Abortion. 100 questions and answers

Foundation: Spanish Episcopal Conference, Committee for the defence of life.
source : Spanish Episcopal Conference.
language original: Spanish.
Copyright: No.
Publication: 25 March 1991.
Checked on 16 May 2002.

Abortion. 100 questions and answers on the defence of human life and the attitude of Catholics.

Presentation

The Episcopal Committee for the Defence of Life, which depends on the Spanish Episcopal Conference, presents with this, the first of a series of works that it intends to publish, related to the value and dignity of human life, and the consideration that it should deserve from people, institutions, public authorities and legislation itself.

This collection of works, which is now being launched, is born with the dual vocation of technical and scientific rigour, on the one hand, and accessibility and simplicity of presentation, on the other. On the present occasion, the aim is to offer the reader basic information, solid criteria and as broad an overview as possible of the phenomenon of induced abortion, its biological reality, legal treatment, social consideration and its ethical and moral aspects. It is certainly not the intention to exhaust the issue with the pages that follow, but it is hoped that what is contained in them will constitute a minimum and secure basis on which to establish the fundamental criteria on such a controversial issue.

In the preparation of this text, the Bishops and the members of the Episcopal Committee have worked in close collaboration with specialists in various fields of research and study: doctors, biologists, biopathologists and pharmacists, on the one hand, and theologians, moralists, jurists, sociologists, psychologists and journalists, on the other. All of them have contributed, with their suggestions, their knowledge, their experience and their presence at the many working meetings, to the final result , which is the text that the reader has in his or her hand.

This is not, of course, the first work that the Spanish Episcopate has offered on this issue to our society; We should remember, for example, the grade of the Episcopal Commission for the Doctrine of the Faith, of 5 October 1974, which deals with the pastoral aspects of the problem, and the documentation on "Life and Abortion", of 31 May 1983, prepared by the same Episcopal Commission for the 51st Meeting of the Executive Committee of the Spanish Episcopal Conference, in which juridical and moral aspects of the question are dealt with, and pastoral recommendations are given to governments and legislators, to believers, to doctors and health personnel, and to priests and pastoral agents.

Narciso Jubany Arnau Cardinal
President of the Episcopal Committee for the Defence of Life.

Introduction

Modern societies have undergone spectacular changes in the last century, brought about by the development of science and technology in all aspects of life. It has been rightly said that humanity has undergone more profound changes in the last hundred years than in the entire history of mankind on Earth. This is indeed the case in all that concerns scientific and technological progress, which has brought us into an era of accelerated mutations, in which events that seemed impossible or the fruit of unbridled imagination have become everyday realities that would not surprise even a child.

Unfortunately, all this progress has not always gone hand in hand with the corresponding moral growth of the person, in such a way that it is placed at the service of man, the recipient of the efforts and work of scientists, technicians and politicians, and of all those who have some responsibility in the life of the community. This reflects what is perhaps the deepest drama of our time: the loss of the meaning of the human person, the forgetfulness of his dignity, the enslavement of men to their own works and projects. Human life is thus threatened in many ways. This situation cannot respond to the plan of God, the Creator and end of man, who has placed everything at his service, that is to say, at the service of his transcendent vocation. It is true that our society does not think much of God. But there is a very close link between the forgetfulness of God and the loss of respect for man, which we cannot but point out.

Thus, for example, we see with desolation how the hurtful imbalances between some peoples and others persist, how wars and all kinds of conflicts arise everywhere on the planet, and how the rights of the human person are violated and trampled on in all latitudes, without exception, although in some places these aggressions take place in a more violent manner, and in others they take on apparently civilised characteristics, thus adding hypocrisy to barbarism.

Spanish society is no exception to this universal phenomenon While the average standard of living has improved ostensibly in recent decades, and in recent years our nation has joined supranational organisations and signed international treaties and conventions that seek the better defence and protection of fundamental human rights, the reality is sample that, on the one hand, irritating pockets of poverty and marginalisation persist among us, and, on the other, that those rights essential to the dignity of the human person are not respected as they should be, both in daily practice and even in our own legislation.

In addition to what we do not hesitate to describe as achievements and visionary efforts to safeguard the threatened dignity of the person (the abolition of the death penalty, the abolition of torture and forced labour, concern for the deterioration of the environment or the constitutional mandate to protect individual and family privacy from computer intrusions, for example), we note with alarm and deep concern that, despite these achievements, other attacks on the person and his or her fundamental rights are on the increase in our society. In particular, the right to life is not defended, and is still the object of unequivocal aggression, both by the attitude of broad sectors of our society and by the very legislation in force in Spain. This fact would be incomprehensible if we did not take into account the enormous strength of hedonism in today's society, which places all its aspirations in purely material well-being, forgetting the transcendent reality of the human being and even neglecting the very logic of the principles of coexistence that we claim to profess.

The Episcopal Committee for the Defence of Life, aware that it is still time to rectify the errors and straighten out the dangerous course that some sectors, including leading sectors of our society, have embarked upon, wishes to initiate with this publication a series of accessible, didactic and clear texts on the value of human life (abortion, assisted fertilisation, euthanasia, ecology, etc.), which may be useful not only to the Christian faithful and their educators, but also to all citizens, legislators and those in power, whatever their beliefs or convictions.), which can be of use not only to the Christian faithful and their educators, but also to all citizens, legislators and those in government, whatever their beliefs or convictions. Convinced that the legislation at subject on induced abortion is condoning a most unjust death of innocents, the main motives for which are convenience, ignorance, loneliness and misinformation, the Committee calls on all men and women of good will to reflect, based on better information about what is happening in front of our eyes. Catholics are in a unique position to understand the nature of the abortion issue. Our faith enables us to perceive more fully and urges us to proclaim to all the greatness and dignity of man, whose life is a gift of God, as Jesus Christ, who is the Way, the Truth and also the Life, has shown us.

I. Abortion and the origin of life

1. What is abortion?

Medicine understands abortion as any expulsion of the foetus, whether natural or induced, in the non-viable period of its intrauterine life, i.e. when it has no chance of survival. If this expulsion of the foetus takes place in the viable period but before the end of pregnancy, it is called premature birth, whether the foetus survives or dies.

Spanish law, like canon law, considers abortion as the death of the foetus by its destruction while it is still in the mother's womb or by its premature expulsion so that it dies, whether it is not viable or not.

In common parlance, abortion is the death of the foetus by its expulsion, natural or induced, at any time during its intrauterine life.

2. How many types of abortion are there?

Abortion can be spontaneous or induced. Spontaneous abortion occurs either because death occurs in utero, or because various causes lead to the expulsion of the new being to the outside world, where it dies due to its lack of capacity to live outside its mother's womb. If the abortion is induced, it is carried out either by killing the child in the mother's womb or by artificially forcing its expulsion so that it dies outside.

Sometimes viable pregnancies are acted upon by killing them inside the mother or by procuring their death after they are born alive. This is not, medically speaking, an abortion, and in fact many legislations that are considered permissive in their tolerance of abortion expressly prohibit it, because they include it in the concept of infanticide. But this is not the case in other cases, as for example in Spain, where the Penal Code does not take into account the viability of the foetus for the crime of abortion to occur, and, on the other hand, in some cases viable foetuses can be killed without receiving any criminal punishment, under the protection of the legislation in force precisely in subject of abortion. For this reason, we will use the definition of abortion in these pages according to common parlance, so that the induced death of a viable foetus will also be considered as abortion.

3. Is a human being the fruit of conception in its early stages of development?

From the moment fertilisation takes place through the union of sperm and ovum, a new human being emerges, different from all those that have existed, exist and will exist. At that moment, an essentially new and different life process begins, different from those of the sperm and the ovum, which already has a full life expectancy. From that first instant, the life of the new being deserves respect and protection, because the human development is a continuum in which there are no qualitative leaps, but the progressive realisation of this personal destiny. Any attempt to distinguish between the unborn and the born in relation to their human condition is unfounded.

4. So isn't it true that in the beginning there is a certain biological reality, but that it will only become a human being later on?

