Faith in the Health Care Debate
Abortion, Euthanasia and Healthcare Reform
Part 1: Abortion
By Alex Metherell, MD, PhD and Pamela Metherell, The Layman, October 1, 2009
The historical origins of medicine and medical ethics
Hippocrates (ca. 460 BC – ca 370 BC), known as the father of modern medicine, was considered the greatest physician of his time. He is most famous for his Hippocratic Oath, which became the standard for professional medical ethics and conduct for all physicians upon completion of their medical school training. It has been universally in use for 2,400 years and only in the last few decades has it been replaced by new oaths taken by medical students when they graduate from medical school.
Click here for more Layman articles on health care reform
The Hippocratic Oath is worth looking at. Even though it is secular in origin, it embodies a standard of ethical conduct which is entirely consistent with the teachings of Scripture. Here is the original oath translated into English from Wikipedia.
- I swear by Apollo, the healer, Asclepius, Hygieia and Panacea, and I take to witness all the gods, all the goddesses, to keep according to my ability and my judgment, the following Oath and agreement:
- To consider dear to me, as my parents, him who taught me this art; to live in common with him and, if necessary, to share my goods with him; To look upon his children as my own brothers, to teach them this art.
- I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.
- I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.
- But I will preserve the purity of my life and my arts.
- I will not cut for stone, even for patients in whom the disease is manifest; I will leave this operation to be performed by practitioners, specialists in this art.
- In every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing and all seduction and especially from the pleasures of love with women or with men, be they free or slaves.
- All that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal.
- If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all men and in all times; but if I swerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my lot.
Biblical and secular ethical prohibitions against abortion
Item 4 of the Hippocratic Path (above) is very clear. In the first part the physician may not give a patient a lethal drug. In the second part the physician may not devise a plan whereby he advises the patient how to take his life himself. In the third part the physician is forbidden from causing an abortion of a pregnant patient.
The word “abort” means to prematurely interrupt. A pilot of an aircraft may abort his takeoff by shutting down his engines and applying brakes before reaching the end of the runway. Medically a miscarriage is called a “spontaneous abortion.” Something about the pregnancy has gone wrong; often fetal demise has occurred and nature terminates the pregnancy. This can be a sad blow to the family, but nothing unethical or wrong has been done by any of the parties.
An induced abortion, however, is one that is deliberately caused, usually by an abortionist. It does not require any religious persuasion for an honest upright person to know instinctively that helping or causing a woman to prematurely terminate her pregnancy is a grave wrong. This practice has been Biblically and ethically prohibited for the past 24 centuries. This does not mean that abortion has not been practiced continuously throughout this period. That is why Hippocrates’ ethical standard forbade the use of a pessary to induce an abortion. (A pessary is a swatch of herbs – usually seaweed – that is inserted into the cervix to soften and dilate it to cause the unborn child to be aborted.)
Scripture is equally strong in proscribing against abortion. The call by God of the prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah. 1:4-10) states:
4 The word of the Lord came to me, saying, 5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”
6 “Ah, Sovereign Lord,” I said, “I do not know how to speak; I am only a child.” 7 But the Lord said to me, “Do not say, ‘I am only a child.’ You must go to everyone I send you to and say whatever I command you. 8 Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you and will rescue you,” declares the Lord.
9 Then the Lord reached out his hand and touched my mouth and said to me, “Now, I have put my words in your mouth. 10 See, today I appoint you over nations and kingdoms to uproot and tear down, to destroy and overthrow, to build and to plant.” (NIV) Clearly here this also applies to us. God Himself knew each of us before we were even conceived and He is the one who formed us in our mother’s womb. Therefore, even before the moment of conception the fetus in the mother’s womb is a person in God’s eyes. It is the worst desecration imaginable to destroy what God is in the process of making.
Moses writing in Exodus 21:22-25 states:
22 “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. (NIV)
Verse 22 is clearly stating that if someone accidentally causes a woman to give birth prematurely they must be punished. If there is otherwise no harm to either the mother or the newborn that person must be fined. Verses 23 to 25 says that if the infant dies then the perpetrator must be put to death; and if the infant lives the person responsible must suffer the same injury that both the mother and the infant suffers.
