Catholic Online Forum

St Thomas More Hospital

How fitting I find this on the 40th anniversary of Roe vs Wade

...
While I certainly don't agree with the position of the author, don't know the "other side" of the story and I understand that we live in a very litigious culture, an institution that purports to be a Catholic hospital should never use as a defense against a lawsuit the contention that a fetus "is not a person". Even if a finding against the hospital would, indeed, result in bankruptcy.

If, in fact, the hospital is using that defense, the charge of "hypocritical" is accurate.

Material bankruptcy, as bad as it is, pales in comparison to moral bankruptcy.
...!

...it appears the lawyers for the Catholic Hospital are doing whatever it takes to defend their client. That is the job of a defense lawyer. This lawyer may or may not be interested in Church teaching. It certainly appears that this hospital is hypocritical for allowing their lawyers to do so. But there is a PH factor in every church (as there are both Pharisees and Philistines in every church). This does not make Holy Mother Church's doctrines wrong, it just means that human beings fail to live as Christ has taught us to live. Is it a scandal? Sure appears to be, but our prayers should be with the father and the daughter who are grieving the loss of their wife/mother and two preborn blessings.

I saw this on a friend's Facebook wall recently. This comment seems the best analysis I can think of:

This is the first I have heard of this and in my opinion the legal arguments that deny truth are but ancillary to what action or policy etcetera requires a denial of truth to protect it. I could be wrong; however, the 'more to the story' is what I am interested in.

From what little I could find thus far it would appear that the lead defendant is Catholic Health Initiatives (a non-profit group that runs approximately 170 Hospitals) and NOT the Saint Thomas More Hospital. Further, I would guess as is usually the case that in reality it is really the malpractice insurance company that actually hires and steers the lawyers as well as directs the legal arguments.

Good point about the insurance company, Daniel.

Would the hospital not then be a witness for the defence? Should they not then say "we do not agree with this defence"?

Would the hospital not then be a witness for the defence? Should they not then say "we do not agree with this defence"?

The Catholic bishops of Colorado learned recently of the deaths of Lori Stodghill and her two unborn children, which took place at St. Thomas More Hospital in Cañon City, Colo. in 2006. We wish to extend our solidarity and sympathy to Lori’s husband Jeremy, and her daughter, Elizabeth. Please be assured of our ongoing prayers.

From the moment of conception, human beings are endowed with dignity and with fundamental rights, the most foundational of which is life.

Catholics and Catholic institutions have the duty to protect and foster human life, and to witness to the dignity of the human person—particularly to the dignity of the unborn. No Catholic institution may legitimately work to undermine fundamental human dignity.

Catholic Health Initiatives is a Catholic institution which provides health care services in 14 states, providing care to thousands of people annually. Catholic Health Initiatives has been accused by some of undermining the Catholic position on human life in the course of litigation. Today, representatives of Catholic Health Initiatives assured us of their intention to observe the moral and ethical obligations of the Catholic Church.

The Catholic bishops of Colorado are not able to comment on ongoing legal disputes. However, we will undertake a full review of this litigation, and of the policies and practices of Catholic Health Initiatives to ensure fidelity and faithful witness to the teachings of the Catholic Church.


Most Rev. Samuel J. Aquila, S.T.L., Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Denver

Most Rev. Michael Sheridan, S.Th.D, Bishop of the Diocese of Colorado Springs

Most Rev. Fernando Isern, Bishop of the Diocese of Pueblo

The lawsuit involves wrongful death. The laws in Colorado do not consider a 'fetus' to be a human being. Technically speaking, the lawyers regardless who they serve are not actually arguing that a fetus is not a human being but rather they are citing the existing law as argument that the lawsuit is legally without premise.

Daniel's got it right, here. The defense isn't "since a fetus isn't a person, you can't collect damages", but rather, "since you don't define that a fetus is a person, you can't assess damages".

