Catholic Hospital Argues Fetuses Aren't People

There are so many levels of hypocrisy to this it's insane. Basically a pregnant woman was rushed to the hospital and died, as did the twins she was carrying, and her husband is suing because they could have saved the fetuses.

Quote :

The lead defendant in the case is Catholic Health Initiatives, the Englewood-based nonprofit that runs St. Thomas More Hospital as well as roughly 170 other health facilities in 17 states. Last year, the hospital chain reported national assets of $15 billion. The organization’s mission, according to its promotional literature, is to “nurture the healing ministry of the Church” and to be guided by “fidelity to the Gospel.” Toward those ends, Catholic Health facilities seek to follow the Ethical and Religious Directives of the Catholic Church authored by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Those rules have stirred controversy for decades, mainly for forbidding non-natural birth control and abortions. “Catholic health care ministry witnesses to the sanctity of life ‘from the moment of conception until death,’” the directives state. “The Church’s defense of life encompasses the unborn.”

Except when one of their doctors is potentially at fault, and it could cost them big bucks.

Quote :

But when it came to mounting a defense in the Stodghill case, Catholic Health’s lawyers effectively turned the Church directives on their head. Catholic organizations have for decades fought to change federal and state laws that fail to protect “unborn persons,” and Catholic Health’s lawyers in this case had the chance to set precedent bolstering anti-abortion legal arguments. Instead, they are arguing state law protects doctors from liability concerning unborn fetuses on grounds that those fetuses are not persons with legal rights.

Quote :

As Jason Langley, an attorney with Denver-based Kennedy Childs, argued in one of the briefs he filed for the defense, the court “should not overturn the long-standing rule in Colorado that the term ‘person,’ as is used in the Wrongful Death Act, encompasses only individuals born alive. Colorado state courts define ‘person’ under the Act to include only those born alive. Therefore Plaintiffs cannot maintain wrongful death claims based on two unborn fetuses.”

The Catholic Health attorneys have so far won decisions from Fremont County District Court Judge David M. Thorson and now-retired Colorado Court of Appeals Judge Arthur Roy.

At press time, Catholic Health did not return messages seeking comment. The Stodghills’ attorneys declined to comment while the case was still being considered for appeal.

The Supreme Court is set to decide whether to take the case in the next few weeks.

In Malpractice Case, Catholic Hospital Argues Fetuses Aren't People

If anyone still believes that the Catholic Church's anti-abortion stance is actually to protect fetuses, this is a slap in the face. The Catholic Church is anti-abortion because it's anti-woman, period, and this proves it without a doubt.

No matter what the court decides here, the hospital loses. Either they lose the suit and are found liable for the death of the unborn fetuses or they win and they have set precedence that unborn fetuses are not persons with legal rights and the case can be used in the future to prevent anti-abortion actions from the hospital (like the one that caused the death of that one woman a few months ago).

That poor man, though. Losing his wife and unborn children like that must be just awful.

Because the lawers of one Catholic hospital are taking the most available loophole does not mean the the Catholic Church from the Pope on down agrees with it, endorses it, or that they're all "anti-woman."

Come down from the cross, sweetheart. SCRUBS

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Because the lawers of one Catholic hospital are taking the most available loophole does not mean the the Catholic Church from the Pope on down agrees with it, endorses it, or that they're all "anti-woman."

Come down from the cross, sweetheart. SCRUBS

I'm not well versed in religious doctrines but doesn't this catholic hospital risk excommunication for trying to argue that fetuses aren't people?

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Because the lawers of one Catholic hospital are taking the most available loophole does not mean the the Catholic Church from the Pope on down agrees with it, endorses it, or that they're all "anti-woman."

oh god yes because the Catholic Church certainly doesn't forbid contraception divorce or abortion

nor has it ever at any period in time imprisoned single mothers prostitutes and so-called "fallen women" in special homes where they were forced to perform menial tasks for little or no pay while their children were taken from them and shoved into orphanages to be beaten by the sisters of mercy and raped by the christian brothers

it certainly never excommunicated a nine year old who had been raped and impregnated and subsequently had an abortion nor did it excommunicate everyone who had anything to do with said nine year old having an abortion except of course the bastard who raped and impregnated her

why the Catholic Church is an absolute bastion of progressive feminist thinking and this is surely just some terrible aberration

Aggie wrote:

No matter what the court decides here, the hospital loses. Either they lose the suit and are found liable for the death of the unborn fetuses or they win and they have set precedence that unborn fetuses are not persons with legal rights and the case can be used in the future to prevent anti-abortion actions from the hospital (like the one that caused the death of that one woman a few months ago).

I hope the hospital does win this one, on principle. Unfortunately the Catholic church hardly seems to know the meaning of hypocrisy, or shame. I doubt a judgment in their favor would deter any anti-abortion activities in the future...

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Because the lawers of one Catholic hospital are taking the most available loophole does not mean the the Catholic Church from the Pope on down agrees with it, endorses it, or that they're all "anti-woman."

Come down from the cross, sweetheart. SCRUBS

Except there does seem to be agreement within the church. From the Denver Post:

Quote :

Denver Archbishop Samuel Aquila, Colorado Springs Bishop Michael Sheridan and Pueblo Bishop Fernando Isern wrote in a joint statement that representatives of CHI assured them Thursday "of their intention to observe the moral and ethical obligations of the Catholic Church."

The bishops, who said they only recently learned of the case and the deaths of Stodghill and her unborn children, would not otherwise comment on the ongoing legal dispute , but said they will undertake a full review of the litigation and of the CHI policies and practices.

Read more: Bishops will review Catholic hospital's malpractice defense - The Denver Post [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

In other words, abortion is still evil and wrong, but when you're doing God's work you can do no wrong. Or something.

Ignoring all the religion hype over this....

Quote :

Dr. Pelham Staples, who also happened to be the obstetrician on call for emergencies that night, never answered a page. His patient died at the hospital less than an hour after she arrived and her twins died in her womb.

WHAT SORT OF SHITTY DOCTOR IS THIS GUY? What, was he at the Hobbit film and just couldn't look at the text? I hope that no matter how the lawsuit goes this guy gets fired.

Quote :

Dr. Pelham Staples, who also happened to be the obstetrician on call for emergencies that night, never answered a page. His patient died at the hospital less than an hour after she arrived and her twins died in her womb.

Wait, he didn't answer one page or he never answered any at all?

Aggie wrote:

Quote :

Dr. Pelham Staples, who also happened to be the obstetrician on call for emergencies that night, never answered a page. His patient died at the hospital less than an hour after she arrived and her twins died in her womb.

Wait, he didn't answer one page or he never answered any at all?

I noticed that myself. Did they only attempt to send him one page for the emergency or did they send him several and he didn't reply to the one that would've given them permission to attempt a c-section? If they only attempted to contact him once, with an emergency situation, to me that indicates a bigger problem and should spark a review of what the hospital's on-call procedures are and how closely they are followed. If it was that he did not answer a page with "Yes, by all means, try a c-section!" there's still fault, but it would, I'd argue, lie more with just the doctor for not responding.