vyckie
A follow-up to:
Extremist “Pro-Life Group Consigns Quiverfull Moms to Die
In the name of “Right to Life” mega-moms like Michelle Duggar could lose their lives
Following the previous post about Vision Forum’s plans to advance their thesis that surgical treatment for a tubal pregnancy before the confirmed death of an unborn baby is the ethical equivalent of elective abortion, several insightful questions have been presented in different areas around the blogosphere including the NLQ Forum. They are worth noting.
The discussion raised some interesting questions about the actual risk (morbidity and mortality) related to ectopic pregnancy as weighed against the chance of a non-tubal ectopic pregnancy producing a live birth. Refer to this HERE at Under Much Grace which includes some great diagrams and statistics from sources including the CDC and Lancet.
Most notably, ectopic pregnancy accounts for 6-9% of all maternal deaths in the US. Assuming that these statistics also apply to other developed countries and those countries that do not provide state-of-the-art care to their citizens, this translates to a rough single year death rate 25,000 worldwide (in 2008 based on Lancet’s estimate) due to ectopic pregnancy.
And the odds of a baby from non-tubal ectopic pregnancy surviving the pregnancy? One in 60 million. That means that worldwide (assuming a general birthrate of 134 million annually for the past 30 years), only one such birth occurs every 6.7 years, based on a now current and somewhat stable global birth rate.
Vision Forum will laud one baby every 7 years while 25,000 mothers die in one year? Hmmm.
This information out of Lancet and from the CDC paints quite a different picture than Samaritan Ministry’s publications when they reproduced Vision Forum’s new dogma. (I think Vyckie’s karma ran over their dogma!)
Is it worth speaking out on behalf of women with ectopic pregnancy, even if it risks the downplay of the significance of the rare live births that result from viable ectopic pregnancies? What will the liberals say?
(I think that they will respect those who are trying to hold their own groups accountable. Liberals think we are hypocrites when we ignore our own problems while pointing out theirs! And they’re right to think so.)
What connection does the Schatz Family have to Vision Forum’s decree regarding ectopic pregnancy?
I believe that both issues point out Evangelical Christianity’s avoidant behavior regarding provocative issues that are not easily understood, are unpleasant, and might result in a loss of contributions from people who think it is unchristian to confront error. Rather than engage the serious natures of both these dilemmas, most ministries have completely ignored the matter. Rather than showing Christian compassion to what I am told is a fringe group that doesn’t equate to a “significant demographic,” suffering people who are precious to God are thrown away like so much inconvenient trash.
“Here’s the thing about the Schatz’s–they weren’t a crazy family. They were right there in the mainstream of QF, doing exactly what the Pearls’ book told them to do–to keep “switching” the defiant child until her will was broken and she submitted. They interpreted her cries as defiance, since she wasn’t “whimpering” like the Pearls tell you to expect. All their Christian friends liked them and considered Mrs. Schatz to be a gentle, kind, loving mother. . .
But since the Pearls’ advice is abusive and not Christian at all, a lot of children are severely harmed by it. And a few are going to die, until we get the word out there that it’s an awful book that should be thrown out and never followed. Lydia will not be the last victim, unless conservative Christians rise up and throw the Pearls out of their midst.
The real kicker about the Pearls and their ilk is that if you believe them, you–loving, well-socialized, reasonable you–will accidentally beat your child to death out of love and duty.”
Why is this decree such a big revelation?
This has been the unspoken and understood message within the ranks of the group from the beginning because birthing conveys spiritual blessing as if it were a sacrament.
Manipulative groups that use spiritually abusive tactics have two sets of rules: the Formal Doctrinal Statements and the “Unwritten, Understood Rules” that are conveyed through rhetoric, propaganda technique, and social pressure/proof. This example demonstrates the rare transposition of a provocative vaguely implied rule into a formal one. (Cultic groups generally avoid making direct and definitive statements.)
Is it every allowable to abort a pregnancy that is literally killing the mother because of conditions like HELLP Syndrome or unmanageable Pregnancy Induced Hypertension? Who cares for these women if they are rendered without mental function? Is Vision Forum going to pay for this care? Who pays to care for the NICU expenses for those babies who are barely viable?
“Even though they say it’s God’s will, they are actually getting to be the ones playing God with their wife’s life.”
How can Samaritan Ministries deny certain kinds of heathcare, apparently without accountability? Are they receiving funds from the government for “Faith Based Initiative” services? Are they not regulated by some outside organization?
Samaritan Ministries avoids accountability because they are classified as a religious ministry and enjoy the benefits of freedom of religion. Therefore, they are permitted to interpret ethics in any way they see fit without accountability to the government. Subscribers also basically sign their rights away after they are given informed consent about the policies which include the denial of any care believed to have resulted from sinful behavior. Their stringent requirements for qualification as a subscriber also include three services monthly (three Sundays out of every four). Could eating too much sugar be considered sin for a diabetic and coverage denied?
