Beware Of Giving Birth In Religious/Catholic Hospital. Life Of The Mother Is Expendable

[TheMastersNemesis]

If a woman gives birth in a religiously run hospital or Catholic hospital the life of the mother does not take precedent if their is a problem birth. The life of the child will always come first and the mother will be sacrificed. Under Catholic dogma is there is a choice between the child and mother the mother must be sacrificed.

As more and more hospitals fall under ownership of religious groups that are pro life, it becomes risky giving birth un such institutions because the mother's life becomes secondary. Many communities no longer have a public hospital in the US now.

It would be important to know if an obstetrician has hospital privileges at a public or religiously run hospital.

[seveneyes]

1. Link?

Not that I don't think it possible, but documented facts are a good thing.

[TheMastersNemesis]

3. There Is No Link. I Was Raised RC And The Dogma Is Life Of The Child Is First.

Several of our hospitals in Denver are now run by a Catholic religious order. And I am sure that the dogma is applies. Religiously run hospitals are not bound to follow policy that public hospitals follow. These hospitals are essentially privately run.

[jwirr]

7. And not all religions follow this RC dictate. My lutheran religion specifically

does not. And no I do not have a link either - just raised to understand that.

I also agree with the poster that says hospitals listen to their insurance provider. My daughter works in a RC hospital and there is a lot of competition in our small city. They do a lot of things that usually are forbidden - like offer their employees some of the services covered in the Hobby-Lobby case. However, they send other kind of thing to the other hospitals rather than deal with them.

[Facility Inspector]

2. Hospitals listen to their liability insurers

more than they do to God.

[TheMastersNemesis]

4. I Would Hope That Is True.

[Facility Inspector]

5. Doctors even more so

[Nuclear Unicorn]

6. You really should stop fabricating lurid tales of fantasy.

[REP]

8. It's not a fantasy.

From the horses's mouth so to speak:


http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/health-care/upload/Ethical-Religious-Directives-Catholic-Health-Care-Services-fifth-edition-2009.pdf

From the LA Times:


http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/18/local/la-me-ln-catholic-hospitals-healthcare-women-aclu-20131218

[Nuclear Unicorn]

9. And yet, I found this --

There are instances in which it is legitimate for an expectant mother to undergo certain medical or surgical procedures that will save her life, even if these procedures inevitably involve the death of her unborn child. In these cases it is not a question of intentionally aborting the child. They involve, rather, accepting the loss of the child as an unavoidable consequence of caring for the mother´s health.

The clearest and surest example is the ectopic pregnancy. As everyone knows, should the fetus become lodged in the oviduct or fallopian tube, its continued growth will result in the death of both child and mother. A normal and proper procedure in this case is the removal of the fallopian tube, from which the death of the unborn child inevitably follows. In this case the death of the child is not sought, nor is the mother´s life saved by the child´s dying.

This is not an abortion. Quite simply, the mother´s life is saved by the surgical removal of the oviduct, not by the death of her child. If this reasoning is too subtle for some American minds to follow, well, the available evidence suggests that just about any coherent thinking these days is too subtle for some American minds to follow.

http://www.catholic.net/index.php?option=dedestaca&id=177

[REP]

10. That reasoning is not universally accepted

And there are other instances where the fetus is given priority over the life and health of the living, breathing, sentient woman. The OP did not make up a "fantasy," but rather state the true state of things for pregnant women.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. In the first link you provided I didn't see anything stating a refusal to provide

abortion services to save the life of the mother. Could you provide a page number or excerpt?

[REP]

13. P 26, section 45 and 47

Which in plain English means: if a pregnant woman needs a hysterectomy/chemotherapy to save her life due to uterine cancer, even though it will terminate the pregnancy, it is allowed because the cancer is not caused by the pregnancy and the abortion is an indirect effect of treating the cancer.

If the pregnant woman is suffering organ failure due to the pregnancy, however, abortion is not allowed even though it will save her life, because the pregnancy is the cause of the organ failure and the abortion would a direct effect.