No. From the moment the new genetic heritage is formed with fertilisation, there is a human being who only needs to develop and grow to become an adult. From fertilisation onwards, there is a continuous development in the new individual of the human species, but in this development there is never a qualitative change that would allow us to say that first there was no human being and then there was. This qualitative change only occurs at fertilisation, and from then on the new being, in interaction with the mother, only needs external factors to become an adult: oxygen, nourishment and the passage of time. The rest is already in it from the beginning.

5. How can a human being exist while being something so small that it does not have the slightest outward appearance of a human being?

Reality is not only what our senses perceive. The most modern electron microscopes and telescopes undoubtedly offer us aspects of reality that we would never have been able to grasp with our eyes. Similarly, science demonstrates that the newly conceived human being is the same as, and not different from, the human being who will later become a baby, a child, a young person, an adult and an old person. Its appearance varies according to its stage at development. Thus, in intrauterine life it is first a pre-implantation embryo (until the so-called nesting, some 12-14 days after fertilisation, when twins may possibly arise from the same fertilised egg); then it is an embryo until all its organs are formed; then, as these mature, a foetus, until the baby is formed as it is born. And then the same process of growth and maturation continues, followed by the reverse of decay until death.

That is why it makes no sense to say that a child comes from a foetus, but that it itself was once a foetus, just as an adult does not come from a child, but was once a child, and is always the same human being, from the beginning. And it would be as absurd to argue that the newly conceived child is not a human being because it does not look like a child, as it would be to suppose that the child is not a human being because it does not have the external appearance of an adult.

6. Admitting that a new life exists from the moment of fertilisation, could it not be a plant or animal life, to become human at a later stage?

No. With current genetic knowledge, there is no doubt that each being is what it is from the moment of fertilisation. From the union of plant gametes only a plant is created; from non-rational animal gametes, for example a chimpanzee, only another chimpanzee is created, and from the union of human gametes a new being of the human species is created, which is such from the beginning, because this is determined by its specifically human genetic heritage.

7. Have there been times when it was believed that the fruit of a woman's conception could be a non-human individual?

Yes, there were times when, through ignorance of genetic mechanisms, it was believed that a woman impregnated by a man could conceive a non-human or half-human being. This idea is a manifestation of superstition and scientific ignorance that today must be considered to have been overcome. Another thing is that, due to diseases or various alterations, disorders may occur at the moment of fertilisation that lead to the formation of abnormal products, such as the so-called "vesicular mole" or "abortive eggs", which lack the capacity of development. Or that sometimes lead to children with congenital malformations, whose life, however, deserves the same respect and protection as that of normally formed beings.

8. And can it not happen that, although the fruit of fertilisation is a human life, it does not become an individual human being until a later time?

In reality there are only individual human beings. The concept of human life is an abstraction that exists only in embodiment in individual beings of the human species. Human life, in general, is an abstract idea; a concrete human life is not, cannot be in reality, anything other than a human being.

9. But given that until the fourteenth day after fertilisation there is the possibility that not one but two human beings (monozygotic twins) can be born from a fertilised egg, should it not be said that as long as such a division is possible, there is no individual human being?

The fact that two human beings can come into existence from the same fertilised egg does not mean that before the division there was not one, but rather that where there was one - by a process that is not yet well understood - there becomes more than one.

It should be noted that individuality is not the same as indivisibility. A living being can be individual, but divisible; this is the case with bacteria and other micro-organisms. The fact that at a certain time in its biological evolution a living being may be divisible does not invalidate its character as a single individual at earlier times. The human being, as mentioned above, up to about day 12-14 of its evolution is individual but divisible, and from the time of nesting onwards it is single and indivisible.

10. If a human being exists from the moment of fertilisation, why do scientists refer to it by different terms depending on the stage of development: zygote, morula, blastocyst, embryo, foetus?

Because the life of a human being is a long process that begins when from two gametes, one male and one female, a clearly distinct reality emerges: the new human being, the fruit of fertilisation, who in the different stages of its development receives different names: the zygote is the first cell that results from the fusion of the male and female cells. After the first few cell divisions, this human being is called a morula, in which a differentiation will soon appear between the cells that will form the embryo (what we have called the pre-implantation embryo, and which some call the pre-embryo) and those destined to form the placenta. In this new phase, the human being is called a blastocyst, and will nestle in the wall of its mother's uterus. Its organs will then differentiate, some before others, throughout the embryonic period, while the placenta is fully developed. The embryo will then be called a foetus, and will continue to grow as its organs functionally mature until, at some point, it will be born and will be called a neonate, a newborn baby. And this unique process, which has developed smoothly, without abrupt changes, continues after birth, and the neonate becomes a child; the child, an adolescent; the adolescent, a youth; the youth, an adult; and the adult, an old man. All these are the names which distinguish the stages in the life of a single being which came into being at fertilisation and which will remain the same until it dies, although its external appearance may be very different at one stage or another.

11. Could it not be understood that until it is viable, that is, until it is capable of subsisting outside the womb, the unborn child is not a human being, since it is dependent on its mother for its existence?

No. The fact that at a certain stage of its life the child needs the environment of the mother's womb to survive does not imply that it is a part of the mother. From the moment of fertilisation, it already has its own genetic heritage, different from that of the mother, and its own immune system, also different from that of the mother, with whom it maintains a relationship similar to that of the astronaut with his spacecraft: if he were to leave it, he would die, but not because he is inside it, he is part of the spacecraft.

On the other hand, what is called viability (i.e. the probability that the child will continue to live outside after a prematurely terminated pregnancy) is greater the further along the pregnancy is, but it is very difficult to determine over time, since whether the child can continue to live depends largely on external factors: . subject of delivery, medical care received by the child, abundance or scarcity of means and state of the art in the place where the birth occurs, etc. Moreover, as scientific knowledge advances, the age of pregnancy at which a foetus can be considered viable is decreasing. Therefore, the acquisition of viability, like learning to walk or speak, or coming to the use of reason, are things that happen to a human being, but by no means the moment at which he or she becomes human. It makes no sense to make the human condition dependent on the technological development .

Moreover, the ability to subsist outside the mother's womb must necessarily be unrelated to the determination of the beginning of human life, because a newborn is also absolutely incapable of subsisting on its own without proper care. Birth determines a change in the way of receiving oxygen and a change in the way of nourishment, but the rest of development continues the course already started at the beginning of intrauterine life.

12. If, however, someone were in doubt as to the exact moment at which a new human being emerges, what attitude should he or she adopt?

In the event that someone has doubts as to whether a new human being is already beginning to exist or does not yet exist, he should refrain from interrupting his normal development or treating him in a manner unworthy of a human being, because in the face of this doubt, the possibility that we are dealing with a human being should prevail; just as, in the event of doubt as to whether a human being is already dead or not yet dead, it is demanded that he be respected as a living human being until there is certainty of his death. Society values the protection of human life to such an extent that in order to remove an organ for transplantation, it is not enough that the donor is likely to be dead, but rigorous scientific criteria are required to diagnose his death.

That this is so can be seen most vividly in the dramatic cases of collapsed buildings or miners trapped in a cave-in: clearance and rescue work continues until it is absolutely certain that no one is alive, and is never suspended just because it is merely assumed that everyone is probably dead.

13. At what points in its intrauterine life does the unborn child develop its various organs and functions?

After two weeks, development of the nervous system begins.

At three weeks of age, the brain begins to differentiate, sketches of what will become the legs and arms appear and the heart begins to beat.

At four weeks, the eyes begin to form.

At six weeks the head is almost in shape final, the brain is highly developed, hands and feet are beginning to form, and

very soon fingerprints will appear, which you will have for the rest of your life.

At eight weeks the stomach begins gastric secretion; the nails appear.

At nine weeks, the functioning of the nervous system is perfected: it reacts to stimuli and detects flavours, as it has been proven that if the amniotic fluid - in which it lives while swimming in the womb - is sweetened, it ingests more, while if it is conference room or acidified, it rejects it.

At eleven weeks she is sucking her thumb, which can be clearly seen on an ultrasound scan.

