LinearGrief, but transformed and transforming (Main Forum)
by Englishwoman 
, Saturday, November 07, 2009, 16:43 (265 days ago)
This is a GEM of an srticle. See also the comments
http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=11985&comments=1#read...
Mary
lockedMary, I beg to differ
by CathyT , Adelaide, South Australia, Saturday, November 07, 2009, 19:36 (265 days ago) @ Englishwoman
Mary, I can see why you thought this article was a gem (at least I think I can). I certainly was very moved by this family's story and by the way they so courageously and effectively took control of the situation. But the author's attitude of how this "shows the beauty of our Catholic values" and all that - that attitude always gets me TEARING MY HAIR OUT(metaphorically)
Of course, this family were able to come to terms with their tragedy and even to make something positive out of it. But not all people/couples/families could do that. In some cases, it may be due to an individual woman's inability to cope with life in general. Or, perhaps even more commonly, not all families would have the capacity to work together and support each other like this one did. It seems particularly hard to see how the Church's teaching here is "pro-life", when the baby was going to die anyway. The important point is that you can't just TELL people this is how they should respond in such a tragic situation; you have to accept that people's reactions will be as they are, and they go very deep.
I also get particularly hot under the collar with all that stuff about this family's response being in "stark contrast to our cultural instinct to take control of a situation and facilitate a rapid, almost immediate resolution". Surely, in most other areas of life, we are not encouraged to think that there is something morally wrong with "taking control" and seeking "a rapid, almost immediate resolution" if we are suffering in any way? Should we perhaps forego buying pain-killers and instead donate the money to a deserving cause, and then if we have a headache or toothache or something just "show patience"? And there always seems to me something cruel -I can't put it any other way - about the criticism of our "expectations of what a new life 'should be'". When a baby is on the way, or some-one's planning to start a pregnancy, it's only natural for the expectant parents and their family and friends to hope for, and expect, a healthy and normally developed little bundle of joy. This is not only natural but, once again, is very deeply felt.
Yet again, I'm convinced that the Church's teaching is not so much about respect for life or about being counter-cultural. It's about exercising its own control, and the family makes a soft target for it to exercise its control on.
Do not fear, only believe... - Jesus of Nazareth (Mark 5:36)
Cathy
lockedMary, I beg to differ
by Englishwoman , Sunday, November 08, 2009, 03:21 (265 days ago) @ CathyT
Cathy,
Thank you for your thoughtful appraisal of this article which I read much too hastily, too early in the day. As you put your points, I realise that I had skimmed much of what I had read. I'd concentrated solely on the courage of this family, and the way things worked out - though I did wonder whether it wasn't a bit too good to be true. But broadly I believe it as the events are recorded.
But yes, I had slid past without noticing the church-speak it was all wrapped in, and which permeated the text. I absorbed it as I would relate it to someone else, without comment. You're right, I agree, in your criticism of the piece and I was slipshod. Apologies all round.
In dust and ashes,
Mary
lockedMary, I beg to differ
by Bill Dowsley , 'Wombeyan, NSW', Sunday, November 08, 2009, 07:13 (265 days ago) @ Englishwoman
What magnificent women are you two, Cathy and Mary!
Thank you both for this exchange.
Thank God, Bett and I never had to worry about using or not using the newly-available 'Pill' but, for me, that was always very much 'woman's business' and whatever Bett would want in it, would be what I wanted.
When Bett told me, gently, after five beautiful babies and a mis-carriage that was it, our PP protested, but he should have known not to take on a woman like Bett.
Of course, the poor cove, brainwashed since age 12, thought he was doing the right thing.
That is what has changed over the last forty-five-odd years. When, previously, strong women spoke amongst themselves, laughed amongst themselves, about the 'stupidity' of all-knowing priests, now they will tell the priest face-to-face.
Thank you again, Mary and Cathy, and all the strong women who come here to read only or to read and contribute. Today's children, and their children are fortunate to witness your courage.
lockedThank you yet again, Bill...
by CathyT , Adelaide, South Australia, Sunday, November 08, 2009, 09:49 (265 days ago) @ Bill Dowsley
...for your kind words. I sometimes wonder if I am as strong as you always say, but then again, you have the wonderful gift of making people feel that they ARE better than perhaps they always thought. At least, that's how you affect me.
Bett is a very lucky woman.
Do not fear, only believe... - Jesus of Nazareth (Mark 5:36)
Cathy
lockedLooks like we're on the same side!
by CathyT , Adelaide, South Australia, Sunday, November 08, 2009, 09:44 (265 days ago) @ Englishwoman
Mary, it's my turn to apologise - I should have realised that you wouldn't agree with all that "church-speak", as you aptly call it. I think I got carried away with my anger at this aspect of the Church's moral teaching: I mean, this focus on whether people who are suffering make the "right" moral choices, rather than a focus on alleviating suffering in the first place. Of course I particularly get upset because it all seems to be about contolling ordinary people's lives.
