Category Archives: CPE

Facts about the Death Penalty


Some Facts About the Death Penalty

 

The drop in executions is an indication that the world is moving in the direction urged by the UN.

The approval by the UN General Assembly in December 2007 of the Resolution for a Universal Moratorium against Capital Punishment was a fundamental step forward not only for the anti-death penalty campaign but also for the affirmation of the rule of law and of those natural rights historically won and often written into national law but not always respected.

After the vote, the usual practitioners of realpolitik tried to diminish its import, saying if would serve no purpose. It is true that the UN cannot force any member country to abolish the death penalty, but the moral force and political message sent by the resolution are undeniable. For the first time ever, the United Nations established that capital punishment is a matter of individual rights and not simply an internal question for national judicial systems. It also sent the message that the elimination of capital punishment would constitute a significant advance for the system of human rights.

  • 34 states have the death penalty; 16 do not.
  • Recent Supreme Court decisions have limited the use of the death penalty by declaring it unconstitutional to execute persons with mental retardation and juveniles under the age of 18, or to impose the death penalty when no murder occurred or was intended. The court has also ruled that defendants are entitled to have a jury decide whether to impose the death penalty.
  • Approximately 3,261 inmates are on death row in 37 state, military, and federal prisons.
  • Since 1973, there have been 138 exonerations of death row inmates.
  • Since 1976, there have been a total of 1,246 executions in the United States, including 12 in the first few months of 2011.
  • The California death penalty system costs taxpayers $114 million per year beyond the costs of keeping convicts locked up for life (L.A. Times, March 6, 2005).  

*Source: Death Penalty Information Center

Most Catholics and almost all fundamentalists have a misconceived notion of what Scripture says about the death penalty.

In A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death, the bishops explain the scriptural roots of Catholic teaching on the death penalty. This begins with the story of creation which teaches “that every life is a precious gift from God (see Gn 2:7, 21-23). This gift must be respected and protected. We are created in God‟s image and redeemed by Jesus Christ, who himself was crucified.”

The bishops also explain “some argue that biblical statements about „life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth‟ (see Ex 21:23-25, Lv 24:17 , Dt 19:21) require that the death penalty be used for certain crimes. A correct interpretation of these passages indicates, however, that the principal intent of such laws was to limit the retribution that could be exacted for an offense, not to require a minimum punishment. Furthermore, it is important to read individual passages in the context of Sacred Scripture as a whole. While the Old Testament includes some passages about taking the life of one who kills, the Old Testament and the teaching of Christ in the New Testament call us to protect life, practice mercy, and reject vengeance.”

Read or download Vatican report on Death Penalty on Decline in United States.

Say NO! to Judicial Murder!

Advertisements

“Barely Christian…Through Defective Baptism”?


The intrinsic difference is that ignorance simply implies lack of awareness about something, while stupidity denotes the inability of a person to understand something due to insufficient intelligence, thus leading to the misinterpretation of a fact.

Ignorance Clipping the Wings of Progress

Ignorance is the great satan of all time. A recent exchange with a Protestant colleague and some research into the Reformists’ understanding of the very carefully crafted documents promulgated by the fathers in Rome illustrates this point clearly. Here’s a personal experience:

A colleague recently wrote:

H., if you read the encyclical “Dominus Iesus”, written in 2000, I believe – it pretty well reverses that sentiment and notes that those of us who are not RC are barely Christian, through our ‘defective’ baptism – and the purpose of dialogue is to prepare the ground in non-Christians so that they can hear the word of God and be converted to ‘true’ Christianity. The language is a little more delicate than I’ve put it, but that’s essentially the sentiment. The World Association of Reformed Churches pretty well went off the wall at that one. World Association of Christian Communication wasn’t entirely happy either.

My response was:

Thank you for your inputs. Yes, the Church is very careful on how they word things and rightly so (because of the effects of pragmatic implication as evidenced in your message). I have read and studied the encyclical and what I read is this: “…the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery, are not Churches in the proper sense; however, those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church.” [17] The correct interpretation of this passage must take the passage in its entirety (you are, in fact, prooftexting, and liberally interpreting what is being taught). It is the “communion with the [RC] Church” that is imperfect, and it is the fact of the Baptism that creates the “communion.” The Church’s teaching is that there is one Baptism, and as long as the communicant is baptized in the Trinitarian formula, “in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” the Baptism is valid.

