Obama Lifts Restrictions on Stem Cell Research, "Science" Will Guide

As expected, President Obama continued to advance the culture of death by removing restrictions of government funding of stem cell research.  Despite the fact that there has not been any meaningful advance in this area and given that there is an alternative.

WASHINGTON (AP) - From tiny embryonic cells to the large-scale physics of global warming, President Barrack Obama urged researchers on Monday to follow science and not ideology as he abolished contentious Bush-era restraints on stem-cell research. "Our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values," Obama declared as he signed documents changing U.S. science policy and removing what some researchers have said were shackles on their work.

"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 said.

You can be sure that the only political agenda that will not be served by the "scientific data" will be conservative, religious or moral.  Besides, if Obama really means it, where would this leave AlGore?

A Time for New Martyrs?

Those of  us in the field of health care may come under additional pressure from this pro-abortion administration and congress.  According to the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration moved on Friday to undo a last-minute Bush administration rule granting broad protections to health workers who refuse to take part in abortions or provide other health care that goes against their consciences.

The Department of Health and Human Services served notice on Friday, through a message to the White House Office of Management and Budget, that it intends to rescind the regulation, which was originally announced on Dec. 19, 2008, and took effect on the day President Obama took office.

When the administration publishes official notice of its intent, probably next week, a 30-day period for public comment will begin, after which the regulation can be repealed or modified.

The rule prohibits recipients of federal money from discriminating against doctors, nurses and other health care workers who refuse to perform or assist in abortions or sterilization procedures because of their “religious beliefs or moral convictions.” Its supporters included the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Catholic Health Association, which represents Catholic hospitals.

In praising the Bush administration last fall, Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, said that in recent years “we have seen a variety of efforts to force Catholic and other health care providers to perform or refer for abortions and sterilizations.”

But opponents of the regulation, including the American Medical Association, the National Association of Chain Drug Stores and Planned Parenthood, said it could have voided state laws requiring insurance plans to cover contraceptives and requiring hospitals to offer emergency contraception to rape victims. It could also allow drugstore employees to refuse to fill prescriptions for contraceptives, critics of the regulation have said.

Fascism comes slowly sometimes.  One step at a time.  And it must be resisted by decent people of all faiths.  Some may have to suffer a "green martyrdom" rather than to submit to this type of intimidation.  Catholic hospitals may need to close. 

The pro-abortion crowd is pleased.

“Dismantling this dangerous rule is a historic step toward preserving profoundly significant health care rights for women, and vital constitutional rights for all,” Mr. Blumenthal said.

Reaction to the move on Friday made it clear that the issue remains an emotional one. “We are encouraged by the Obama administration’s recent effort towards ensuring that patients have the ability to access necessary, widely used and accepted medical services,” said Mary Jane Gallagher, president and chief executive of the National Planning and Reproductive Health Association.

Fellow Catholics who voted for Obama you have your change, but with little hope for a better America.

Technorati Tags: abortion,Obama,healthcare,conscience

Disability on Display

If nothing else, Sara Palin's nomination as Republican VP candidate has brought matters of disabled children to the forefront in this political season. Palin and her husband have welcomed a child with Down's Syndrome into their family.

Unfortunately not all are willing to accept children as they are rather than as they might be. Wesley Smith at SHS blog has a disturbing post about a mother who murdered her disabled child.

Joanne Hill, 32, planned the murder after her husband refused to allow their daughter, Naomi, to be adopted, it was alleged.

A jury heard how Mrs Hill struggled to cope caring for the youngster, who suffered with cerebral palsy. She wore callipers to help her walk and had poor hearing.

Opening the case for the prosecution Michael Chambers QC told Chester Crown Court that Mrs Hill was "ashamed and embarrassed" of her daughter's condition and murdered her in a "determined and planned act".

"Joanne Hill could not come to terms with the fact that her daughter Naomi was disabled," he said.

"Instead of seeking help from the social services, she quite deliberately and consciously acted to kill Naomi."

Mrs Hill allegedly planned the murder for the afternoon of November 26 last year knowing her husband Simon would not be home until 5.30pm.

After picking up Naomi from the childminder she drove them to the family home in Deeside, Flintshire, north Wales, poured herself a glass of wine then ran a bath.

Mr Chambers said: "When the bath was full she told Naomi she was having a bath, but Naomi didn't want one. The defendant carried her upstairs and undressed her.

"The defendant put her in the bath and drowned her by holding her head under the water for a long time until she was dead."

Smith writes:

Princeton University's Peter Singer and some other bioethicists argue that killing unwanted babies is perfectly fine since babies aren't persons. Babies born with disabilities and terminal illnesses are already being subjected to infanticide in the Netherlands--acts of murder under Dutch law that go unpunished, and which have been supported by prestigious medical and bioethics journals such as in an article published in the prestigious Hastings Center Report. Here in America, 90% of fetuses testing with genetic anomalies such as Down or dwarfism are not allowed to be born--a eugenics action sometimes encouraged by doctors and genetic counselors. In Canada, Robert Latimer murders his daughter Tracy because she had cerebral palsy and is embraced by many there as a loving and compassionate father. Meanwhile, some people savage the Palins because they are affronted by Trig's presence in the world and a Canadian medical official worries that it could mean more parents deciding not to abort their disabled babies.

We as physicians have wonderful opportunity to affirm life from conception until natural death. Our patients respect us and we can influence the debate. Our actions and words are noted. Set the example and frame the debate in a life affirming way.

Technorati Tags: Down's Syndrome,disability,ethanasia,suffering,Catholic,physician,cerebral palsy,infanticide

On Being a Burden

"Doc, I just don't want to be a burden to my family." 

The patient was in his 80's and suffering from the usual mixture of heart disease, arthritis, prostate cancer, etc. He lives with his wife--both very proud, independent Yankees. Over the years, as I have served as his family physician, Tom (not his real name) has often expressed anxiety about growing old and being unable to care for himself. He is a nominal Christian with no firm faith in life after death, no hope in heaven or fear of hell--"A loving God could never send anyone to hell forever." 

As I listened to Tom talk, I thought to myself, "You are not a burden, but a blessing!" I tried to explain, but Tom replied, "I just sit around all day--I don't have the energy to do anything useful." How could I open a window to another perspective on his situation? 

This idea that the aged, the infirm, the disabled, the unborn could be a burden is so pernicious in our society. Tom is thoroughly convinced that as he becomes less and less productive, he becomes more and more ready for the rubbish pile. What effect could my few words have against such an onslaught from the Culture of Death? We all seem to judge our value by what we do, by our productivity. The notion that a person has inherent value as a human being has slipped away. We have become "human doings" rather than "human beings". 

Tom, "Do you have any children?"--I knew he had several children and grandchildren, but asked anyway. "What did you think about your newborn son, Samuel, when you first saw him?"  "Why, I thought he was the most wonderful thing I had ever laid eyes on!" replied Tom with enthusiasm.  Gently I asked, "That first day, could Samuel do anything useful?" Tom smiled and for an instant I think a window opened. I pray the Lord will hold that window open as the days and infirmity of age progresses. 

As Catholic physicians we've all heard someone say, "Doc, I just don't want to be a burden." What would you say? Have you found any useful ways to respond to this dark perspective on the life we have all been given?