In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses aren’t people

In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses aren’t people

Lori Stodghill was 31-years old, seven-months pregnant with twin boys and feeling sick when she arrived at St. Thomas More hospital in Cañon City on New Year’s Day 2006. She was vomiting and short of breath and she passed out as she was being wheeled into an examination room.

Stodghill’s obstetrician, 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.

In the aftermath of the tragedy, Stodghill’s husband Jeremy, a prison guard, filed a wrongful-death lawsuit on behalf of himself and the couple’s then-two-year-old daughter Elizabeth.

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.”

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.

Link
GodsCowboy
✍️
INTERESTING, Which way will this one go? Both sides have changed their roles. The church seems to be taking the legal abortion side and the government taking the church's side that an unborn baby is a human being.
If the church wins, abortion wins. If the church loses then abortion becomes a gray area. I hate saying it but I hope the church loses. Abortion has BAD long term effects on the mother's …More
✍️

INTERESTING, Which way will this one go? Both sides have changed their roles. The church seems to be taking the legal abortion side and the government taking the church's side that an unborn baby is a human being.

If the church wins, abortion wins. If the church loses then abortion becomes a gray area. I hate saying it but I hope the church loses. Abortion has BAD long term effects on the mother's changes of ever having another child. Worse yet it greatly inceases the mother's changes of having an unhealthy child in the future. See the following video on GLORIA.TV Just use the following link below to see for yourself if what I just said isn't so:

Video scientifically debunks ‘safe abortion’

🧐