Sunday, October 14, 2012

A Mile In My Shoes



Knowing What It’s Like

Remarks Delivered at Midpoint Rally for 40 Days for Life, Fall 2012
Saturday 10/13/12 at 3100 Professional Dr, Ann Arbor Planned Parenthood (slightly edited for place references, including resources and language not used at the time because children were present)

I’m here to tell you about three lives, my children’s lives, and their deaths. Why should you care? Well, if there’s anything that I hear most often as a pro-life woman, it’s this: you don’t know what it’s like, walk a mile in their shoes, you don’t know what it’s like to be a pregnant teenager, to be pregnant and poor and have no help, or to be pregnant by rape. I’m here to tell you yes I do know what it’s like. Many people who come here to Planned Parenthood or go to other clinics to pray and offer help know what it’s like. Let me tell you what it was like for me.
 
I was abused as a little girl; when I was 16, I was introduced to my first boyfriend. He was a few years older than me, and I told him about the abuse I’d experienced as a child, and that I wanted to keep all that was left of my virginity. One day, he said, “I’m sorry, I can’t wait anymore,” held me down, kept my mouth shut…and that was the end of that. I was so despairing that I decided nothing mattered anymore and went along with whatever he wanted. My relationship with my parents deteriorated to the point that I ran away, and during that time I got pregnant. The home pregnancy tests had been negative, so I remember the total shock I felt the day I got the blood test results: my knees went weak, the room began to spin, and I heard ringing in my ears. I had to go and tell my Dad. His response was to take me in his arms and hold me.

Outside my immediate family, the pressure mounted quickly. My boyfriend offered to help me “take care of it.” I was so naïve, I thought he meant he would help me raise the baby! I said, “No, I’m giving him or her up for adoption.” He was shocked. I decided to go to IL, where the adoption laws used to be the best in the country for open adoptions. This meant leaving school, where I was dual enrolled in high school and nursing school; the guidance counselor, after my Dad and I met with her together, privately asked me why I didn’t just “take care of it” and continue my nursing school career, since I was on the fast track. Before going to IL, on a family vacation up North, I was resting on the couch in our cottage to stop a possible miscarriage. A relative came in to tell me to stay away from her children, one of whom had introduced me to my boyfriend, since I would be a bad influence on them. She told me that since it would be best for everybody if I did have a miscarriage, I should just go for a walk, take a swim, ride a bike, because miscarriage is the body’s way of getting rid of something bad, and encouraging it to happen would “take care of it.” In IL, I was in classes at Bradley University and got comments from classmates: “what the fuck was I thinking?” and, “didn’t I know where the clinic was?” The most hurtful remark came from a total stranger. I was in a supermarket and the cashier looked at me with disgust and said, “Don’t you have any shame? You should have had it taken care of before you started showing, you little whore.” I was in shock. Her solution to my being a “little whore” was to have an abortion, to hide my shame. To “take care” of my baby—by killing him or her.
So with all this pressure to abort, what happened? I went to Peoria IL, lived with former students of my grandma’s, and went through a very difficult pregnancy. The initial threatened miscarriage didn’t happen, but I had to have frequent ultrasounds because I was high-risk: I was young and had a short cervix. At 22 weeks, just before Halloween, I went into preterm labor. My doctor put me in the hospital, on complete bed-rest, on some really nasty medications to stop the labor. I was there for six weeks, so my doctor got me a private room which became almost like a dorm room. I had weekly ultrasounds and was on the fetal monitor almost daily. I got to watch my daughter grow from a little blip-blip-blip on the screen to a healthy little girl, who had so much hair it was visible on the ultrasound as a halo around her head. She sucked her thumb, played with her toes, and kicked the ultrasound probe and the fetal monitor when it pushed on her. I loved her so much it hurt like death to think of the time I would give her up. The doctor, nurses, and counselors tried to prepare me to deliver a very pre-term baby who would have to go to the NICU and might not make it. Nothing could have prepared me for what did happen.

My doctor came to me in mid December and told me there had been a genuine miracle, something she could not explain and had never seen or heard of: everything had reversed itself, closed back up, tightened back up…I was back to normal. She said that pre-term labor could be arrested, but that “things just don’t go back to completely normal; there must be a lot of people praying for you.” I was able to have Christmas with my family. I continued to go in weekly for checkups, but my doctor, who told me she hadn’t expected me to make it to 28 weeks, now expected me to deliver my healthy baby girl on March 8, 2001. On Feb 13th, I went out to lunch with my Catholic Social Services worker, Tony, who had become a very close friend during my whole difficult pregnancy, and another girl who was pregnant, scared, and didn’t know what to do. Tony wanted me to encourage her. My girl was very, very active during lunch, and that evening, finally turning one last huge somersault.
That night, I had a terrible nightmare: my baby had died, and my mom had taken her body and buried it and wouldn’t tell me where she was. I woke up on Valentine’s Day and knew something was horribly wrong; I didn’t feel any movement. I had an appointment that afternoon, but when I called the office in the morning in a panic and told them that I didn’t feel her moving, they said that I should just wait, since I was already going to be coming in. I went to the appointment, and I begged Andrea, the lady I was living with, to come in the room with me. The doctor put the Doppler on my stomach: she couldn’t find a heartbeat. I knew then. My daughter was dead. But my doctor had to be sure. She took me next door to the ultrasound room. I was there with Andrea for a little while, waiting, and began praying desperately, though I had left the Church, asking Mary to pray for me since she, too, had lost her Son. The doctor came in and immediately focused on my daughter’s heart: it was still. We all started crying. I still had to have it confirmed officially by the hospital high-risk clinic. My doctor met me there, and another doctor, this one cold, impersonal and uncaring, with residents watching interestedly, performed another ultrasound, carefully examining every inch of my daughter’s body, measuring bloodflow to the placenta and umbilical cord and the lack of bloodflow in her heart. “Yep,” he said, “Got us an IUFD here.” Then he left. Intrauterine Fetal Demise. My daughter was dead, and no one knew why. Andrea and my doctor had to call my Dad and tell him, I couldn’t speak for the tears.

My parents came immediately, driving from MI, to be with me while was in labor and delivery. My boyfriend and his Mom eventually showed up, though not until just before I delivered; he had been out with his other girlfriend and didn’t get the message I left on his answering machine until the 15th. Mom and Dad got to Peoria at 9 pm on February 15th 2001, and we went to the hospital immediately to begin the induction of labor. My Dad stayed with me all night, and my Mom and Dad were both with me all the next day. At 11:02 pm on 2/16/01 I delivered Lillian Mary. My doctor cried as she put Lillian on the bed to examine her. Her umbilical cord had twisted itself, probably during her final big somersault, and cut off blood supply. In every other way, Lillian was a perfect little girl. Her hair lay in little S’s on her head, her mouth was a rosebud, her ears and nose were just like mine, her long fingers and toes were like her dad’s. She was beautiful. I got to hold her, and so did my Mom, Dad, grandma, friends, and even my boyfriend and his Mom. A priest was there to bless her body.
She was loved from the beginning to the end; at her funeral back here in MI, the church was packed. Fr Ed carried her casket up to the altar himself, knelt and held it up toward the tabernacle as if offering her up to God. I remember very little of that service, but this quote stands out, “Lillian went to sleep and woke up in the arms of Jesus.” There were some who tried to tell me that her death was a punishment for my sins, that I had brought it on myself, that I should have done the “decent thing” from the beginning and aborted her, and my pain would have been less. I am telling you now, that is not true. God was not punishing me, and the survivor’s guilt, pain, and anguish I felt at losing my daughter would have been enormously worse had I done anything to deliberately cause her death. Her life was honored with a funeral; her body was buried in a cemetery: the babies put to death at abortion clinics are disposed of in the trash, not named, not honored, not treated with any humanity at all.

“Enormously worse” is the phrase that represents my second pregnancy from beginning to end. I had descended from worse to worse, through grief over the loss of my daughter, and my cousin Joe (who died accidentally on my 21st birthday), and I’d gotten involved in more and more abusive relationships. I was raped, tortured, and abused. In a death spiral, I finally met Gaven, and he moved in with me. I found out in stages that he abused alcohol, heroin, other drugs…and me. He was also a literal Satan worshiper. A scary dude, all around. When I got pregnant, it was a surprise, because I had been on birth control pills for years to control my cycle. I had to stop taking the pill for medical reasons, and the doctor told me I would be infertile for at least a month after stopping. Well, I got pregnant immediately, without a period between the last pill I took and the estimated date of conception.
I went to the high-risk clinic in Pittsburgh, PA, because of my first pregnancy’s tragic ending. From the beginning the doctors and the staff there took every opportunity to encourage me to “terminate the pregnancy.” One day it was because the medications I was taking could produce birth defects, the next it was because my mental health was too fragile to deal with a risky pregnancy; naturally, when they found out that my boyfriend was an alcoholic heroin addict who abused me, the pressure to abort stepped up to a new level. I told them over and over that I would not, under any circumstances, kill my child, but the pressure didn’t let up. “Did I think it was right to bring a child into the abusive relationship?” No; I had a plan with my social worker to get away from my boyfriend with the baby to a shelter, if he didn’t keep his word about getting help. “Did I really want to put myself through this, after what happened the first time?” Yes; I was afraid, but my baby was healthy so far and I would not cause his death. The pressure never stopped! I went through a number of difficulties with the pregnancy; then I had other health problems like kidney infections, bronchitis, and eventually pneumonia. It was the pneumonia which put me in the hospital around Thanksgiving.

I was 22 weeks pregnant again when I was hospitalized with pneumonia and severe asthma complications. I wound up in the ICU, my oxygen levels dropped to 75%, I was almost intubated, on IV antibiotics and other medications. My parents came down from MI because my Dad had a feeling that they needed to be there. I was able to go back to a step-down unit, and spent some time there, but in the very early morning of 12/4/05, I woke up in pain with some bleeding. In a panic, I screamed for the nurses. They came and did an ultrasound: my son was still alive, but there was a small tear of the placenta away from the uterus. The staff on the unit assured me of what I already knew, through my nursing school studies, that the tear was small, there was a lot that could be done to keep me pregnant as long as possible, my son was not doomed to die. The bare minimum of viability at that hospital was 23 weeks, but it would be best by far to keep my son in my womb as long as possible. They were very reassuring. “Wait until the OB doctors get here, they’ll help you, you’ll see. It’ll be okay,” the nurse said.
When the doctor from the high-risk clinic got there, I asked her what they would be doing to save my son and keep me pregnant as long as possible, since I knew there were things they could and should do. She looked at me in surprise and said, “We’re not going to do anything! In fact, we want to do a D&E right now.” I told her, basically, “over my dead body.” She said fine, but they still were not going to do anything to try to save my son, but just “let nature take its course.” Then they gave me steroids, and my blood pressure went up. The high-risk doctor came back in and gloatingly said that now I had to be induced into labor, since I had pre-eclampsia. So they gave me ptosin, which worsened the tear in the placenta, and I began to hemorrhage. I was determined that I would deliver my son and hold him and baptize him; if he was to die, he would die in my arms, surrounded by love. But the bleeding got worse and worse, and I received more and more blood through transfusion. Finally, I was at the point of death.

