1. Are abortion bans killing women?, A Texas radio host says his wife was denied life-saving miscarriage care, By Amber Duke, The Spectator, June 6, 2024, 10:09 AM, Opinion
 

 
There is not a single pro-life law in the country that would prohibit doctors from providing life-saving care to pregnant women. All twenty-two states that restrict or ban abortions have exceptions on abortions that are performed to save the life of the mother. This is based on the “reasonable judgment” of the medical provider, which is a common standard for any healthcare decision. Sixteen out of twenty-two states with abortion restrictions also state that abortions may be performed to protect the health of the mother. The Texas Supreme Court recently clarified in one of its rulings that women need not face the consequences of a life-threatening pregnancy i.e. she does not need to be imminently facing death or impairment before doctors intervene.
 
There is also no law that prohibits care for ectopic pregnancies or miscarriages, which no reasonable person would confuse with an elective abortion. There have been a few recent viral stories that suggested women who are miscarrying are getting substandard healthcare in states with abortion bans.
 

 
In Texas, radio host Ryan Hamilton similarly claims his wife was denied a procedure to remove a fetus she was carrying that no longer had a heartbeat. The couple went to a healthcare provider seeking surgical intervention — a dilatation and curettage (D&C) to remove the child — but that provider does not provide surgeries. Doctors instead prescribed her a drug, Misoprostol, to help expel the child. When two doses did not work, Hamilton tried to get a refill, which doctors declined to provide. A different hospital said Mrs. Hamilton’s situation wasn’t enough of an emergency to yet perform a D&C and prescribed her another round of Misoprostol. They suggested scheduling a D&C for another time if needed (D&C is an elective procedure). The third round worked, but Mrs. Hamilton bled significantly, passed out and had to be rushed to the hospital. Hamilton has accused the doctors of denying his wife a D&C due to Texas’s abortion law, even though it explicitly states that miscarriage care is permissible: “An act is not an abortion if the act is done with the intent to: remove a dead, unborn child whose death was caused by a spontaneous abortion [miscarriage].”
 
A write-up on the case from the Dallas Morning News says, “It’s impossible to say whether the woman’s miscarriage care was influenced by the abortion bans, even though her case should fall outside the laws bounds.”
 
The Hamiltons’ case is sad and unfortunate, but it wasn’t caused by Texas’s abortion law. If anything, they should blame the irresponsible rhetoric of pro-abortion activists who have created unrealistic and potentially dangerous expectations for miscarriage care. In both of these cases, you have scared couples who have been warned that they will be unable to get treatment for one of the most horrific things a woman might ever go through. They demand pills and surgical intervention when the normal standard of care for a miscarriage is expectant management. It can take around two weeks for the body to pass the fetus, at which point a doctor would then check to make sure all of  the tissue has been properly expelled. A responsible doctor would not immediately jump to prescribing three doses of Misoprostol or scheduling a D&C.
 
Even if it were the case that doctors were providing substandard miscarriage care because of fears about state abortion laws, anger should be directed toward doctors, not pro-lifers. Any sane and reasonable doctor would be able to differentiate between an elective and spontaneous abortion and would not be “confused” by laws banning the former. If they declined care to a woman for the latter, they would be guilty of malpractice. Any doctor that cites an abortion restriction or ban as a reason to deny miscarriage care should rightfully be called out for putting their desire to score political points over the health of women.
 
https://thespectator.com/newsletter/are-abortion-bans-killing-women-culture-shock-06-06-2024/
__________________________________________________________
 
2. Vatican detains ex-employee who allegedly tried to sell back manuscript of Bernini’s basilica canopy, Vatican police have detained a former employee after he allegedly tried to sell a 17th century manuscript back to the Holy See, By Nicole Winfield, Associated Press, June 6, 2024, 8:46 AM
 
Vatican police have detained a former employee on charges of attempted extortion after he allegedly tried to sell a 17th-century gilded manuscript describing Bernini’s designs for the altar canopy of St. Peter’s Basilica back to the Holy See.
 
Vatican prosecutors said that the 18-page manuscript, which apparently contains the first known specifications for the gilding of the baldacchino canopy, had disappeared from the basilica archives.
 
The person implicated had worked for the Fabbrica di San Pietro, the entity that administers the basilica, and was attempting to sell the manuscript to the Fabbrica when he was arrested on May 27, according to a statement from prosecutors released by the Holy See press office.
 