John Calvin, the father of the Presbyterian form of church government, writing a commentary on Exodus 21:22 states this:
For the fetus, though enclosed in the womb of its mother, is already a human being, and it is a monstrous crime to rob it of the life which it has not yet begun to enjoy. If it seems more horrible to kill a man in his own house than in a field, because a man’s house is his place of most secure refuge, it ought surely to be deemed more atrocious to destroy a fetus in the womb before it has come to light. – John CalvinCalvin is arguing that abortion is not only murder; it is the worst kind of murder.
A few years ago at a PCUSA General Assembly meeting considering the abortion issue, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a former abortion provider, gave a talk at a Presbyterians Pro-Life luncheon. Nathanson was co-founder of NARAL (known originally as The National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws). At the time when the Supreme Court was considering the Roe v. Wade decision he was a leading abortion provider. He was asked by the U.S. Supreme Court (through their clerks) to advise the court up to what fetal
age an abortion should be allowed. As best as we recollect the story, he met with several other abortion providers in a bar in Washington D.C. The issue was the age of viability (when a live birth would allow the baby to survive). They could not agree on what the gestational age limit should be. After a few drinks they decided to toss a coin. The 24 weeks (second trimester) limit for a legal abortion for any reason was thus determined by a coin toss.
Nathanson continued providing abortion services and when the first real-time ultrasound machines became available in the late 1970s Nathanson acquired one. This enabled him to get a very grainy crude 2-dimensional image of what was happening inside the uterus as he introduced his instruments into it. He would have been able to see where the fetus was and better guide the instruments to the part of the fetus he wanted to cut off.
Shortly after beginning to use the ultrasound machine Nathanson tape recorded the real-time images so that he could go back and review his technique. When he reviewed the ultrasound tape he saw the face of the baby fetus open its mouth in a silent scream as he grabbed it and tore it apart. For the first time he saw what he was doing from the baby’s point of view. He immediately quit doing abortions and now is active in the pro-life movement.
Ultrasound imaging systems are now routinely used in abortion clinics. They are important to show the abortion provider if it is a multiple pregnancy and to document the fetal age. They routinely do not allow the woman to either see the screen or have a photo of her baby.
Here is a letter from a patient who persuaded the ultrasonographer to allow her to see the image. This is from the www.silentscream.org Web site. (Warning: Web site shows graphic videos of abortions.)
Dear Silent Scream Website,
I just wanted to write a quick note to say thank you. I was supposed to have an abortion today and I was up all last night researching abortions on the internet. I came upon your site and couldn’t stop thinking about it. It had a profound effect on me.
I still went to the clinic and went through the blood testing and watched their video….then came the ultrasound; I begged the nurse to let me see my baby; I felt that I had to see. As soon as I saw my child on the ultrasound I knew I couldn’t do it.
The clinic can absolutely NOT convince me that that living child inside me wasn’t going to feel anything. I saw the heart beating, and he moved his little hands (almost like a wave). I think god intervened and sent me a message that I was about to make the biggest mistake of my life.
My nurse was very compassionate (which I thought was odd) I asked her for a picture of my baby and she explained that she wasn’t allowed to do that. She also explained that she wasn’t supposed to show me the ultrasound screen either. Well, she broke the rules and gave me a picture anyway.
Thanks to the nurse at the clinic and to your video I made the right decision. I’ll be having the baby in 7 months and am looking forward to meeting my little miracle in person.
Thank you a million times over,
Erica
The www.silentscream.org homepage also has links to the Nathanson video of the same name. It is in five very short segments with links to each. The first two segments are not too graphic but some viewers may find the remaining segment difficult to watch. It is not recommended for young viewers. Another video can be found at www.abortionno.org. (Warning: Web site shows graphic videos of abortions.)