The doctor told my parents I was dying, that to save my life they had to perform a D&E, dilation and evacuation or extraction, immediately, and that I had to sign the papers to consent. I refused, because the last ultrasound showed my son was still alive. A D&E, I knew, would rip his arms and legs off, tear his guts out, and rip his head off his spine, causing him grievous pain. They perform that same procedure here, at this clinic, and at abortion clinics around the country, on babies who can also feel the pain. My parents told me that I could not save my son’s life by dying for him, that dying with him was not morally permissible, and that I was not consenting to direct abortion but to a procedure to save my life with the effect that my son would die. I signed the papers. I felt like I signed my son’s death warrant. I told the nurse that I wanted him baptized, I wanted the general anesthesia I received to be one that would cross the placenta, and that they had better take him out in one piece if they could. Then I was beyond the point of speech; blood loss had sent me into deep shock. I couldn’t even ask for a priest, though I realized that I was on the point of death and needed to be right with God.
As they ran with me down the hallway to the OR, I had a near death experience: floating above the stretcher, I saw my body. Then I was in a tunnel, rushing toward light: I came to a stop and I saw my daughter, my cousin Joe, and my son in Joe’s arms. I pleaded with my cousin to take me with him, but he told me it wasn’t my time and that I had to turn around. He showed me that my children were with him, in heaven, and that I would see them again…if I turned my life around.

It was the hardest thing I’ve ever had to do, to come back to my body, in so much pain and grief. I was hurting so much I had a “morphine pump;” I could push the button every three minutes, and every tick of the clock seemed like eternity. I heard from a doctor later that the kind of procedure I had at the gestational age my son was produces pain the equivalent of a traumatic amputation: like getting your arm taken off by a chainsaw. The emotional pain was worse. I felt like a murderer. I felt like I had killed my son so that I could live, when I would have given my life for him. Then the high-risk doctors added insult to injury and fudged the chart, saying I was only 19 weeks, 6 days along so that they didn’t have to give me a fetal death certificate or any documentation of what had happened, or why they took no action to save my son. They had pushed for the death of my son from the beginning, and in the end they won.
The only way I won was in getting his body: I refused to let them dispose of his body as medical waste, the way they do with babies here at Planned Parenthood or other clinics around the country. I had my son cremated, since he was not able to be buried right away because I was in the hospital so long. The finale of the story is that when I went back to the apartment I shared with my boyfriend, he didn’t listen to the restrictions the doctors had put on me as far as certain activities, and his abuse of me tore some things and jarred some clots loose, sending the clots to my lungs and putting me right back in the hospital. The nurses and doctors told me that they would release me to my grandparents, to a shelter, or to my parents but if I went back to my boyfriend I would die.

So my parents rescued me. I came back here, to MI, where I buried my son across from my daughter. I tried, after a little while, to go back to church…all on my own steam, without the grace to do it. No wonder I ended up falling flat on my face. Because that’s where the third little life begins and ends. I met a guy through a young adults group, and we became friends. He had a girlfriend at the time, and I wasn’t looking for a boyfriend. I trusted his good reputation and I told him everything about myself and my history. On the anniversary of my daughter’s death and funeral, I was house-sitting for a friend, and asked this guy to meet me at Aubrey’s in Depot Town to talk me through the pain. Neither of us drank anything but Coke, but we sat there for hours talking. He offered to drive me back, though the place I was house-sitting was just around the corner. Instead of leaving once he dropped me off at the foot of the stairs, he followed me up and didn’t leave. I won’t get into details, but he raped me brutally. On the advice of a very close family friend, I went to the hospital, filed a police report and pressed charges. One thing I did not expect, since it is so rare, was to be pregnant. But a few weeks later, as I was getting counseling from Safe House, a local rape crisis center and shelter, I told them I was “late.” They told me they could refer me to Planned Parenthood and “take care of it.” I said, “no way.” Besides, I wasn’t sure yet.
I went home and took a home pregnancy test and it was positive. I had had a blood test done a few days earlier, and I got the results that very day: my hCG was high but not definitive, I might be pregnant but about to miscarry. I couldn’t face it then; the next day I had to go testify in the preliminary exam. What they say about rape victims testifying in court is true: it is like being raped all over again. I was on the stand for 8 hours. My close friend who had advised me to go to the police, who was like another father to me, was there to support me. He said it was the hardest thing he had ever had to do in all his life, just sitting and listening. I went home with bad cramps, the next day I started bleeding. I bled and bled: then I saw the little body—just a glimpse, but I saw his hand clearly. Perfectly formed, even at only 7 weeks. My baby, and I couldn’t catch him, couldn’t save him, couldn’t get his body to bury it…my baby, and he was flushed down the toilet. Like so many others, killed by medication abortions. I had to go to the University of Michigan ER because I was bleeding so heavily, and the doctor there congratulated me that my body had cleaned itself out so well that I didn’t need a D&C. He said that it was better this way, because I was spared the trouble and expense of getting it “taken care of later,” which would also be more painful. He knew that the pregnancy had been caused by rape. I told him to get the fuck out.

In every circumstance, I was under so much pressure to have an abortion: I was a teenager; I was high-risk, had an abusive boyfriend, and was on Medicaid; and last but not least I was pregnant by rape. Everyone was shocked when I made a different decision, like I had no right to make the choice for LIFE. My babies all died anyway, and I don’t know why, but I know I did not choose death for them. I grieve so much for the women who come to Planned Parenthood or go to other clinics, under so much pressure, who choose death for their children. I’ve seen their faces as they leave after making their choice; I’ve met their eyes, and seen their tears, and they’ve seen mine.
I want to share one final story about another death, which I witnessed in a way while praying here. I was meditating on the 4th and 5th Mysteries of the Rosary, the Carrying of the Cross and the Crucifixion. As I saw a woman being dropped off for an abortion by her partner, I saw that this road right here, the driveway to Planned Parenthood, is the Via Dolorosa, the Way of the Cross. The women who come here, who are pregnant and seeking an abortion, are carrying crosses in their burdens and pain, and the babies inside their wombs are carrying the Cross, on the way to torture and death. This, Planned Parenthood, is Calvary, the Place of Skulls, where Christ is being crucified in the bodies of the babies who are being torn apart, ripped out of their mothers’ wombs. I realized that we here, though restricted in what we can do to save lives and save mothers from a lifetime of pain and regret, we here can do one thing: we can be John, the Beloved Disciple, Mary Magdalene, Mary Mother of God, at the foot of the Cross, bearing witness and loving Jesus to the end.  I love my children, regardless of the circumstances of their conception. I loved them to the end and gave each of them a name: Lillian Mary, Gaven Joseph, and Aaron Michael.

My sisters, if you are pregnant and don’t know what to do, know that I have been where you are. If you have had an abortion, I have too, though in different circumstances. I know the pressure and the difficulties and the panic that you felt when faced with an unexpected pregnancy. I, too, was burdened, and I needed help and hope and healing. I still need it! Whatever burdens you’re carrying, there is healing and hope for you in Jesus and in the people who want so much to help you. Jesus did carry his cross and die for you, so you can lay your burdens on him. We in the pro-life community will help, too, so that you know the Father’s love for you through our hands. I hope you understand this is a message of love, not condemnation, from someone who has been on the road you’re on. May God bless you with peace.
There are local resources to help you all through your pregnancy and afterward. Two examples are the Family Life Services Center at 2950 Packard Rd, Ann Arbor, phone (734) 434-3088 and ArborVitae Women’s Center at 625 E. Liberty, Ann Arbor, phone (734) 994-8863. There are also national hotlines that can connect you with help; for example (800) 712-HELP. If you have had an abortion and are experiencing pain and grief, anger, regret, depression, or other emotional distress: you are not alone. There is help and hope for you, and many people who want to help you heal. Rachel’s Vineyard and Silent No More are two examples of national post-abortion healing groups. These groups also offer help to men who are suffering after their wife or girlfriend chose to abort their child; men regret their lost fatherhood, too. There are local retreats offered frequently, and private options with counselors at the Family Life Services Center and ArborVitae. There are many groups and people who can help. Go to the website http://silentnomoreawareness.org/ and look around; or check out http://rachelsvineyard.org/. If you need to talk to someone right away, call the Rachel’s Vineyard hotline (877) HOPE-4-ME.   

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Break With My Old Reality


Not the Same Old Story:

Healing and Hope during Holy Week
The same sad story:

During the bad old days, it was the same old thing: I made a big mistake and trusted the wrong man. This man was an ex-army, ex-cop security guard at my apartment building and, I thought, a friend of mine. In fact, when he moved to his apartment in the area, his other friends and I helped him move in. I helped him find dishes and furniture at the local thrift store, showed him the local stores, and hung out with him and the other guys from the security company at a welcome party. We were friends. One evening, I went over to watch TV with him and eat dinner with him, as I had done before, because he was depressed over his girlfriend distancing herself from him. His other friends and I were worried about him drinking more and possibly using drugs.

That evening, March 3, turned into a very bad night and a very bad next day. He slipped me something. I woke up there. Bad things happened. I won’t go into detail now, but certain bad things had permanent physical consequences. I was hit across the face with the butt of his service pistol, partially dislocating my jaw. My left shoulder was also partially dislocated. I reduced both myself and sought no medical treatment. I was too afraid; I went away and hid for a while until the bruises were mostly gone. In the end, he came after me with a gun and the other security guards defended me: they also demanded to know why I hadn’t told them the truth. I could only say that I had been afraid they wouldn’t believe me. The cops there were corrupt; because of the “thin blue line,” they charged him with a DUI since they had to charge him with something and he spent one night in jail. However, the security company fired him, and my friends took care of him. So justice was served, in a way. The long term consequences were less easy to take care of.

It won’t wash off:

After that event, my mind started to slip its gears. I was already troubled by flashbacks from a sort of similar event in the previous November. Now, this had happened. It was impossible to handle. I went to a rape crisis group. It didn’t help. I kept being troubled by the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Then my cousin died on my birthday that year. My mind completely went off the tracks. I was completely away from God. Furious with Him. Hated Him. Blamed Him. Couldn’t turn to Him for anything.

One of the symptoms of PTSD that I had to deal with most often was the feeling of being dirty: that I still had blood and other things on me I couldn’t wash off. I used to get into the shower feeling fine and suddenly be hit with a flashback, and then not be able to get out of the shower, washing myself off over and over. There was something there that would never wash off. I found out that this feeling is common among rape survivors. I dealt with this symptom by taking the phone with me into the bathroom and calling for help from friends in the building if the situation got out of hand. Years later, looking back, I know what I was trying to wash away was something inside me: shame and guilt and pain. That won’t wash off in the shower.

