Besides the appropriate moral intent, the surgical act is acceptable. A more adequate treatment would have included the following key points consistent with Catholic moral analysis.įirst, the two surgical procedures are morally acceptable because the intent behind the surgery is to heal damaged tissue, not directly kill the fetus. Yet, the Holy See’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has not addressed the matter - though the topic has been supposedly before it for almost a decade.īecause such pregnancies are not uncommon and their outcome potentially fatal, a fuller discussion in the column should have occurred. Some writers like the author do not agree with this. But, these concerns were not found to be contrary to church thinking. In those reviews, note was taken of the concerns his column raised. This issue has been reviewed by the cardinal’s Bioethics Committee three times in the past six years. His opinions do not represent the teaching of the church nor mainstream moral thinking faithful to the magisterium on this topic. He asserted that only one - a surgical approach - is morally acceptable and the other two are morally objectionable. It addressed the morality of three approaches (two surgical and one pharmaceutical) used to resolve the lifethreatening, often fatal tragedy of pregnancy attachment outside the womb. 7 edition of this paper included a column by the neuroscientist - priest Father Tad Pacholczyk. Fr Tad and his writing can be found through the National Catholic Bioethics Center’s (NCBC) website ).The Oct. in Neuroscience from Yale University, where he focused on cloning genes for neurotransmitter transporters which are expressed in the brain. As an undergraduate he earned degrees in philosophy, biochemistry, molecular cell biology, and chemistry, and did laboratory research on hormonal regulation of the immune response. Tad is a priest of the diocese of Fall River, Massachusetts. Tadeusz Pacholczyk, Ph.D., Director of Education, NCBCįr. It must also respect the right of the individual to accept or decline help for the sake of spiritual integrity. The bio-psycho-social (or holistic) perspective we practice and preach must include respect for the human dignity and well-being of any and all who are touched by addiction. Every domain of professional care from intervention to transitional therapeutic living requires attention with informed expertise. Medically safe detoxification, the safety & well-being of minor dependent children and even public safety are at the front of the gallery of considerations. While our increasing knowledge illuminates the professional treatment community and its patients with their families, the challenge remains to be fully human and humane, respecting the choices of persons compromised by addiction.Ī bioethics of intervention brings unique ethical matters into the whole care continuum process. Genetic predisposition, gradual decay of healthy neurotransmission in the human brain and a host of other physiopathologies can become the “excuse” to continue using, or enabling addictive use. With the bioethical considerations of addiction, a contrasting set of ethical dilemma appears. That personal choice cannot be made, as the quoted recovering persons who are among millions or billions know, alone or in a vacuum of self-direction and self-will. I therefore do not have any choice but to continue on this path…” (paraphrase)įather Ted also quotes addicts whose recovery was initiated by intervention after their capacities to choose had diminished – in the sense that is often referred to as “progressive disease” and that a key to recovery becomes personal choice. Where the essence of stigmatization forms, it is in judgement and condemnation for the individual’s perceived rejection of grace and abundance in health and fulfillment. It is encouraging to hear from the pastoral realm of human service and care about the spiritually dynamic aspects of addiction and (implicitly) recovery. Because we are creatures of habit, the choices we make, either for good or for evil, form us in one direction or the other, so we become individuals who are either capable or incapable of choosing the good freely.” (article) “,radical loss of freedom lies at the heart of the tragedy of addiction. His message demonstrates what I have come to see as the core of misunderstanding and stigmatization that we face as individuals, families and a community. Father Tad, as he is known, writes from a Roman Catholic, spiritual perspective. In a recently published article entitled At the Heart of the Tragedy of Addiction, Bioethicist Tadeusz Pacholcyzk* offers two valuable observations on the nature and scope of addiction’s tragic impact on individuals and families.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |