FYI-The Catholic Church Does Approve Terminating Pregnancies in Certain Cases

Even thought the conservative voices and the hierarchy prclaim loudly their absolute anti-abortion stances (even in cases of rape and incest), one thing they are hush about is the church's backdoor "approval" of abortion/abortive proceedures/terminating pregnancies.

In a comment box discussion with Catholics for Bush I make the point that the Church actually does allow abortions in certain cases. However, that approval is hidden its doctrine of double effect, a principle credited to Thomas Aquinas, who developed it to justify killing in self defense.

This Stanford website gives a good explanation of the principle of double effect. Basically the principle says:

The doctrine (or principle) of double effect is often invoked to explain the permissibility of an action that causes a serious harm, such as the death of a human being, as a side effect of promoting some good end. It is claimed that sometimes it is permissible to cause such a harm as a side effect (or “double effect”) of bringing about a good result even though it would not be permissible to cause such a harm as a means to bringing about the same good end. This reasoning is summarized with the claim that sometimes it is permissible to bring about as a merely foreseen side effect a harmful event that it would be impermissible to bring about intentionally.

Here are the classic conditions for double effect:

1. The act itself must be morally good or at least indifferent.
2. The agent may not positively will the bad effect but may permit it. If he could attain the good effect without the bad effect he should do so. The bad effect is sometimes said to be indirectly voluntary.
3. The good effect must flow from the action at least as immediately (in the order of causality, though not necessarily in the order of time) as the bad effect. In other words the good effect must be produced directly by the action, not by the bad effect. Otherwise the agent would be using a bad means to a good end, which is never allowed.
4. The good effect must be sufficiently desirable to compensate for the allowing of the bad effect” (p. 1021).

If we take the classic case used, that of an ectopic pregnancy. What is an ectopic pregnancy? (From Ectopic Pregnancy Trust)

What is an Ectopic Pregnancy?
Put very simply, an ectopic pregnancy means "an out-of-place pregnancy".

It happens when a woman's ovum when it has been fertilised by a man's sperm, instead of moving down her fallopian tube into the womb to develop there, remains "stuck" in the tube.

In the case of the ectopic pregnancy the fetus is stuck in the fallopian tube. If the fertilized egg is left there it'll rupture the fallopian tube and result in death for the woman (and the baby). Thus, the heartbreaking situation is that for the mother to live, the baby must die.

Now Catholic theology cannot allow for a direct abortion because such an action is seen as intrinsically evil and thus never justified. However, the principle of double effect kicks in and the baby can be aborted as a side effect or "double effect" or another proceedure. In this example classic Catholic moral theology says that the doctors may remove the fallopian tube with the direct of intention of saying the mother's life from a tube rapture. However, as a side effect of that action, the baby is inevitable killed. However, according to the principles of double effect, the death of the baby is tolerated because the good effect of saving the mother's life is sufficiently desireable to the bad effect of the baby's death. So as long as the intent was to save the mother's life and not the destruction of the baby, that situation is okay.

Now, the problem here is that this is not a case in which a pregnant mother has, say cancer of the kidneys and life-saving surgery is required which puts the baby at extreme risk. In the case of the cancerous kidney, it is possible to save both the mother's life and that of the baby's. (double effect can apply here to address the moral question of what level of risk is acceptable in order to save the mother's life.) However, in the case of ectopic pregnancies, the baby will be the ultimate cause of the mother's death and it is the baby that ultimately has to be terminated for the mother to live. Now, even if everyone directs their intention to the saving of the mother's life, it is still clear what the ultimate result needs to be that the baby must be terminated. This is done indirectly by removing the fallopian tube and thus, not called an abortion. But it is clear that it really is an abortion, or an abortive action.

I remember that one of the criticisms of Ru-486 or one of those pill contraceptives/abortifacients was that it worked, not by acting directly on the baby, but drying out the uterine wall or doing something indirectly to cause the baby to starve. The anti-abortion crowd argued that it was an abortive effect even if the pill wasn't acting directly on the baby and equally as rephrensible. It follows then, that in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, in which the baby must die for the mother to live, even if the direct action is directed at something else, it is ultimately designed to result in the baby's death. It is an abortive proceedure.

So the point here is that the Church allows for the termination of pregnancies in cases of ectopic pregnancies. I've heard people argue that it is not technically an abortion and does not fall into the AMA category of abortion, etc. It doesn't matter what it is classified as, the point is that we know ultimately that the baby has to be terminated by the actions of those involved; basically, we are giving the woman the choice in this very difficult situation to terminate her pregnancy.

The cries of the conservative anti-abortion movement for an absolute ban on abortions is not consistent with the Church's theology. The Church realizes that in certain situations the woman should have the choice (Does the woman have a moral obligation in an ectopic pregnancy to save her life? That's a discussion for another day and blog). For now, it is enought to acknowledge that the Church is more pro-choice than it lets on.