Most of the organs are fully formed by the end of the twelfth week, and almost all of them will be functioning by the second half of intrauterine life. But there are changes that will only occur after birth: the first dentition only appears six months after birth, the permanent teeth appear around the age of seven, and sometimes the last molars do not erupt until well into adulthood. Puberty, with all its anatomical and physiological changes, occurs in the second decade of life, and reproductive capacity in women begins shortly after puberty and ceases in the climacteric period. In other words, life is a single process, which begins at fertilisation and does not stop until death, with its evolutionary and involutionary stages.

14. On what grounds, then, do some argue that the unborn child is part of the mother's body, and that she alone can decide on the fate of the child?

Those who argue in this way have no basis whatsoever. Reality categorically proves that the child is a being completely separate from its mother, that it develops and reacts on its own, even if its dependence on its mother is very strong, a dependence which, incidentally, continues long after birth. Not even the placenta, the umbilical cord or the amniotic fluid are part of the mother's body, but these organs have been generated by the child from its zygote stage because they are necessary for its early stages development, and it abandons them at birth, just as, several years after birth, it abandons its milk teeth when they are no longer useful for further growth. Therefore, to claim that the child is part of the mother's body is, at best, nothing more than a sample of absolute ignorance.

II. How abortion is performed

15. What are the common methods of abortion?

The purpose of induced abortion is the destruction of the child at development in the womb or its premature expulsion so that it dies. In order to achieve this result , various methods are used, which in other circumstances are also commonly used in gynaecology and obstetrics, and which are chosen according to the means available and the age of the foetus to be removed. The most commonly used methods are: aspiration, curettage, hysterotomy ("mini caesarean section"), induction of contractions and intra-amniotic injection.

16. Aren't there also abortion pills?

Although many attempts have been made to use drug-like means to produce abortions, so far only the so-called "abortion pill" (RU-486) has succeeded with any success. By administering it very early in the pregnancy, before the sixth week of the child's life, i.e. before the mother's second missed menstrual period, this hormone preparation is intended to override the function of the developing placenta, resulting in the death of the child, which is then an embryo in absolute need of the nourishing function of the placenta, and the subsequent expulsion of the child with all its envelopes. If the desired results are not completely achieved, a curettage must be performed to complete the abortion.

17. How is an aspiration abortion performed?

The cervix is first dilated with instruments suitable for this purpose, so that a tube connected to a powerful aspirator can fit through it. The force of the suction drags the embryo and the rest of the uterine contents, all broken into small pieces. Once the suction operation is complete, a curettage is usually performed to ensure that the uterus is completely empty. This method is usually used when the pregnancy is less than ten or twelve weeks.

18. What is the curettage method?

Curettage, also called curettage, is the most frequently used method. It begins by properly dilating the cervix, which can only be done under anaesthesia. Then a kind of sharp-edged spoon called a curette is introduced into the uterus, which cuts the placenta and the child into pieces by being passed up and down the entire cavity of the uterus. The pieces thus obtained are removed with the same curette.

This method is usually performed mainly in the first three or four months of the child's life. If the pregnancy is beyond 12 weeks, the difficulties increase and the body of the foetus has to be very carefully crushed in order to remove it from the uterus. Sometimes there may be large pieces of remains inside the uterus, for example the head, so the abortionist must carefully identify all the extracted remains to make sure that nothing is left inside the mother.

19. Why are these methods used only in early pregnancy?

Because the child grows and develops very quickly, and after this time its crushing and vaginal expulsion becomes very difficult for the abortion provider and very dangerous for the mother.

20. What is the method of abortion known as "mini caesarean section"?

Caesarean section is an operation performed at the end of pregnancy, which consists of removing the child through an incision in the mother's abdomen when, for whatever reason, it is not possible to give birth through the normal birth canal. This operation has saved many lives of both mothers and children. A caesarean section performed only a few weeks into the pregnancy is called a "mini caesarean section" and involves making an incision in the uterus through the mother's abdomen to remove the baby and placenta. This method is usually performed from the 15th or 16th week of pregnancy onwards. Usually live babies are removed and die shortly afterwards because they are not viable. Sometimes, however, live, viable babies have been obtained through procedure , and then left to die without the care that could possibly have saved them, or they have died, usually by asphyxiation.

21. What is contraction induction abortion?

It consists of provoking the expulsion of the foetus and placenta by administering to the mother, by various means, substances (prostaglandins, oxytocin) that produce contractions similar to those of childbirth, which in turn cause the cervix to dilate and the sac containing the child to detach from the walls of the uterus. The baby may be born dead, because it suffocates inside its mother, or alive.

Hydrophilic stems or dilators are also sometimes used prior to the use of oxytocids, which, when placed in the cervix, progressively swell and dilate it.

22. What is the intra-amniotic injection method?

A hypertonic saline or urea solution is injected through the mother's abdomen into the amniotic fluid in which the baby lives. These hyperosmotic irritant solutions cause labour-like contractions, and within a day or two of the injection, the baby and placenta are usually expelled. In a number of cases a curettage must be performed afterwards to ensure expulsion of the placenta.

This method is sometimes used to evacuate a spontaneously dead foetus retained in the uterus, and can only be used in an advanced pregnancy. If it is to cause a miscarriage, i.e. if the child is alive inside the mother and has to be removed, the pregnancy must also be of a certain length of time, more than four months.

The irritant solution introduced beforehand often poisons the foetus, causing extensive burns. Sometimes, instead of caustic solutions, prostaglandins have been introduced into the amniotic fluid; but abortionists prefer the other solutions, because dead foetuses are more certain to be obtained, and it is unpleasant if the child is born alive and has to be killed or left to die in full view of all.

23. Are these methods safe for the life or health of the mother?

No. The word "safety" is completely inadequate for these situations. In aspiration abortions there is a risk of infection and even perforation of the uterus, and that the haemorrhage will be accompanied by injury to the mother's abdominal organs. This risk is increased in curettage abortions. In contraction induction abortions the most serious complications are haemorrhage and embolism, and in "mini caesarean sections" there is a risk of scar tearing and superimposed infections. Intra-amniotic injections can lead to the passage of toxic substances into the mother's circulatory system.

It is true that these complications are not very frequent and that maternal mortality is not high (although there are complications and there are deaths), but there are important sequelae resulting from these manipulations, which can seriously influence the development of subsequent pregnancies.

The high risk of psychological disturbances, which can often appear late in life, must also be mentioned here. Abortion often involves a strong psychological trauma for the mother, even if she submits to it voluntarily.

In short, no abortion is "safe" for the woman who aborts. It is just a figure of speech, as opposed to other methods that involve even greater risk.

24. Are there other, cruder and more dangerous methods used in clandestine abortion?

Yes, for thousands of years there has been historical evidence of induced abortions, with great risk to the life of the mother. Today, home methods are still used in clandestine abortions.

25. Would it not be better to legalise abortion in order to avoid the risks of clandestine abortions, or so that poorer women are not in a worse position than richer women who can go abroad for abortions?

First of all, it should be known that even in countries with very permissive legislation on abortion, clandestine abortion still exists, for a thousand reasons that are easy to understand (adultery with unwanted consequences, the need to conceal a pregnancy in order to maintain a certain social position, or so many others). In any case, the external circumstances surrounding abortion can make it more sordid and inhumane by endangering the life of the mother as well as that of the child. But abortion, whether it is performed by rich or poor women, whether it is done clandestinely or under the protection of the state, whether it is performed without means or with the most sophisticated technology, is always the same crime against the life of a defenceless innocent, and this action can never be justified.

III. Abortion Laws

26. How has abortion been regulated in national legal systems?

In ancient Greece and Rome abortion, as well as infanticide, was generally permitted and socially accepted. Since the humanisation of law under the influence of Christianity, abortion has always been punished as a crime.

The 20th century has seen several changes to this situation: the Soviet Union allowed abortion in 1920, and in the 1930s several Scandinavian and later Eastern European countries then under Soviet domination, as well as Japan, were added.

Since the late 1960s, induced abortion has been permitted - with more or less restrictions, depending on the country - in the Western world, although in many countries the right to life of the unborn continues to be respected and protected.

27. What is the situation in Spain?

In Spain, abortion has been a punishable offence in the Penal Code without exceptions until 1985, when a reform of the Code, popularly known as the "abortion law", established certain cases in which, under certain circumstances, abortion would not be punishable.