The statement suggested that Vatican law enforcement had essentially set a trap: They launched an investigation after the basilica first made a complaint about the manuscript, and then followed the negotiations for the purchase of it until money actually exchanged hands on May 27 in the Vatican.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/06/06/vatican-bernini-manuscript-extortion-basilica-altar-canopy/d3073e20-2402-11ef-bc8d-a8ae61b84dde_story.html
__________________________________________________________
 
3. This Catholic leader shelters migrants. Texas says he runs ‘stash houses.’, Ruben Garcia founded Annunciation House to shelter the neediest immigrants — the undocumented. Texas officials say his work encourages illegal migration., By Arelis R. Hernandez, The Washington Post, June 5, 2024, 5:00 AM
 

 
The influential patriarch of Annunciation House, a faith-based network of shelters based in El Paso, Garcia has taken in tens of thousands of undocumented immigrants he calls “guests” for nearly five decades. Working in collaboration with U.S. immigration officials, he provides them food, clothes and a first home in the United States, and some of his expenses are reimbursed by the federal government. It’s work he sees as a religious calling — to help the most vulnerable, no matter how they arrived.
 
But as Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) clamps down on illegal immigration, state investigators are raising questions about Garcia’s humanitarian work. In court records, they contend that his shelters are “stash houses” sheltering the undocumented from authorities.
 
Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) is asking a judge to shut down Garcia’s Annunciation House shelters and force him to turn over all of his organization’s records — including the names of people he is housing. Garcia has refused, setting up a legal battle between the state of Texas and a religious leader whose work is key to the federal government’s management of border crossings and who has drawn praise from the highest echelons of the Catholic Church.
 
The case is tied to a bill passed in 2015 that makes it a state crime to “encourage or induce” someone to enter the country illegally by “concealing, harboring, or shielding” them from detection. The legislation was approved shortly after Abbott became governor, and marked the first in a string of bills he has backed challenging federal authority on immigration. Garcia has not been charged, but Paxton’s office is using the organization’s refusal to turn over internal documents he demanded as a reason to shut it down.
 
That action has drawn alarm from humanitarian workers stepping in to help the massive number of people arriving at the border. Pope Francis has denounced the investigation into Annunciation House as “madness.”
 

 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/06/06/texas-border-abbott-immigration-shelters/
__________________________________________________________
 
4. Colorado discriminated against Catholic preschools, judge finds, By Kate Quiñones, Catholic News Agency, June 5, 2024, 5:00 PM
 
Archdiocese of Denver Catholic preschools will now be allowed to participate in Colorado’s universal preschool (UPK) program after a federal court ruled Tuesday that the state’s decision to exclude Catholic preschools was unconstitutional.
 
Two Catholic parishes with preschools, St. Mary Catholic Parish and St. Bernadette Catholic Parish, as well as a Catholic family and the Archdiocese of Denver asked the Denver federal court to stop the Department of Early Childhood from excluding them from the UPK program because they prioritize the admission of Catholic families and have religious expectations for teachers. 
 
“Because of the court’s ruling, Colorado can no longer punish Catholic schools for caring about their students’ faith,” Nick Reaves, counsel at Becket, told CNA. Becket is the religious liberty legal group that argued on behalf of the preschools in the case, St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy.
 
Both preschools in the Denver metropolitan area serve low-income families. According to the Archdiocese of Denver, 85% of families attending St. Bernadette Parish preschool in Littleton receive free or reduced-price meals. Similarly, 25% of St. Mary’s preschoolers receive tuition discounts or scholarships. St. Mary’s also provides services for students with disabilities such as Down syndrome and autism.
 

 
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/257905/colorado-discriminated-against-catholic-preschools-judge-finds
__________________________________________________________

5. Senate rejects ‘Trojan horse’ Right to Contraception Act, By Kate Quiñones, Catholic News Agency, June 5, 2024, 6:10 PM
 
The U.S. Senate has rejected the “Right to Contraception Act,” which would create a federal right to contraception with ramifications on religious freedom and protections for minors. 
 
The legislation failed to reach the 60 votes it needed to move forward, in a 51 to 39 vote. Most Republicans voted against the bill.
 
Framed as a reproductive freedom issue by supporters, the bill had legal implications that could have affected religious freedom and even codified a federal right to sex-change surgeries for minors, according to its opponents. 
 
Terry Schilling, a Catholic and president of the socially conservative think tank American Principles Project, condemned the legislation in a statement, saying that “in the details lurks a radical change, which the vast majority of Americans oppose.”
 

 
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/257908/senate-rejects-trojan-horse-right-to-contraception-act
__________________________________________________________
TCA Media Monitoring provides a snapshot from national newspapers and major Catholic press outlets of coverage regarding significant Catholic Church news and current issues with which the Catholic Church is traditionally or prominently engaged. The opinions and views expressed in the articles do not necessarily reflect the views of The Catholic Association.
 
 
Subscribe to the TCA podcast!


“Conversations with Consequences” is a new audio program from The Catholic Association. We’ll bring you thoughtful dialogue with the leading thinkers of our time on the most consequential issues of our day. Subscribe today or listen online and enjoy our entertaining and informative weekly episodes.