Partial birth abortion
Abortion at any gestational age is now allowed “for the health of the mother.” Nowhere is the “health of the mother” defined. The woman and the abortionist are the ones who decide if the health of the mother will benefit from a third trimester abortion. Therefore, if having and caring for a baby will be a psychological stress on the mother – when isn’t it? – the abortion is justified. Effectively, abortion at any gestational age is legally permitted. Viable third trimester abortions are now routine.
Third trimester abortions, sometimes called partial-birth abortions, are performed by turning the living baby around so that, instead of being delivered the normal way head first, they are delivered feet first. With all of the body out of the birth canal except for the head, the abortionist punctures the back of the neck below the skull with sharp pointed scissors, which are used to spread an opening at the base of the skull. The baby’s body jerks in reaction to the pain but with its face still in the birth canal and not having taken its first breath the baby cannot make a sound while it screams silently from the unthinkable agony. The abortionist continues to hold the baby preventing it from being fully delivered. Then, through the opening he has made in the back of the neck he inserts a suction tube through the top of the spinal cord and through the foramen magnum in the base of the skull and into the brain. The contents of the skull are then rapidly sucked out removing all of the brain contents. As the brain is removed the skull collapses and the rest of the skull, with the now dead baby, is now fully delivered.
For more on this subject click here.
Fetal pain
The subject of fetal pain is a contentious subject. Members of the pro-choice community will claim that any perceived physical reaction to noxious stimuli is merely reflexive, denying that there is any conscious awareness of pain. Those in the pro-life community argue that if the physical responses to the noxious stimuli are present the development or lack thereof of conscious mental perception has little to do with whether it hurts or not.
The Fetal-Pain.com Web site documents many of the pro and con assertions that fetal pain is real.
The most convincing argument supporting the very real presence of fetal pain comes in response to these remarks made by President Ronald Reagan:
“When the lives of the unborn are snuffed out, they often feel pain, pain that is long and agonizing.” (New York Times, Jan. 31, 1984) Many people disputed this statement, but two weeks later the president received this letter from many doctors, including two former presidents of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology:
February 13, 1984
President Ronald Reagan
The White House
Washington, DC
Mr. President:
As physicians, we, the undersigned, are pleased to associate ourselves with you in drawing the attention of people across the nation to the humanity and sensitivity of the human unborn.
That the unborn, the prematurely born, and the newborn of the human species is a highly complex, sentient, functioning, individual organism is established scientific fact. That the human unborn and newly born do respond to stimuli is also established beyond any reasonable doubt.
The ability to feel pain and respond to it is clearly not a phenomenon that develops de novo at birth. Indeed, much of enlightened modern obstetrical practice and procedure seeks to minimize sensory deprivation of, and sensory insult to, the fetus during, at, and after birth. Over the last 18 years, real time ultrasonography, fetoscopy, study of the fetal EKG (electrocardiogram) and fetal EEG (electroencephalogram) have demonstrated the remarkable responsiveness of the human fetus to pain, touch, and sound. That the fetus responds to changes in light intensity within the womb, to heat, to
cold, and to taste (by altering the chemical nature of the fluid swallowed by the fetus) has been exquisitely documented in the pioneering work of the late Sir William Liley — the father of fetology. Observations of the fetal electrocardiogram and the increase in fetal movements in saline abortions indicate that the fetus experiences discomfort as it dies. Indeed, one doctor who, the New York Times wrote, “conscientiously performs” saline abortions stated, “When you inject the saline, you often see an increase in fetal movements, it’s horrible.”
We state categorically that no finding of modern fetology invalidates the remarkable conclusion drawn after a lifetime of research by the late Professor Arnold Gesell of Yale University. In “The Embryology of Behavior: The Beginnings of the Human Mind” (1945, Harper Bros.), Dr. Gesell wrote, “and so by the close of the first trimester the fetus is a sentient, moving being. We need not speculate as to the nature of his psychic attributes, but we may assert that the organization of his psychosomatic self is well under way.”
Mr. President, in drawing attention to the capability of the human fetus to feel pain, you stand on firmly established ground.
Respectfully,
Signed by 26 prestigious Obstetrics and Gynocology professors and physicians (see footnote below for the list of signors.)
