Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
utsfl:classroom:seminars:pba303h [2016/09/30 10:49] – balleyne | utsfl:classroom:seminars:pba303h [2023/11/08 21:59] (current) – mmccann | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== PBA303H: Double-Effect Reasoning ====== | ====== PBA303H: Double-Effect Reasoning ====== | ||
Prerequisite: | Prerequisite: | ||
+ | |||
+ | FIXME double-effect reasoning is not a magic " | ||
* Simple example: a mother cleaning her child' | * Simple example: a mother cleaning her child' | ||
Line 67: | Line 69: | ||
- //Not// a protection of personal preferences or opinions, but talking about a situation that touches the very moral integrity of a person | - //Not// a protection of personal preferences or opinions, but talking about a situation that touches the very moral integrity of a person | ||
- It's not simply the integrity of the person that's at stake, as important as that is, but issues where conscience objection plays in concern fundamental and objectively grave matters not only for the individual but for the common good and integrity of the society | - It's not simply the integrity of the person that's at stake, as important as that is, but issues where conscience objection plays in concern fundamental and objectively grave matters not only for the individual but for the common good and integrity of the society | ||
+ | * Referrals: "I don't kill people, but I know someone who does." | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== Vital Conflicts ===== | ||
+ | Situations in a pregnancy where the life or health of the mother or child is in question, and there' | ||
+ | |||
+ | FIXME Thomas Murphy Goodwin, medicalizing abortion decisions (400-level) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Examples: | ||
+ | * cancer, e.g. uterine cancer | ||
+ | * premature rupture of membrane (amniotic sac), risk of life threatening infection | ||
+ | * placental eruption (detaches from the uterus) | ||
+ | * preeclamcia, | ||
+ | * pre-existing conditions | ||
+ | * peripartum cardiomyopathy: | ||
+ | * pulminary aerterial hypertension | ||
+ | * ectopic pregnancy | ||
+ | |||
+ | In same cases, the risk can be so extreme that it is impossible to save the life of the child, no matter what you do. And the only thing you can do brings you to an action that seems very similar to an abortion. | ||
+ | |||
+ | FIXME extreme cases are referred to as extreme vital conflicts (and Ronheimer' | ||
+ | |||
+ | The deliberate and direct killing of a human being is always wrong. Direct abortion, willed as an ends or a means, is always a serious moral evil. Double-effect reasoning does not seem precise enough. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Before viability, you have to have an extreme vital conflict before you can apply double-effect reasoning. We're talking about inducing labour here, not doing a surgical removal of the child (D&C). | ||
+ | |||
+ | After viability, you just need a proportionate reason that inducing labour is in the best interest of the child and the mother. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== Uterine Cancer ==== | ||
+ | Rare because young people rarely get cancer, and pregnant people are usually young. And rare because chemotherapy has advanced to the point where the child can tolerate chemotherapy just fine. If a child can endure a therapeutic program of chemotherapy, | ||
+ | |||
+ | The first step is always: what can we do to save both? | ||
+ | |||
+ | If you have moral certainty that (a) there is no longer anything medical technology can offer, (b) the child is not viable, and (c) you cannot wait to viability otherwise both will die, then and only then does double-effect reasoning offer a way forward. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== Ectopic Pregnancy ==== | ||
+ | FIXME laptop notes | ||
+ | |||
+ | FIXME | ||
+ | Q from a fellow pro-lifer, regarding a video that talks about how purposefully removing the baby too early (e.g. abortion pill) is still a form of killing the baby because you are purposefully putting the baby in a lethal environment. | ||
+ | PL: "But this is exactly what we do when the mother' | ||
+ | And we do not consider this killing; rather it shows respect for life. How do we reconcile this comment with this post?" | ||
+ | Maria: "in a life-threatening scenario like that, the child is no longer safe when inside the mother, either; so yes, you are moving her to an unsafe | ||
+ | environment, | ||
+ | firefighters don't get there for ages. By that time, the baby has died of | ||
+ | exposure. In that second scenario, was she responsible for the baby's death? No; she and the baby left an imminently lethal environment, |