On My Own:

I tried for years to cope with everything on my own. I went to rape survivor groups, counseling, chronic pain specialists, physical therapists and doctors. I took psychiatric medications and pain medications. I was dealing with it. I was FINE. Except, I wasn’t. There was something still deeply wrong.

I tried, occasionally, to go back to church: because it had been important to me when I was young, because I knew it was the truth, because I knew God had spared my life (later blog post) and therefore I owed it to Him to find out why…for many reasons. I never really wanted to go back to Him, though. Every time I would walk in the door of a church, a red mist descended over my eyes and I felt a blinding, sickening rage fill me. Where was God when I had needed Him before? Hiding in a Tabernacle. Up in Heaven being worshiped. Busy. I had been on my own when I was raped and abused and had horrible things happen to me, I guessed I would just keep on dealing with things on my own. In fact, I hated God. At one point, I hated God so much that during a Good Friday service I happened to be attending with my family, I told Jesus that I wished I had been there to pound the nails in myself. I hated Him like poison.

Needless to say, this method of dealing with my PTSD and chronic injuries didn’t really work out well. Oh, I was stable enough mentally. I wasn’t suicidal anymore. I was off the really heavy pain medications I had been on for years. I met a guy who was decent, and for a while I hoped we might get married. I went back to school to try to finish my nursing degree. All the while, I felt a great, gaping emptiness in myself. I thought it was “just the PTSD” or something like that. After all, I felt it most strongly when I thought of my losses and my painful experiences and the deep wounds and shame I couldn’t wash away.

Breaking Away:

Things started to change for me, as I wrote in my early posts, when I got very sick in February 2011. Prior to that, in January, I had gone to confession in a “if this is really necessary” sort of way so that I could receive Communion at my little sister’s wedding, even though I wasn’t sure I believed in the Eucharist or any of this God stuff. I maintained myself in a “state of grace,” by the skin of my teeth, because I was too sick to do any sinning, until I was in the hospital in February. In the hospital, a chaplain came and brought me Communion, since my religious preference was somehow listed as “Catholic,” though I have no recollection of ever saying so. In March I got sicker, my cousin was murdered, and I had to drop out of nursing school. In April, I continued to get sicker at home. Finally in May, I had emergency surgery, as I have written about before, and spent the summer with my parents. My life changed then.

My boyfriend, though a good man, found that he couldn’t deal with the heaviness of my situation. We decided to take a break so he could think things over, and decide finally whether he was going to ask me to marry him or not. Around Thanksgiving, we decided that we were better off being friends.
At the same time, I found out that I would need further surgery: on my leg, where I had had surgery twice already, most recently in May; and on my jaw. The surgery on my jaw was one I knew I needed for years, but had been put off several times. I had been diagnosed with TMJ disorder, but there was something else besides the typical TMJ problem wrong with the left side of my jaw. I knew what it was: it was from the incident years ago, when I had been pistol-whipped and my jaw partially dislocated. My jaw was irreducibly partially anteriorly subluxated (in normal English, it was still partially dislocated, forward of the actual joint, and they couldn’t put it back because it had formed a false joint because it had been that way so long). It was devastating emotionally to have to face the effects of that incident.

I found a counselor who encouraged me to look at it as a break with the past, as starting anew, as repairing myself and healing from the trauma physically and emotionally. I was very skeptical. Even thinking about having to have surgery to repair what that son of a bitch did was very emotionally trying. I also no longer had my former boyfriend to fall back on. I had completely broken away from my previous ways of coping.
Shut Up…and pray:

I had surgery on February 20, 2012, on my leg, a broken tooth, and my jaw. My leg was not painful, but my jaw…hurt. It hurt badly. Worse than it did when it first happened because of the surgical trauma, and I couldn’t even open my mouth. I couldn’t speak. My face was swollen. Oh, God, it was like when it first happened. Except this time...

Our Father, Who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done: on earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us and lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil. Amen.

Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.
I could pray. And pray. And pray.

I went back to my parents’ house for a little while, while my mouth was wired shut and there was a danger of me choking and not being able to cut the wires in time. I had to take everything in liquid form, including medication. At first, the pain medication I was on was not strong enough because of my high tolerance to opiods because of past prescriptions. I paced the floor, tears streaming down my face. My Mom thought I was nuts. Of course, there was more to the tears than just physical pain. There were flashbacks. I had nightmares. My thoughts were constantly drawn back there. In the shower, I scrubbed myself bloody again. Then…

My Grandpa brought me the Precious Blood of Jesus, in a little dropper bottle. I remember one particular occasion when my Mom and I had been butting heads over things and I wasn’t handling the pain well, and I was just ready to fall apart. Everyone was going to my niece’s first birthday party, and there would be too many people there, so I couldn’t go. There was a lot of confusion, and when Grandpa brought the container with the bottle in it, he set it on the kitchen counter to wait for a little while, until he could do the little prayer service with me and give me Communion. I fell on my knees in the kitchen, in front of that little dropper bottle containing the Blood of Christ and cried my eyes out. My Grandma came into the kitchen, ready to leave with my Dad and brother, who were back to pick her up, and put her hand on my shoulder and prayed silently. I felt more peaceful, and stood up. She put her arms around me, and said, “You are a strong woman, a woman of great courage. The Lord will get you through this.” I knew she was right. I received Communion in a spirit of peace, and awareness that, “I can do all things in Him who strengthens me.”

Grandpa has continued to bring me Communion, daily. It has been something he has done out of love for me, and it has changed my life completely. I’m not saying I’m never tempted; I am…frequently. Before my surgery, I was tempted to do things I haven’t done in a long time just because of the feelings the pending surgery was stirring up. My language isn’t perfect: though I don’t swear, I cuss like a sailor sometimes. I’m still me…just a bit different. I feel more patient, more peaceful, more joyful. Not happier, but more joyful. I don’t know if I can explain the difference between being happy and being joyful, but there is one.

The surgery and having my jaw wired shut made it painful to try to talk, so I had to keep things in and sometimes be misunderstood. I couldn’t express myself as well as I was used to doing. I couldn’t sing, which is a huge part of my life. I had to pray silently, in my heart. Being forced to be more silent forced me to listen to God more. And I heard Him say He loved me.

Cross of Changes:

When the wires were cut and replaced with rubber bands, allowing me to open my mouth slightly, I went back to my apartment. It had been broken into while I was at my parents’ house, and my big, fancy, HDTV was taken. Before I went in for surgery, I had spent a lot of time playing video games at night and watching political opinion shows and letting myself get angry at what I saw. It was good for me to not have the TV. I had to let go of something I had saved up for, let go of a thing I was attached to: hey, it was the Lenten season anyway. I gave up watching all TV and playing video games. I eventually replaced my TV with the insurance money, with something not as expensive. During Holy Week, I watched The Passion of The Christ on the new TV on Holy Saturday to break it in.

For the first time, watching that movie, my tears were tears of gratitude. I had seen it before, many times, and always wept out of shame and pain and hate and a feeling of abandonment by God. This time, I was able to see the true story: the suffering and death, yes, but the victory over sin, and shame, and guilt, and death in the end. I celebrated Easter with more joy and peace than I ever have before. I know that the suffering that I have been through was all a consequence of human sin, mine or others’, and Jesus took it on Himself and experienced it. I know that the victory He won over sin and death belongs to me as well, through Baptism. Therefore, the pain I’m in from the recent surgery and the other constant pain, relic of other incidents during my dark years, is united to Jesus’ pain on the Cross, and is no longer a matter for shame and guilt, but victory and hope in the Resurrection. This is the hope we can all have, whatever pain or shame is in our lives, if we turn to Him and turn away from our old lives. Unite the pain to His on the Cross, and we unite also to His victory over death and sin.
This doesn’t make life a bed of rose petals. There are always consequences for sin, and I am still facing them in my life. I will always have pain, unless God miraculously heals me, and I will always have bad memories that will sometimes overwhelm me. However, I take great comfort in the fact that all of the guilt has been washed away and I am victorious through He who is victorious even over death.  

Monday, March 12, 2012

The Story of a Life



The Story of a Life: Lillian Mary

In the beginning…



I was 16 when I got pregnant, as I wrote about in a previous post ("I Want My Mom"); I never expected that I'd get pregnant because my 18 year old boyfriend took "precautions". When I made a very bad decision and ran away from home, I stayed with my boyfriend and his family. Though his parents tried to instill some sense into me, and prevent the two of us from "misbehaving" in their house, I nonetheless ended up making another bad decision. Not to get explicit, but I thought there was no way I could get pregnant. Of course, looking back, I could smack my young self for being so stupid...especially since I had just aced Anatomy and Physiology. Anyway, eventually my Dad intervened and brought me home. A few weeks went by and I noticed that the smell of Mom's ratatouille was making me sicker than usual...in fact, I felt pretty sick a lot of the time. But I didn't connect the dots because, hey, it couldn't happen that way.

Mom was the one who first suspected. She bought me a home test, which came up negative twice...I thought it was just ridiculous when she made me go to the doctor and get a serum HCG test. The blood test is much, much more accurate than the home pregnancy tests. A few days went by and I wasn't worried. Then, while out working with the whole family cleaning the business office of my Dad's old employer, Mom reminded me that the results should be in and I should call the doctor's office to find out. I called. They said, "You were expecting this result, right? Because you are very definitely pregnant." I remember, so clearly, hanging up the phone and feeling like I was going to throw up, faint, and explode into a million pieces all at once. You see, I hadn't expected that I was expecting. That was a long ride home.

Difficult Decisions…


Well, there we were: my Mom and I barely able to speak to each other without cussing, my Dad heartbroken, and my younger sisters and brother confused and upset. I remember lots of discussions about what to do. Never, ever did I think about sneaking to get an abortion and saying I miscarried. As soon as I knew I was pregnant, that was it for me: whoever was growing inside me was MY son or daughter. I felt protective, and scared, and happy...I knew my life had changed forever.

During one of our discussions, Mom said, "We're not raising any grandchildren," which I interpreted, "we won't help you if you decide to keep him or her." My Grandma stepped in at a critical point with an offer: I could go to Peoria, Illinois, and live with a family there who had been some of her students when she taught at Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio. The adoption laws for open adoption were the best in the country, and she had already contacted a couple who would love to adopt my child and would agree to an open adoption. This meant I would get periodic updates: pictures, letters from the adoptive parents, and possibly an introduction some years down the road.
I haven't ever said anything about this to my parents or my grandparents, but I felt that I had no choice but to give the baby up for adoption. I knew (or thought I knew) that my parents wouldn't help me raise the baby, and therefore I'd probably be on some kind of welfare and only able to give my child a lower class life--the adoptive parents were very well off, and would be able to send my little boy or girl to the best schools, get the best medical care, have hockey or ballet lessons--all the things a teen mom is unlikely to be able to do. I felt railroaded, and I hated them all for it. I only knew I loved my baby, and would do whatever was necessary to give him or her the kind of life he or she deserved: the best of everything.