Abortion and health care reform
We are going to discuss the Health Care Reform in greater detail in a later article so for now we will be brief and to the point concerning abortion.
It is clear that abortion services will be included in the coming reforms. A stated major purpose for the reforms is to reduce the overall cost of government spending, particularly in the Medicare and Medicaid areas. When these are replaced with one overall government plan for everyone that will strive to reduce costs, how will this impact abortion costs?
This is not hard to figure out. Which will save more money? A pregnancy termination or a normal delivery of a healthy baby and the medical costs associated with the medical pediatric care for, say, the first 5 years of the child’s life? Obviously the cost of the latter will be at least 10 times more than having an abortion.
There will therefore be a major financial incentive for the “system” to favor an abortion. When a couple does have a child there will be pressure to limit the number of children a couple can have to maybe two. We don’t expect this to be as bad as it is in China where, by law, a couple may have no more than one child, which is enforced by government sterilization of the woman.
You will not see this expressed specifically in the legislation, but this is the direction that health care reform and the abortion issue will lead.
Presbyterian Church (USA) policy on abortion
The PCUSA’s policy on abortion is essentially unchanged since it first adopted a pro-abortion policy, which included the statement that “It can be a act of faithfulness before God for a woman to choose an abortion.” Since 1983 the church has fully endorsed the right for a woman to choose abortion at any time during the full 9 months of her pregnancy.
The latest attempt to change the PCUSA policy has failed, despite the best efforts of the Presbyterians Pro-Life organization. The 215th General Assembly (2003) went further by expanding their policy in a document it adopted entitled “Statement on Post-Viability and Late-Term Abortion.” The second page of this document states the following:
We affirm the statement of the 214th General Assembly (2002) on post-viability and late-term abortion with the following revisions:
The church has a responsibility to provide public witness and to offer guidance, counsel, and support to those who make or interpret laws and public policies about abortion and problem pregnancies. Pastors have a duty to counsel with and pray for those who face decisions about problem pregnancies.
Congregations have a duty to pray for and support those who face these choices, to offer support for women and families to help make unwanted pregnancies less likely to occur, and to provide practical support for those facing the birth of a child with medical anomalies, birth after rape or incest, or those who face health, economic, or other stresses.
The church also affirms the value of children and the importance of nurturing, protecting, and advocating their well-being. The church, therefore, appreciates the challenge each woman and family face when issues of personal wellbeing arise in the later stages of a pregnancy.
“In life and death, we belong to God.” Life is a gift from God. We may not know exactly when human life begins, and have but an imperfect understanding of God as the giver of life and of our own human existence, yet we recognize that life is precious to God, and we should preserve and protect it. We derive our understanding of human life from Scripture and the Reformed Tradition in light of science, human experience, and reason guided by the Holy Spirit. Because we are made in the image of God, human beings are moral agents, endowed by the Creator with the capacity to make choices. Our Reformed Tradition recognizes that people do not always make moral choices, and forgiveness is central to our faith. In the Reformed Tradition, we affirm that God is the only Lord of conscience and not the state or the church. As a community, the church challenges the faithful to exercise their moral agency responsibly.
When an individual woman faces the decision whether to terminate a pregnancy, the issue is intensely personal, and may manifest itself in ways that do not reflect public rhetoric, or do not fit neatly into medical, legal, or policy guidelines. Humans are empowered by the spirit prayerfully to make significant moral choices, including the choice to continue or end a pregnancy. Human choices should not be made in a moral vacuum, but must be based on Scripture, faith, and Christian ethics. For any choice, we are accountable to God; however, even when we err, God offers to forgive us. While the ending of a pregnancy after the point of fetal viability is a matter of grave moral concern to us all, it may be undertaken only in the rarest of circumstances and after prayer and/or pastoral care and counsel, when necessary to save the life of the woman, to preserve the woman’s health in circumstances of a serious risk to the woman’s health, to avoid fetal suffering as a result of untreatable life threatening medical anomalies, or in cases of incest or rape. When it is deemed necessary to end a pregnancy to protect the mother’s life or health in the later months of pregnancy when the baby may be able to live outside the womb, a procedure should be considered which gives both the mother and the child the opportunity to live.