28. Does this mean that abortion is no longer a crime in Spain?

No. Abortion in Spain is a crime regulated in the Penal Code, in Title VII ("crimes against persons"), Chapter III, Articles 411 to 417 bis, inclusive. These precepts establish penalties for those who abort, as are established elsewhere in the Code for those who murder, rape or rob.

29. What, then, is new about the "abortion law"?

The new legislation, if carried out in the circumstances and under the conditions provided for in that legislation, does not punish the practitioner or the person who consents to it being carried out.

30. What are these circumstances?

They are of three kinds: some are related to the mother: that she gives her consent to the abortion; that the pregnancy results in serious danger to her life or her physical or mental health, or that the pregnancy is the result of a crime of rape. result . Others, relating to the child: that it is presumed that the child will be born with serious physical or mental disabilities. Others, finally, relating to the practice of abortion itself: when it is carried out in one of the above cases, it must be carried out in an authorised centre; it must be carried out by or under the direction of a doctor; in some cases, there must be one or more medical opinions advising abortion, and it must be carried out no later than certain time limits in cases of rape or presumed malformation of the child.

31. What is the justification given for abortion not being punishable in some cases?

In some legislations, it is assumed that the conceived and unborn child does not deserve any legal protection except after a certain period of intrauterine life, which is when the child begins to be considered worthy of protection. According to this criterion, abortion is legal at a certain stage of pregnancy. This system is known as the "time limit system".

In other legal systems, as in the Spanish case, the child is considered to deserve legal protection from the beginning of its life, but the circumstances in which deliberate abortion should not be punishable are established. This is the system known as the "indications system", which is usually mixed, i.e. each indication usually corresponds to a period of pregnancy in which induced abortion is not punishable.

32 Is the system of indications more restrictive than the system of time limits?

Yes, because in the system of indications, the law considers the life of the unborn child as a good worthy of protection, even if it is thought that an abortion should not be criminally punished if there is a conflict of goods that the State does not want to prejudge how it is resolved. On the other hand, in the term system, the life of the unborn child becomes a thing available and can be destroyed by the free private will of the mother, as the State does not care about the unborn child and does not provide it with any protection whatsoever.

33. Does our legislation explain in any way the reasons why certain indications are established to make abortion not punishable?

Typically, advocates and consenters of laws facilitating induced abortion attempt to justify permissive legislation by arguing that in borderline cases, heroic behaviour cannot be required of distressed mothers, as this is not a function of the criminal rule .

34. And isn't that indeed the case?

No. Any criminal law generally establishes that "borderline cases", in which a person is forced, physically or mentally, to commit a crime (any crime, not just abortion), imply exemption from criminal liability for the perpetrator. Spain also has this exonerating circumstance, called "state of necessity", which, when assessed by the judge, leads to the acquittal of the perpetrator of the crime. This means that there was no need for specific legislation for "borderline cases" in subject of induced abortion, as no one has ever been convicted of this crime in Spanish judicial history if the circumstance of state of necessity was present.

If what was intended was to resolve borderline cases, the reform of the Penal Code not only failed to fill a gap, which did not exist, but also gave society the erroneous impression that abortion under certain conditions is not a crime, whether in borderline cases or not.

35. And isn't applying an exonerating circumstance the same as declaring certain abortions non-punishable?

No, because in the first case the law continues to convey to society the message that abortion is a crime, even if judges apply the maximum understanding towards the offender in a state of necessity, and in the second case it conveys the idea that it is enough to comply with certain formal requirements for abortion not to be a crime, and may even become a socially respectable conduct.

36. Why, then, was this amendment to the Penal Code made, if it was also previously possible to acquit in cases of necessity?

Some of the promoters of the current legislation on abortion have never concealed the fact that this has to be the first step for society to consider induced abortion, in whatever circumstances, not only as something legitimate, but also as a mother's right to suppress her child. Later on we will see that in Spanish law, apart from true states of necessity, normal circumstances in life, however harsh they may be, are considered as grounds for non-punishability of abortion.

On the other hand, if the reform had not been carried out as it was, it would not have been possible, among other things, to legally establish centres dedicated to the practice of abortions, as if they were a medical or therapeutic activity instead of a systematic elimination of unborn children. This concealment of reality is experienced to the extent that induced abortions are euphemistically referred to as "voluntary terminations of pregnancy", or even with the initials "I.V.E.", which suggests something technical and scientific, and certainly unrelated to the possibility of there being a human victim in this process, as indeed there is.

37. How do doctors feel about performing induced abortions?

The vast majority of doctors, in Spain and throughout the world, strictly refuse to perform abortions, because they know that an induced abortion is to violently end the life of a human being, and this is entirely contrary to the practice of medicine.

38. What does the article of the Spanish Penal Code that declares certain abortions not punishable say?

It is Article 417a and reads as follows:

"Abortion performed by or under the direction of a doctor in an accredited public or private health centre or establishment, with the express consent of the pregnant woman, shall not be punishable when any of the following circumstances apply:

1stIf it is necessary to avoid a serious danger to the life or physical or psychological health of the pregnant woman and this is stated in an opinion issued prior to the intervention by a physician of the corresponding specialization program , other than the one by whom or under whose direction the abortion is performed.

In urgent cases of vital risk to the pregnant woman, the opinion and express consent may be dispensed with.

2nd: If the pregnancy is the result of an act constituting the crime of rape under article 429, provided that the abortion is carried out within the first twelve weeks of gestation and that the said act has been reported.

3rd: If it is presumed that the foetus will be born with serious physical or mental disabilities, provided that the abortion is carried out within the first twenty-two weeks of gestation and that the opinion, expressed prior to the abortion, is issued by two specialists from a public or private health centre or establishment, accredited for this purpose, and different from the one by whom or under whose direction the abortion is carried out.

2. In the cases provided for in the previous number, the conduct of the pregnant woman shall not be punishable, even if the abortion is not performed in an accredited public or private centre or establishment, or if the required medical opinions have not been issued.

It is therefore a mixed legislation of indications and time limits, although in the first of the three cases it is exclusively based on the system of indications.

39. What is meant by "abortion performed by or under the direction of a physician in a public or private health centre or establishment shall not be punishable"?

The first is that the conduct described in this article does not carry any penalty if the assumptions and requirements of the article itself are fulfilled. It also means that the law does not require that the abortion be performed by a doctor; it can be performed by anyone, even without any qualification requirement, as long as a doctor acknowledges having performed it. And it is established that, in order for the abortion not to be punishable, it must be carried out in an establishment that meets certain technical conditions, which are regulated by decree and refer to the personnel and facilities that the place must have.

40. What does the circumstance 1st of this article mean?

This means that the determination of whether the life or the physical or mental health of the mother is at serious risk as a result of the pregnancy will only be made by means of a single certificate medical examination. Abortion based on this circumstance is known as "therapeutic abortion".

41. Why is it called "therapeutic abortion"?

Initially, this was the name given to abortions performed when the life of the mother and the life of the child were in conflict. Today this term is extended to any ailment or risk of ailment. In the latter sense, it is intended to suggest that abortion cures some illness of the mother, although, strictly speaking, an induced abortion does not cure anything, it is not therapy for anything.

42. How many weeks must the pregnancy be before abortion is not punishable in this circumstance?

There is no time limit. The mother may have an abortion with impunity at any time during her pregnancy if the medical certificate is based on danger to her life or health.

43. Is it common for a woman's life to be in serious danger as a result of her pregnancy?

No, it is very rare for that to happen. With the latest advances in medical science, it is becoming more and more difficult for such a collision between the life of the mother and the life of the child to arise. The reality is rather the opposite: there are more occasions when a mother is in danger of death as a result of an induced abortion than as a result of her pregnancy.

44. What about the mother's physical health?

Certainly, a pregnancy that is considered normal is in itself an overload that the pregnant woman must suffer, and it can produce, and in fact does produce, disorders of various kinds; but it seems clear that none of these irregularities fall within the grounds for abortion not to be punishable, since the law would then be superfluous, because, as has been said, these dysfunctions correspond to pregnancies that are medically considered perfectly normal.