In other words, you have misapprehended what is actually being promulgated in Dominus Iesus, especially in terms of the validity of Christian Baptism, one of the two [major] sacraments almost universally celebrated by all Christian denominations, and confusing that with the “imperfect” communion with the [RC] Church; “imperfect” is a word most English speakers can easily misconstrue, as you have done, and it has nothing to do with “defective” as you put it, but carries more of the meaning of “incomplete.” Again, the “communion” or unity with the [RC] Church is what is incomplete or imperfect, NOT the Baptism. In fact the statement is that those who are baptized in those communities not in communion with the Church are incorporated in Christ and are “in a certain communion” (certain is read not as “approximate” or “undefined” but as ‘indisputable,’ ‘unquestionable’ here).

We must be careful when reading these documents and read them very carefully with a very fine eye and mind for the nuances of very carefully chosen expression.

I do hope this clarifies your understanding somewhat and that others reading your misconstruction will also be enlightened (read unburdened as well as illuminated) by my explanation of the language.

Headless

Continuing…I prefer to call my response a clarification versus a “correction.” When the Vatican documents uses “Church” it means the Roman Catholic Church or the some 22 Eastern traditions in 100% communion (= accepts the primacy of the bishop of Rome and the Roman magisterium etc.). In other texts not RC or Vatican or promulgated by the traditions in communion with Rome, Church, I would safely conclude means the Christian Church or those in communion with the Body of Christ through sacramental Baptism, or “baptism of blood” or “baptism of desire.”

Again you are tripping down the path of mixing up Baptism with “communion.” Please! If you are baptized in the Trinitarian formula and are Lutheran, Baptist, Presbyterian, etc. but NOT Unitarian (you are not professing the Trinitarian faith), you are in communion with the Church in faith BUT in imperfect communion with the [RC] Church (read: in virtue of the sacrament of Baptism you are in partial communion, hence “imperfect” but not “defective,” because the [RC] Church would require you to accept Baptism and the Eucharist (the sacrament, not the celebration, and it’s attendent Real Presence sacramentology + affirmation of the doctrine of transubstantiation–although some RC theologians have argued in favor of restating that doctrine), plus the other five sacraments of the RC tradition (reconciliation, confirmation, matrimony, holy orders, sacrament of the sick) plus the dogma of the RC Church, some of which is not acknowledged by the Protestant, Reformist or Orthodox traditions.

You mention objections to rules of [re]marriage that miffs some Catholics. But let me remind you that there is little consensus among the Reformist traditions as to what marriage is, notwithstanding the acknowledgement of its sacramentality. For example, the Lutherans have a social model, the Calvinists a covenantal model, the Anglicans a commonwealth model, the rest have a contractual model, and the Catholics a sacramental model.

Now, I won’t broach, nor do I have any intention of getting into a discussion of the myriad “disgruntled” Catholics or Lutherans or Reformed or Jews…pick a denomination, faith, or tradition and tell me none of its adherents or quasi-adherents don’t have something to bitch about. The Catholic tradition is ancient, very complex, it has rules and standards, it is not democratic and has not been secularized, it has many traditions within it, most Catholics are ignorant and poorly formed in their tradition. It is generally the person carrying a lot of other baggage and with a PARTICULAR problem who publicly announces his/her displeasure with one or another dogma, doctrine, or rule of the [RC] Church. It’s human, all too human to badmouth and slander when one doesn’t get it his/her way. Too, bad! And I’ll be the first to tell them so. Faith is there if it’s there; if it’s not, don’t blame it on the Church. Moreover, make the distinction between what is God-given and what is human-made, or a human-made rule. But in my book, rules are there for a purpose and if they work, we keep them. That’s how the Catholic Church as a religion and as an institution has survived, through thick, thin, and questionable times, and it will survive and evolve as it has done for more than 2000 years. Rather than count the disgruntled,let’s be more positive and count the gruntled and those former Reformists who come back either as individuals or as entire churches.

The dinner rules are different in different households. Some households take dinner in front of the TV; others take their evening meal individually, not as a family, others have a set time and place for their family communal meal, and some even have a decorum that is enforced at table. So, too, the churches. Some of us have spent years studying the why’s and wherefore’s of the traditions and how they got to where they are. In the end, though, does it matter. After all the greatest law is to Love God and to love one’s neighbor as one’s self. If we love as that “love” is meant, and define neighbor as intended, we’ve done good in a trinitarian fashion: vis-a-vis God, vis-a-vis ourselves, and with respect to our “neighbor” or, as I teach it, the rest of Creation.