Living and Loving in Illinois…


I moved to Peoria, and lived with a very dear, very special family. I'll call them the Browns: Anna Brown and Randy Brown, with their kids John and Stephen. I loved them, almost from the very first. Anna was very sympathetic to my crying and hormonal craziness, and I talked to her a lot about my relationship with my parents. She's the reason I told my Mom I loved her, on the phone, for the first time in years...she made me see that I was being an idiot, hurting my Mom and Dad. How would I feel if the baby I was pregnant with did something like this? It took a while to sink in, but I realized I had hurt my parents, and that I still needed them.
I enrolled at Bradley University, and took Organic Biochemistry and Abnormal Psychology, to add to my BSN credits once I got back to Michigan. I did well in both classes, tutoring some of the older students in the Biochem class who had trouble. Our section was the Pre-Med section, and the professor tested us and gave us homework and quizzes at a much, much higher standard than the other Biochem sections...so it was challenging, and interesting. The Abnormal Psych teacher prefaced the first class by warning us that a rapist was on the loose on campus, and that according to the police sketch artist and his own assessment of the rapist's personality, he fit the profile. He also drove a Harley and swore like a sailor. That class was also very interesting!

For a little while, the pregnancy progressed relatively normally. I was considered high risk from the beginning because I was so young, and a certain measurement looked a little small at the first ultrasound. Since I was high risk, I had a doctor at the high risk OB-GYN clinic of St. Francis Medical Center. Call her Dr. Jill. She was very good; I had frequent ultrasounds to check on how the baby was developing, and to monitor the risky situation. I was able to watch my baby grow: a tiny blip of a heartbeat on the screen, the first time I could make out a face, the waving hands and kicking feet, the thumb-sucking and playing with little toes. I could watch all this on the ultrasounds, and I grew to know my baby. Then came the day I found out I was having a little girl. I remember, before that ultrasound, praying to God I was pregnant with a boy: not because I would love the baby any less, but because I had always wanted a girl and couldn't bear the thought of giving up a baby girl. I cried. My little girl, my daughter. From that point on I had ever more serious regrets about even considering adoption...I wanted to raise her myself, no matter the cost to my future. I had to argue myself back to a rational, unselfish decision over and over.
Down in my room, in the basement of Mr. and Mrs. Brown's house, I began to sew little things for my daughter. Things she could take with her. I made her a blanket sleeper, a dolly, a blanket, a Onesie. I played music for her, to settle her down if she was kicking too much, or to get her kicking if I hadn't felt her moving enough: Enya for soothing her to sleep, Eric Clapton or Stevie Ray Vaughan to wake her up, and Metallica for making her dance. She would kick rhythmically, in time to the heavy bass beat. When she was keeping me awake at night, kicking one rib over and over until it hurt, and music wasn't enough to make her settle down, I would get on my hands and knees and rock back and forth until she slept.

I decided that I would nurse her for the first six weeks, and then give her to Scott and Janice. The nurses at the clinic told me that if she could nurse at least six weeks, she would be much healthier; but really, I just wanted to be the one to hold her and feed her and have that time of bonding with her. She wouldn't remember it, it couldn't hurt her, and I would remember any time I had with her in my arms, for the rest of my life. Mrs. Brown told me it would be difficult; that I would get no sleep once she was born and demanding feeding every couple hours. I couldn't wait. I wanted to see her face in living color, her eyes looking into mine. I wanted to test her reflexes myself: to put my finger in the palm of her hand, and have her hold on. I remember so clearly, how I loved her already.

Trouble in the Heartland…


Around the end of October, I began to have cramps. Then serious cramps, and back pain. Mrs. Brown had just experienced a miscarriage of her own, and knew that I needed to be seen by my OB right away. Sure enough, I was in pre-term labor at 21 weeks. At that time and place, the earliest a baby had any reasonable chance of survival was 25 weeks. My doctor immediately hospitalized me. It was just Halloween time. I had exams. I thought I'd be in and out of there, and back to class. Then the nurses came and explained things to me: my labor was far enough along that my cervix was dilating and effacing, and I could lose the baby at any time.

Things became more serious in a hurry: my parents came to visit me in the hospital, bringing along their youngest, born just a few weeks before. I met my baby brother Michael for the first time while I was pregnant with my daughter and in the hospital. I have a picture I treasure, of me holding Michael on my chest, with my pregnant belly below him, my daughter kicking up at her uncle. Mom and Dad and the nurses tried to prepare me for delivering a very pre-term baby, who was unlikely to survive. The nurses had the chaplain come to visit me, my Grandma sent in a former student of hers who was a priest to visit me and try to prepare me for my daughter's likely pre-term birth and death within a few hours or days. I visited the NICU, neo-natal intensive care unit, and saw tiny babies, sick babies, dying babies. I remember a set of twins, born at 27 wks, who weighed only two pounds each. They were in the same incubator, curled around each other as they had been in the womb. I don't know if they lived. I was told they weren't likely to. I still have some of the literature the nurses gave me to read: a little book called "When Hello Means Goodbye," a pamphlet called "Empty Arms," and other similar titles. I decided that if my daughter were to be born so prematurely that she would likely die I would not give her up. If she were to spend her time after birth in the NICU and then die, she would live and die my daughter.
I spent a total of seven weeks in the hospital, on medication to stop the premature contractions and on strict bed-rest. My doctor came to me one day in December and said "There is no other way to say this, but there's been...a miracle. Your labor has stopped, but the miracle is that everything has reversed itself. We didn't expect you to make it to 28 weeks, now it's entirely likely that you will carry the baby to full term. This, medically, doesn't happen. You can go back to the Browns!" She released me from the St. Francis Medical Center a week before Christmas; I was able to spend the holiday with my family. When I returned to Peoria, I was more focused than ever on my daughter and her growth and development. I went to childbirth classes with Anna Brown, and prepared for the time I would have with her before surrendering her to Scott and Joyce. I was in constant communication with the Catholic Social Services case worker, who became my good friend and confidante. She was consistent in her encouragement to "do the right thing" and give my daughter to her prospective adoptive parents. I was still intent on doing so; however the pain of losing her was growing in my mind. Giving birth to her, spending time with her, and then...never to see her again!

Never to see her again. As it turned out, the time I spent with her was only during my pregnancy, and the separation between us was permanent indeed.

Hearts Breaking…


February 13th, 2001, I spent the day with my CSS case worker, had lunch with another young girl in the same case as I was, whom the case worker wanted me to convince to give up her baby for adoption if I could, and went home to the Browns anticipating my weekly check up the following day. I complained all day about how much the baby was kicking; she had a favorite position to lie in and since her head was down, and she had moved into position for delivery, my right ribs were her favorite things to kick. It actually became very painful! The nurses advised me to try to encourage her to move and stop the constant kicking in the same place by changing position frequently myself, by tapping her butt, and other such methods. The night of the 13th, she was particularly active, and I was very annoyed because she was keeping me awake. When I finally did fall asleep, I had a horrific nightmare: she was dead, and my family had taken her away and buried her without telling me where she was, or letting me see her.

I woke up the morning of the 14th with a very bad feeling. My appointment with my doctor was at 2:30, but I called the nurses and my Mom that morning because my baby, whose primary enjoyment in life seemed to be kicking my ribs since she couldn't turn flips anymore, was not kicking. In fact, I hadn't felt her move. I tried to suppress the feeling that something was drastically wrong, tried to shake off the dream about her being dead, tried to get her to move by drinking caffeine, eating sugary things...all the things the nurses said to do. I couldn't get rid of the dread; something was very wrong.
Anna Brown took me to my appointment, and since she knew my feelings and forebodings, she came in with me to see the doctor. I told Dr. Jill my feelings and about my nightmare, and that I hadn't felt her move since very early in the morning. Looking back, I can see that Dr. Jill didn't want to feed into my fears but was concerned, herself. She measured me first: everything was on target for 36 weeks and 4 days, the baby had dropped but was in a different presentation than before, everything looked ok from the outside. Then she brought out the Doppler, a device used by obstetricians to listen to the baby's heartbeat. She searched all around my stomach: Lillian had played tricks before, turning away from ultrasound probes and pokes and prods from me, the nurses, and the doctor. I could see Dr. Jill's expression growing troubled. I held Anna Brown's hand. I told Dr. Jill, "She's dead, she's dead, I know she's dead." She met my eyes and quickly looked away. Dr. Jill told Anna and me that she needed to go "check on something" and then we'd do a quick ultrasound, just to make sure everything was okay. She asked Anna to come with me into the room for the ultrasound.

The probe on my stomach was cold, the doctor didn't take the time to warm the conducting gel. She turned the screen away from me, so that I couldn't see what she was looking for. I held Anna's hand like a lifeline, and prayed: Hail Mary, Hail Mary, Hail Mary...
The probe stopped moving. Dr. Jill gasped. I was shaking my head, no, no, no. Dr. Jill said, "Megan, I'm so sorry. I don't understand what happened. She's gone!" I think I screamed. I remember making Dr. Jill show me the screen, show me the baby, show me...her heart, not beating. Her limbs, not moving. The blood in the cord, not flowing.


No Hello, just Goodbye…


After the initial diagnosis of Intra-Uterine Fetal Demise, my doctor had to send me to the hospital maternal-fetal clinic...their ultrasounds were much, much better. Maybe...something, maybe she wasn't quite gone. Maybe she could still be saved. Anna Brown drove me over to the hospital, just around the block from where we were. Dr. Jill met us there. A specialist took over the ultrasound in the hospital high risk clinic, where I had spent so much time during my stay at St. Francis. The doctors conferred in low voices. They spoke quietly to Anna. She came and put her arms around me and held me when Dr. Jill told me, "There's nothing we can do. She's dead. There's not even a little flutter of a heartbeat left, the bloodflow through the umbilical cord has stopped. We need to induce labor. Do you want to do that now, or wait a while?" I couldn't speak, except to say, "Mom, Mom, Mom, I need my Mom."

Anna and Dr. Jill arranged that I could make the long distance calls to my parents from the hospital, before any decision was made about when to induce labor. I called Mom: no answer. I called Dad...and he answered the phone. I said, "Daddy, she's dead," and couldn't speak anymore. Dr. Jill and Anna Brown took the phone, and explained what had happened as far as they could: my baby had died, unexpectedly, for no reason they could see on ultrasound, and I needed to deliver her quickly. Could my parents come? I didn't want to start the process of induction of labor until they were there.
I spent that night, Valentine's Day 2001, over at my case worker's house, with her mother. I couldn't stand to remain at the Browns' house, in my basement room with all the little things I had made for my daughter and where I had experienced such bonding and growing love for her. My parents left Michigan for Illinois, a 9 hour drive, the next morning. They arrived at around 8 pm on the 15th, and we immediately went to St. Francis Medical Center, where Dr. Jill was waiting for me. Induction of labor began at 10 pm on 2/15/01.