On certain occasions it may happen that a pregnancy aggravates a previous illness of the mother, but it is very difficult to quantify the added risk that the pregnancy may entail and, in any case, the well cared for mother will be able to overcome the difficulties posed without major problems, because today there are more than enough means for this to happen. On the other hand, it should not be forgotten that the practice of an abortion can in itself lead to a worsening of the mother's health.

Finally, we must take into account the enormous disproportion of the conflicting values in this case, which are the better or worse health of the mother versus the life or death of the child. The elimination of the child cannot be justified in order to avoid a worsening of the mother's health.

45. What about mental health?

Of course, every unwanted pregnancy is emotionally upsetting for the mother, as is the case with any serious upset. But from there to assuming that there is a serious danger to the mother's mental health average there is an abyss. If we were to judge by the reasons given for non-punishable abortions in Spain, we would have to conclude that it is indeed very common for a pregnancy to cause "serious danger" to the mother's mental health, since, in fact, the vast majority of abortions carried out in Spain under the law are for this reason. The spokesman for an abortion establishment in Madrid stated that "we perform free abortions without being outside the law, because we interpret every unwanted pregnancy as a serious risk to the mother's mental health".

46. It seems that there are many who believe that any unwanted pregnancy is in itself a serious psychological illness for the woman.

This is one of the many erroneous beliefs that are held as a result of ignorance, deliberate or otherwise, of the obvious fact that life is necessarily made up of happy moments and sad moments, and even bitter ones. Being seriously upset, suffering a major disappointment or having to bear the unpleasant consequences of something that was done without measuring the extent of its effects, are things that happen all the time in all walks of life, without anyone being able to seriously say that all those who are in such a situation suffer from a serious mental illness. There will be those who do, but it is obvious that this is not the current case, otherwise we would have to accept the absurdity that all men and women on earth suffer from a serious psychic illness because they exist; the absurdity that existence, because it brings with it unhappy episodes, is in itself a serious psychic illness.

In any case, even assuming that a woman who finds herself pregnant without wanting to be pregnant suffers a major psychological disorder, we must bear in mind that experience shows that many, if not very many, unwanted pregnancies are transformed, if the child is allowed to be born, into joyful motherhoods that are wanted, and well wanted. Experience shows that the most common thing is for an unwanted foetus to become a beloved child when it is born. And there is nothing unusual about this, because the mother may experience, in the face of an unwanted pregnancy, an emotional disturbance that makes it difficult for her to fully realise position who she is carrying in her womb, but this situation disappears as soon as she hears the child cry and sees it clinging to her breast for nourishment.

There are, however, cases in which the mother hates her child already born anyway, just as there are mothers, and fathers, who love their children intensely when they are young and hate them when they are older, for whatever reason. In such situations, it seems that the most prudent legislation would be that which takes care of the life and safety of those who may be threatened, especially if they are helpless and innocent of any guilt (by setting up systems of adoption, foster care, education, etc.), and not legislation that accepts infanticide or patricide as legal.

47. Is there a way to check whether the danger alleged in the medical certificate exists and, if so, whether or not it is serious?

It is very difficult to contrast this. The study of mental disorders still has, according to the unanimous opinion of specialists, a long way to go. To speak in general of "mental health" is so vague and vague that it may not mean anything scientifically. It has not yet been proven that no known and precise subject mental illness can be cured by abortion alone, because it is practically impossible to prove this class , just as it is equally impossible to prove that abortion is not more harmful to the mental health of the mother than allowing the child to be born.

48. What is meant by the circumstance of rape?

This means that for abortion not to be punishable, the rape must have been reported beforehand, and the abortion must be performed within the first three months of pregnancy. Abortion for this reason is known as "ethical abortion".

49. Why is it called "ethical abortion"?

It was given this name by those who considered induced abortion in such cases to be ethically admissible. Today, this expression is intended to convey the feeling that an act of savagery such as rape is being remedied, although in reality abortion does not remedy anything, since rape cannot cease to have existed, and the child born of rape is completely innocent. Abortion due to rape has nothing to do with ethics, because it is not an ethical attitude to try to compensate an injustice with another injustice.

50. Why is the three-month time limit set in this case?

There is no biologically or medically based reason why deliberate abortion on the grounds of rape should not be punishable before three months' gestation and should be punishable after three months' gestation. It is only that it is easier and less risky for the mother to carry out the abortion the younger the child is in the womb.

51. Is the practice of legal abortion on the grounds of rape common?

No, it is extremely rare, because it is very rare that a pregnancy results from rape. Moreover, in these cases, the police have to intervene as a result of the obligation to report the rape before the abortion is performed, which immediately leads to the use of the circumstance of "serious danger to the mental health" of the mother, which only requires a medical certificate , does not require any time limit for the abortion and keeps the police at a distance.

52. What is meant by the circumstance of risk of serious impairment of the foetus?

This means that in order for abortion due to foetal malformation (also called "eugenic abortion" or "eugenic abortion") not to be punishable, these two conditions must be met:

a) there are two medical certificates, issued by specialists other than the one who may perform the abortion, stating that the child is presumed to be seriously handicapped;

b) that the abortion is performed in the first twenty-two weeks of gestation, i.e. up to five and a half months of the child's life in the mother's womb.

53. Why is it called "eugenic abortion"?

The word "eugenic" means "of good origin". Since the end of the last century, eugenics has been studied, which is the science that studies how

development The project, which had a great impact in the United States, had a great impact on the improvement of hereditary factors in living species, including humans, and which had a great impact in the United States; well into this century, in Nazi Germany, the birth of children of Aryan parents was encouraged, and attempts were made to avoid, through sterilisation, the reproduction of people with real or supposed genetic defects.

The term subject has been applied to this form of abortion because it is intended to prevent the birth of children with malformations or anomalies. However, this term is inappropriate, as this form of abortion does not improve the hereditary factors of the human species.

54. Why is the deadline of 22 weeks' gestation set for this abortion class ?

Because it is around the 22nd week that the most common techniques can detect signs that the child has a congenital malformation.

55. Is it not better to avoid the birth of a child destined to have a diminished life, with great suffering for both him and his family?

No. Thinking in this way leads to the aberration of supposing that to put a human being to death in certain circumstances is to do him a favour. Death as a remedy runs directly counter not only to the most elementary humanitarian approaches, but also to common sense.

The public authorities, when faced with cases of physical or mental handicaps, should not only not preach death, but have the serious obligation to promote a legislation that pays special attention to them, because there is no better expression of solidarity than a legislation that positively helps the fullest social integration of the handicapped and the achievement by them of all the quality of life that is attainable for them. sample There is no more atrocious expression of lack of solidarity than sponsor the death of a severely handicapped human being when he or she already exists and is alive, even if it is before birth.

But in addition to these questions of principle, experience shows us continually sample that people with serious physical disabilities, who according to Spanish law could have been killed with impunity before birth, have rendered and are rendering relevant and even spectacular services to the human community. And as far as the mentally handicapped are concerned, the experience of thousands of handicapped children also shows us that they are often happy members of their families and decisive factors of family cohesion and mutual love.

Finally, it must be said that Spanish legislation establishes a lacerating disproportion between the probability of malformation and the certainty of death in this subject of non-punishable abortion.

56. Are abortions performed under this circumstance frequent?

No; they are very infrequent, because when there is knowledge that the child is or may be deficient, it is easier to make use of the first circumstance ("grave danger to the mental health" of the mother), which only requires one certificate doctor instead of two, and also does not limit the practice of abortion with any time limit.

57. This article of the Penal Code also states that a mother who aborts under one of these "indications" will not be punished, even if there are no medical certificates or the abortion is not performed in an "accredited centre". What is the meaning of this statement?

With this mandate, the intention is to exempt a mother who consents to an abortion because she mistakenly believes that the law requirements has been complied with, even if this is not the case, from any criminal liability. In this case, only the other perpetrators of the crime will be punished.

58. What happens if it is proven that a required medical certificate does not correspond to the reality of a risk to the life or health of the mother, or to a probable serious malformation of the child?

