Religion & Law

Robby George mentioned the work of Martin Rhonheimer the other day.  MOJ friend Greg Walker kindly calls to our attention a recent work by Rhonheimer, titled Vital Conflicts in Medical Ethics (2009) and published by the Catholic University of America Press:  here and here.  Greg writes that "Anscombe inspires Rhonheimer?s action theory ... ?Basic Intentional Action? he calls his understanding of human actions."

A footnote to the "Editor's Preface" states:

"In anticipation of what follows, it may be helpful to the reader to include the following remarks at this point. These cases of 'vital conflict' are defined precisely as those in which the life of the unborn child

or embryo cannot be saved, whereas the mother?s life can be. The debate surrounds the morality of medical intervention through certain procedures that are judged to be immoral according to traditional analyses of Catholic moral theology because they cause the death of the unborn in a physically direct manner. Since the conclusions of such traditional moral analysis would prohibit seemingly legitimate medical options to save the life of the mother (i.e., by removing an infant lodged in the birth canal after crushing its skull through a craniotomy) or to preserve her physical integrity (i.e., saving her fallopian tube by removing the lodged embryo through a linear salpingotomy or salpingostomy), these conclusions have been vigorously debated for well over a century."

Thanks for calling this work to our attention, Greg.