After all, our vocation of pastoral/spiritual care providers has more to do with the great Law than all the talk of Jesus, Christ, Church or church, and sometimes it’s easy to cough up chunks when inundated with Jesus this and Jesus that. His name is overused, invoked carelessly, it’s become almost pedestrian. It’s like the f-word: you use it often enough and it loses its impact. Let’s reframe the approach and, if we’re going to be interfaith, let’s leave Jesus in peace. Most all traditions would agree that simply the great Law will suffice, if taught and lived circumspectly, to make great a caregiver of anyone of any faith or tradition.

Duc in altum!

Postscript

In response to several questions, I followed up on the sources of my comments and the various responses to Dominus Iesus in 2000 (see, for example,  Christianity Today article). The evidence would indicate that Reformed churches (the Calvinist tradition)  appear to be the most aggressive in promoting misinformation and misunderstanding, and is most enimical to the Roman Catholic Tradition. Why then do we (Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany) send our deacons, seminarians, pastoral care students to enjoy the tutelage of a Calvinist who refers to his own church as the “Deformed Church of America?” See my postings at Interfaith, Chaplain Wuss, Disciple Syndrome.


REFLECTIONS ON EUCHARIST IN LIGHT OF “ADORO TE DEVOTE”


Effectively there are two variants of this beautiful hymn. Most of the variations occur in the first two verses. The substitution of the words “posset omni scélere” for “quit ab omni scélere” in the second-to-last verse and “cupio” for “sitio” in the closing one are practically the only other changes.

This hymn is usually attributed to St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) even though the earliest extant manuscript hails from about 50 years after his death. References to Aquinas’ hymn in the writings of his

Franciscan contemporary Jacopone da Todi (1228-1306, author of the Stabat Mater) tend to confirm its authenticity.

In spite of its saintly authorship the hymn never entered into the official liturgy and was only saved from obscurity when Pope St. Pius V included it among the prayers of thanksgiving after communion in his missal of 1570. Paul VI incorporated it into the Roman ritual, using a critical text established by the liturgist Dom André Wilmart. (read the entire Adoro Te Devote + Blue Vestments).

In 2004, Father Cantalamessa began a series of Eucharistic reflections in the light of the hymn Adoro Te Devote.

Reflection on the Eucharist


First Sermon – Adoro te devote

To respond to the Holy Father’s desire and intentions to dedicate this year to the Eucharist, the preaching for this Advent — and, God willing also for next Lent, will be a stanza-by-stanza commentary of the Adoro Te Devote.

With his encyclical “Ecclesia de Eucharistia,” the Holy Father John Paul II said he intended to reawaken “Eucharistic wonder” in the Church,[1] and the Adoro Te Devote lends itself wonderfully to achieve this objective. It might serve to give spiritual inspiration and heart to all that will be done during this year to honor the Eucharist.

A certain way of speaking of the Eucharist, full of warm unction and devotion as well as of profound doctrine, banished by the advent of so-called scientific theology, was preserved in old Eucharistic hymns and it is here that we must look for it today, if we wish to overcome a certain arid conceptualism that has afflicted the Sacrament of the Altar in the wake of so many disputes surrounding it.

Ours, however, will not be a reflection on the Adoro Te Devote, but on the Eucharist! The hymn is only the map that helps us to explore the territory, the guide that introduces us to the work of art. (Continue Reading the Reflections On Eucharist In Light Of Adoro Te Devote Part 1.)


Spiritual Art: Consumer Christ


This is an example of spiritual art.

What does it say to you?

Consumer Christ

Leave a comment below and let us know your thoughts.


TE DEUM: ENTRUST TRAGEDIES AND HOPES OF THE WORLD TO GOD


Ambrose Baptising Augustine

VATICAN CITY, 31 DEC 2011 (VIS) – In the Vatican Basilica at 5 p.m. on Sunday, December 21, 2011, the Pope Benedict XVI presided at first Vespers for the Solemnity of Mary Mother of God. This was followed by the exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, the singing of the traditional “Te Deum” of thanksgiving for the conclusion of the year, and the Eucharistic blessing.