That night, my Dad stayed with me in my Labor-Delivery-Recovery room. We watched my favorite movies and played canasta. I don't think I slept that night. Dad had a sort of cot at the foot of my bed. Things began to intensify early in the morning of the 16th: I was already on an Oxytocin IV drip and labor had already begun, but the doctors added more to the cocktail of medications I was receiving. I spent the entire time I was in labor in the most intense and unpleasant stage: transition. It was very painful, and the doctors gave me morphine and Dilaudid and other narcotics at much higher doses than would have been given to a woman with a living baby to deliver.
I remember walking around the unit, with my IV pole, but it was too hard for me to see other women doing the same thing...in labor with a living baby. The nurses who had taken care of me during my previous hospitalization on the prenatal side of the Mother-Baby unit came to visit me; the childbirth class instructor came to be my coach as soon as she could. My recollection of that time is of pain, and more pain, and praying for another miracle. I was also waiting for my erstwhile boyfriend, Dave, to arrive with his mother. They finally arrived, and I told the anaethesia team that they could go ahead with the epidural. My Mom had asked if I were waiting until Dave got there so that he could see me in pain. I said, "Of course I am. He deserves to hurt just as much." Mom laughed, but then she sighed. Looking back, of course, I understand his reactions and decisions much better than I did at the time. He couldn't hurt as much as I did, he didn't have the bond I had with our daughter, he had been in Michigan with his other girlfriend...in fact, when I was trying desperately to contact him and tell him our baby was dead he was out with this girl, the girl he had sworn up and down didn't exist.
 
I got the epidural; but without the physical pain to focus on, the emotional pain became overwhelming. I prayed desperately: to St. Jude, patron of lost causes, St. Rita, patroness of the impossible, begging Jesus to bring my daughter miraculously to life. "You did it for your friend Lazarus, and for your friend Peter's mom...why not my daughter? You could, Jesus, I know you could. Please, please, give me another miracle!" I didn't get my miracle. At 11:02 pm, on 16 February 2001, I delivered Lillian Mary. As Dr. Jill was looking at her, trying to understand why, she was in tears. The nurses who were with me were in tears, the residents who came to see the novelty of a dead baby...their faces were horrified.


Beauty in Death…


She was so beautiful. Her hair was so curly, and it lay flat in little "S's" on her head. Her face was sweet, with the Mishler nose, and a rosebud mouth. Her ears were perfect. Her eyes were perfect. She had such long, slender fingers and toes. Perfect. And still, and limp, and dead.

I was able to hold her for a long time. I dressed her in the sleeper I made, put lotion on her little hands and face, put the hat I'd made for her on her head. My Mom, Dad and Grandma held her. Dave held her, cried, and looked confused.
The priest, who had visited me before, Fr. Ken, came and prayed with us. He prayed the prayers for the dead and blessed her little body. I remember, so clearly, that when he was done with the formal prayers he got down on one knee and held her hand and kissed it.

Finally, the nurses took her body away, to measure and record and photograph. They moved me to a different part of the maternity floor, so that I wouldn't have to stay in the same area as other mothers whose babies were alive. They gave me something to make me sleep; my Dad stayed with me again, sleeping at the foot of my bed. I was so glad he was there. I couldn't have faced that night alone.
The next day, my family (and Dave) came again. I had a lot of paperwork to fill out; a death certificate, rather than a birth certificate. The nurses brought Lillian's body back to me from the morgue. They had the kindness and forethought to wrap her in layers of warm blankets. But in kissing her and holding her, eventually the cold came through. I was never allowed to be alone with her...I asked everyone to leave, to let me be alone with her for a few minutes. Dave wouldn't. I was so angry with him, but I didn't have the energy to make him leave. I wanted to be alone with her, to sing to her, to kiss her and mourn my baby in privacy and peace for a few minutes. I never had the chance. The nurses came and took her away again. That was the last time I ever saw her: February 17, 2001, around one in the afternoon.

The Last Things…



We made our way home to Michigan, having arranged for Lillian's body to be flown and delivered to the funeral home in Ann Arbor, since transporting bodies across state lines privately is not allowed. I stayed with my parents and planned the funeral. I remember sitting on Mom and Dad's bed, with the Church songbook and the possible Bible readings for funerals in front of me. I chose everything, and asked some people I loved to do the music and the readings and the prayers.

The funeral itself, on February 23, 2001, is a blur to me. It was at St. Thomas Catholic Church in Ann Arbor, since my parish was in the middle of building its church. I remember two things clearly. Fr. Ed carried her tiny casket up to the front of the church, and knelt with her in front of the Tabernacle, offering her up to God. I remember he said "She fell asleep in the womb of her mother, and woke up in the arms of Jesus."
I remember, vaguely, that he said good things about me and how I handled my pregnancy and the whole situation, but nothing specific. I wish someone had thought of recording his sermon; they do that now at Christ the King, because no one can focus well enough at a child's funeral to remember anything about the homily. I remember being vaguely aware that the church was packed, and that people were there who I hadn't seen in years, and that lots of people came to the cemetary too.

When we got to the cemetary, the gravesite hadn't been "dressed up" or disguised in any way. There was a frame over the gaping hole in the ground, with a little fake grass on one side; but there was a pile of dirt right next to the hole, and tracks from the backhoe were muddy in the February snow. I saw Lillian's tiny white satin casket in the middle of this filth. I thought of having to leave her there. I didn't hear Fr. Ed's prayers at all. When he was finished, my Grandma handed me a rose to put on top of her casket. My knees trembled and I fell to my knees in front of that hole in the ground and laid over the casket, screaming, "I can't leave her here, not here, not in this mud and filth." Grandma told Dave to get me up, get me out of there. My Dad on one side, and Dave on the other, they picked me up and took me to the car. We drove away.
It's now 2012, and I still go to visit her grave, at St. Thomas Cemetary in Ann Arbor, and I still feel the same way. Though I know that her soul is with God, with Mary and the other saints in heaven, I can't stand to leave. I've stopped going to the cemetary by myself, because on my own...I can't leave her there.

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Proof of Life

This post is a brief adjunct to my recent posts about human life. I laid out the scientific and philosophical arguments for human personhood from conception until death in those posts, but some people need to see things in pictures or videos in order to connect.

I watched this video, from the website IamaHumanBeing.ca, and I cried. It reminds me of my daughter...and my son, whose face I never got to see except via ultrasound. It reminds me of all the babies whose mothers never looked at them, before getting rid of them.

This video, and others like it, should settle all argument about whether the pre-born baby is human for those who need to see in order to believe. In Canada, there is a major, nationwide movement underway to recognize that humanity begins with conception. The United States needs to follow suit, on a national level.




http://www.iamahumanbeing.ca/

Thursday, March 1, 2012

Dignity in the Brave New World


Dignity in the Brave New World

In the modern era, few people ever consider the implications of any scientific advancement. If it’s new, it’s good. Well, in vitro fertilization isn’t so new anymore; neither is genetic screening for diseases nor prenatal diagnosis of illness. Recent articles from LifeSiteNews.com, and in the National Catholic Register, contain evidence of the rise of popularity of the new eugenics. From 2/28/12: two headlines from LifeSiteNews.com are particularly striking, and indicative of the appalling direction the new eugenics is taking. The headlines were “Ethicists justify infanticide in major medical journal,” and “Journal editor defends pro-infanticide piece: Killing newborns is already legal in Holland.”

Both articles summarize the position of the ethicist in question, Alberto Giubilin. He argued, in his piece in the Journal of Medical Ethics online entitled “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?” that infanticide of disabled newborns, healthy newborns, or infants up to an age he does not specify, is justified if the parents so choose (Baklinski, 2012). His position has the benefit of being logical, as the editor of the Journal of Medical Ethics points out in the second article from LifeSiteNews.com, and I pointed out in a previous post. If abortion for eugenics reasons (for example: the baby has Trisomy 21, or Tay-Sachs, or Trisomy 18, or the genotype XX instead of XY) is acceptable and widely practiced, and abortion on demand performed on healthy babies (for example: the mother wants to focus on her career) is acceptable and widely practiced, then infanticide is likewise acceptable and should be more widely practiced (Jalsevac, 2012). The editor of the Journal of Medical Ethics, Julian Savulesco, points out, “the arguments in the article “are largely not new and have been presented repeatedly in the academic literature and public fora by the most eminent philosophers and bioethicists in the world, including Peter Singer, Michael Tooley and John Harris” (Jalsevac, 2012). Likewise, in the National Catholic Register, Rebecca Taylor observed, “Modern eugenicists do not fear the horrors of the past. They support aborting fetuses with disease or disability, what is sometimes called eugenic abortion. Or they advocate the screening of in vitro fertilization (IVF) embryos for disease and ‘throwing out’ the ‘defective ones’” (Taylor, 2012).

How do IVF embryo screening and eugenic abortion relate to infanticide? The answer is obvious: if one accepts that human personhood and therefore human rights are things to be gained or granted by the State or the medical establishment, and humans at pre-born developmental stages are not persons and have no protection of their right to live, then it is perfectly logical to apply the same criteria for killing the pre-born human not-person to the new born infant who is identical in terms of developmental stage to the fetus except that the new born is no longer obtaining oxygen from his or her mother’s blood but from breathing. Peter Singer and Michael Tooley have argued that infants are not persons, any more than an embryo at 8 weeks gestation is a person because the infant, like the embryo, is not: sentient, self-aware, interested in the future etc. There is no consensus among the “personhood is not intrinsic” ethicists as far as when the new born, infant, or toddler actually fulfills all the criteria for personhood. They don’t agree on what the criteria even are (Mishler, 2012).

This is where we are heading: it’s ok to screen embryos for the “breast cancer gene,” or for hair color, eye color, gender, Trisomy 21, etc, and then dispose of the “extra” embryos…therefore embryos are commodities, to be specially ordered; it’s ok to abort fetuses if they are the “wrong gender,” or are diagnosed with some illness or disability, or are simply inconvenient…therefore fetuses have no protection whatsoever; everyone acknowledges that there is no difference between the 23 week gestation pre-term baby who is born alive and put on ECMO and in the NICU, and the 23 week gestation pre-born fetus who is being disarticulated via suction curette, other than location…therefore infants are equivalent to fetuses and fetuses are equivalent to infants. It has been alright to kill the fetus; it is now alright to kill the infant.

