t eanc 0 VOL. 34, NO. 26
•
Friday, June 29, 1990
F ALL RIVER, MASS.
High court rules in abortion, comatose patient cases
FALL RIVER DIOCESAN NEWSPAPER FOR SOUTHEAST MASSACHUSETTS CAPE COD & THE ISLANDS Southeastern Massachusetts' Largest Weekly
•
Sll Per Year
''No one knows whose womb bears the Chief:' -Ancient African Proverb
WASHINGTON (CNS) - In June 25 decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against withdrawing food and water from Nancy Cruzan, a young Missouri woman in a persistent vegatative state; upheld an Ohio requirement of parental notification in teeiliage abortions; and allowed Minnesota to demand notification of two parents, as long as a cOllirt can intervene to circumvent that rule. Following are statements from Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk, presidelilt of the National Conference Qf Catholic Bishops and the U.S. Catholic Conference, on the pnrental notification' decisions; and from Mark E. Chopko, general counsel to the U.S. Catholic Conference, on the Cruzan case. The statements are followed by Catholic News Service reports on the decisions. Archbishop's Statement The Catholic Bishops of the United States have spoken often and forcefully about the need to restore respect for life in our society. State legislatures around the nation have responded to this need by enacting laws which restrict and regulate abortion. Today the Supreme Court endorsed the legitimate interest of the parents of a pregnant adolescentto be involved in the decision whether to end the life of her unborn child. The result is a victory for family unity. The U.S. Supreme Court's June 25 decisions in State of Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health and Jane Hodgson v. State of Minnesota recognize the right of states to strengthen the involvement of parents in the decisionmaking process of a minor seeking an abortion. States have a legitimate interest in assisting pregnant minors and encouraging parental responsibility. A reasonable legal requirement to notify parents when pregnant minors seek abortions implements this interest. Legislatures have reflected the sentiment ofthe overwhelming majority of Americans by enacting such reasonable requirements. Today's decisions, and the Court's ruling in Webster v. Reprot!uctive Health Services last summer, recognize that state legislatures are the traditionalforum for resolution of public debates of this kind. Parents have an Obligation to give their children guidance and hope. A pregnant teenager is in crisis: she should have the benefit at the very least, of parental gui: dance and support. The Church praises the opinion in the Ohio case for its special understanding of the need for compassion among family members at such a time of crisis. The Catholic Church will continue to work with young people and their parents to address their needs and prepare them to meet life's challenge~. The Catholic Church values the strength of the family as the cornerstone of our society's stability and will continue to provide material and spiritual assistance to pregnant teenagers and their families. General Counsel's Statement Today in the Cruzan case, the United States Supreme Court wise-
Iy refrained from creating a fundamental constitutional right to refuse medical treatment that would prevail over all other concerns, including those of the family, the medical facility, or even a concern about life itself. In entering this case, the U.S. Catholic Conference had one purpose, namely to advance our firm conviction that this case did not involve this kind of constitutional "privacy right." In addition to the interests of Nancy Cruzan and her family, there are many other legitimate interests involved in this case, including those ofthe medical profession and of the community as a whole, as expressed in the laws of the State of Missouri. The Court's decision allows these considerations' to be weighed in future cases and by other legislatures. To that extent, this is a commendable result. On the other hand, although a fair balance among these interests can best be achieved through the ordinary processes of the common law, the Court today went further by casting its decisional language in c.onstitu~ional ter~s. By finding a Itberty mterest 10 refusal of treatment f~r a comatos~ p~rson ~~d ~,ssummg a constitutIOnal nght for ~ compe.tent ~e~son, the Court IS, tr~admg .. dl~fl~ult ground. It has mVlted theJu~.lcla,ry to ?ec~~e a ~orum offuture leglslatlOn 10 thiS area. For the family. of Nancy Cruzan, these are surel~ difficu~ttimes. They have and will contmue to hav~ oU,r de~p sympathy. In filing a br~ef I.n thiS case, we expressed n.o vle,w on Nancy <?~uzan's tragic sltu~tlOn: Our posItion was that her.sltuat~on should ~ot ~e res~!ve~ by mV,okl?,g a ~onstitutlOnal ~nvacy nght w~l~h wou~d outwel~h all ot~er le~ltlmate mterests 10 case~ ,mvolvmg patients in her condition. On that point, the Court and the Conference agree, Parental Notification WASHINGTON (CNS) - In separate rulings June 25, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Ohio requirement of parental notifica·tion in teenagers' abortions and allowed Minnesota to demand notification of two parents - as long as a court can intervene to circumvent that rule. The court ruled 6-3 to uphold the Ohio law in Ohio vs. Akron Center for Reproductive Health