Extracts from Benedict XVI’s homily are given below:

 “Another year is drawing to a close, as we await the start of a new one: with some trepidation, with our perennial desires and expectations. Reflecting on our life experience, we are continually astonished by how ultimately short and ephemeral life is. So we often find ourselves asking: what meaning can we give to our days? What meaning, in particular, can we give to the days of toil and grief? This is a question that … runs through the heart of every generation and every individual. But there is an answer: it is written on the face of a Child Who was born in Bethlehem two thousand years ago, and is today the Living One, risen for ever from the dead. From within the fabric of humanity, rent asunder by so much injustice, wickedness and violence, there bursts forth in an unforeseen way the joyful and liberating novelty of Christ our Saviour, Who leads us to contemplate the goodness and tenderness of God through the mystery of His Incarnation and Birth”.

 “Since the Day of the Lord’s Nativity, the fullness of time has reached us. So there is no more room for anxiety in the face of time that passes, never to return; now there is room for unlimited trust in God, by Whom we know we are loved. … Since the Saviour came down from heaven, man has ceased to be the slave of time that passes to no avail, marked by toil, sadness and pain. Man is son of a God Who has entered time so as to redeem it from meaninglessness and negativity, a God Who has redeemed all humanity, giving it everlasting love as a new perspective of life.

“The Church lives and professes this truth and intends to proclaim it today with fresh spiritual vigour. … Christ’s disciples are called to reawaken in themselves and in others the longing for God and the joy of living Him and bearing witness to Him. … We must give primacy to truth, seeing the combination of faith and reason as two wings with which the human spirit can rise to the contemplation of the Truth; we must ensure that the dialogue between Christianity and modern culture bears fruit; we must see to it that the beauty and contemporary relevance of the faith is rediscovered, … as a constant orientation, affecting even the simplest choices, establishing a profound unity within the person, so that he becomes just, hard-working, generous and good. What is needed is to give new life to a faith that can serve as a basis for a new humanism, one that is able to generate culture and social commitment”.

 “To proclaim faith in the Word made flesh is … at the heart of the Church’s mission, and the entire ecclesial community needs to rediscover this indispensable task with renewed missionary zeal. Young generations have an especially keen sense of the present disorientation, magnified by the crisis in economic affairs which is also a crisis of values, and so they in particular need to recognise in Jesus Christ ‘the key, the centre and the purpose of the whole of human history'”.

 “Ever since God sent His only-begotten Son, so that we might obtain adoptive sonship, we can have no greater task than to be totally at the service of God’s plan”.

 “‘Te Deum laudamus!’ We praise you, O God! The Church suggests that we should not end the year without expressing our thanks to the Lord for all His benefits. It is in God that our last hour must come to a close, the last hour of time and history. To overlook this goal of our lives would be to fall into the void, to live without meaning. Hence the Church places on our lips the ancient hymn ‘Te Deum’. It is a hymn filled with the wisdom of many Christian generations, who feel the need to address on high their heart’s desires, knowing that all of us are in the Lord’s merciful hands”.

 “With hearts full of thanksgiving, let us prepare to cross the threshold of 2012, remembering that the Lord is watching over us and guarding us. To Him this evening we wish to entrust the whole world. Let us place in His hands the tragedies of this world and let us also offer Him our hopes for a brighter future”.

HML/                                                                                                VIS 20120102 (810)

IMPORTANCE OF EDUCATING YOUNG PEOPLE IN JUSTICE AND PEACE

VATICAN CITY, 1 JAN 2012 (VIS) – In the Vatican Basilica this morning, Benedict XVI presided at a Eucharistic celebration for the Solemnity of Mary Mother of God. The Mass was concelebrated by Cardinal Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone S.D.B.; Cardinal Peter Kodwo Turkson, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace; Archbishop Giovanni Angelo Becciu, substitute for General Affairs; Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, secretary for Relations with States; Archbishop Pier Luigi Celata, secretary of the Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue, and Bishop Mario Toso S.D.B., secretary of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. The ceremony also marked today’s forty-fifth World Day of Peace, which has as its theme: “Educating Young People in Justice and Peace”.

  Extracts from Benedict XVI’s homily are given below:

  “On the first day of the year, the liturgy resounds in the Church throughout the world with the ancient priestly blessing that we heard during today’s first reading: ‘The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make His face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you; the Lord lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace’. … In order to be blessed, we have to stand in God’s presence, take His Name upon us and remain … in a space lit up by His gaze, diffusing grace and peace”.

