present the problems it did in the past, and a one month premature infant is no longer a problem for the medical field. Obviously carrying a birth full term is ideal, but birthing a child one month early is now a viable option for doctors, rather than it being a complication.

Should the child survive, there will be massive brain damage, resulting in retardation and/or cerebral palsy.

And this is an answer for what? Sounds like eugenics to me. Kill the child before it becomes a potential problem for society.

The younger the mother, the greater the risks for pre-eclampsia, and full-blown toxemia. The blood pressure increases and increases, which can cause a stroke or death to the mother. The only guaranteed treatment is immediate delivery.

And this says what about the question at hand?

A baby belongs in the womb for nine months. Modern medicine has made great progress in the handling of prematurity, but it can no way even come close to the

Exactly, a baby belongs in the womb, not in a vacuum tube.

 

[VOW]

To NYJ:

one month premature infant is no longer a problem for the medical field.

Don't bet the rent on that!


Peace,
~VOW

 

[nyj]

Originally posted by VOW

Don't bet the rent on that!

Vow,

Women who carry their child full-term can still die from complications. There is infant mortality even for full-term infants. You can drown on one ounce of water. You can still choke on your food even if you chew each bite 30 times before swallowing.

But because a certain amount of risk can be found in everything we do, does that mean we should stop eating, drinking and giving birth?

The fact of the matter is, the Church makes no distinction between a child conceived by rape, a child conceived between two loving parents, or a child conceived "by accident" by two people fooling around. Regardless of the circumstances in which that child was conceived, it is a life and that life is sacred.

 

[VOW]

To NYJ:

In the United States, there are 10,799 babies born each day, of which 1239 are born preterm; 817 babies are born daily weighing < 2500 g, 156 are born weighing < 1500 g, and 12 are born weighing < 454 g (1 pound). While preterm births are increasing as a whole, the group that is especially increasing is the very low birth weight group (VLBW), with weight < 1500 g. This group has a 70-fold increased rate of mortality in the first year of life.

Neonatologists have now pushed the envelope, saving some fetuses born at 22-23 weeks. According to Dr. King, female premature infants do better than males. For infants born at 24 weeks gestation, 50% of females survive whereas only 35% of males survive. African-American female infants do the best; white males have the worst survival. A recent abstract[21] from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) showed that survival for infants born weighing between 501 g and 1500 g has continued to improve: 84% of 4438 infants weighing 501 g to 1500 g at birth survived until discharge to home or a long-term care facility.

However, morbidity and major mortality remain high, 71%, in the smallest infants (< 600 g at birth).[22] Although the survival rate of premature infants is improving, the morbidity associated with premature birth can be lifelong. School performance has been shown to increase with increased birth weight. Unfortunately, according to the NICHD study, 97% of all VLBW infants and 99% of infants weighing < 1000 g at birth had weights that fell below the 10th percentile at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age. In addition, the financial cost of survival is great. The average lifetime cost of a preterm infant exceeds $500,000. Respiratory distress syndrome and prematurity are 2 of the 3 most expensive conditions in medicine. (Spinal cord injury is the third.)

This is from www.medscape.com, a report from the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology meeting, 2002.


Peace,
~VOW

 

[nyj]

Yes, mortality is decreasing (which supports my position) but morbidity still remains a problem (which seems to be what you are using as a leg to stand on to support your "It may be possible to have an abortion" in this instance). So, is this potential morbidity (ie:a state of disability) suitable reason to abort the child beforehand?

Two questions:
Q1) Do you know the infant in our case will suffer any detrimental effects?

Q2) Is this or is this not, eugenics?


Two answers:
A1) No, we do not know if any particular child will suffer any detrimental effects from being born prematurely. The only thing we know for certain is that being aborted, that child has NO CHANCE for anything.

A2) Yes, it is eugenics and as such is flatly condemned by the Catholic Church, for obvious reasons. Margaret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood), Adolf Hitler and Peter Singer (who advocates a parents right to terminate the life of their child within the first 30 days of birth) are all proponents of this idea.

 

[VOW]

To NYJ:

I'm not advocating abortion in all cases of rape. I'm saying that unless you have walked in those shoes, you have no business making the decision for someone else.

