Home | About | Donate

Pregnancy Is Scary Enough Without Having To Worry That a Catholic Hospital Might Turn You Away


Pregnancy Is Scary Enough Without Having To Worry That a Catholic Hospital Might Turn You Away

Julia Kaye

Maybe I’m just more attuned to it these days — your 30s will do that to you — but lately it feels like everyone I know has a scary story about pregnancy. After the adorable photographs have been posted, the celebratory texts sent, the welcome-back-to-the-world-of-sushi-and-beer meals eaten, they tell you about the darker parts of the experience. The nightmarishly long labor. The NICU. The miscarriages that sometimes came before.


I'm rather suspicious of these allegations and as no doctor lets such policies interfere with needed care. I don't think Catholic hospitals in Canada do this. But Ms. Kaye should be happy that this problem has been solved in my area - there are no Catholic hospitals left in my rather Catholic region of the US as they were all were taken over by "UPMC" - official healthcare provider of the Pittsburgh Penguins (TM) Pittsburgh Steelers (TM), Pittsburgh Pirates (TM) and other rich people. They also own the McGee Woman's Hospital - providing premium women's healthcare to rich women.

Poor? Tough.


How about the case of the young woman facing likewise in Ireland and denied care... which resulted in the loss of her life?

Few people are courageous or honest enough to connect the dots; and those dots expose patriarchy for its inherent misogyny.

What right have MALE church authoritarians to dictate the rules to how others live?

How DARE they assert an authority that is not theirs to assert.

The Catholic Church has so much blood on its hands.

So many within its upper echelon stood by and did NOTHING while Hitler worked to eradicate the entire Jewish population of Europe along with others he deemed undesirable. In fact, the Catholic Church helped to finance Project Paperclip which exported Nazis into the U.S. after the war so that they would not have to face the Geneva Convention Nuremberg Trials.

How about the MURDER--through overt torture in the form of BURNING PEOPLE ALIVE--of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of women in the so-called "witch burning" that went on for CENTURIES. How better to force women into submission to the all merciful church and its male authorities?

How about the legion of children sexually molested many of whom went on to no doubt molest or harm others... unable to process the sense of transgression that impacted them during their tender years.

How about the church's bond with the European nobility as the Americas were conquered through all sorts of mass murder AND torture.

This entity has about as much moral authority to tell women what they can do with their bodies as do the big banks in assigning credit scores to average, honest working people.

There IS a movement to do away with the wall that separates church from state here in the U.S.

History PROVES that there are no such horrors as the worst of those... that occur with the illusion of Divine impunity. In other words, church leaders set the moral narrative and as mentioned, they have SO much to account and atone for.


So true, Siouxrose1! The patriarch is one of the biggest terrorist organizations on the planet. Hands down. What we need, is a Matriarchal Movement!

My question to the hospital staff would be, "Who would Jesus refuse to help?!" Jesus DID say, "Let those without sin cast the first stone." Not that I'm a Christian after being indoctrinated as a child, but your Prince of Peace and Lord of Love said those words. "Judge not, lest ye be judged."
When those Bishops get to their pearly gates, God's going to exclaim, "Are you f-ing KIDDING ME?!" lol


I would hope at the very least that these women could sue these hospitals for all they're worth. However, I also would not be surprised if our legal system, which is generally the protector of the rich and punisher of the poor, would rule that the hospital's freedom of religion overrides the woman's right to her life. Just like corporations are deemed to be persons with the right of political speech (aka monetary political contributions), these hospitals may be deemed to have "freedom of religion."


If a woman's OB-GYN or midwife isn't aware of the policies of Catholic hospitals, perhaps a different professional should be selected. Simply stated, "Catholic" hospitals will not sterilize (people, not instruments), and will not perform abortions. The latter policy is based on the principal that killing the unborn child either before or after birth, is wrong; it certainly is at odds with the Hippocratic oath (which forbids doing harm).


Glaringly absent from your "neutral observation" is the fact that there are not always alternative hospitals within a 50 mile radius.

There is a good reason for the separation between Church and State. If a hospital has a religious affiliation but also must be chartered by the state to operate, then the rights of individuals (in need of treatment) should override its claim to the religious "right" to deny that claim (i.e. patients' needs and legal rights).

It's fascinating to watch the Born Again Christians collectively make the assertion that blocking others from doing what they wish or need to do somehow attacks the rights of the Born Again Christians... meaning their time-tested "right" to force Indigenous Americans, Blacks, Latinos, and most women to do what THEY say.

After all, they're 100% convinced that "god" told them to act as thus; and that only THEY have the authority to speak for all... and thereby impose THEIR wills.

It's sickening. Prejudice, punishment, and a vile absence of compassion masquerading as "religious freedom."


You misunderstand "separation of church and state". The purpose of the 1st Amendment is to protect the church (and its members) from the state, not the state from the church. If the state can force a person or group of people to conduct acts that violate their conscious because of another's "right" to treatment, the 1st Amendment is meaningless.murder of

The Catholic church holds that an unborn child is a human life, worthy of dignity and respect, and that abortion is the murder of God's children and is indefensible (you may disagree with this stance, but this is what we believe). The Catholic church also has a call to charity that includes "healing the sick". If the government can prevent the Church from establishing/running a hospital to help the sick unless they perform abortions (or other procedures that violate their beliefs), it forces the church to compromise its principles. This is what the 1st Amendment is meant to protect.


This is barbaric...and rather a chapter that hails from the dark ages. It's beyond disgraceful that, in the 21st century, that the Catholic Hospitals can have such totally gruesome policies and disregard for human beings, especially woman. Sad, sad, indeed.


It's a blatant disregard for the need of separation of church and state, as far as I can see. People, regardless of their religious beliefs, have the right to control their own destiny, even if it means aborting an unborn baby in order to protect a mother's physical and/or mental health, or because they're financially and/or emotional unable to give birth to and/or care for a child.