Recent Pro-Life News
I write this during the second week of our Easter season. It is a season of resurrection. Thus, it is a season of life. If we are to enter into eternal life in the resurrection, we must first be good custodians of life in this world. After all, Jesus says, “His master said to him, ‘Well done, my good and faithful servant. Since you were faithful in small matters, I will give you great responsibilities” (Matthew 25:23, see Matthew 25:14-30 for context).
In recent days there has been news regarding both life in the womb and life at the end that I would like to offer some thoughts on.
I will start with life in the womb. There are cases in the courts concerning the abortion pills and their approval process. Two federal courts in different districts have issued conflicting decisions. One said the FDA process was not properly followed so that judge ordered the suspension of the FDA approval. The other judge has said the abortion pill approval was valid and stands. Our federal Department of Justice has applied the first judge’s ban and asked the Supreme Court to step in.
It is my understanding that the abortion pill first gained approval 20 years ago. Knowing medical science develops and with it pills, I don’t know if there have been subsequent approvals for updated pills. I am not a medical or legal expert. We must always consider the medicine behind any pill. The most important question is, “Is the medicine safe for the person taking it?”. On the legal front, we must ensure proper processes were followed for FDA approval (again for the safety of the patient).
However, I think sometimes what gets lost in these legal actions is the need to help people understand why we are pro-life (see my series, Treating Life with Dignity and Love). If we change hearts so that no one will seek an abortion, then we have succeeded.
Now, this doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t pursue legal action. When it is appropriate, we should. Even then, we must do so in a way that articulates why we are pro-life. This is not easy. In the news stories about these current court cases, I have not seen much mention of the pro-life position. The coverage is about the legal battle between the two sides.
It is hard to dialogue on these issues. Those who hold a pro-choice position say we are against a woman’s right to choose. We are not. The question is the baby alive and have its own rights (see my article, “Biology Makes Me Pro-Life”). Seeing the baby as alive, the mother’s right to choose does not trump out the baby’s right to life. The woman made a choice when she choose to engage in intercourse, knowing pregnancy was a possibility. Here, I freely acknowledge a woman right to choose to engage in intercourse was denied if she is raped. In those cases, two wrongs don’t make it right. The support for life, in this case the baby’s life, must have the highest priority.
Now, switching to the end of life issues, Canada recently issued new guidelines for assisted suicide (see Kevin J. Jones, “Canada’s assisted suicide guidance for docs: ‘virtual’ assessments, and don’t tell patient’s family.” Catholic News Agency. 4/14/23. Online at https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/254096/canada-s-assisted-suicide-guidance-for-docs-virtual-assessments-and-don-t-tell-patient-s-family).
These new guidelines are a mixed bag to me. For those who put a patient’s right to privacy as an absolute, it could seem like a victory. However, I am very concerned that the health care workers are told not to tell the family. My first concern is ensuring that it really is the patient’s choice and not a health care worker’s choice. Related to this is concern over whether the patient is competent to make the decision. Morally, there is always the concern of the patient receiving the support they need to make a good decision. Does the patient think they are doing it because of what they think the family wants? If so, the family should have something to say.
I also find the guidelines a mixed bag for health care workers who believe that assisted suicide is wrong. There is a positive in the guidelines that it says these health care workers should not be forced to participate in suicide. However, they must refer the patient to someone who will help them with their desire to end their lives. Yes, the patient has their right to choose but I don’t see it necessary for the health care workers who opposed assisted suicide being compelled to refer them. I suspect the patient won’t have a hard time finding a doctor on their own who will help them.
Before ending, I will briefly mention the concern expressed in the news article over the virtual visits. More and more medical visits do happen virtually. There is concern over whether that is good medicine. In cases of assisted suicide, we are literally talking about decisions of life and death. It seems in-person consultations would be appropriate to ensure sound decisions.
Peace,
Fr. Jeff