 Panel affirms 'the protection of viable babies in the womb' By Angela R. Treadway The Layman Online Wednesday, June 30, 2004
The action was a response to Overture 4-10 from the Presbytery of Charlotte, "On Urging Churches to Affirm in Their Ministries the Protection of Babies in the Womb Who Are Viable." In arriving at its decision, commissioners struggled with questions of when a fetus is viable outside the womb, whether the procedure known as partial-birth abortion is ever medically necessary, and whether mental health should be considered a justifiable reason to have an abortion. During the first morning session on Monday, commissioners heard testimony related to Overture 4-10 and other abortion-related overtures. Because too many people had signed up to speak during the hearing, a lottery was held to determine who would actually address the committee. Speaking in favor of Overture 04-10 were Mary Van Driest, Rick Klug, Tara Winter, James Berkley, William Stuart, Patricia Monge-Meburg, and Page Brenner. Speaking in opposition were Nyisrela Watts-Afrisie, Michael Adee, Douglas Potter, Trina Zellie, Michael Chee, Lee Carhart, and Judith Michaels. Conflicting medical testimony was presented regarding the necessity of partial-birth abortion. Patricia Monge-Meburg, a physician specializing in women's health concerns, cited recent studies by the American College of Obstetrics & Gynecologists and the American Medical Association, both of which determined that there was no medical reason that would justify a partial-birth abortion. Dr. Charles James from the Presbytery of the James presented a petition signed by 200 Presbyterian physicians that stated: "We, the undersigned physician members of the Presbyterian Church (USA) affirm that with modern medicine, abortion of a fetus who is able to live outside the womb is never needed to preserve the life or health (including future reproductive capability) of the mother. There are no conditions that make it necessary to induce the abortion of a viable fetus, and there are no medical indications for the procedure commonly termed "partial-birth abortion." Dr. Lee Carhart, an abortion provider in Kansas and Nebraska, said there are occasions when a late-term abortion may be medically necessary. He pointed out that a fetus might be "viable" outside the womb where a state-of-the-art medical facility was nearby, but that level of medical service is not available in many places, and in fact, he claimed that in Nebraska he could not get a fetus less than 24 weeks old admitted into a hospital. After considerable discussion and debate, commissioners voted 35 to 29 to recommend to the General Assembly that Item 11-02 (Overture 04-10) be answered by the changing language in the current "Statement on Post-Viability and Late-Term Abortion" to read as follows: "The ending of a pregnancy after the point of fetal viability is a matter of grave moral concern to us all. We affirm the protection of viable babies in the womb. In cases where problems develop late in the pregnancy, we urge our members to support the live delivery of the baby. In the interest of protecting the life and health of both the mother and the baby, late term abortion should be considered only if the physical life or mental health of the mother is at serious risk and no alternative means of delivering the baby alive is available. Furthermore, we urge our members to provide pastoral and tangible support to women in problem pregnancies, seeking ways that the church can intervene to mitigate the problems in a pregnancy or late-term abortion. We affirm adoption as a provision for women who deliver children they are not able to care for and ask our members to assist in seeking loving adoptive families." Rev. Kim Nelson, the Presbytery of San Jose, advised the Committee that a minority report would be filed with the Office of the General Assembly. |
||
Respond to this article |
||
| Home
· Archives
· The
Layman ·
PLC
Publications Presbyterian Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |
||