Hey, is anyone thinking a retirement in the near future for the Cardinal might be a good idea?
Some German newspaper reports:
Two Catholic hospitals in Cologne declined to give emergency contraceptives to a rape victim. The archbishopric in Cologne has now changed its mind – and has also shown an impressive capacity for contraceptive nuance.
That the Catholic Church intends unequivocally to protect conceived life is nothing new. What has changed is how Cologne Cardinal Joachim Meisner approaches the “morning-after” pill.
Through his spokesman Christoph Heckley, the Cardinal issued a personal explanation on Thursday (31.01.2013) which read: “If, after a rape, a supplement is used with the intend of preventing fertilization, that is in my view justifiable.” Heckley reiterated once again, however, that everything which is abortive in nature is not allowed.
Cardinal Meisner’s change of heart is the result of consultations with specialists. He now understands that certain forms of the “morning-after” pill prevent conception and are not technically abortive. This suggests that the Cologne church leader previously believed that all kinds of pills which could be taken by a woman after intercourse prevented an already fertilized egg cell from implanting in the uterus.
A woman can be pregnant and it not be detected because it’s very early and the morning after pill can destroy the life created inside her. So I don’t see how he’s getting this.
February 4, 2013 at 12:49 pm
From the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Healthcare Services, USCCB: 36. Compassionate and understanding care should be given to a person who is the victim of sexual assault. Health care providers should cooperate with law enforcement officials and offer the person psychological and spiritual support as well as accurate medical information. A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault. If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred
22
already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum.19
February 4, 2013 at 12:52 pm
P.S. My purpose in posting the passage from the ERD is to point out that the USCCB does not hold to the idea that pregnancy can't always be detected. Personally, I have no idea what the statistics are for false negatives on pregnancy tests.
February 4, 2013 at 1:14 pm
Why did the Catholic Hospital pharmacy even have those drugs in the first place?
February 4, 2013 at 2:16 pm
The Cardinal might be getting a little note from Rome anytime now.
February 4, 2013 at 3:08 pm
Hmmm… what about that statement isn't in line with Catholic teaching? You didn't give any source for the article, so we have no context except your word, but the part you quoted looks OK to me. It is valid to prevent conception in the case of rape, but not to abort an existing child.
If there are medications which can be given to rape victims which are not abortifacient they should be licit. It is my understanding that such medications do exist (or at least Trent Horn referenced such on a Pro-life open forum on Catholic Answers live a few days ago).
February 4, 2013 at 3:25 pm
Mike, that is my understanding as well. I am not a pharmacist, but the various sources I have studied in my capacity as a philosopher have all said that there are certain "morning-after" pills that do not have the function of preventing implantation, but of preventing fertilization. The problem is in the ambiguity of terms. "Morning after pill" is actually a range of different medications with different functions. The problem is more in the reporting than in the cardinal's judgment.
February 4, 2013 at 3:38 pm
See "Postfertilization Effect of Hormonal Emergency Contraception" for a good medical journal article explaing this debate.
"CONCLUSIONS: Based on the present theoretical and empirical evidence, both the Yuzpe regimen and Plan B likely act at times by causing a postfertilization effect, regardless of when in the menstrual cycle they are used. These findings have potential implications in such areas as informed consent, emergency department protocols, and conscience clauses."
February 4, 2013 at 3:58 pm
I'd like to point you to this PDF of an article in the Journal of the Catholic Health Association of the United States, which provides evidence that Plan B does not act as an abortifacient:
http://www.chausa.org/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=6159
I am not a scientist and so can't evaluate the article with any sort of scrutiny beyond a layman's, so I would welcome any sort of critique or endorsement of this article by someone with better credentials.
February 4, 2013 at 4:31 pm
I don't see how the cardinal's statement, as reported here, is in violation of Catholic teaching. My understanding is that it is morally acceptable to try to prevent fertilization after a rape, if it can be determined medically that the woman has not ovulated yet.
This article from the National Catholic Bioethics Center may be useful:
http://ncbcenter.org/page.aspx?pid=301
February 4, 2013 at 4:33 pm
The Catholic Health Association of the United States is simply trying to justify the clinical practices at a number of "catholic" hospitals in the US affiliated with them.
The Catholic Medical Association is a far more trustworthy (i.e., orthodox) source. They have stated (emphasis added),
The Catholic Medical Association (CMA) has analyzed studies of post-sexual assault medications over the last several years. In the considered judgment of CMA representatives, scientific evidence supports the conclusion that all these formulations have some potential to prevent the implantation of a newly conceived human being.
February 4, 2013 at 4:47 pm
Paul said:
This article from the National Catholic Bioethics Center may be useful:
http://ncbcenter.org/page.aspx?pid=301
That is a good article. If the Catholic Health Association of the United States affiliated hospitals are actually following the recommendations there,
"When a woman arrives to an emergency room following a sexual assault, a simple urine test for leutinizing hormone (LH) can be used to gain information about whether she is ovulating. If it is determined that her LH levels have spiked and she is ovulating, the morning-after pill will not be able to block the egg’s release from her ovary. If it were to be administered under these circumstances, the morning-after pill might function to prevent the implantation of any newly conceived embryo(s), which would be the moral equivalent of an abortion. Under these conditions, therefore, the morning-after pill should not be administered."
…then I'd be pleasantly surprised and would gladly retract my criticism of them above. But I sincerely doubt that is the case.
February 4, 2013 at 8:27 pm
This comment has been removed by the author.
February 7, 2013 at 6:55 am
Murder Is Murder
February 19, 2013 at 9:31 am
Yes, the morning after-pill can be great for rape victims.
–FemiCareSurgery.com