Denver Catholic

15 DENVER CATHOLIC | AUGUST 22-SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 I n recent years, scientists in indus- try and academia have come to rely on freshly obtained human tissue specimens for certain types of research and experimentation. Sometimes these tissues and organs can be obtained after routine surgeries like gall blad- der removal from adults or foreskin removal during the circumcision of newborns. The use of such tissues and organs can be morally acceptable if the patient (or the parents of the newborn) provide informed consent. The use of cells and tissues from fetuses can also be morally acceptable when those cells are obtained from a natural miscarriage, and the parents provide consent. This would be equivalent to consenting to an organ donation from their deceased child. Recently, however, a phenomenon has come to light that involves the part- nering of biomedical researchers with abortionists, for the purpose of securing a reliable supply of human tissues and organs. In these cases, parental con- sent (usually from the mother) may be sought prior to using the aborted child's remains. Researchers claim this consent is necessary to enable the ethical use of the cells or tissues. This procedural detail is frequently described in the section called "Materials and Methods" found in scientifi c research papers, as, for example, in this February 2015 article on brain research in the journal Science: "Human fetal brain tissue was obtained from the [clinic], follow- ing elective pregnancy termination and informed written maternal con- sents, and with approval of the local University Hospital Ethical Review Committees." Planned Parenthood, the largest pro- vider of abortions in the United States, also seeks maternal consent prior to procuring fetal body parts from direct abortions, as chronicled by the Center for Medical Progress in their bombshell 2015 video exposé in which the sales of fetal heart, lungs, brain and liver were discussed and negotiated. The strong public outcry that fol- lowed these revelations of harvesting fetal organs was understandable on the one hand, yet di² cult to explain on the other, since there hadn't been a par- allel outcry when it came to the more o£ ensive act of terminating the life of the unborn child itself. As one commen- tator observed, "Maybe it is not enough to be outraged at abortion on its face because, I don't know, killing is some- how worse if body parts are sold." Despite this inconsistency, it is none- theless clear that the use of tissues and organs from direct abortions raises signifi cant moral concerns, even if the mother's signature may have been sought and obtained. Typically when we serve as a proxy for someone and give consent on their behalf, we act simply as their agent and provide an a² rmation of their original wishes ("yes, he told me he wanted to donate his kidneys"). Alternatively, if we do not know the wishes of the deceased patient, we do our best to make a rea- sonable decision based on the specifi cs of their situation, using a "best inter- est" standard ("based on my friendship with him and concern for him, I think he really would have wanted to donate his kidneys). When we serve as a proxy decision maker for a fetus, an infant, or a deceased child prior to the age of reason, it is incumbent on us to make a "best interest" decision on their behalf. The assumption is that as we cared for them in life, and had their best interests in mind while they were living, we can continue to exercise that "best interest" decision-making capacity later when they are deceased. But if the mother of an aborted child were to sign the dotted line granting permission to utilize fetal cells and organs, that consent would necessarily be void, because she would have already categorically demonstrated that she does not have the best interests of her child in mind, having arranged for the taking of that child's life. From the eth- ical point of view, she has disqualifi ed herself from being able to give valid informed consent on behalf of her now-deceased child. In the absence of proper informed consent, taking organs or tissues from the corpse would represent a further violation of the integrity of the child's body and constitute a failure to respect the remains of the dead. Thus, the tis- sues and organs of the directly aborted child should not be utilized for research, transplantation or the development of therapies, but instead should be given a proper and respectful burial. In the fi nal analysis, maternal consent cannot provide moral clearance for researchers to utilize fetal remains from direct abor- tions in their research. Such permission from the mother is not, objectively speaking, an authentic form of consent but is rather a type of "sham consent" that secures the veneer of legitimacy for what is ultimately an unconscionable research practice. Consenting to the Unconscionable Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, Ph.D., serves as director of education at the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia, www.ncbcenter.org. Making Sense of Bioethics FATHER TADEUSZ PACHOLCZYK, PH.D. Thanks for "The Catholic Response" Kudos to Melissa Keating and her article, "Planned Parenthood Scandal hits Denver." I thought it was very well written and very informative! The best part was the section titled, "The Catholic Response." Thank you for quoting Mrs. Gran- don and her emphasis on being cognizant of our reactions to these recently surfaced videos. I think it's important that the Denver Catholic commu- nity continues to hear the importance of being kind to our fellow parishioners. Too many assume that the world's sins are occurring outside of the Church's walls. We need to be much more aware of our fellow brothers and sisters and the pain they are experi- encing. Enough with the wagging fi ngers and judg- ing "the world." Thank you for publish- ing a great article! TANYA JABCZYNSKI Denver Planned Parenthood coverage THANK YOU for keep- ing us abreast of the latest re PP and what "Action" we can take! I really appreciate that PP info is fi rst on the website. Its placement emphasizes that with- out our 1st Amendment protecting life, there is no need to address other issues. God's blessings on you, Katie KATIE ABBOTT LETTERS A memorial Mass will be celebrated at 6:30 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 16, at the Denver Loretto Center Chapel, 4000 S. Wadsworth Blvd., Lit- tleton, for Loretto Sister Marie Joann Rekart. Sister Marie Joann© was a long- time teacher who primarily taught in the Denver area, including 24 years at the Loretto-sponsored school St. Mary's Academy. The Mass will be followed by a gathering with refreshments. Sister Marie Joann died July 4 at Loretto Motherhouse in Nerinx, Ky. She was 78 and in her 60th year as a Sister of Loretto at the Foot of the Cross. Sister Marie Joann was born Joyce Rose Rekart March 19, 1937, in Brentwood, Mo., to Annabelle (Richard) and John Rekart. She attended St. Mary Magdalen School in Brentwood and Eugene Coyle High School in Kirkwood, Mo., receiving her high school diploma in 1955. She entered the Sisters of Loretto at the Foot of the Cross in Nerinx later that same year from St. Mary Magdalen Parish. She was received into Loretto on May 24, 1956, and made her fi rst vows in 1958 and her fi nal vows in 1963. Among immediate survivors are her sister Jackie (and her husband Paul) McArthur of Webster Groves and her brother John (and his wife Dian) Rekart of Savannah, Ga., along with numerous nieces and nephews and great nieces and nephews. Memorials in Sister Marie Joann's name may be sent to the Loretto Com- munity, care of the Loretto Development O² ce, 4000 S. Wadsworth Blvd., Little- ton, CO 80123-1308. OBITUARY Memorial Mass set Sept. 16 for longtime St. Mary's Academy educator Sister Marie Joann Rekart Loretto Sister Marie Joann Rekart

• Cover