. and 5-4 to strike down a Minnesota measure demanding strict notification ofa teenager's two parents. But it turned around and subsequently ruled 5-4 that the Minnesota law is valid as long as the teenage girl has the option of going to a court to avoid notifying both parents. Ohio's law, which had been struck down by the Cincinnatibased 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 1988, requires 24-hour notice to' a parent or guardian, or use of a judicial bypass, before a minor can obtain an abortion, unless she h;as already produced written parental consent for the procedure. "We reverse" the appeals court, the Supreme Court majority held in the Ohio case, "for we determine that the statute accords with our precedents ,.. and does not violate the 14th Amendment" to the Constitution. Allowing girls to avoid informing parents by going to court instead is called a "judicial bypass," The Minnesota law under attack was. upheld in 1988 .by .the St. Louis-based 8thY.S, CirCUit Court of App~als, which overruled both a three-Judge panel of~ha~ appeals court and. a lederal dlstnct court but questioned. ~he ,concept of a two-parent n?tlflcatlOn. Mmnesota s statute de~anded that 48 hours before havmg an abortion a pregnant minor under age 1.8 had, to have. her physician prOVide wntt,en notice to both her pare,nts - even in c~ses of parental divorce or separatIOn, although the girl could alternatively get court ~pp~oval for t~e abortion. While fmdl~g fault With the two-parent reqUirement, the app~als court agreed to .a~low a versl(~n. ~f the law contamlllg the posslblltty of judicial bypass. . In its first 5-4 decision on the Mi,nnesota law, the'Supreme Court pomted "to the unreasonableness ~f th~ Minnes.ota two-parent notiflcatlO.n req~uement and to the ease With which the state can adopt less burdensome means to protect the minor's wl~lfare." "~e therej~ore hold that ~his r~quIrementvlOlate~ the Constltutlon," declared Justices John Paul Stevens, WilliamJ. Brennan, Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun and Sandra Day O'Connor. Turn to Page II
Countless numbers of people suffering from catastrophic diseases are waiting for a particular child to be born, They don't know the baby's name. They may not even be aware that they are Walting. But that special child will hold in its hand the cure for their disease. This baby could be born now, tomorrow, next week. It could be the child you are canying. or the baby you WIll shortly conceive. It could hold a million lives in its soft little hand. Starving families in Third World countries -and in our own-are hoping for the birth
of a child who will bring them the answer to world hunger, who will help us to feed ourselves and our neighbors, and teach us to sit down in peace and break bread together. Whose womb bears this child? Could it be yours? Any moment now, some mother could give birth to the child who will erase racial barriers, tear down walls, teach us to respect each other-and ourselves-for who we really are. The time is ripe. Isit here? Is it now? Is it you? Please.
a
THE ABOVE AD is one of series being used in a pro-life campaign sponsored by the eight dioceses of New York. (CNS/NY Catholic Conference photo)
Seven Birthright centers in diocese
Love is what's needed OKLAHOMA CITY (CNS) ."God didn't choose a social worker with a dozen degrees" to begin Birthright, said its founder, Louise Summerhill. "You don't have to have a paper of any kind" to be a Birthright volunteer, she told the crisis pregnancy service's 19th annual convention in Oklahoma City earlier this month, "just a lot of love and compassion, and [to] believe in life." Nearly 400 volunteers from the 625 Birthright centers worldwide attended the convention. They included Janet Barbelle, regional
R 1\.
iJ
A#$
Birthright consultant for Massachusetts and a member of St. Dominic parish, Swansea, and Jeanne Lincoln, director of Birthright of Attleboro, a member of Community Covenant Church, / Rehoboth. "I'm not a saint, not a Mother Teresa," said Mrs. Summerhill, who began the first center in donated space in a basement office in Toronto in 1968. Since then the emergency counseling service for distressed, pregnant women has spread around the world. Turn to Page II
I
LOUISE SUMMERHILL, founder of Birthright, with Native American children who performed during Birthright's Oklahoma City convention. (CNS photo)