The new eugenics described in the National Catholic Register is one of personal decisions: the decisions of parents to abort 90% of Trisomy 21 fetuses, or to implant only embryos which have passed genetic screening muster (whatever trait the parents happen to be looking for), or abort a female fetus because they want a male child. The new eugenics is supposed to be better than the old eugenics because the governments are not forcing these eugenic decisions (Taylor, 2012). Supposedly, the fact that parents are deciding on their own to selectively murder their disabled or diseased children before they are born is a good thing. It has decreased the number of people living with Trisomy 21 or other genetic birth defects or congenital birth defects. Parents are taking responsibility themselves for the quality of children they allow to be born. The children who are being aborted are not up to standards. Infanticide, argues Alberto Giubilin, is actually a better way to handle those children who don’t meet their parents’ standards for birth. He claims that allowing the child to be born and medically evaluated outside the womb, before a decision is made as far as whether to allow the child to continue to live, is more ethical than killing him or her in the womb because it gives a more accurate determination of the child’s future quality of life and the potential burden to the parents (Baklinski, 2012). The editor of the Journal of Medical Ethics pointed out that such infanticide is already legal, and practiced, in Holland. Savulesco explains, “The practice is permitted under the so-called Groningen Protocol, which outlines the circumstances under which a physician may deliver a lethal injection to a newborn who suffers from a disability, at the request of the child’s parents” (Jalsevac, 2012). Further, Savulesco and Giubilin claim, infanticide via lethal injection, after the parents and doctors have determined that the child in question will likely have a poor quality of life and will be a burden to the parents, is more ethical than abortion.

 I can see the logic: sometimes prenatal diagnosis is wrong and healthy babies are mistakenly aborted; therefore it is better to be sure the child is “defective” before killing him or her. In addition, abortion procedures are horrific, and, depending on the developmental stage of the embryo or fetus in question, is an excruciating way to die. Most abortions for eugenic reasons are performed after there is an intra-uterine diagnosis procedure such as amniocentesis or post-nuccal measurements indicate the presence of Trisomy 21, etc; at that point in fetal development there is no question that pain is felt, simply by virtue of the neural development of the fetus. A lethal injection of a newborn is much less painful, and does not dismember or decapitate or disembowel the baby, preserving the body for the parents to bury if they so choose.

Now extend the logic a bit further. Imagine an older relative develops Alzheimer Disease: a progressive, incurable, fatal disease which robs the victim of their memories, dignity, and life. Caring for patients with Alzheimer Disease (or other dementia diseases), is very arduous and expensive. It is an unquestionable burden on the family. Wouldn’t it be better for all involved if the patient’s relatives could simply request that the physician administer a lethal injection before the burden becomes unbearable to the family, and before the patient reaches the worst stages of the disease? It would preserve the dignity of the patient, as well as spare them pain and suffering as their disease progressed.

The argument has already been made for the elimination of the disabled on these grounds by Peter Singer, Michael Tooley, and Heinrich Himmler. Of course, Himmler made the elimination of the unfit mandatory. Singer, Tooley, Giubilin, and Savulesco want such decisions to be personal, and between the family and the doctor, at least for now. Sanger argued along similar lines, placing her first birth control clinic in a poor, urban, minority neighborhood. Singer, Tooley, Giubilin and Savulesco are not advocating racial eugenics, as Sanger and Himmler did, only the personal decision of parents and doctors to eliminate the diseased and disabled. They make the case that the fetus and the newborn are non-persons, as are those who have lost the capability of exercising their full human capacities, or who are only partially able to exercise those capacities.

It should be clear by now that it is impossible to defend the rights of the ill and disabled if one accepts the premise that the pre-born are not persons. If personhood is something arbitrary, to be gained or lost, and decided on by the whims of society or the current powers that be, there is no way to defend the right to life and dignity of those who have limited capacity or have lost their capacity to exercise whatever the criteria for personhood may be. A society which accepts the legality of abortion on demand up to the moment of complete delivery on the basis that “we don’t know when the baby acquires human rights” is not far from accepting infanticide, euthanasia, and the old eugenics, on the same basis: “we don’t know when the dementia patient loses human rights.”

Bibliography


Baklinski, P. (2012, February 28). Ethicists justify infanticide in major medical journal. Retrieved February 29, 2012, from LifeSiteNews.coom: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/shock-ethicists-justify-infanticide-in-major-medical-journal

Jalsevac, J. (2012, February 28). Journal editor defends pro-infanticide piece: Killing newborns is already legal in Holland. Retrieved February 29, 2012, from LifeSiteNews.com: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/journal-editor-defends-pro-infanticide-piece-killing-newborns-is-already-le

Mishler, M. (2012, February 10). Some Lines Can't Be Crossed. Retrieved February 29, 2012, from The View From Here: http://meggymishviewfromhere.blogspot.com/2012/02/some-lines-cant-be-crossed.html

Taylor, R. (2012, January 29-February 11). How Modern Eugenics Discounts Human Dignity: The Sum of Millions of Individual Choices. National Catholic Register , pp. 7-8.

Friday, February 10, 2012

Some Lines Can't Be Crossed


Draw the Line

sometimes i do say never

Introduction:


On March 9th, 2009, I watched President Barack Obama give his prepared remarks, in front of a cheering crowd, as he signed Executive Order 13505 reinstating federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research. I watched with a heavy heart, struck by the realization that sooner or later, once his Executive Order was implemented, I would be paying for it with my taxes, and participating in something truly evil. So much for freedom of conscience. Welcome to the Brave New World.

I listened carefully to his statement at the time, and re-read his prepared remarks recently. Mr. Obama’s argument for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research rested on four key points. First, he argued that governments have a responsibility to invest in scientific research which has “…the potential to help us understand, and possibly cure, some of our most devastating diseases and conditions,” and that without government funding, promising avenues of investigation are neglected because the cost is too high (Obama, 2009). The second point Mr. Obama made is that, in his view, government has been forced into a “false choice between sound science and moral values” (Obama, 2009). He claimed that because human embryonic stem cell research may one day help advance medicine, it will ease human suffering and is therefore morally acceptable. Third, Mr. Obama said that with his Executive Order, and the attached Memorandum to the head to the White House Office of Science and Technology, he would be restoring scientific integrity and progress, promoting open inquiry “free from manipulation or coercion,” and “ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda—and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology” (Obama, 2009). Finally, throughout his remarks, Mr. Obama gave several examples of terrible diseases and conditions which, he argued, one day might be cured by human embryonic stem cells, making his abstract point about easing suffering more concrete.

I found President Obama’s statement so deeply disturbing, I want to address the issue in depth. In order to refute Mr. Obama’s arguments, I must first establish some common ground regarding the science of embryology, and how human embryonic stem cells are derived. I must also touch briefly on previous policy regarding the funding of such research as well as the legal situation surrounding President Obama’s Executive Order and the National Institute of Health Guidelines implementing his policy. Finally, I will refute each of his points and offer a comprehensive counter-argument.

Background:


The science of embryology has come a long way, and there are basic biological facts which are now known regarding the earliest stages of human growth and development. According to William L. Saunders, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Human Life and Bioethics in Washington D.C., in Embryology: Inconvenient Facts, an essay adapted from a chapter in his book Human Dignity in the Biotech Century, “Every human being begins as a single-cell zygote, grows through the embryonic stage, then the fetal stage, is born and develops through infancy, through childhood, and through adulthood, until death. Each human being is genetically the same human being at every stage, despite changes in his or her appearance” (Saunders, 2004). In the usual course of events, a few hours after sexual intercourse a sperm and egg meet and combine into a single cell, the zygote, which is a new, unique, complete human organism at the very first stage of his or her development. With technological developments, technicians are now able to introduce the sperm to the egg in a laboratory setting, with the same results: a new human organism at the first stage of development. This is known as in vitro fertilization, or IVF. The latest advance is that scientists are now able to remove the nucleus from an egg cell, replace it with the nucleus of another type of cell from someone’s body, give the egg with the new nucleus a small amount of electrical stimulation and cause it to become a zygote, with the donated nucleus providing the genetic material and the egg providing the cellular structure and division. This is cloning, now known as somatic cell nuclear transfer, or SCNT, for public relations reasons  (Saunders, 2004).

However one ends up with a zygote, whether through sexual intercourse, or IVF, or cloning, the result is the same. A zygote immediately begins to divide, passing through several stages, until it is officially called an embryo. The process is very complex, and very fascinating, and many people have devoted their lives to researching human development in these early stages. The important points about the scientific advances are: embryos have cells which are pluripotent, meaning they have the potential to become any type of cell in the body, depending on which chemical signals they receive; scientists in the laboratory are able to induce growth of zygotes into embryos and then “pause” them at certain points; and scientists can remove the nucleus of a cell from any body part of any person and insert it into an egg cell from which the nucleus has been removed and that egg and the donated nuclear material will become a new, living zygote and divide from there until it becomes an embryo.

To obtain hESCs, scientists take an embryo at a certain stage of development (called the blastocyst stage) and remove the pluripotent stem cells they want. In the process, the embryo is killed. There have been no documented treatments so far with hESC treatments, and there have been problems encountered with the cell lines currently in existence, whether privately or publicly funded. These problems include uncontrolled, accelerated growth and neoplasm formation in general. On the other hand, there are other ways to obtain pluripotent stem cells without creating and destroying a human embryo and there have been documented successful treatments with those alternative methods.

Having established that it is accepted scientific fact that biological human life begins with formation of the single cell zygote, by whatever method that formation occurs, I must briefly summarize previous government policy on funding of research into the use of human embryonic stem cells, or hESCs, using taxpayer dollars. In 1996, as the potential for hESCs and hESC research became clearer, Congress passed the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, restricting federal financing of research which was “harmful to the human embryo” (National Committee for a Human Life Amendment, 2010).  In 1999, President Clinton decided that while the Dickey-Wicker Amendment prohibited funding the actual destruction of the embryos needed to produce new hESC lines, he could subsidize research on the stem cells derived from the embryos after they were already destroyed (National Committee for a Human Life Amendment, 2010). President Bush, on the other hand, somewhat restricted funding again in 2001, providing financial support for research on stem cell lines already in existence as of that year.

President Obama signed Executive Order 13505 Removing Barriers to Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells on March 9, 2009 and the National Institute of Health finalized its guidelines to implement the Order on July 7, 2009. The Executive Order allows federal financing of hESC research derived from embryos “that were created using in vitro fertilization for reproductive purposes and were no longer needed for this purposes [and] that were donated by individuals who…gave voluntary written consent for the human embryos to be used for research purposes” (National Institutes of Health, 2009). There was a legal challenge to the funding, and Judge Royce Lambeth of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a preliminary injunction against the implementation of the policy, based on the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, on August 23, 2010. However, on April 29, 2011, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals overturned Judge Lambeth’s injunction, allowing federal funding of hESC research to resume (Smith, 2011).

no false choice


To return to Mr. Obama’s prepared remarks on March 29, 2009, he presented four main points. First, that government must fund hESC research because otherwise the full promise will remain unknown. Second, that the obligation to ease human suffering makes hESC research morally acceptable. Third, that federal funding of hESC research advances the progress of science, free from ideological manipulation. Finally, through the use of the personal story of Christopher Reeve and other examples, he reiterated the point that hESCs have the potential to cure debilitating diseases and conditions.