Vyckie Garrison reported HERE on the NLQ Forum that she contacted Samaritan Ministries when pregnant after having already delivered three previous children via Caesarian Section. She was told that a hospital delivery would not be a covered expense, but that Samaritan Ministries would pay for a midwife to aid with a vaginal delivery at home. (After THREE previous C-sections?????) Do they think that uterine rupture is not a risk in such cases, or are they counting on the woman croaking? They aren’t that important anyway. Was the pregnancy some kind of pre-existing condition? If it was, why would they have then paid for a home birth, as this should have also been denied.
Could Vision Forum or Samaritan Ministries be cited for practicing medicine without a license? Could VF possibly be in violation of tax codes due to too much overlap between their for profit division (www.visionforum.com) and their not-for-profit arm (www.visionforumministries.org)? How do they get around suing fellow Christians? Where do they get their funding? Hasn’t anyone tried to hold them accountable before?
Many have discussed their anger and their sense of spiritual disillusionment ~ as the topic elicits deep feelings like survival guilt that mothers have after miscarriage, for pregnancy is always a deeply personal matter for any woman.
“I didn’t expect that they would try to make the world conform to their rigid doctrines but that is exactly what they are trying to do.”
All legitimate and astute questions!
Cynthia Mullen Kunsman, RN, BSN, MMin , ND www.UnderMuchGrace.com
(Discussing the phenomenon of Spiritual Abuse in Evangelical Churches)
vyckie In the name of “Right to Life” mega-moms like Michelle Duggar could lose their lives
Editors note: There is a growing subculture of extreme fundamentalist Christians who eschew all forms of birth control. “Quiverfull” women typically give birth to a half a dozen or more children.
In June of 2008, Vision Forum posed the following question from their Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy on its website: “If abortion is the murder of a human being, is it biblical to oppose all abortions?” The organization addressed this topic in a series of blog posts on the matter, determining definitively that tubal ectopic pregnancy did not justify surgery to remove the fatally compromised fetus along with a pregnant woman’s fallopian tube.
Despite the medical fact that tubal pregnancies prove to be fatal to the fetus in all cases, the Vision Forum group determined that any surgery which ends any ectopic pregnancy to rescue the mother constitutes an elective abortion, unequivocally qualifying as a utilitarian decision which amounts to the murder of the already terminal fetus. The group also improperly downplayed the incidence, morbidity, and mortality associated with tubal pregnancy.
Though the Catholic Pro-Life position supports surgical intervention in the case of tubal pregnancy to save the mother, Vision Forum’s dangerous position continues to spread throughout sectors within the Evangelical Christian community.
Samaritan Ministries, a Christian medical needs-sharing ministry that provides an alternative to “third party payment” medical insurance that is not subject to laws governing the medical insurance industry, republished Vision Forum’s position in their materials ostensibly as a moral imperative. Samaritan Ministries ambiguously suggests that such care might be an expense that their organization would refuse to cover, potentially qualifying as a condition that involves unethical behavior.
Per the ministry’s policy and the subscriber’s agreement, the group denies payment for treatment of any conditions resulting from sinful behavior (e.g., sexually transmitted disease, substance abuse recovery, etc.). Vulnerable subscribers may potentially be rendered without coverage if their physicians opt for early treatment.
By capitalizing on fear and distortion through undue influence, Samaritan Ministry’s stance complicates the medical decision-making process for affected families, delaying appropriate care at best or precluding care at worst.
Vision Forum seeks to advance this position on ectopic pregnancy as well as their views on corporal punishment for children through the vehicle of their “Baby Conference” in July in San Antonio.
Dan Becker, President of Georgia Right to Life was invited to speak, falsely suggesting that all state and national level Right to Life Organizations also share Vision Forum’s views. Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar (natural parents of 19 children of the TLC/Discovery show) have also been invited to the conference to participate as keynote speakers and receive an award.
The group also plans to address spanking, likely as damage control following the recent death of Lydia Schatz who died as a consequence of the stringent corporal punishment methods that are staggeringly popular among the group’s following. Presumably, Vision Forum seeks to capitalize upon the notoriety of the Duggar Family to surreptitiously advance both of these agendas.
Though EthicsDaily.com reported on this issue of ectopic pregnancy in August of 2008, not one Evangelical Christian Pro-Life or Biomedical Organizations agreed to make any public statements specifically confronting Vision Forum or Samaritan Ministries regarding their views about ectopic pregnancy.
Cynthia Mullen Kunsman, RN, BSN, MMin , ND
http://www.undermuchgrace.com/
(Discussing the phenomenon of Spiritual Abuse in Evangelical Churches)