If this were proven, the abortion thus performed would be a punishable offence, and the guilty parties (perpetrators Materials, inductors, accomplices, accessories, accessories) would have to be punished. But it is extremely difficult for this to happen in practice, because a criminal case would have to be opened, following a complaint that would allow the judge to investigate, and both the mother and her relatives want at all costs to forget this dramatic episode in their lives, which benefits doctors and other people who profit financially from the practice of abortion. All this without taking into account the great technical difficulty involved in ascertaining the veracity of what is said in a medical certificate , especially if it establishes forecasts or prognoses and not diagnoses.

59. Can the cases in which abortion is not punishable as a criminal offence be extended in Spanish law?

Of course it is, and if this were to happen, it would be nothing new, since the legislation of some other countries also considers abortion carried out for economic reasons to be non-punishable partner, i.e. if the arrival of the new child would imply an economic or social sacrifice that the parents consider unbearable. This is the so-called "fourth assumption", which some people want to introduce into our legislation because it seems to them that, if it were included in the Code, it would bring the legal motivation for many induced abortions closer to reality, as now they have to be based on the indication of "serious risk to the mental health" of the mother.

60. But isn't the assumption of risk to mental health already sufficient for induced abortion to be, in fact, abortion on demand and with impunity, as we have already seen?

In theory this might be thought to be the case, but this is not the case in practice, because among the aims of this legislation is not only the absence of criminal punishment, but also the indirect indoctrination of society, conveying the idea that abortion can be considered as something socially respectable.

For this reason, there are even those who understand that the system of indications, however broad it may be, does not fully resolve this question, and they seek to transform the legal nature of abortion in Spain, so that, from being a crime, it would become the right of mothers to kill their conceived and unborn children; this, according to the sponsors of this idea, could be achieved by implementing a mere law of time limits, which would completely disprotect human beings under three or four months of age in the mother's womb. The law, according to this rules and regulations, would completely disregard these little ones, who would be at the mercy of whatever their mother decides to do with them, including putting them to death without having to explain to anyone why.

61. Does the fact that the law sometimes disregards the protection of the unborn child mean that the child is not a person?

The unborn is a person, as there is no other form of human being than a personal being. However, legal systems sometimes establish fictions about who is a person and who is not, but these fictions do not alter the reality of things.

The word "person" has, in law, a meaning that does not always correspond to reality, as is the case, for example, with companies, which are called "legal persons" to mean that they are subject to rights and obligations as such. Another example: in Spanish law, a missing person who has not been heard from for a number of years is considered dead, but this legal fiction does not mean that if the missing person is alive, he or she ceases to be a person.

In Spanish law, the unborn must be considered a person, as abortion is regulated in the Penal Code as one of the "crimes against persons", although for other legal purposes the unborn is not considered a person (by virtue of a fiction in the Civil Code) until 24 hours after birth.

62. Why the 24 hours after birth for Spanish law to consider a human being a person for civil purposes?

This precept of our Civil Code is an archaism that has been carried over from the times of Roman Law, when there was a huge mortality of newborns.

However, given the demands of reality, the Civil Code itself establishes that the unborn child is considered to be born for all beneficial effects (for example, in the case of inheritance) if it is born alive.

63. In spite of everything, shouldn't Spain be on a par with neighbouring countries, most of which have legalised abortion?

No. Other countries should be imitated in everything that is favourable to the defence of human life and dignity, but not in what is negative and alien to humanist progress.

64. But if most of the most advanced countries of our time have legalised abortion to a greater or lesser extent, shouldn't the legalisation of abortion be seen as progress sample ?

No. Countries, like people, can be advanced and progressive in some ways, and backward and reactionary in others: Athens in the 5th century BC was the most advanced country of its time in art, philosophy, literature, organisation, but all these achievements coexisted with slavery. The same can be said of Renaissance Europe and torture, of the United States of the last century and black slavery, or of today's Europe and abortion. Even today we have witnessed genocide, such as that committed against the Jews during Nazism, which was presented as a step forward in the purification of the Aryan race.

Just as it would not be a sign of progress to imitate 5th century B.C. Athens on slavery, so it would not be good to imitate the rest of Europe today on the legalisation of abortion.

IV. Ethical requirements of the state

65. Isn't the question of abortion a matter of women's conscience, to which the state should be oblivious?

No. Abortion is not a problem of the individual conscience of the mother, nor of the father, because it affects someone other than them: the child already conceived and not yet born. It is another matter that abortion can create problems of conscience.

The public authorities must intervene positively in the defence of human life and dignity, in all periods of human existence, regardless of the circumstances of each individual, even though this principle, a common heritage of all legal systems since Christianity, is today being called into question by some. Induced abortion is not only an intimate matter for parents, but directly affects the natural solidarity of the human species, and every human being must feel challenged by the commission of any abortion.

The autonomy of individual conscience must be respected in the interests of the human person, but it is precisely because of this conviction that States have an ethical obligation to protect the life and integrity of individuals, and they would be seriously disregarding this obligation if they refrained in the case of induced abortion, just as they would disregard it in the case of torture. Indeed, an argument that states should allow torture when the interest of the tortured in obtaining information or a confession and the interest of the victims in not providing it or not confessing clashes is meaningless. States cannot inhibit themselves from defending human life or its physical or moral integrity by arguing that no one can oppose that someone, according to his or her conscience, believes that torture should be practised. Abortion, like torture, affects us all, and states cannot be oblivious to that.

66. How is it that this is clearly understood in the case of torture, but not so in the case of abortion?

For various reasons, not the least of which is the archaism of believing that only what is in front of our eyes exists. But the unborn child exists, it is alive, even if it cannot be seen or heard. We can easily imagine torture in all its crudity and horror, but we have to make an effort to imagine the crude and horrible reality of an induced abortion. This is why the preceding pages have explained, albeit succinctly and in the least dramatic way possible, a reality that is certainly dramatic, which cannot and should not be hidden, because the value of human life does not depend on our feelings, but on what it really is.

On the other hand, states that legally permit induced abortion find spontaneous allies for their silence in those who have the primary obligation to protect the life of the unborn child: the mother and the doctor preaching the abortion; whereas, in the case of torture, the victim's relatives are permanent accusers, let alone the victim herself, if she comes out of the torment alive. Therefore, the state's obligation to protect the tortured is much more easily understood than that of the abortion victim. But this in no way absolves states of their ethical obligation towards the unborn.

67. So, do States have an obligation to criminalise the practice of abortion?

States have an obligation to provide the means, including legal means, to ensure that abortions do not take place, just as they have an obligation to provide the necessary means to ensure that murder, rape and robbery do not take place; and according to current legal techniques, the criminalisation of abortion is the legal measure proportionate to the gravity of the attack on human life.

There are also other legal means for States to develop a policy against the practice of abortion (administrative sanctions, birth prizes or subsidies, etc.), but their light and collateral nature would not be proportionate to the intrinsic seriousness of abortion, which, as a radical attack on a basic and fundamental good, deserves the maximum legal protection, which today is none other than its configuration as a crime. The same can be said of murder or rape: they must be a crime, as it would not be proportionate to threaten the murderer or rapist only with a fine or something similar.

68. Does this mean that the state must sanction in its laws everything that morality forbids?

No. The State should only sanction immoral conduct that falls within the scope of its skill as it is not exhausted in the field of personal privacy, and provided that the legal rules are a technical instrument Pass to prevent what is prohibited from being done. All this is without prejudice to the prudence required of the legislator to know in each case how far he can and should go, as sometimes it is admissible to tolerate evil because it is impossible to eradicate it and if its prohibition could cause even greater evils.

69. And is this not precisely the case with abortions, since there will always be abortions and their clandestinity can cause very serious dangers to the mothers who abort?

Not at all. The State must protect, by all the means at its disposal, the values on which the social order is founded, such as human life, and it can never, under any circumstances, renounce the repression of basic and definitive attacks on these values (murder, abortion, rape, torture...), even if it is known that they can never be eradicated, because that would be like renouncing the raison d'être of any organised society and of public power itself.

70. Does the fact that a certain tolerance of evil may sometimes be acceptable mean that there are circumstances in which it may not be regarded as evil, but as a good?

