Saint Paul Hospital Ethics Committee Policy Proposal
The proposal of new policies for services conducted at Saint Paul Hospital are to be fully aligned with the mission statement and legacy of the institution:
“Since 1867, our mission at Saint Paul is to put the patient first. Our duty is to give tangibility to Christ’s healing mission and the mercy of the Catholic Church to care for and ensure the wellbeing and good health of our community.”
The proposed policies are as follows:
The purpose and legacy of Saint Paul does not align with assisted reproduction procedures except in extenuating circumstances. Saint Paul will refuse to provide and subsidize abortion services for under-insured patients unless the life of the patient is at risk. It is in our historical faith to respect the human being “from the very first instant of his existence.” (Donum Vitae) Respectful treatment of the unborn child from the moment of conception does not permit abortion. Abortion operations will only be conducted in circumstances where the life of the mother is at stake. This position is aligned with our Catholic roots and mission statement, as it promotes the greater health of our community whilst putting the patient’s health first.
Subsidized In-Vitro Fertilization treatments for under-insured patients will not be conducted at Saint Paul Hospital as such services are an unnecessary procedure. This decision does not only appease the Catholic faith but also serves to better serve the community as IVF treatments are not in the best interest of the community. The introduction of third or fourth parties into reproduction serve to threaten the identity of the child (Shivanandan, Atkinson, 138) but also “the unity and stability of the family with damaging effects on society.” (Donum Vitae) The policy to not conduct In-Vitro Fertilization treatments is reflective of the mission of Saint Paul Hospital to ensure the wellbeing of our community.
Pre-Natal testing (including amniocentesis) will begin at Saint Paul Hospital as the early detection of possible medical issues have the potential to be beneficial for both the mother and child. Biotechnologies told “significance of present and projected uses of biotechnology to serve human goals beyond healing disease and relieving suffering and to satisfy widespread human desires.” (Kass, 234) Saint Paul Hospital encourages the utilization of unused embryos for potentially life-saving research only in the event that such embryos can be safely harvested during an unrelated procedure.
In addition to pre-natal testing, genetic and spiritual counseling will continue to be conducted at Saint Paul Hospital. Catholic belief is that “intervention in this field is inspired also by the Love which she owes to man, helping him to recognize and respect his rights and duties.” (Donum Vitae) Spiritual guidance is a right given to Saint Paul patients. Although spiritual counseling has historically been given by Catholic clergy, Saint Paul will be inviting the clergy of other religions to better represent the diverse community the hospital serves. The ultimate decision of whether to accept the assisted reproductive technologies and late term genetic testing belongs to the patient. The spiritual counseling is to serve as a guide to these decisions, if desired. It is and will not be mandatory for any patients at Saint Paul Hospital.
As the abortion and reproductive services offered at Saint Paul via these policies reflect the mission statement and long-legacy of the institution, it is unlikely that the Saint Paul Foundation and nursing staff will take offense. Elective operations to terminate human life will only be had under emergency conditions. Any nursing staff unwilling to perform these procedures will be reminded that the nature of the operation is for the betterment of the patient and the community.
Works Cited:
- Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, “Donum Vitae: Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation: Replies to certain questions of the Day”. February 22, 1987.
- Shivanandan, Mary, and Joseph C. Atkinson. “Person As Substantive Relation and Reproductive Technologies: Biblical and Philosophical Foundations.” Logos: A Journal of Catholic Thought and Culture, vol. 7, no. 3, 2004, pp. 138.
- Kass, Leon. “Reflections on Public Bioethics: A View from the Trenches.” Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, vol. 15, no. 3, 2005, pp. 234.
I will comment on this.
I will comment for Midterm
I will comment
Victoria,
To start, I liked how you started the proposal with the institution’s mission statement. This gave the reader an insight into the anticipated stances regarding the ethical issues at hand. I know now that you are taking the stance behind the Catholic Church. As I read forward, I can remember that the hospital is using Catholic standards for the basis of the policy proposal.
In the paragraph where you discuss abortion, I agree that the Catholic Church does not condone the use of abortions. However, I think you could fluff this argument by adding direct quotes from the Donum Vitae. Especially when you add the “abortions will only be conducted in circumstances…” a quote that demonstrates this allowance will enhance the validity of this statement. I think your IVF statement was well-written and backed up with good evidence.