This last sentence about considering a live delivery is meaningless. Every pregnant woman considers letting her baby live but this policy does not even acknowledge that there is a moral and Biblical imperative to do so. Instead, it is laced with religiosity and words like “prayer,” “grave moral concern,” “pastoral care and counsel,” etc. while being totally neutral. The advice is indistinguishable from what a Planned Parenthood counselor would say.
The Offices of the General Assembly of the PCUSA continue to push for legislation that allows unrestricted access to abortion services at all stages of pregnancy. This includes having the Washington Office advocating for unrestricted access to early and late-term abortions in the Obama healthcare plan.
Furthermore, the PCUSA health plan that covers all employees at every level of the denomination provides coverage for abortion on demand at a
ny stage of pregnancy for the employees and their families – no questions asked. Untold numbers of babies are being wantonly killed without anesthesia or pain medication by being drawn and quartered without mercy – all paid for with our tithes and offerings. – God forgive us!
Pam Metherell is a member of the Board of Directors of the Presbyterian Lay Committee. Her husband, Alex Metherell, MD, PhD, is a licensed physician and is a former board member of Presbyterians Pro-Life.
Footnote: Signors of the letter to President Ronald Reagan:
Dr. Richard T. F. Schmidt, Past President, A.C.O.G., Professor of Ob/Gyn, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH
Dr. Vincent Collins, Professor of Anesthesiology, Northwestern University, University of Illinois Medical Center
Dr. John G. Masterson, Clinical Professor of Ob/Gyn, Northwestern University
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, F.A.C.O.G., Clinical Assistant Professor of Ob/Gyn, Cornell University
Dr. Denis Cavanaugh, F.A.C.O.G., Professor of Ob/Gyn, University of South Florida
Dr. Watson Bowes, F.A.C.O.G., Professor of Material and Fetal Medicine, University of North Carolina
Dr. Byron Oberst, Assistant Clinical Professor of Pediatrics, University of Nebraska
Dr. Eugene Diamond, Professor of Pediatrics, Strict School of Medicine, Chicago, IL
Dr. Thomas Potter, Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics, New Jersey Medical College
Dr. Lawrence Dunegan, Instructor of Clinical Pediatrics, University of Pittsburgh
Dr. Melvin Thornton, Professor of Clinical Pediatrics, University of Texas (San Antonio)
Dr. Norman Vernig, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota (St. Paul)
Dr. Jerome Shen, Clinical Professor of Pediatrics, St. Louis University
Dr. Fred Hofmeister, Past President, A.C.O.G., Professor of Ob/Gyn, University of Wisconsin (Milwaukee)
Dr. Matthew Bulfin, F.A.C.O.G., Lauderdale by the Sea, FL
Dr. Jay Arena, Professor Emeritus of Pediatrics, Duke University
Dr. Herbert Nakata, Assistant Professor of Clinical Pediatrics, University of Hawaii
Dr. Robert Polley, Clinical Instructor of Pediatrics, University of Washington (Seattle)
Dr. David Foley, Professor of Ob/Gyn, University of Wisconsin (Milwaukee)
Dr. Anne Bannon, F.A.A.P., Former Chief of Pediatrics, City Hospital (St. Louis)
Dr. John J. Brennan, Professor of Ob/Gyn, Medical College of Wisconsin, (Milwaukee)
Dr. Walter F. Watts, Assistant Professor of Ob/Gyn, Strict School of Medicine, Chicago, IL
Dr. G. C. Tom Nabors, Assistant Clinical Professor of Ob/Gyn, Southwestern Medical College, Dallas, TX
Dr. Konald Prem, Professor of Ob/Gyn, University of Minnesota (Minneapolis)
Dr. Alfred Derby, F.A.C.O.G., Spokane, WA
Dr. Bernie Pisani, F.A.C.O.G., President, NY State Medical Society, Professor of Ob/Gyn, New York University