Mr. Obama’s first point is that medical research takes a lot of time and money, and “[when] government fails to make these investments, opportunities are missed” (Obama, 2009). While that is no doubt true; the government has no responsibility to fund research of any kind. In fact, funding medical research is an area the government should remain well out of, given the role the government plays in regulating the testing of pharmaceuticals and medical treatments, and their lucrative nature once they are on the market. It is not the job of the federal government to pick winners and losers in the market by choosing who they will and will not subsidize. It smacks of cronyism and conflict of interest for the NIH to decide which researchers will receive grant money and which will not, when the same researchers have had input into the writing of the guidelines and have lobbied for the money in the first place.

In addition to the high potential for conflict of interest and the impropriety of government agencies repaying the researchers who lobbied for the change in policy with grant money, there is a deeper problem with using federal tax dollars to pay for hESC research. Even though the NIH guidelines were worded such that the funds would not pay directly for the derivation of the stem cells, in other words the destruction of the human embryos, the fact is that the embryos are none the less being destroyed for those cells in order to get NIH funding. To illustrate the point another way, imagine if it were at the other end of human life. Imagine if scientists thought that the cure for Alzheimer’s could be found by studying the living brain tissue of dementia patients at the end of their lives, when they were at the point where they were no longer cognizant, and those scientists pursued NIH government grants for research into those cells. It would be the same situation as it is with hESC research if the NIH agreed to give grant money to scientists after they procured cells from the living Alzheimer’s patient (killing them in the process) but not for the actual procedure of getting the cells from the patient. That is obviously an extreme example because public outcry would be intense, but the point is the same. The NIH will not fund the direct destruction of the embryos, but it will fund the research of the cells procured from that destruction. In the end, it amounts to the same thing and to say otherwise is sophistry. To use taxpayer dollars to fund such research makes all taxpayers involuntarily complicit. It is reprehensible on the part of the government to force taxpayer participation in something that so many find ethically objectionable, the destruction of nascent human life for research purposes.

Mr. Obama next claimed that human compassion obligates us to pursue research which has the potential to ease human suffering. He criticized the previous administration’s restriction of funding of research into hESCs, saying,

[In] recent years, when it comes to stem cell research, rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values. In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research—and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly (Obama, 2009).

This argument is flawed on a fundamental level. It is never morally acceptable to choose to do something evil in the hope that something good might result. In the case of embryonic stem cell research, a unique human organism is killed to derive the stem cells. The potential treatment of human diseases and conditions does not mitigate the essential evil of killing an innocent human. Rev. Tad Pacholczyk, Ph.D., makes the situation very clear in his article Stem Cell Ethics and the Things We Refuse To Do saying, “In fact, the direct killing of other humans, whether young and embryonic or old and in their dotage, is properly referred to as an intrinsic evil, meaning it is in every instance morally wrong, and ought never be chosen as a human act” (Pacholczyk, 2009). Obviously, Mr. Obama was wrong to claim that the choice between moral values and science in this case was a false choice. It is a clear choice between ethical science and unethical science, between good and evil, between life and death.



The next point Mr. Obama brought up is related. He claimed that his Executive Order was a step forward for scientific freedom and advancement, free from ideological manipulation or coercion. He said, “promoting science isn’t just about providing resources—it is also about protecting free and open inquiry….It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda—and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology” (Obama, 2009). Making decisions based on scientific facts is fine, but all decisions must be made in consideration of first principles. For example, it is unethical to experiment on human subjects without their informed consent. This is common knowledge. Institutional Review Boards monitor all research that interacts with humans, making sure that each research team has ethical review boards and complies with ethical standards. Very few people would say that scientific research is more important than protecting the human rights of the human research subjects.



In the case of hESC research, Mr. Obama himself is making decisions based on ideology. No scientist or ethicist disputes that human life begins when the egg is fertilized and becomes a single-celled zygote, a new human organism. On the campaign trail, then-Senator Obama famously said that the question of when human life begins was above his pay grade (Born Alive Truth, 2009). That question was asked in reference to the abortion issues, but clearly Mr. Obama is willing to let his ideology loosen his grasp of biology. The debate among ethicists in the bioethics field, on both sides of the human life issue, centers on the issue of human personhood not when biological life begins. On one side of the question, some ethicists argue that human personhood is a function of consciousness or self awareness or the capacity to experience pain or a number of other subjective factors. On the other side, the argument is that human personhood is intrinsic to the condition of being a human, not dependent on any other factor, and therefore all humans are persons at all stages of development. President Obama has never openly acknowledged his ethical point of view, though it is apparent through his voting record as an Illinois state senator. By saying that he thinks his Executive Order is setting science free from ideological constriction, he is deluding himself and deceiving the country. All science is done in the framework of some ideology, whether the scientists acknowledge it openly or not, even whether they are consciously aware of it or not. Mr. Obama is setting a dangerous precedent by pretending that no ideology is involved in his decision to allow hESC research, simultaneously denying personhood to a class of humans and denying that that is what he is doing. He is also apparently unaware of the slippery slope he has sent us sliding down. If humans at one stage of development can be destroyed for research purposes, there is no rational basis for stopping research that destroys life at any stage, as long as the argument could be made that the human involved is not really a person.



The final point Mr. Obama made in his remarks was that Mr. Christopher Reeve and others like him drew public attention and support to the issue of hESC research. As he wrapped up his remarks, he honored “…Christopher and Dana Reeve, who we wish could be here to see this moment….Christopher did not get that chance. But if we pursue this research, maybe one day—maybe not in our lifetime, or even in our children’s lifetime—but maybe one day, others like him might” (Obama, 2009). He also gave examples toward the beginning of his speech of the diseases and conditions that could one day be cured by hESC treatment. Touting the wonders that could come from this research he said the following:

At this moment, the full promise of stem cell research remains unknown, and it should not be overstated. But scientists believe these tiny cells may have the potential to help us understand, and possibly cure, some of our most devastating diseases and conditions. To regenerate a severed spinal cord and lift someone from a wheelchair. To spur insulin production and spare a child from a lifetime of needles. To treat Parkinson’s, cancer, heart disease and others that affect millions of Americans and the people who love them (Obama, 2009).

This goes back to the point he made earlier, about human compassion and the potential for easing human suffering making hESC research morally acceptable. The quote above came shortly before he stated that the government had been forced into what he called a false choice between science and morality. His story about Christopher Reeve’s support for hESC research, in hopes that it would help him to walk again, or one day help others like him, and the quote above, particularly the mention of juvenile diabetes, is designed to appeal to the emotions of his listeners. It is not so much a rational argument as a rhetorical technique, and one which politicians use frequently. As such, it is hard for some people to formulate a reasoned refutation for fear of seeming callous.



It is quite possible that some day in the future there will be a breakthrough in medicine using embryonic stem cells. It is possible that one day, cells obtained from embryos created in labs will be used to cure every disease and allow the paralyzed to walk again. However, it is never ethical to choose to do something intrinsically seriously evil in the hope (or even in the sure knowledge) that something good may come. Similarly, we cannot “…afford to pay the steep ethical price of ignoring the sacrosanct humanity of the embryo, that tiny creature that each of us once was ourselves. Treating a fellow human being, albeit a very small one, as a means rather than an end, violates his or her most basic human rights” (Pacholczyk, 2009). Clearly the choice between pursuing hESC research and abandoning it as an unethical, intrinsically evil option is not a “false choice,” as the President said, but rather, one that needs to be explained more honestly and debated more openly by society, and soon.



the logical extension




By far the most important concept in President Obama’s remarks on March 29, 2009 was his fundamental philosophical point of view. To summarize, he argued that the potential use of hESCs to treat human maladies and alleviate suffering in the future makes it morally acceptable and even necessary, to perform research in which human embryos are destroyed to obtain pluripotent stem cells. The underlying assumptions behind his argument have profound ethical and philosophical implications. In a statement he made during his campaign in 2008, he infamously said, responding to a question from Pastor Rick Warren, that the question of when life begins is a question “above [his] pay grade” (Born Alive Truth, 2009) . However, his voting record in Illinois makes his point of view quite clear: he voted against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act, and spoke vehemently against it on the floor of the Senate and in committee (Illinois State Senate, 2002). In Mr. Obama’s mind, even children who survive a clinical abortion procedure and are born alive have no human rights and therefore no human personhood because their mothers have already decided that they should die (Illinois State Senate, 2002). While it is unclear at what point President Obama believes humans acquire personhood and rights, it is clear that his philosophy of the human person leads to an ethical quagmire and thus demands a counter-argument.

As discussed earlier, embryologists and ethicists alike are perfectly clear on when biological human life begins. It begins when an ovum becomes a zygote, through the introduction of new genetic material, usually by the penetration of a spermatozoon, either in the body of a woman or in a lab, but occasionally through somatic cell nuclear transfer. At that point, a new living human organism is in existence. The question then becomes: is that new human a human being, in other words, a person with the same universal human rights shared by everyone?

Certain ethicists, such as Peter Singer (Ira W. Decamp chair holder of Bioethics, Princeton University, Laureate Professor, University of Melbourne Center for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics) and Michael Tooley (Professor of Philosophy, University of Colorado, Distinguished College Professor, Arts and Sciences), advocate a concept of personhood which seems radical to most people, but which is merely a logical extension of the idea of a woman’s “right to choose.” These ethicists argue that personhood is acquired gradually, is a function of self-awareness, and is related to the capacity of the subject to experience suffering. Therefore, merely belonging to the species homo sapiens does not make one a person. In his article on Peter Singer’s ethics, Donald Demarco, adjunct professor at Holy Apostles College & Seminary in Cromwell, CT and Professor Emeritus at St. Jerome’s University, Waterloo, Ontario, and member of the Pontifical Academy for Life, quotes Professor Singer from his book Rethinking Life and Death:

Human babies are not born self-aware or capable of grasping their lives over time. They are not persons. Hence their lives would seem to be no more worthy of protection than the life of a fetus.

And writing specifically about Down syndrome babies, he advocates trading a disabled or defective child (one who is apparently doomed to too much suffering) for one who has better prospects for happiness:

We may not want a child to start on life’s uncertain voyage if the prospects are clouded. When this can be known at a very early stage in the voyage, we may still have a chance to make a fresh start. This means detaching ourselves from the infant who has been born, cutting ourselves free from the ties that have already begun to bind us to our child have become irresistible. Instead of going forward and putting all our effort into making the best of the situation, we can still say no, and start again from the beginning (Demarco, 2003).

Clearly, Professor Singer’s philosophy of personhood is not popular with disability advocates. However, he, and others like him, remain very popular and receive very high honors and have frequent speaking engagements around the world. There is an insidious appeal to the sort of ethics he propounds, the ethics of reducing suffering. After all, isn’t it more compassionate to end the suffering of a human so disabled they can’t enjoy life? Isn’t it more compassionate to put a human who is no longer able to remember who they are out of their misery? Isn’t it better to end the miserable suffering of an infant born with serious birth defects, which cannot understand why it is in pain, than to let the pain go on, possibly to no avail? Not to mention that ending the lives of these suffering humans, not yet or no longer capable of self awareness anyway, saves a lot of time and money.