No. Evil is always evil even if it has to be tolerated. Good is not tolerated; it is desired, sought, tried to be achieved. Only what is negative can be tolerated as long as the negative cannot be suppressed, but it is never legitimate to see as good what is intrinsically evil, such as abortion.

71. And if, at a given moment, part of the population of a country does not perceive abortion as intrinsically evil, does that mean that abortion should not be sanctioned or prosecuted by the State?

No; if this were the case, that part of the population would be wrong, as were those who in former times did not see slavery or torture as wrong. Those who are wrong have a right to be helped out of their error, and to be encouraged not to cause irreparable harm by acting in accordance with their error.

Basic and essential values, such as the life of the human being and his dignity, are prior, independent and superior to the determinations of majorities. That is why states should not be guided by majority opinions regarding the nature of things. Things are not true or false, beautiful or ugly, good or bad, because a majority may so decide at a particular moment.

72. Should the state's attitude towards induced abortion be limited to criminalising and prosecuting it?

No. The State is also obliged to favour the life of people and their dignity, helping to solve the social problems that are at the root of the decision or temptation to abort (helping motherhood, favouring adoption, creating a framework of public customs that favour life and life with dignity...), and seeking the ideal that it is not necessary to apply the penalties of the crime because positive measures are more effective.

73. But, as long as abortion is happening in reality, isn't it better to take it out of the underground to control it?

financial aid No. Legalising abortions does not lead to their disappearance, but rather to an increase in their number. To believe otherwise is a widespread misconception that is contradicted by statistics from all over the world, without exception. The multiplier effect of legalising abortion is due to the fact that general public opinion sees what is decriminalised as good, and the decision to have an abortion is increasingly trivialised in people's consciences.

The purpose of criminal law is not only to prosecute crime, but also to help shape social awareness of the basic values of coexistence, encouraging citizens not to commit what is criminalised. That is why, when a certain conduct is decriminalised, it becomes more and more frequent until it is seen as good and, therefore, practised as a matter of course, in the mistaken belief that everything legal is moral and everything illegal is immoral.

74. Does this mean that the State must place its legislative and repressive power at the service of a certain morality, specifically Catholic morality?

No. But there is a minimum that is articulated around the defence of human dignity - which includes the right to life, also of the conceived and unborn - that is absolutely indispensable, otherwise neither society nor the State would have any justification whatsoever. This minimum is not the exclusive patrimony of the Catholic Church, but of the whole of humanity.

Legislators cannot, do not have the right to determine who is or is not human for the purpose of legal protection. This is a fact of reality that people must respect, because they cannot change it. Hence, any legal rule that violates this principle is essentially unjust, even if it is approved with all the legal formalities; in the same way that it is radically illegitimate to base the right to life of any human being on their health, their physical or mental skill or any other circumstance other than the fact of being human and alive.

This is a doctrine that humanity has learned (even if not always applied consistently) from the experience of 20th century totalitarianism: the rules that first protected the killing of Germans considered "useless parasites" and later the extermination of the Jews in Nazi Germany in the 1930s were intrinsically evil and unjust, even if they were agreed upon by the competent organs of the State. The same is true of current laws that seek to legitimise the practice of induced abortion.

These considerations, it must be repeated, are not only part of Catholic doctrine and morality, but are part of elementary humanist common sense. Opposing procured abortion today, as in the past against slavery, is not fanaticism, nor does it have to do exclusively with religious convictions, Catholic or otherwise, but it is an undeniable obligation for all those who believe in the right to life and in the dignity of the human being.

75. Should people who have abortions be radically rejected?

Not at all. We must be firm with the truth, but sympathetic towards people; this does not, of course, presuppose that understanding, helping and living with people who have made a mistake means denying that they have made a mistake. A crime is a crime, even if the criminal is helped and welcomed, and may even be exempted from guilt and responsibility, if there are reasons to do so.

V. Catholics on Abortion

76. What does the Church understand by abortion?

The Catholic Church understands abortion to mean the provoked death of the foetus, carried out by any method and at any moment of pregnancy from the very moment of conception. This was declared on 23 May 1988 by the Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the Code of Canon Law.

77. Is the issue of induced abortion only a scientific, political or social problem?

Certainly not. This question is, of course, a serious scientific, political and social problem. But it is also, and to a large extent, a serious moral problem for anyone, believer or non-believer.

78. Do Catholics have additional obligations to non-Catholics or non-believers on the issue of abortion?

Every man and woman, if they do not wish to deny the reality of things and defend human life and dignity, must try by every lawful means at their disposal to ensure that the laws do not permit the violent death of innocent and defenceless beings. But Christians, among whom we Catholics count ourselves, know that the dignity of the human person has its deepest foundation in the fact that we are children of God and brothers and sisters of Jesus Christ, who willed to be man for love of each and every one of us.

That is why we Catholics, if we live our faith, value the terrible drama of abortion in its full dimension as an attack on this sacred dignity. Rather than additional obligations, then, we should speak of a deeper and fuller understanding of the value of the human person, thanks to our faith, as the basis for our attitude in favour of life, since we know that forgetting God leads more easily to forgetting human dignity.

79. As a Catholic, what does a person who performs or consents to an abortion incur?

Whoever consents to and deliberately performs an abortion, accepts to have an abortion performed or provides indispensable collaboration in its performance, incurs a moral guilt and a canonical penalty, i.e. commits a sin and a crime.

80. What is moral guilt?

Moral guilt is a grave sin against the sacred value of human life. The Fifth Commandment commands not to kill. It is an exceptionally grave sin, because the victim is innocent and defenceless and his death is caused precisely by those who have a special obligation to care for his life.

Moreover, it must be borne in mind that the aborted child is deprived of the Sacrament of Baptism.

81. What is a canonical penalty?

The canonical penalty is a sanction which the Church imposes for certain particularly relevant conduct, and which is laid down in the Code of Canon Law, in force for all Catholics.

82. What is the canonical penalty for procuring an abortion?

Whoever procures an abortion, if he knows that the Church punishes him in this rigorous way, is excommunicated. Canon 1398 says: "Whoever procures an abortion, if it takes place, incurs excommunication Latae sententiae".

On the other hand, Canon 1041 states that he who procures an abortion, if it is consummated, as well as those who have positively cooperated, incurs an irregularity, which is a perpetual impediment to receive holy orders.

83. What does it mean to incur excommunication?

It means that a Catholic is deprived of receiving the Sacraments until the penalty is lifted: he cannot go to confession validly, he cannot go to communion, he cannot marry in the Church, etc. The excommunicated person is also deprived of holding office in the organisation of the Church.

84. What does it mean that an excommunication is Latae sententiae?

By this expression is meant that whoever incurs in it is automatically excommunicated, without the need for any authority of the Church to declare it for his specific case in an express manner.

85. Does the phrase "if it - the abortion - takes place" mean anything special?

Yes, it means that for the penalty of excommunication to occur, the abortion must be consummated, i.e. the child must die as a result of the abortion. If, for whatever reason, the abortion is not consummated, excommunication does not take place, but the sin is still present.

86. In the case of abortion, who incurs the penalty of excommunication?

If the conditions for the penalty of excommunication are met, in this case, in addition to the woman who voluntarily aborts, all those who have provided indispensable collaboration for the abortion to be committed are excommunicated: those who perform the abortion, those who assist them in such a way that without this financial aid the abortion would not have taken place, etc.

87. Why is abortion condemned by such a serious canonical penalty as excommunication?

The raison d'être of this rule is to protect - also in this way, not only with the catechesis and the right formation of conscience - the life of the child from the very moment of conception, because the Church realises that the fragile life of the child in the womb depends decisively on the attitude of those closest to it, who are also those who have the most direct and special obligation to protect it: parents, doctors, etc. Then, when the child is born, it will already be protected in some way by society itself.

The Church has always understood that procured abortion is one of the worst crimes from the moral point of view. The 11th Vatican Council says in this regard: "God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the illustrious mission of protecting life, which is to be carried out in a manner worthy of man. Therefore, life already conceived must be safeguarded with extreme care; abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes" (Const. "Gaudium et Spes").

88. But since in recent years more and more states have been allowing abortion, would it not have been a gesture of benevolence on the part of the Church to have mitigated the penalties for Catholics who have abortions?

