NOTE: Please kindly respect copyrights. Do not copy and paste this commentary. Share the link http://wp.me/psOlF-NDM
The devil is in the details…
I have always held the firm opinion that the defense of innocent human life cannot be nuanced. I have stated this in my writings and as a tenet of public policy during my campaign for the United States Senate (on the ballot 2012 – Florida).
During the past few days I have become concerned over the wording of the Dublin Declaration, which I had included as a reference in my article titled, Urgent Message from Marielena Montesino de Stuart (16 August 2015).
It is my opinion that the Dublin Declaration does not clarify the critical issue of “procured abortion”—that is, inducing a baby who will not survive or has little chance of survival outside the mother’s womb.
I must clarify, for the sake of justice and fairness, that the more than one thousand individuals who have signed the Dublin Declaration—including some members of the Committee on Excellence in Maternal Healthcare (the select panel of writers and original signators of the Dublin Declaration) may not be aware of what, in my opinion, is the critical need for the Dublin Declaration to clearly define what it means by “necessary medical treatments” and how this ambiguity may leave the door open for spurious justifications of procured abortions—which are abortions per se.
Regardless of their good intentions, unless the crafters of the Dublin Declaration make it clear that delivering a premature baby who cannot or may not survive outside the mother’s womb (procured abortion) is never a reasonable nor permissible pretext for “necessary medical treatment”—then their declaration could lead less informed individuals to accept procured abortions as an acceptable pro-life option.
My concerns over the Dublin Declaration are also based on a statement by Dr. Eoghan de Faoite, who is one of the members of the select panel which wrote and signed the declaration.
Dr. de Faoite’s statement, which I quote below, was made on January 10, 2013 during a Joint Committee on Health and Children Debate held at the Houses of the Oireachtas (Ireland’s National Parliament) in Dublin:
“Irish obstetricians and other specialists will always intervene to save the life of a mother when she has a life-threatening complication of pregnancy. This practice of intervening, which includes premature delivery of the baby even when the baby has little of [sic] no chance of surviving, is permitted in Ireland today. It is permitted under Irish law and by the Medical Council’s ethical guidelines and is within pro-life principles.”
Dr. de Foite’s statement in the Irish Parliament is of great significance and concern, as one of the original drafters and signators of the Dublin Declaration.
Dianne N. Irving, PhD, as Professor of Philosophy and Medical Ethics at The Catholic University of America, published an excellent analysis titled, Abortion: Correct Application of Natural Law Theory, which is the theory of natural person known as the principle of double effect. The proper application of this principle is the crucial factor in decisions made during extreme medical conditions involving a pregnancy.
I encourage my readers to pay careful attention to her analysis (which I provide in the reference section below)– in connection with the issue of procured abortions.
Furthermore, the correct application of the principle of double effect is in observance with Roman Catholic teaching (I am a Roman Catholic) and is centered on the fact that knowledge and intent are critical for medical practitioners involved in a woman’s pregnancy. As such, it is not reasonable nor acceptable for a medical practitioner to carry out a procured abortion as “necessary medical treatment” knowing that the “baby has little or no chance of surviving.” The Roman Catholic Church is explicit on her rejection of procured abortions.
When it comes to procured abortions, the following expressions come to mind, “the devil is in the details” and “words have consequences”(or the consequences of words left unsaid, in the case of the Dublin Declaration)—because while the subject of procured abortions may at first appear small inside the house of horrors where abortions are performed— this does not mean that we should ignore the ambiguity of “necessary medical treatments.” The fact is that ambiguity leaves the door open for abortion advocates who are aggressively looking for loopholes, i.e., procured abortions.
A single loophole can bring an end to precious innocent and helpless lives, that later end up cut into pieces and sold to the highest bidder at Planned Parenthood.
This is the reason why a uniform and authentic pro-life position cannot be ambiguous nor nuance the value of a baby’s life.
It’s time to lift the fog…. someone has to say the truth.
Copyright © Marielena Montesino de Stuart. All rights reserved.
I encourage my readers to gain more insight into the critical matter of procured abortions through the reference section provided below.
This post also reaches an international audience through the following categories:
Dublin Declaration, Abortion, Aborto, El Aborto, Actualidades, Actualités, Current Events, Dublin Declaration, The Vatican, el Vaticano, le Vatican, International, Internacional, L’avortement, Avortement, Marielena Montesino de Stuart, News, Noticias, Nouvelles, Planned Parenthood, Provida, Pro-vie.