Skip to main content

Husband of pregnant, brain-dead woman sues hospital for keeping her on life support | CTV News

This story is wrong on so many levels. First off, what will the effects be on the unborn child of being kept alive inside his/her dead mother's womb. Has there ever been a case where a child was born after such a case where the mother has been dead for weeks?

Next, while I appreciate the Church's stance on euthanasia, it would seem to me that the husband is well within his rights to take this action if his wife left a specific wish not to be kept 'alive' by artificial means. People are allowed to refuse extraordinary medical care so her wish should be respected.

Finally, the ethics of denying such a right to a citizen by the state is very troubling since it seems to me to be an inappropriate use of state power. Should the state have such a right? I don't believe so. It virtually reduces this woman to being little more than a state controlled 'baby machine'.

Like I said, a sad story on so many levels.

Agree? Disagree?

Click on the link below to read the article:

Husband of pregnant, brain-dead woman sues hospital for keeping her on life support | CTV News

Comments

  1. Also the Principle of Double Effect would apply here.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Is the unborn in this case a living Person? Doesn’t the state have -not the right- but the legal obligation to exercise authority which serves the best interest of a living person above a dead one when the two conflict?
    What level (let alone levels) can that be wrong if those premises are true?

    “It virtually reduces this woman to being little more than a state controlled 'baby machine'.” This claim implies that before she died she was a “ baby making machine” not controlled by the state. The irony is that she may well have been one of many women while she was alive to state the same claim “ we are baby making machines controlled by the state!”

    ReplyDelete
  3. G'Day Larry: Your questions are valid and point to the conundrum that this story poses to our morality. The state indeed has the right, indeed I would say an obligation to preserve the life of all people. And I do believe that the unborn child is a person. But when such extraordinary means are used - means which deny the reality that this mother is brain dead long before the point where the child was even viable then is that no a major intrusion of state control over her life?

    I guess for me the issue is one where even if something is considered 'good', it can be transformed into something entirely different if pushed to the extreme. It points to a reality that there exists a line that if crossed vitiates the good that is intended.

    Thank you for this comment as it is helping me to clarify in my own mind just how important is to recognize that issues of morality cannot be reduced to a simple right/wrong equation.

    All the best to you, Arden and the 'kids' (at least that's what they were when I last saw them 20+ years ago!).

    Fr. Tim

    P.S. Still looking forward to our getting together for a meal. Perhaps you and Arden might consider accepting an invitation to coming here, or if you prefer we could rendezvous at a restaurant of your choosing?

    ReplyDelete
  4. 1.No one is controlling the mothers life if she is in fact dead as is clearly asserted by the doctor who say that she is not terminally ill ... she is dead... i.e. the body supporting the life within is lifeless. God is Life , we the living (unborn inclusive) are not life, we receive life.
    2. Jesus did say that we should be perfect like He is, but even God does create evil insofar as it is attached to good. No use trying to be too perfect.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

 

Canadian Euthanasia Information

The May 2010 Euthanasia Prevention Coalition Newsletter can now be found at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/Newsletters/Newsletter108(May2010)(RGB).pdf Bill C-384 was soundly defeated by a vote of 228 to 59. Check how the Members of Parliament voted at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/HowTheyVoted.pdf On June 5, 2010, we are co-hosting the US/Canda Push-Back Seminar at the Radisson Gateway Hotel at the Seattle/Tacoma Airport. The overwhelming defeat of Bill C-384 proved that we can Push-Back the euthanasia lobby in the US and Canada and convince people that euthanasia and assisted suicide are a dangerous public policy. Register for the Seminar at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/2010SeminarFlyer(RGB)(LetterFormat).pdf The Schindler family are being attacked by a Florida television station and Michael Schiavo. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is standing in solidarity with the Schindler family. My blog comments: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2010/05/att