Counseling, medical advice, prayer, and certainly guidance by the Church are all necessary. And IF the pregnancy is allowed to go to term, the nine-year-old mother certainly cannot be abandoned to "God's will." She will need to be placed in an incredibly supportive, protective, nurturing environment.

Are YOU personally going to provide that for her?


Peace,
~VOW

 

[nyj]

Originally posted by VOW
I'm not advocating abortion in all cases of rape.

No offense Vow, but as a Catholic you shouldn't be advocating abortion in ANY cases of rape.

Originally posted by VOW
I'm saying that unless you have walked in those shoes, you have no business making the decision for someone else.

Cow puck! I haven't had a family member murdered but that doesn't stop me from disapproving of capital punishment. I haven't been discriminated against, that doesn't stop me from decrying the actions of the Klu Klux Klan. There are a lot of things in life that we do not experience but by common sense, a strong moral standard and a Christian conviction that we can see are not acceptable to society. Abortion is one of those things. So, am I correct in thinking that you view the Church's stance on this issue as just a bunch of stodgy old men making choices for women that they have no business making?

Originally posted by VOW
Counseling, medical advice, prayer, and certainly guidance by the Church are all necessary. And IF the pregnancy is allowed to go to term, the nine-year-old mother certainly cannot be abandoned to "God's will." She will need to be placed in an incredibly supportive, protective, nurturing environment.

Are YOU personally going to provide that for her?

No Vow, if it was my daughter I'd kick her to the curb. You've got to be kidding me right? How could you even ask that question with a straight face after seeing me defend that unborn child's right to life?

 

[VOW]

To NYJ:

Because a LOT of Right to Lifers' interest end in the courtroom.

A nine-year-old still needs active parenting for HERSELF. She certainly is not mature enough to be left overnight alone, and she certainly wouldn't be a primary caregiver for an infant. I doubt she'll be permitted to attend a regular elementary school. I mean, who's going to keep her from playing "keep-away" on the playground?

It takes perseverance and intelligence to handle the medical system, it takes even MORE to obtain adequate care from MedicAid. Kids are DYING from neglect and abuse in the present Children's Protective Services program, because the caseworkers are so overloaded. Who is going to watch out for this child?

If you've got a welfare family, headed by a single mother, who has other kids to care for, and then you add to her life a nine-year-old pregnant CHILD... give me an honest medical evaluation for the survival of both the child-parent and the child-fetus.

What are her chances of being placed in a caring foster home, where she will be attended to, nurtured, watched, and protected?

If she gives birth to a premature infant who ends up having developmental defects because of a PRE-TEEN mother, where will that infant go?

I'm NOT advocating eugenics. To be compared to Hitler is abominable, and I resent it.

I suggest you contact your local office of Children's Protective Services and sign up to be a foster parent.



Peace be with you,
~VOW

 

[nyj]

Vow,

Perhaps you didn't read the question that started the poll.

If your child was raped and pregnant, would you get her an abortion?



With that said...

As for the eugenics comparison, from what I have read, your entire argument is that the child has a good chance of being born premature, and premature children suffer from disabilities. And that is the leg you appear to be standing on when you say that you cannot say unequivocally that abortion is not an option. Am I correct? Cause I see nothing that appears to run counter to what I've just summarized, and it is certainly what you've been arguing for the past several posts.

If this is not what you are arguing, please clarify exactly what your reasoning is for allowing abortions in certain rape cases (knowing that a premature birth is a viable option to protect the mother and giving the unborn child the greatest chance at survival). If your line of argument IS that it is better in these cases to abort the child because it's potential quality of life is diminished, that IS eugenics... chances are that that child (the one in our scenario) could be completely healthy and given a few of decades of life could even go on to win a Nobel Prize in medicine!

 

[ZiSunka]

If your child was raped and was now pregnant, would you get her an abortion?

Is the baby conceived by rape less human than a baby conceived in any other way?

It is the humanness of the baby that makes its life precious, and its abortion wrong, not the holiness of the parents or the circumstances of how it was conceived.

Making abortion of rape-conceived babies okay only serves to reinforce the idea that people are disposable if they are inconvenient.