Local Stem Cell Research discussions

The Immaculate Conception Parish Bulletin (on page 5), in promoting its weekly Lenten Inspiration Quest speakers, presents to the faithful, Sr. Jean deBlois' talk, "The Stem Cell Controversy", in the following manner, which says, in part:

Become more informed on the critical issue of stem cell research and get answers from an extremely qualified Catholic authority on ethics...(my emphasis)

First, what is Inspiration Quest? From the ICD web site, we read:

Inspiration Quest, (often abbreviated “IQ”) is an adult Christian learning series at Immaculate Conception Parish which offers a wonderful variety of speakers and events, once each month throughout the year, and weekly during the Lenten season. The overall idea for this series is to educate and inspire Catholic adults who seek to deepen their understanding and appreciation of our faith.

Inspiration Quest events are currently held in the Church. Each event begins at 7:30 p.m. and is over by 9:00 p.m. There is no charge and no registration. A freewill offering is taken up to offset expenses. Childcare is provided by reservation. We welcome everyone to attend IQ and are also open to parishioners who would like to be part of the planning and hosting of these events as members of the IQ Committee.

There have been some great speakers in the past, such as Fr. Eugene Morris. However, there have been some events that others might classify as questionable, at least from a Catholic perspective. Such an example is the following - a speaker selection which has raised a number of questions, especially in the area of presenting the authentic Catholic teaching regarding the Missouri Stem Cell initiative:

Thursday, March 23, 2006 7:30 - 9:00 p.m.
"The Stem Cell Controversy"
A Presentation and Discussion led by Jean deBlois, C.S.J.

Become more informed on the critical issue of stem cell research and get answers from an extremely qualified Catholic authority on ethics. Jean deBlois is a Sister of St. Joseph of Carondelet currently engaged as Director of the Master of Arts in Health Care Mission program at Aquinas Institute of Theology in St. Louis. In her former life she was a registered nurse working in critical care. She asked to study theology because of the many ethical issues she encountered in the area of health. She received an MA in theology from the University of San Francisco in 1979 and then went on to continue her studies, receiving a Ph.D. in moral theology and medical ethics from the Catholic University of America in 1988. She had the great privilege of studying with and being mentored by Charles Curran. She is particularly interested in end of life decision making, the effects of advancing technologies on the delivery of health care, professional ethics, the relevance of Catholic social teaching to Catholic health care today, and environmental ethics. (all emphasis mine)

Before I begin, three red flags pop up immediately:

1. She belongs to the Sisters of St Joseph of Carondelet
2. She teaches at Aquinas Institute
3. She had the "privilege" of being "mentored" by Fr. Charles Curran.

Now, I understand that the above three items could be construed as engaging in 'rash judgment', objectively a sin against the Eighth Commandment of the Decalogue. However, I merely noted that my internal warning system was activated (red flags), not that any "guilt by association" was being imputed. But these warning signs can be buttressed by other items. For instance, in this 2004 article from Women for Faith and Family, we read:

In a 1993 article, "Anencephaly and the Management of Pregnancy",1 Sister Jean deBlois, CSJ, then-senior associate for clinical ethics at The Catholic Health Association, proposed anencephaly as a case where "the pregnancy may be terminated at any time". Although Sister deBlois acknowledged that "there is no life-threatening maternal pathology", she cited the increased physical risks during labor and delivery, the "emotional trauma suffered by a couple upon diagnosis of anencephaly", and the lack of mental development in the baby as justification for "inducing labor to end the pregnancy".

Employing the principles of proportionality and "double effect", she maintained that "the resulting fetal death is indirect" and thus not an abortion. Sister deBlois further stated that because "human life involves more than simply biologic life", and infants with anencephaly lack "psychological, social, and creative capacities", such babies "can never acquire the quality of viability, properly understood". Thus, she maintained, "once the diagnosis is made, there seems to be no purpose in maintaining the pregnancy".

Anencephaly was thus singled out as a special case from other lethal birth defects because of the presumed lack of mental function. According to Sister deBlois's rationale, Catholic hospitals would then be ethically allowed to perform early induction delivery -- an acknowledged abortion procedure used for terminating babies with birth defects -- as a kind of termination of life support rather than abortion.