I still think though, that the family's story on its own is very moving and inspiring. Some people do genuinely manage to find peace and meaning in the midst of their personal tragedy. The thing is, you cannot expect everyone to be able to do this. So thank you for making this story available to us.
Do not fear, only believe... - Jesus of Nazareth (Mark 5:36)
Cathy
lockedCathy,
Amazingly I've been witness to a few of these heart-wrenching scenarios recently. In each case, not for particularly 'Catholic' reasons, the couples chose to allow the pregnancies to full term. In each case the couples found the process 'transformative'. In every case I was astonished by the capacity of the couples to think clearly and to draw on incredible moral courage.
So the article did resonate with me in a very positive way.
It also attempted to walk a very difficult path of presenting a narrative that was consistent with church teaching without being dogmatic and without condeming those who would choose other paths.
For you, it seems, it failed.
For me, it is a far better model of presenting church teaching than quoting a rule book or making a huge fuss of people who 'bravely' follow church teaching and, sometimes, condemning those who don't.
In other words, the church comes across as handling these very difficult decisions in a way that comes across as cold, inflexible and built on propoganda (which may not lie exactly, but overemphasises 'selective' truth).
Mary,
One thing that does concern me a little is you wanting to apologise for posting the article.
I'd just like to thank you for posting it.
I think we do need to try and understand where the church is coming from on these issues and when you can find material like this that at least attempts to put it in a real, compassionate way -- even if it doesn't get it quite right -- it's worth talking about, warts and all.
Peace to you
The hand is the cutting edge of the mind - Jacob Bronowski
lockedWell, maybe, but...
by CathyT , Adelaide, South Australia, Sunday, November 08, 2009, 10:32 (265 days ago) @ TonySee
Tony, strangely enough, in replying to you I'm reminded of a comment about the Church's teachings on condoms (especially in the context of the AIDS tragedy in Africa)which, if I remember correctly, you yourself posted. I'd probably never find the actual post now, but the gist of it was that, even though Church leaders claim that condoms don't work and they're culturally inappropriate for Africa and all that, this isn't relevant. Even if condoms were the perfect solution to the AIDS epidemic, the Church would still forbid their use.
I don't know if it's really the same thing, but that's how I regard the article under discussion. I can understand that, in many cases, a family would find it the best option to take the pregnancy full-turn, BUT THIS IS NOT THE REASON FOR THE CHURCH'S TEACHING! If it were, there would be some leeway for people to make the opposite choice. For people who genuinely believe that the Church is right about everything, the Church's uncompromising teaching might make the choice easy. For other Catholics, and people in general, this added moral pressure at a vulnerable, difficult time could simply be an extra burden.
The more I think about it, the more I wonder whether the more subtle approach which this article takes is better than more overt moralistic ranting and raving. The author admits that not all cases are like the one he describes, but he still seems to leave no room for an alternative, morally acceptable solution. To do so, he would have had to say so specifically, since he is obviously supporting the Church's teaching and that doesn't allow for any alternative!
People need to find for themselves what is in their best interests. Of course, we live in a social context, and we need to work this out in consultation with others, and with reference to a moral framework or set of values. But you cannot have one uncompromising rule which you try to force on everyone. One rule will not fit every case, and even if it did, trying to force something on people "for their own good" is both paternalistic and ultimately not very workable!
That's my opinion, anyway. 
Do not fear, only believe... - Jesus of Nazareth (Mark 5:36)
Cathy
locked
Well, maybe, but...
Cathy,
I would have to agree with Tony here, but in reference to my own experience. At the time we found out that we had lost our 30 week old baby whilst still pregnant, and even though this wasn't about whether to terminate her life or not, our obstetrician suggested a number of alternatives for us to take. One of these choices was to continue to carry the baby for as long as possible, allowing for my body to take it's own course in recognising that there was no 'viable' pregnancy anymore, and as such, the body begins it's own path of dealing with it, ie natural labour would begin, rather than inducing an artificial one. This was closely monitored with regular blood tests etc, so that there would be no danger to me.
We were more than happy (as one could be under those circumstances) with this pathway as it gave us the desired time to grieve and make preparations for her funeral and burial. This I simply could not have done under traumatic enough circumstances had I been ordered to go to hospital immediately and been induced.