The Church could have changed the penalty of excommunication for those who knowingly procure an abortion in the last thorough revision of the Code of Canon Law, which culminated in 1983, but it did not do so precisely because in recent decades there has been a marked relaxation in the sensitivity of people (and also of many believers) to this crime throughout the world. And while this greater social laxity, which exerts a certain pressure on consciences, may diminish the seriousness of the crime in some cases, an attenuation of the penalty would inevitably have given rise to the erroneous idea that the Church today considers induced abortion to be less serious than it used to be, when this is clearly not the case.

The Church is Mother and Teacher; as Mother, she is slow to anger and easy to forgive, but as Teacher she cannot distort the deposit of doctrine bequeathed to her by God, and she cannot say that what is wrong is right, nor can she allow anyone to suppose that she acts in this way.

89. Is it possible for a person to consent to or assist in an abortion and not incur excommunication?

Yes, since in Canon Law there is no crime without grave sin, there are circumstances in which this penalty, which requires full imputability, is not incurred. For example, those who procure an abortion are not excommunicated if they are unaware that it is punishable by excommunication; those who are unaware that to abort voluntarily is a mortal sin; those who have been involved in a forced abortion with irresistible violence against their will or through grave fear; minors...; in general, those who have acted without full warning and plenary session of the Executive Council consent.

90. If a doctor (or an anaesthetist or a nurse), unwilling to perform this subject procedure, were to be dismissed and he and his family were in need, would he be able to help?

One can never collaborate in a positive way in the commission of an act which goes against the law of God, which must be obeyed before the law of men. Catholics who find themselves in this situation have a serious obligation to protect themselves with the right to conscientious objection, even if this attitude could lead to reprisals.

The Christian health professional must also bear in mind that if his or her faith is known, he or she can cause a serious scandal if he or she collaborates in the practice of abortion.

If the family members of the health professional are also Christians, they have a human and moral responsibility to help him or her to cope with difficulties, to support him or her in his or her decisions and to make common cause with him or her in times of tribulation. This responsibility also extends to their friends and colleagues, if they are Christians and want to live their faith authentically, as well as to the members of the Catholic community in which the health professional is involved.

91. What about the rest of the people working in a hospital where abortions are routinely performed?

They must use all lawful means at their disposal to stop the practice of abortion. In any case, they must deny their direct collaboration with such actions.

92. Is it possible to maintain this attitude in Spain?

Yes. Doctors and nursing staff, even if they are not Catholic or even believers, are protected by their respective professional organisations from acting against their convictions in this subject. The Constitutional Court has expressly stated (Judgement of 11 April 1985) that the right to conscientious objection is protected by the Constitution and, consequently, the relevant protection of this right can be obtained from judges and courts.

93. What does the Spanish Code of Medical Ethics and Deontology say about this?

Article 25 states that "it is not deontological to admit the existence of a period in which human life has no value. Consequently, the physician is obliged to respect it from the beginning. And in Article 27 it states that "it is in accordance with ethics that the physician, because of his ethical or scientific convictions, refrains from intervening in the practice of abortion or in matters of human reproduction or organ transplantation".

94. What about the Spanish Nursing Code of Ethics?

Article 14 states: "Every human being has the right to life, to security of person and to the protection of health". It adds in Article 16: "In their professional conduct, nurses shall bear in mind that life is a fundamental right of the human being and shall therefore avoid actions that would undermine it or lead to its destruction". And it states in Article 22: "The nurse has, in the exercise of his/her profession, the right to conscientious objection, which must be duly explained in each specific case. The committee General and the Colleges will ensure that no nurse can suffer discrimination or prejudice because of the use of this right".

But even if this were not the case, Catholic doctors, nurses and nurses have a grave moral obligation not to lend themselves to the commission of induced abortions, whatever the harmful consequences for themselves or their families that may result from their attitude.

95. Isn't the Catholic doctrine on abortion a harsh doctrine, which very few will be able to follow?

Almost in the same words Jesus' contemporaries replied when they heard his preaching. And Jesus himself told us that we must follow the narrow path to reach the Kingdom of Heaven. Following Christ in His Church is not easy, but with God's grace the way is smoothed and the difficulties, however great they may seem, are overcome. Jesus also told us to come to Him with confidence, and He would relieve us of our anxieties.

The Catholic doctrine on abortion does not derive from the will of ecclesiastical authority, but is founded in the depths of the nature of things willed by God, which is expressed in the Law that He has made known to us, and which the Church has the task of passing on. But the Church also fulfils its duty by being the place where Christians can best strengthen their faith and be helped and encouraged to live their Christian life more intensely.

96. How can an excommunication be lifted after having collaborated in a completed abortion?

If a Catholic finds himself in this situation, he should go to the bishop or the priest delegated by him. In practice, he can go to any priest, who will tell him what to do.

97. In addition to the grave obligation of not collaborating in any induced abortion, do Catholics have other obligations in this subject?

All Catholics are called to a full life, that is to say, to holiness, and to contribute actively to the extension of the Kingdom of God on earth by bringing the Gospel to the farthest corners of the world. If every responsible member of a society that claims to be civilised has the duty to defend human life and human dignity, there is all the more reason for Catholics to take on this task.

98. How can this be done in the case of abortion?

Ensuring that the right to life is respected in a society is the responsibility of everyone in their daily activities, because everyone, by the example of their conduct, their words, their writings, their opinions, their vote, the education of their children, etc., influences what they think, how they live AND what is legislated.

Politicians, educators and media managers certainly have an important role to play, because of the impact that their words or actions have on the community; but they, while influencing society, are also influenced by it.

99. What can an ordinary Christian, an ordinary citizen who neither appears on television nor speaks from a chair or a public platform, do to influence this subject ?

The first thing that everyone can and must do to affirm life is to live in the awareness of his or her dignity. We will only affirm the life of others if we perceive our own in all its greatness and if our conduct is consistent with our conviction. The example of Jesus, taking each person he met seriously, should help us to make all those who cross our path feel valued and taken into account as unique beings. Such an affirmation of personal life in our everyday experiences will naturally lead to the emergence of esteem for each and every human being, including the conceived and the unborn. But alongside this general attitude, there are many concrete ways of working specifically for life:

Praying to the Lord for legislators and social leaders in general, that they may understand that conceived and unborn children are the most innocent and defenceless members of our society, and that, as Pope John Paul II has repeatedly said, the death of an innocent person can never be legitimised.

Not despising the moral value of pain and sacrifice, the rejection of which leads to justifying any attempt to do away with what are believed to be its causes, including the useless elderly or sick, the handicapped who are a burden, or new children who may complicate life or diminish the well-being of the family.

Welcoming and helping, also financially, those who, because of their maternity, find themselves in difficult situations.

Welcoming with joy, however hard it may be, the new sick or handicapped child who comes into the family as a blessing from God. The witness of so many Christian parents in this regard is exemplary.

Reacting positively to public writings or audiovisual programmes that defend human life, and critically to those that attack it.

Orienting the vote towards those alternatives that deserve more trust for their attitudes to life in general, and to the issue of induced abortion in particular.

Informing those around us, charitably but firmly and clearly, of the reality of the unborn child and the importance of defending its right to live.

Doctors, especially gynaecologists, and other health professionals, using the technical means that allow a mother to see in an ultrasound scan, with her own eyes, the child in her womb, moving, swimming, sucking its thumb. It has been said that if mothers' wombs were transparent, many would see the issue of induced abortion differently.

These are just a few examples that can give an idea of the enormous field that a Christian has before him or her in relation to this very serious problem.

100. Is it reasonable to think that one day human life and dignity will be respected from conception to death?

It is not possible to answer this question categorically, but the efforts of all those who aspire to a just world should be directed towards this goal . Aggressions against human life, especially of the innocent, have always had dramatic consequences in history. Christians know that when individuals and communities have recognised Jesus Christ, this recognition has led to an affirmation of life unparalleled in any other culture. This is why we must strive to extend the presence of Christ in society, because in this way people will recognise their own greatness and will be able to live with a new awareness of their own dignity. With the help of Jesus and his mother, who conceived him in her womb, and with the example of our own life, it will be possible to work better to defend this ideal.