Whatever the semantics, Sister deBlois's position was a radical departure from the Church's condemnation of direct termination of pregnancy based on the condition of the unborn baby. Especially because some ethicists consider anencephaly as analogous to the controversial "vegetative state", this position unfortunately also furthered the contention that a presumed lack of mental function overrides the obligation to provide for the basic needs of a person by justifying even the interruption of a process as natural as pregnancy.

The excerpts certainly need no commentary from me as they are quite clear regarding Sister deBlois' position. But there is more. While this article dealt with a beginning of life issue, let's take a look at an end-of-life issue, specifically, The Pope's Address on Feeding and the "Vegetative" State (again from Women for Faith and Family):

Pope John Paul II in a March 20 address to the International Congress "Life-Sustaining Treatments and Vegetative State: Scientific Advances and Ethical Dilemmas", [in] affirming the obligation to feed and care for patients considered in PVS, [said,]

"The sick person in a 'vegetative state', awaiting recovery or a natural end, still has the right to basic health care (nutrition, hydration, cleanliness, warmth, etc.), and to the prevention of complications related to his confinement to bed. He also has the right to appropriate rehabilitative care and to be monitored for clinical signs of eventual recovery".

[However,] Sister Jean deBlois, C.S.J., director of a master's degree program for health care executives at Aquinas Institute in St. Louis, said that the pope's statement places "an unnecessary and unfounded burden on family members faced with treatment decisions on behalf of their loved ones" and that "artificial nutrition and hydration... holds no comparison to a meal".

She is also quoted as saying:

"When someone suffers an illness or injury that puts them in a persistent vegetative state, they have put their first foot on the path to eternal life. When we remove artificial nutrition and hydration, we open the door and say, 'Have a wonderful journey'". (Sister Jean deBlois, ethicist, Aquinas Institute, Spring, 2004)

"Have a wonderful journey, while we starve and dehydrate you to death?" Is this for real? And coming from a "Catholic" ethicist? Truly, unbelievable and directly contrary to the Holy Father's words.

Now, having reviewed the above we come to July, 2005, and we read that the Archdiocese has closed its doors to the Aquinas Institute Theology discussions which were taking place at the Rigali Center:

Lecture series forced to leave Catholic center
Discussions featured controversial issues.

ST. LOUIS - The St. Louis archdiocese has closed its doors on a popular round-table discussion series on Catholic theology, forcing organizers to find a new home.

The latest discussion, held earlier this month, focused on the debate over stem cell research, with the lecturer, Sister Jean deBlois, explaining the church’s ethical and moral problems with such research. But deBlois’ lecture appears to have been the last on church property.

We are not privy to the actual reasons for this action by the Archdiocese, but there seems to a pattern which might suggest that there are grave problems, at least from an authentic Catholic perspective.

As Providence would have it, a recent discussion of Sister deBlois' talk was posted on the CatholicStLouis yahoo group, which is accessible from the main page of this blog. Apparently, if I understand it correctly, the good sister's talk was not about the intrinsic evil associated with cloning and embryonic stem cell research but she approached it from a social justice or distributive justice perspective - a position which obscures the grave immorality of embryonic stem cell research. It would seem that attempting to discuss this issue from such a perspective minimizes the Catholic position as discussed by Archbishop Burke in his article here.

While it is stated at the CatholicStLouis site that Sister deBlois did uphold some of the teachings of the Church, it seems that if a Catholic parish is going to have a discussion of the stem cell issue, it should at least be presented in full accord with the Church's teaching on the matter and in a way consonant with the presentation made by Archbishop Burke. It seems that using the Social Justice perspective to oppose cloning/embryonic stem cell research is flawed. If, as the bulletin states, the faithful should "become more informed on the critical issue of stem cell research and get answers from an extremely qualified Catholic authority on ethics", is it not reasonable for the faithful to expect to be given the cold, hard facts and the truth as the Church wishes us to have them, rather than Sister's opinions and theories? For what it is worth, I understand that the Archdiocese has been advised and we await further information.