The motive for an abortion is always considered as paramount for Catholic moral theologians. The Church's teaching is abortion, whatever the motive, is a sin. Exception is made to the medical case where the life of the unborn is sacrificed for that of the mother - the 'lesser evil' argument. But, the divisive issue is whether cases of conception through violence (like rape) or abominable acts (like incest), others, fall into this 'lesser evil' category. Here, I think the Church's stand is for the intrinsic dignity of the unborn baby, a religious argument that is totally rejected by the secular world.
But that is also not quite true. There is no such thing as "abortion to save the life of the mother". There is "premature delivery to save the lives of the unborn and the mother". When early, it is inevitable the baby will die, but that was not the intent.
Are you sure about that? Does not sound right to me. Doctors are not always right. To instigate a procedure which will almost certainly result in the death of the foetus is abortion. How can you say "premature delivery to save both lives" on the one hand and then "it is inevitable the baby will die" on the other. This is a complete contradiction.
Here is Piux XII from his "Allocution to Large Families" which I would consider of greater reliability.
Pius XII = "Any direct attempt on an innocent life as a means to an end - even to the end of saving another life - is unlawful
Pius XII = "
Never and in no case has the Church taught that the life of the child must be preferred to that of the mother. It is erroneous to put the question with this alternative: either the life of the child or that of the mother. No, neither the life of the mother nor that of the child can be subjected to an act of direct suppression. In the one case as in the other, there can be but one obligation: to make every effort to save the lives of both, of the mother and of the child."
Pius XII = "It is one of the finest and most noble aspirations of the medical profession to search continually for new means of ensuring the life of both mother and child. But if, notwithstanding all the progress of science, there still remain, and will remain in the future, cases in which one must reckon with the death of the mother, when the mother wills to bring to birth the life that is within her and not destroy it in violation of the command of God - Thou shalt not kill - nothing else remains for the man, who will make every effort till the very last moment to help and save, but to bow respectfully before the laws of nature and the dispositions of divine Providence."
Pius XII = ""Deliberately We have always used the expression 'direct attempt on the life of an innocent person,' 'direct killing.' Because if, for example, the saving of the life of the future mother, independently of her pregnant condition, should urgently require a surgical act or other therapeutic treatment which would have as an accessory consequence, in no way desired nor intended, but inevitable, the death of the fetus, such an act could no longer be called a direct attempt on an innocent life. Under these conditions the operation can be lawful, like other similar medical interventions - granted always that a good of high worth is concerned, such as life, and that it is not possible to postpone the operation until after the birth of the child, nor to have recourse to other efficacious remedies."
To suggest that the Popes "surgical act or therapy" extends to an early inducement of a pregnancy is a severe distortion of his intent and completely contradicts his earlier statements. The Pope may be referring to the case of ectopic pregnancies where the mother and child it is claimed by science will almost certainly die if action is not taken. In that case according to modern parlance the problem is the fallopian tube. The injured or defective tube is removed and as an unavoidable consequence the feotus dies. I have a number of concerns about this concession. God stated to Eve that he would greatly increase her sorrow at childbirth. Suffering and even death in childbirth is a natural consequence of this punishment. The use of medical science to bypass the natural order is a questionable grey area.
What is rarely mentioned in the debate is that half of ectopic pregnancies result in a tubal miscarriage and the mother survives with no lasting effect. So a surgical intervention can render a woman infertile (at least on one side) who might have otherwise survived and been able to conceive again.
In fact I would seriously question some of the statistics being put out by the medical profession. They say that 1 in 100 pregnancies are ectopic. So given that half of these would survive without intervention then that would be 1 in 200 maternal deaths. Now if we look at your regular developed nation rural maternal death rate eg. in Egypt it is about 200 maternal deaths out of 100,000 live births.
http://www.holysmoke.org/fem/fem0230.htmThat translates to 1 maternal death out of 500 births. In fact very few of these 1 in 500 deaths were caused by ectopic pregnancies and most were as a result of poor hygiene, blood loss, poor pre-natal care and poor birthing skills. So clearly the problem of ectopic pregnancies is vastly overstated and unnecessary interventions are ruining women's fallopian tubes. None of this makes it easy for the catholic parents confronted with a doctor bearing bad news, but this is where we need the muscle of the church to stand up for the truth and oppose medical science when necessary. Sadly this is not happening today and compromises to the might of medical science are constantly being made with every pronouncement of doctors being regarded as gospel truth. With their bold words they hold the balance of life and death. This should not be.