This line of defense leaves them open to the shallow interpretations that we're seeing in the media; yet, they've taken a Solomon-esque tack: "I will play the game that you're attempting to make me play -- but if you do so, I'll skewer what you claim to hold dear in the process. What is your higher priority: your victory, or what you claim to hold most dear?"

But the "you" who will suffer in the instance is a family who has lost three loved ones and is seeking compensation, not the society at large who defined a fetus as "non-human".

But the "you" who will suffer in the instance is a family who has lost three loved ones and is seeking compensation, not the society at large who defined a fetus as "non-human".

Advocate Steve Myers is a disillusioned lawyer who becomes fed-up with the perceived corruption within the judicial system. He quits the law business and buys a small fishing boat and takes up fishing for a living. His fishing boat is struck by lightning and explodes into pieces, burns and sinks. He informs his insurance company, which reviews and then subsequently declines his claim on the grounds that it is not liable as his fishing boat was destroyed due to an 'Act of God'. Frustrated that his claim is repeatedly declined, Steve files a claim against God, naming church officials as representatives of God, and thereby the respondents. The church leaders, their respective lawyers, as well as their insurance company get together to find a way to settle this dilemma, which does catch the fancy of the media. It is in Court that God's representatives will have to admit that the destruction of Steve's fishing boat was actually God's Act, accept it, and compensate him, or deny it altogether, and thereby deny God's existence, and leave the onus on Steve to prove his claim.

Attorneys for St. Thomas More argued that the hospital provided the best possible medical care to Lori Stodghill and her sons, and that there was no possibility of saving their lives. Two courts affirmed that argument.

Evidence indicates that St. Thomas More Hospital undertook all possible efforts to save Lori Stodghill. Medical experts testified to that effect. They also testified that the Stodghill children tragically died before medical care commenced, so an emergency C-section would not have saved them. We have every reason to believe that St. Thomas More Hospital provided excellent and conscientious medical care in this case.

Attorneys for St. Thomas More Hospital argued that because unborn children are not defined as persons under Colorado’s Wrongful Death Act, the law did not permit this lawsuit. We became aware of this tragic situation on Thursday, January 24, 2013. We at once contacted the leadership of CHI for clarification.

CHI was unaware that legal counsel for St. Thomas More had aligned itself with an argument based upon an unjust law. CHI officials have assured us that they believed it was “morally wrong” to make recourse to an unjust law. They have also assured us that they will no longer utilize this unjust law if the case is heard before additional courts.

CHI joins us in our commitment to work for comprehensive change in Colorado’s law, so that the unborn may enjoy the same legal protections as all other persons.

We commend CHI for its rapid acknowledgment of this situation and its commitment to rectifying any harm it may have caused. We join CHI in affirming the fundamental truth that human life, human dignity, and human rights begin at conception. No law can ever mitigate God-given human rights. All Catholic persons and institutions, indeed all men and women of good will, share the solemn responsibility to support efforts aimed at establishing legal protection for the unborn.

DENVER – Feb. 4, 2013 - Colorado’s top Catholic Church officials expressed their support for Catholic Health Initiatives after the national health care organization acknowledged that it was “morally wrong” for attorneys to cite the state’s Wrongful Death Act in defense of a lawsuit involving one of its affiliated hospitals.

Attorneys for St Thomas More Hospital, which is sponsored by Catholic Health Initiatives, cited the statute in legal proceedings in the tragic case of Lori Stodghill and her twin unborn sons, who died at the Cañon City hospital on New Year’s Day of 2006. The law does not consider unborn children to be persons, which contradicts the moral teachings of the Church.

The Catholic bishops of Colorado -- Archbishop Samuel Aquila of Denver, Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs, and Bishop Fernando Isern of Pueblo -- met last week to discuss the case with CHI senior leadership after announcing they would review the circumstances of the case.

CHI officials declared their firm commitment to one of the Church’s most basic moral teachings – that every person is created in the image and likeness of God and that life begins at the moment of conception. The CHI officials reiterated their deeply held belief that Colorado law fails to adequately protect the rights of the unborn, and expressed their commitment to work for laws that respect the rights of the unborn.