The overriding problem at the time was the inability of CATHOLIC friends to understand our need to do this. They found it incredibly difficult to discuss anything with us for fear of upsetting us, but at the same time, could not cope with the fact that I was still carrying our child, knowing she had already died.
Whilst I believe it will always be the choice of the parents, I really don't think many women listen to what a group of sexually immature, celibate, all male priests would have to say on the matter if they intuited their natural abilities as parents. The story that Mary posted emphasizes the need to share our stories so that women will feel more comfortable to connect with their own circumstances. What Tony posts about, is, I believe, a lot closer to presenting a more wholistic approach to the issue, rather than simply treating it as a problem that needs immediate solving.
I do think we live in a culture that anything less than perfect seems to need fixing immediately. It is in the imperfection of life that we get glimpses of God. At this point is where the church is needed, not parroting off some 'rule book'.
Billy.
locked
And thank you all for sharing
by ray(O) , Toowong, Sunday, November 08, 2009, 13:17 (264 days ago) @ Billy
What more can I say?
The story that Mary posted emphasizes the need to share our stories so that women will feel more comfortable to connect with their own circumstances.
Please do not leave us men out. Remember behind each great woman there is a great man!!!
together in the Faith of Christ
Ray
lockedWell, maybe, but...
I forgot to mention that it was the incompetence and dismal failure of the CATHOLIC obstetrician who allowed this death to occur in the first place. She was the one who fell apart at the news and we were left to comfort her. We were redirected to another obstetrician who was a Christian, but not a Catholic. His undivided attention to our needs was above his call of duty and he continued to be like this throughout my subsequent pregnancies. Our faith was so much revived by his care and attention to detail. We are indebted to him for life for his goodness and kindness.
The other doctor left her practice and probably still plays golf. Never did hear from her again.
Billy.
locked
Proposing not imposing
by TonySee 
, Adelaide, Sunday, November 08, 2009, 14:07 (264 days ago) @ CathyT
Cathy,
To use your own remark, I think we're on the same page.
» Tony, strangely enough, in replying to you I'm reminded of a comment about the Church's teachings on condoms ... Even if condoms were the perfect solution to the AIDS epidemic, the Church would still forbid their use.
I don't remember the particular reference but I've said it in this, and other, forums before. This notion of 'intrinsic' evil, independent of context, gets to the nub of what I see as the church's biggest problem since the publication of HV.
» I don't know if it's really the same thing, but that's how I regard the article under discussion. I can understand that, in many cases, a family would find it the best option to take the pregnancy full-turn, BUT THIS IS NOT THE REASON FOR THE CHURCH'S TEACHING! If it were, there would be some leeway for people to make the opposite choice. For people who genuinely believe that the Church is right about everything, the Church's uncompromising teaching might make the choice easy. For other Catholics, and people in general, this added moral pressure at a vulnerable, difficult time could simply be an extra burden.
This is what I liked about the article, it left the door ajar (if only slightly). I'm used to it being slammed shut.
» The more I think about it, the more I wonder whether the more subtle approach which this article takes is better than more overt moralistic ranting and raving. The author admits that not all cases are like the one he describes, but he still seems to leave no room for an alternative, morally acceptable solution. To do so, he would have had to say so specifically, since he is obviously supporting the Church's teaching and that doesn't allow for any alternative!
Like I say, I think it leaves the door ajar, but I'd also agree that this article comes from a position of support for the church line. Maybe my expectations are too low!
» People need to find for themselves what is in their best interests. Of course, we live in a social context, and we need to work this out in consultation with others, and with reference to a moral framework or set of values. But you cannot have one uncompromising rule which you try to force on everyone. One rule will not fit every case, and even if it did, trying to force something on people "for their own good" is both paternalistic and ultimately not very workable!
I agree! The church needs to take seriously its own mantra to 'propose' and never to 'impose'. The church lives by imposing because that's about power. Proposing is about saying 'this is what we think and why, but you are the one in charge and, ultimately, we will support you in love'.
Peace to you
The hand is the cutting edge of the mind - Jacob Bronowski
locked'The Article'
by Helen , The other side of Australia, Sunday, November 08, 2009, 15:08 (264 days ago) @ CathyT
This article was passed to me to post on the Cyber Christian Community website which I will be doing.
It is a good story and it shows the courage of people who can draw the strength from all this. So it needs to be read.
However, I also agree with Cathy - what about those of us (and I personolize this because although nothing like this ever happend to me, I would be seeking an early release from all that anguish I can tell you!!) who don't have the back up, or the mental health to cope with tragedies of this sort.
Too easy to codemn people in situations like this as being anti-life.
But, as I said, I put this on the website, because it needs to be read in the context of offering help and support to those faced with this awful choice.
Helen
locked