[REP]

14. Also, read the LA Times link and the ACLU report

https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/growth-of-catholic-hospitals-2013.pdf

From the LA Times:

The lawsuit was filed last month on behalf of Tamesha Means of Muskegon, Mich., who was 18 weeks pregnant when her water broke. She showed up at her local Catholic hospital and was sent home twice with only Tylenol.

According to the lawsuit, Means was not informed that her pregnancy was no longer viable, nor that she risked infection if an abortion were not performed. During her third trip the emergency room, in the grip of a serious infection, her body expelled the severely premature baby, who soon died.

Does that sound like they gave her life and health priority? It doesn't to me.

[Quackers]

16. I think I read the ruling on that last month.

They dismissed the case because she didn't actually sue the hospital, she sued the church or counsel of bishops, something like that. I'll have to look for that article again.

[Jerry442]

17. Patrick Henry Reardon, the author of this piece isn't even Catholic. nt

[PeaceNikki]

20. You shouldn't go to a Catholic hospital and expect you will get decent care.

At all. Especially if you're a women. In fact, try, at all possible costs to avoid one. Tell your loved ones and put in advanced medical directives that you want nothing to do with them. The problem is that many poor have no choice so dogma is given priority over your health.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/10/catholic-hospitals-bishops-contraception-abortion-health-care

This is such an important issue. The ACLU is suing catholic hospitals for this.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/12/02/248243411/aclu-sues-u-s-bishops-says-catholic-hospital-rules-put-women-at-risk

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/03/25/dont-take-her-to-catholic-hospital/

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/safety-of-women-in-catholic-hospitals-questioned-by-top-bioethicist-94688044-237696791.html

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/2/dangers-of-a-catholichospitaluntold.html

[Gloria]

12. had a friend who had an ectopic pregnancy...went to St. Peter's and

was basically blown off. Had to go by ambulance to a real hospital where they saved her. This was in NJ.

I don't trust any Catholic hospital and am happy that a religious bunch was rejected here.....

I would worry over other procedures and complications that might leave me on life support forever ...regardless if my directives.

[Jerry442]

15. Ectopic pregnancy will never be treated...

...as per sections 48 and 45 of the document linked to by DU'er REP.

Not 100% true, I suppose. They'll hold your loved ones hand as she dies.

[Runningdawg]

18. Speaking as a retired nurse

who worked in both Catholic hospitals in Tulsa, I don't see this as true. I assisted on many operations to remove a tube with a failed pregnancy, one with intra-abdominal pregnancy, and several c-sections to remove a late-term dead fetus. IF - big doubtful IF - they were letting women die over this type of case in the ER, the news never traveled up to the OR.
What they did do, which was a little strage to me, was bring in a priest to give the "products of conception" the last rites. This was done with every failed pregnancy, regardless of the parents religious background and to my knowledge without their permission.

[REP]

19. Removing an already dead fetus is not an abortion

And therefore not in conflict with doctrine.

[Runningdawg]

22. My reply was in response

to those who had posted that an ectopic pregnancy would not be removed to save the life of a woman. There are sects of the religious community, that would allow a woman to die without intervention in such cases. The previous posters claimed religiously affiliated hospitals would allow this to happen. My comment was to refute that claim based on experience.
You and I may not consider these cases abortion. However, the Catholic hospitals in which I worked considered them a death of a living baby and treated the tissue in the same matter as the death of an adult.

[PeaceNikki]

21. It's not just a problem for birth.

You shouldn't go to a Catholic hospital and expect you will get decent care. At all. Especially if you're a women. In fact, try, at all possible costs to avoid one. Tell your loved ones and put in advanced medical directives that you want nothing to do with them. The problem is that many poor have no choice so dogma is given priority over your health.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/10/catholic-hospitals-bishops-contraception-abortion-health-care

This is such an important issue. The ACLU is suing catholic hospitals for this.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/12/02/248243411/aclu-sues-u-s-bishops-says-catholic-hospital-rules-put-women-at-risk

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/03/25/dont-take-her-to-catholic-hospital/

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/safety-of-women-in-catholic-hospitals-questioned-by-top-bioethicist-94688044-237696791.html

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/2/dangers-of-a-catholichospitaluntold.html