Assuming that there is no ulterior motive of saving the money spent on medical expenses for disabled or unwanted humans who are incapable, for whatever reason, of self awareness, there is still something very wrong about denying human rights and personhood to an infant, whether disabled or not, and something very wrong about denying those rights and that personhood to someone who has lost the capacity for self awareness. The world rejected that kind of thinking, for the most part, when the world saw its results in Auschwitz and Treblinka. Denying personhood to one subset of the human species, including those not yet born and those not yet implanted in the uterus of a woman, results in catastrophic consequences for the species as a whole.

Philosophically speaking, there are problems with the theory that personhood is something that can be acquired or lost by a human. Tooley, Singer, and others like them argue that there are criteria for personhood, in particular, that a human must be sentient (in other words, a feeling being) in order to be a person and have rights as such. There are two main problems with this view. First of all, though a zygote or embryo is not able to experience suffering it can definitely be harmed. Depriving an embryo of life is as harmful to him or her as it would be to you if you were smothered in your sleep. Second, if one wishes to make sentience the criterion for personhood, anyone who is asleep, or unconscious, is not a person during that time, which is clearly not the case. Those who make this argument would say that a zygote or embryo never has been sentient, whereas a sleeping person has, and so their argument stands; however, the point is that the embryo has the capacity for sentience, and it is that capacity for sentience (among other things) that gives us personhood, regardless of developmental stage (Beckwith, 1993). The same general principle applies to other criteria for personhood arguments. It is the quality of being human which gives us the capacity to be sentient, conscious, risible, rational, loving, etc., and the fact that not every human experiences all those things does not lessen their inherent humanity. The innate capacity is present from the moment they begin to develop.

President Obama and philosophers like Singer and Tooley deny personhood to humans in some developmental stages to justify the killing of those humans. President Obama justified the killing of embryos to obtain their pluripotent stem cells by claiming that decisions about when humans get human rights are beyond him, but clearly he believes embryos and fetuses and those infants born alive despite abortion procedures have no rights. He claims, out of pity for the people who are suffering who may one day be helped by medicine developed by researchers of hESCS, that such life-destroying research is morally acceptable. Singer and Tooley also justify the killing of humans at various developmental stages out of compassion, but they are more open about the logical extension of their position: infanticide, euthanasia, and eugenics. That philosophy gave us Buchenwald and Warsaw.

An alternative to such a ‘dehumanizing’ view of our species is clearly necessary. Fortunately, there is one. “[Each] human life is ‘inviolable, unrepeatable, and irreplaceable’” (Demarco, 2003). The idea that each life, however it begins, from the moment it begins until the moment it ends with natural death, is precious and worthy because it is a human life, is looked on by some as a strictly religious point of view. However, it makes sense from a logical perspective if you start with the fact that human life begins with conception and passes through many natural developmental stages along the way.

Descartes said “Cogito ergo sum,” I think, therefore, I am. It would be more philosophically sound to say the reverse, “I am, therefore, I think.” Being is the necessary factor for thought to occur. Humans are subjects (in the philosophical sense of the word) who have the inherent capacity to think and suffer and love and laugh, not thinkers or sufferers who have the capacity to one day be human. This makes it rational to say that a zygote, a single celled human, is still a human person. He or she has the capacity to think, they just have not reached the developmental stage where they can exercise that capacity yet. The same applies to a six month old baby, for example. He has the capacity to laugh and has reached the developmental stage where he can exercise that capacity and giggle at his mother’s silly faces, but he still has not reached the stage where he can understand a joke. Both the single celled zygote and the six month old baby are humans, at a particular stage of development, and both are persons because they are human beings.

Just as Peter Singer and President Obama’s denial of human personhood to certain classes of humans has ethical consequences, granting personhood to all humans regardless of developmental state also has ethical consequences. If it is the case that a zygote is a human, and a human is a person, then a zygote has human rights, particularly the right not to be murdered. The same thing goes for an embryo, or a fetus, or a neonate, or any other human at any other stage of development.

Obviously, the right of humans regardless of developmental stage not to be murdered necessitates some ethical reforms. Clinical abortion should be illegal, except where the mother’s life was in danger. IVF clinics need to exercise more care in the number of embryos they bring to life, not creating “extras” which would later be destroyed. Genetic testing at IVF clinics to select embryos for sex, eye color, hair color, or the presence of certain genes (such as BRCA1, the “breast cancer gene”) is not a valid reason to destroy that embryo. Amniocentesis to determine sex or the presence of congenital abnormalities such as Trisomy-21, in order to select gender or other traits, a common practice now, cannot be a reason to abort a pregnancy at any gestational age. Most difficult for some people to accept, even among those who are at least nominally pro-life, humans who are conceived as a result of rape or incest do not deserve to be killed because of it. President Obama must stop funding research which involves us all in the death of embryos who are destroyed for their stem cells.

These things sound harsh to people who are not used to thinking about human life in this way. There are many who would say that it is a denial of scientific progress, that it takes away women’s rights, and that it would be cruel to force a rape or incest victim to carry a child conceived in violence to term. However, it is no denial of science to refuse to murder someone in the name of progress, even if that someone is the size of the period at the end of this sentence. There are ethical ways to study every human disease and condition, and there are unethical ways. Human embryonic stem cell research is one of those unethical ways. Refusing to perform clinical abortions unless it is necessary to save the life of the mother is not taking away the rights of women, because the right to kill someone for arbitrary reasons has never been a human right. Instead, it is granting rights to women and men who are living but not yet born. Likewise, children conceived through acts of violence are not themselves the perpetrators of that violence, and do not deserve to become a second victim of it. Women who are victims of rape and incest deserve help and compassion, not to become accomplices in an act of violence themselves.

There are some things that should never be done, lines that should never be crossed. Taking the life of someone else, someone else who is a person just like you, for research purposes or for convenience’s sake, is one of those things that should never be done. Draw the line at killing.

Protecting human life, from conception to natural death, has come to be a political position, a religious position, a cause, and a philosophy. The most important point to remember, beyond the hype and the finger pointing and shrill accusations back and forth, is that you began as a single cell. You were an embryo once. You floated in the dark in your mother’s womb for roughly 40 weeks, and she chose to give birth to you. You were a person from the beginning; you will be a person until the end.

the personal perspective


In the end, I believe my passion for life comes from the fact that I have experience in the types of situations where I “should have” chosen to have an abortion. I was a wild child, and got pregnant at 16. I was scared to death when I found out, but for some reason I had a very early ultrasound, at about 7 weeks gestation, and from the moment I saw the tiny beat-beat-beat of my daughter’s heart I loved her. I had a difficult pregnancy, and she was finally stillborn at full term. I was 17 then, but I can still see her tiny hands and beautiful face, and I will never forget.

Then the situation got worse. I was involved with an abuser and got pregnant at age 22, carried the baby to 22 weeks while making plans to escape my abuser, and then almost lost my life because I had a sudden complication with the pregnancy and almost bled to death. To save my life, the doctors took my son in a clinical abortion procedure. They told me that I was lucky to be alive, much less to still have my uterus. I had seen ultrasound pictures of him moving just a few hours before, and I will never forget.

 A few years later, I struck out a third time: I became one of the unlucky few who conceive during a rape. The man who raped me was charged with four counts of the maximum sexual assault felony under Michigan law, and I went to testify against him in court. I was on the witness stand for eight hours. The next day I had a miscarriage at home, alone. I saw the baby’s tiny body, and I will never forget.

All these experiences have inured me to those who would say that people like me, who would make clinical abortion illegal except to save the life of the mother, and hESC research illegal for any reason, have no compassion. I have experienced being a teenager who made bad decisions. I was the victim of an abuser, and I was the victim of rape. I almost lost my life because of my pregnancy. I told those doctors at the time to do everything they could to save my son, but it was too late for him. It is not too late for others. There are embryos who are going to be destroyed for their research value. There are embryos who are going to be killed because their mothers made bad decisions before they were conceived. There are fetuses who are going to be murdered because they have Trisomy-21. I have compassion for them.

I have compassion for the women who don’t know what they are doing, who feel they have no choices, who are being pressured to make the decision to abort, and for all those women who feel scared and alone. I have been that woman. I have compassion for the women who have had an abortion and regret their decision bitterly. Though the abortion I had was done to save my life, I regret it just as bitterly and feel just as guilty as if I had made the choice myself. I have compassion for the people who are pinning their hopes on a cure for their debilitating medical condition coming from human embryonic stem cells. I have serious medical problems myself, and I understand the frustration and the pain. But I have learned through all my experiences of violence, and pain, and pregnancies that ended in tragedy and death that nothing is more precious than life, and the people who live it.


references


Beckwith, F. J. (1993). Politically Correct Death: Answering Arguments for Abortion Rights. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House Company.

Born Alive Truth. (2009). Senator Obama's Voting Record. Retrieved August 13, 2011, from Born Alive Truth Web Site: http://bornalivetruth.org/obamarecord.php

Demarco, D. (2003, October). Peter Singer: Architect of the Culture of Death. Retrieved August 13, 2011, from Catholic Education Resource Center: http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/medical_ethics/me0049.html

Illinois State Senate. (2002, April 4). Senator Obama's Voting Record. Retrieved August 13, 2011, from Born Alive Truth: http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST040402.pdf

National Committee for a Human Life Amendment. (2010). Stem Cell Research. Retrieved August 13, 2011, from NCHLA: National Committee for a Human Life Amendment: http://nchla.org/issues.asp?ID=6

National Institutes of Health. (2009, July 9). National Institutes of Health Guidelines for Human Stem Cell Research. Retrieved August 13, 2011, from National Committee for a Human Life Amendment: http://nchla.org/datasource/idocuments/7NIHescGuidelns7.09.pdf

Obama, B. (2009, March 9). Remarks of President Barack Obama – As Prepared for Delivery Signing of Stem Cell Executive Order and Scientific Integrity Presidential Memorandum. Retrieved August 13, 2011, from The White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-prepared-delivery-signing-stem-cell-executive-order-and-scientifi

Pacholczyk, T. (2009, December). Publications: Making Sense Out Of Bioethics. Retrieved August 13, 2011, from National Catholic Bioethics Center: http://www.ncbcenter.org/page.aspx?pid=1021

Saunders, W. L. (2004, December). Embryology: Inconvenient Facts. Retrieved August 13, 2011, from Catholic Education Resource Center: http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/medical_ethics/me0069.html

Smith, P. J. (2011, April 29). Appeals Court green-lights federally funded embryonic stem cell research. Retrieved August 13, 2011, from LifeSiteNews Web Site: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/appeals-court-green-lights-federally-funded-embryonic-stem-cell-research