  “The shepherds of Bethlehem had … the experience of standing in God’s presence, they received His blessing … in a stable, before a ‘babe lying in a manger’. From this child, a new light issues forth, shining in the darkness of the night. … Henceforth, it is from Him that blessing comes, from His name – Jesus, meaning ‘God saves’ – and from His human face, in which God, the almighty Lord of heaven and earth, chose to become incarnate, concealing His glory under the veil of our flesh, so as to reveal fully to us His goodness.

  “The first to be swept up by this blessing was Mary the virgin. … Her whole life was spent in the light of the Lord, within the radius of His name and of the face of God incarnate in Jesus, the ‘blessed fruit of her womb’. … The mystery of her divine motherhood that we celebrate today contains in superabundant measure the gift of grace that all human motherhood bears within it. … The Mother of God is the first of the blessed, and it is she who bears the blessing; she is the woman who received Jesus into herself and brought Him forth for the whole human family”.

  “Mary is the mother and model of the Church. … The Church also participates in the mystery of divine motherhood, through preaching, which sows the seed of the Gospel throughout the world, and through the Sacraments, which communicate grace and divine life to men. … Like Mary, the Church is the mediator of God’s blessing for the world: she receives it in receiving Jesus and she transmits it in bearing Jesus. He is the mercy and the peace that the world, of itself, cannot give, and which it needs always, at least as much as bread”.

Jesus Christ, the path of peace

  “The Church too, on the first day of the year, invokes this supreme good in a special way; she does so, like the Virgin Mary, by revealing Jesus to all, for as St. Paul says, ‘He is our peace’, and at the same time the ‘way’ by which individuals and peoples can reach this goal to which we all aspire”.

  “‘Educating Young People in Justice and Peace’ is a task for every generation, and thanks be to God, after the tragedies of the two great world wars, the human family has shown increasing awareness of it, as we can witness, on the one hand, from international statements and initiatives, and on the other, from the emergence among young people themselves, in recent decades, of many different forms of social commitment in this field. For the ecclesial community, educating men and women in peace is part of the mission received from Christ, it is an integral part of evangelisation, because the Gospel of Christ is also the Gospel of justice and peace”.

  “In the face of the shadows that obscure the horizon of today’s world, to assume responsibility for educating young people in knowledge of the truth, in fundamental values and virtues, is to look to the future with hope. And in this commitment to a holistic education, formation in justice and peace has a place. Boys and girls today are growing up in a world that has, so to speak, become smaller, where contacts between different cultures and traditions, even if not always direct, are constant. For them, now more than ever, it is indispensable to learn the importance and the art of peaceful coexistence, mutual respect, dialogue and understanding. Young people by their nature are open to these attitudes, but the social reality in which they grow up can lead them to think and act in the opposite way, even to be intolerant and violent. Only a solid education of their consciences can protect them from these risks and make them capable of carrying on the fight, depending always and solely on the power of truth and good. This education begins in the family and is developed at school and in other formative experiences. It is essentially about helping infants, children and adolescents to develop a personality that combines a profound sense of justice with respect for their neighbour, with a capacity to address conflicts without arrogance, with the inner strength to bear witness to good, even when it involves sacrifice, with forgiveness and reconciliation. Thus they will be able to become people of peace and builders of peace.

  “In this task of educating young generations, a particular responsibility lies with religious communities. Every pathway of authentic religious formation guides the person, from the most tender age, to know God, to love Him and to do His will. God is love, He is just and peaceable, and anyone wishing to honour Him must first of all act like a child following his father’s example. … In God, justice and mercy come together perfectly, as Jesus showed us through the testimony of His life. … Jesus is a way that can be travelled, open to everyone. He is the path of peace. Today the Virgin Mary points Him out to us, she shows us the Way: let us walk in it!”.

HML/VIS 20120102 (1090)


Te Deum and its History


In the Vatican Basilica at 5 p.m. on Sunday, December 21, 2011, the Pope Benedict XVI presided at first Vespers for the Solemnity of Mary Mother of God. This was followed by the exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, the singing of the traditional “Te Deum” of thanksgiving for the conclusion of the year, and the Eucharistic blessing.

Read excepts from his holiness’ homily.

