[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Anna Paulina Luna Exposes the Guy Behind the Anti-ICE Riots

Mike Huckabee Working To Keep Netanyahu in Power

Israeli Military and Israeli-Backed Gang Shoot Aid Seekers in Gaza, Killing 14

Only 68 Building Permits Issued for Pacific Palisades After Wildfires Destroyed 6800 Structures

Violent Rioters Fire Off Exploding Projectiles at Police Horses Use Fireworks and Explosives to Attack Police

ICE Just Shattered Records With One Massive Operation That Has Democrats Fuming

Nolte: Insurrectionist Democrats Plan Another Summer of Blue City-Riots

Violent riots have now been reported in over 30 American cities. Heres a full list:

Mass shooter opened fire at graduation party was an migrant who was busted in LA ICE raids:

Cash Jordan: ICE Raids Home Depot... as California Collapses

Silver Is Finally Soaring: Here's Why

New 4um Interface Coming Soon

Attack of the Dead-2025.

Canada strips Jewish National Fund of charitable status

Minnesota State Rep. Vang just admitted that she is an ILLEGAL ALIEN.

1100% increase in neurological events since the roll-out of Covid mRNA

16 Things That Everyone Needs To Know About Violent Far-Left Revolution In Los Angeles

Undercover video in Arizona alleges ongoing consumer fraud by Fairlife

Dozens arrested after San Francisco protest turns violent Sunday

Looking for the toughest badasses in the city (Los Angeles)

Democrat Civil War Explodes: DNC Chair Threatens to Quit Over David Hogg

Invaders waving Mexican flags, pour onto the 101 Freeway in Los Angeles

Australian Fake News Journo Hit By Rubber Bullet In L.A. Riot

22-year-old dies after being unable to afford asthma inhaler

North Korean Bulsae-4 Long-Range ATGM Spotted Again In Russian Operation Zone

Alexander Dugin: A real Maidan has begun in Los Angeles

State Department Weighing $500 Million Grant to Controversial Gaza Aid Group: Report

LA Mayor Karen Bass ordered LAPD to stand down, blocked aid to federal officers during riots.

Russia Has a Titanium Submarine That Can ‘Deep Dive’ 19,700 Feet

Shocking scene as DC preps for Tr*mp's military birthday parade.


Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: Catholic, Anglican bishops condemn ‘mercy killing’ of premature babies
Source: Catholic Online
URL Source: http://www.catholic.org/internation ... ternational_story.php?id=22036
Published: Nov 16, 2006
Author: staff
Post Date: 2006-11-19 01:27:17 by gargantuton
Keywords: None
Views: 14

Catholic, Anglican bishops condemn ‘mercy killing’ of premature babies

11/16/2006

Catholic Online

LONDON (Catholic Online) – The termination of lives of premature infants that have little no chance of survival is morally wrong and violates existing law against euthanasia, British Catholic and Anglican bishops agreed.

In a Nov. 15 joint statement issued upon the publication of an independent think-tank report on ethical critical care decisions in fetal and neonatal medicine, Archbishop Peter Smith of Cardiff, Wales, representing the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, and Bishop Tom Butler of Southwark, England, on behalf of the Church of England House of Bishops, drew a distinction between interventions in the lives of newborn babies that are “aimed at killing” and those withheld or withdrawn when “judged to be futile or unduly burdensome.”

The report from the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, released on the same day, opposed so-called “mercy killing” of premature babies while, in a controversial finding, recommending that health-care staffs should not attempt to resuscitate babies born less than 23 weeks old. It added that only one percent of such children survive and if they did there was a high risk of disability.

Further, the report, which sees to achieve uniform practice across the United Kingdom, noted that babies born at 25 weeks should receive intensive care unless there were other medical problems, as these infants had a good chance of survival and low risk of disability.

“We warmly welcome the clear recommendation from the Nuffield Council today that ‘the active ending of life of newborn babies should not be allowed, no matter how serious their condition,’” the bishops said.

“This reaffirms the validity of existing law prohibiting euthanasia, and upholds the vital and fundamental moral principle that the deliberate taking of innocent human life is always gravely wrong.”

Yet, while praising the rejection of active taking of all fetal and newborn life, the prelates questioned the ethics associated with predetermined procedures of denying medical treatment.

“We believe that every case should be judged on its merits,” Archbishop Smith and Bishop Butler said, agreeing with the British Medical Association.

“We would have concerns about any blanket recommendation regarding the treatment of babies born before 22 weeks,” they said on behalf of Catholic and Anglican bishops. “Decisions regarding treatment should always be made on an individual basis having regard to all the circumstances of the case.”

They quoted the joint Catholic-Anglican bishops’ 2004 testimony to the Select Committee of the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill in stressing that doctors do not have an obligation to prolong life by extraordinary means and that “treatment for a dying patient should be 'proportionate' to the therapeutic effect to be expected.” “Treatment may therefore be withheld or withdrawn, though such decisions should be guided by the principle that a pattern of care should never be adopted with the intention, purpose or aim of terminating the life or bringing about the death of a patient,” the statement said.

“We will wish to study the detail of the Nuffield Council’s report,” the bishops said, “but welcome the extremely important recommendation opposing any action aimed at the active ending of life of newborn babies.”

The report said the baby's best interest must always be put first and the parents always fully informed and involved in decisions. Consideration must be give to the pain and distress a baby would experience from invasive procedures when there was little chance of survival.

The Nuffield Council has sent the report to the Department of Health and the royal colleges for consideration that its recommendations will become part of new codes of practice.

Among those reacting to the report were two pro-life groups.

"We see much that is good in the Nuffield report,” said Matthew O’Gorman, spokesperson for the British national pro-life group, LIFE. “The clear statement against active euthanasia of newborn children is to be welcomed, as is the emphasis on good palliative care for children who are dying and support for their families.”

Yet, the group questioned whether allowing doctors to base medical decisions on "the best interests of the baby" would “leave the way open for … resources to play a greater role in future treatment.”

“In addition,” O’Gorman said, “the idea that there should be a blanket prohibition on providing intensive care to children born at 22 weeks or below is a deeply worrying one,” adding that “would prefer every child to be considered individually.”

The 22-week across-the-board recommendation also concerned Alison Davis, of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children.

"The Nuffield Council seems to have decided that severe disability is a fate worse than death, and a good enough reason not to treat a premature baby,” Davis said.

"It thus ignores the inherent right to life of all babies, disabled or not, as well as the right to treatment on an individual basis according to clinical need."

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  



[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]