In addition, I think you can go a little more in depth when connecting your evidence (quotes) to your claims. By adding a few sentences connecting the two with a big picture it can create a greater flow to your writing. I noticed this in your Pre-natal testing part, and I think this paragraph could be greatly improved with more connections between the quotes and the big picture.
I was a little confused when you transitioned from your main arguments into the spiritual counseling portion. I understand that the Hospital is not funding certain ART procedures. However, I had to re-read when you said it is up to the patient to decide whether they want to receive them. I think this could be easily solved by giving a bit of an introduction to help with the fluidity. Then, adding some evidence regarding other religions and how they might accept abortion and ART procedures to conclude this portion.
Hi Victoria,
First, I agree that the hospital should not provide abortion services. However, I think there is a clarification needed when you say that the abortion will only be conducted where the life of the mother is at stake. Does this mean the life of mother weighs more than the unborn child? If so, why? In addition, based on your mission statement, is unborn child not counted as a patient? I think answers to these questions will bring much clarification to your proposal.
In addition, it is little confusing when you mentioned, “The ultimate decision of whether to accept the assisted reproductive technologies and late term genetic testing belongs to the patient.” Based on your proposal above, I don’t think it aligns with your policy. I think you meant that the ultimate decision belongs to the patient, but the hospital will not accommodate. Therefore, patients should look for other hospitals.
Overall, your proposal isn’t really a proposal, but sounds more like a decision already made. Make sure you change the voice of your essay to reflect a policy proposal that needs to be voted on by your committee.
Dear Victoria, Saeyoung and Madison,
Thanks! This is a very well-written essay, and I had little to say on that score. it is clear, grammatical and well-said. Your commentators have made some very good suggestions and I think you ought to pay close attention. The main thing you need to do as you expand this however, is much more detailed attention to the class readings and to persuasive arguments. Remember, you can’t decide what the hospital policy is. You can only convince others by the force of your arguments!
Victoria,
I really enjoyed reading your midterm. I thought it was extremely well written and had a really great flow and rhythm. I had a few questions and concerns I wanted to bring up that I thought you could definitely expand upon for your final.
-In instances where the life of the mother is at risk who will perform the abortions, given the staff do not want to partake in this? You address this a bit in your final paragraph but you are very vague and don’t go into detail of the many complications that are inherent in the discussion of whether or not your employees will agree to partake in this practice of medicine. You cannot make a doctor or nurse perform these operations- and if there is a case in which none of your staff are willing to do these operations what will you do? I think this is a concern you should address in more detail.
-Since you have claimed that you will not provide or subsidize abortions how will they get paid for, in the case the mother’s life is in danger? Will the mother whose life is in jeopardy be forced to pay for this procedure to save for her life? What is the value of her life then? I think your final would be really strong if you addressed the ethical concerns and issues here.
-I am a little confused about what you mean by “Subsidized In-Vitro Fertilization treatments for under-insured patients will not be conducted at Saint Paul Hospital as such services are an unnecessary procedure”. In what way is IVF an unnecessary procedure, especially considering that there are many couples in our community who could potentially benefit from these procedures. It is unfair to deny married couples who simply want to have children with each other with gametes from each other, the technology that could make their dreams come true? You say “This decision does not only appease the Catholic faith but also serves to better serve the community as IVF treatments are not in the best interest of the community.” but don’t provide any feedback as to how or why these technologies are not in the best interest of your community. Catholicism does align with IVF treatments for couples where both gametes come from the mom and dad in their married relationship. What are you opinions if this is the case?
-The sentence “Biotechnologies told “significance of present and projected uses of biotechnology to serve human goals beyond healing disease and relieving suffering and to satisfy widespread human desires.” (Kass, 234) ” is a bit confusing. The double use of the word biotechnologies makes your sentence a bit difficult to understand. What I got from this sentence was that somehow biotechnology was informing human goals and relieving human suffering. I think this is what you are trying to say but it could be done a bit simpler.
-You say that the hospital will allow unused embryos to partake in life-saving research, in what way does life-saving research value the life of the human being since that life will die due to its cells being taken for research. I think this section of your argument could benefit from some evidence showing that the Catholic church aligns with this reasoning since you have chosen to represent the Catholic Church. Personally, I am unaware of how they feel but I’m sure it would be easy to find out!
All in all I thought you proposal was well thought out and organized and will turn out to be a really interesting and though provoking final!
-Dominique