Te Deum laudamus! The Te Deum is also sometimes called the Ambrosian Hymn because of its association with St. Ambrose. First attributed to Sts. Ambrose, Augustine, or Hilary, it is now accredited to Nicetas, Bishop of Remesiana (c. 335 – c. 414). It is used at the conclusion of the Office of the Readings for the Liturgy of the Hours on Sundays outside Lent, daily during the Octaves of Christmas and Easter, and on Solemnities and Feast Days. The petitions at the end were added at a later time and are optional. A partial indulgence is granted to the faithful who recite it in thanksgiving and a plenary indulgence is granted if the hymn is recited publicly on the last day of the year.

The Te Deum was one of only 2 hymns (along with Veni Creator Spiritus) which was incluced in the Anglican Service by Thomas Cranmer in 1549. The Te Deum laudamus is also included as one of the Greater Canticles and is traditionally used in the Anglican service at Evening Prayer (Evensong).

There are over twenty-five metrical versions of the Te Deum translated into English. These include two versions used in American Catholic hymnals, including “Thee, Sovereign God, our grateful accents praise” (Dryden) and “Holy God, we praise Thy Name” (Walworth). There are also six English versions based on Luther’s free German translation. Other German versions include, “Grosser Gott, wir loben dich.” [From the Catholic Encyclopedia.]

Unlike the Gloria (the Greater Gloria), the Te Deum is rarely sung congregationally but is often sung on festival occasions in concert version by the choir. These include settings by Ralph Vaughan Williams, Benjamin Brittin, John Rutter, and others.

Read or download the Zenith article on the Te Deum in English its History.

Read or download the Te Deum.


Blotting Out Parenthood


Imagine gazing at your child and coldly declaring, “You should never have been born.” Yet parents are doing exactly that in courts around the world as they bring “wrongful life” or “wrongful birth” lawsuits against doctors and fertility clinics.

  • “Wrongful life” cases are filed on behalf of the child, claiming that non-existence is preferable to living in a diseased state.
  • A 2003 lawsuit sought damages because Down syndrome was not diagnosed prenatally.
  • A 2009 case in England sought £1.5 million as a down payment on the care of Rupert, a 5-year-boy who was born with congenital heart defects, a cleft palate, a vertebral abnormality and a single kidney.

Here are some useful definitions:

1) Wrongful life means the the child sues the mother or other people for being born.

2) Wrongful birth means the mother sues other people for being burdened with a disabled child something she could have avoided. In essence wrongful birth suits are genetic or prenatal malpractice suits tort cases

3) Wrongful pregnancy means that you became pregnant or had a child period without wanting it (this happens if a pregnancy isn’t detected or a sterilisation procedure fails the difference between 1-3 in my eyes is that in 2) the child is damaging the mother.

in 1) the child him/herself can say they were wronged and they could at least theoretically say that based on their impairment or based on the societal framework.

3) is like 2) but not based on disability. Interestingly if you sue for 3) you will like in USA be compensated for the cost of e.g. the sterilisation procedure but NOT for the cost this addittional child will cost you till he/her is 18. But in 2) you will get payments for the costs the kid cost you (very likely lifetime costs). The rational for not giving child
related cost s to the mother in case 3) the non disabled child is that having a child is so great that you can’t get reimbursed for it. but in 2) in the case of the disabled child that argument of 3) is not used because having a disabled child is truly not a good thing and so you the mother were harmed.

In addition, there is case 4)

4) wrongful breech of warrenty means that a mother or child can sue because a bad embryo was used in the IVF procedure in the case preimplantation diagnostic is available. UK below opens possibility that child can sue related to preimplantation diagnostic

HFE Act1A; (1) (UK) In any case where

  • a child carried by a women as the result of the placing in her of an embryo or of sperm and eggs or her artificial insemination is born disabled,
  • the disability results from an act or ommission in the course of the selection, or the keeping or use outside the body, of the embryo carried by her or of the gametes used to bring into the creation of the embryo, and
  • a person is under this section answerable to the child in respect of the act of omission, the child’s disabilities are to be regarded as damage resulting from the wrongful act of that person and actionable accordingly at the suit of the child.

Read the entire scandalous practice at  When the Child ‘Ordered’ Is Not the Child Received. In similar connection, please see my Opinion comments on Abortion.


%d bloggers like this: