doctor

‘An unborn child is a child’: Lawyer questions lack of empathy regarding pregnancy loss #Catholic Ecuadorian lawyer Pablo Proaño questioned the lack of empathy for families who lose a child during pregnancy and called for protocols to support them.His remarks followed the death due to a pregnancy complication of Stefano, the son of Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa and his wife, Lavinia Valbonesi.On Aug. 15, Interior Minister Nataly Morillo announced the news and offered her condolences to the presidential family.Many comments appeared on social media questioning the characterization of the loss as the death of a “child” rather than an embryo or fetus, or arguing that the matter should have remained private.For Proaño, a lawyer with the firm Dignidad y Derecho (Dignity and Law), these reactions reveal “a lack of understanding regarding pregnancy loss and a lack of empathy that goes beyond the political debate over the way the president is running the country.”“Many people approached this topic by first claiming it’s a ‘fake news’ story — arguing that it’s not a child, but rather an embryo or a fetus — and secondly, by insisting that it’s a matter that should remain private. And this reveals, as I said, a profound lack of empathy,” he noted in an interview with ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News.‘There’s already an expectation’ of welcoming the childThe lawyer explained that regardless of gestational age, “parents who already know, long for, and look forward to welcoming this baby are already forming an expectation, both on the psychological and social level.”He said there can be “severe psychological impact following the loss” but also “long-term effects when the time comes to decide whether or not to try for another child.”The lawyer also noted that this suffering can arise in everyday situations, particularly when the mother encounters other women with babies.Proaño said he believes the scale of the phenomenon makes it important for society to learn how to support those going through this type of grief. “According to the World Health Organization, 1 in 4 women has experienced pregnancy loss at some point in her life,” he stated.The lawyer noted that while the circumstances of a miscarriage or an abortion may differ, both situations can involve suffering and grief.“Induced abortion often entails a greater sense of guilt,” he said.Regarding miscarriage, he said there is also “a great deal of suffering regarding why the pregnancy could not be carried to term.” “Many questions remain unanswered, and this creates a great deal of anxiety and can even lead to cases of severe depression in women and families going through this grief,” he continued.The need for protocols regarding pregnancy lossProaño said he believes healthcare systems should have protocols in place to care for women who lose their babies during pregnancy.“The first and most important aspect is institutional support from a medical standpoint. In many Latin American countries, there are protocols known as ‘butterfly protocols’ for the care of women experiencing pregnancy loss,” he explained.In this practice, the silhouette of a butterfly is placed on the headboard of the patient’s bed, alerting the hospital staff to be particularly sensitive to her emotional state. The butterfly symbolizes a brief life, fragility, and transformation.Ecuador does not currently have an official protocol from the Ministry of Health. “There are foundations promoting these types of protocols, and individual hospitals may implement them, but it largely depends on whether the hospital authorities choose to adopt them,” Proaño stated.These protocols, he explained, aim to prevent situations that could increase the suffering of a woman who has just lost her child.“What do these ‘butterfly protocols’ mean? It means healthcare staff are sensitized that they don’t say things like, ‘Oh, right. Well, it would have been better if you’d done this or that, and then you wouldn’t have lost the baby,’” he explained.He also emphasized the need to avoid placing a woman who has just suffered a loss “in the maternity ward, where you can hear and see other women with their babies.”Proaño even proposes identifying these patients: “They should be given a separate room and identified by a symbol or a sign on the door, so that when a nurse or doctor walks by, no one makes the mistake of asking, ‘And where is your baby? Why haven’t they brought your baby to you?’” he said.In addition, the woman should receive psychological care, he noted.Employers should also have to make allowancesAccording to Proaño, families also need “social recognition that extends to the workplace.”“In Ecuador, these cases often only qualify for three days of leave for a family emergency, and three days is not enough,” he maintained.“Many of these people go through episodes of severe depression, return to work, and are then fired because the enhanced job protection afforded to pregnant women because they are carrying a child does not apply. But if the baby dies, they don’t benefit from this leave,” he added.Parents' right to say goodbye to their childAnother aspect the lawyer deems necessary to review is what happens to the babyʼs remains following a pregnancy loss.Measures should be in place “to ensure the baby can be given a proper burial," he stated.Proaño explained that, according to Ecuadorian regulations, there is a distinction regarding the release of remains based on whether the pregnancy has reached 22 weeks of gestation.“In Ecuador, up to the 22nd week of pregnancy, hospitals are not required to hand over the child — the body or remains of the fetus — and may simply dispose of it, donate it for research, or even sell it to institutions,” he stated.He said this situation can deprive parents of a step that is important for the grieving process.“This baby is the child of a family that deserves and needs, for the sake of their grieving process, to bury him and have a place to go to mourn his death,” he noted.In his view, families should receive clear information about their rights and be able to decide what happens to their childʼs remains.“Parents should be provided with informed consent that explains this possibility and their rights, so they can make a decision. And if they ultimately decide not to take the fetus, they should also be able to decide on its final disposition,” he explained.‘An unborn child is a child’Beyond the legal and medical aspects, Proaño said he believes there is a cultural challenge: “A great deal of work to raise awareness and foster understanding” needs to be done, he noted.“Because an unborn child is a child; it’s not merely a fetus,” he emphasized.The lawyer lamented that many families do not even receive condolences after losing a child during pregnancy. He also questioned certain responses that may seem well-intentioned but ultimately minimize the pain.For example, he said, “there are many doctors who say, ‘You can get pregnant again; there’s no problem.’ As if that loss could simply be erased from a mother’s heart.”An issue that also involves the stateProaño maintained that the response should include public policies focused on prevention, support, and family protection.“At the state level, there are these three points: promoting the implementation of support protocols; ensuring proper informed consent when the disposition of the fetuses is to be decided; and enacting workplace reforms to grant parents more time to grieve the loss of their child in accordance with the law,” he explained.“And also, having awareness-raising campaigns. Furthermore — taking it a step further — it would be very important for the state to take up this issue as a public policy necessity,” he added.Proaño said he also believes that proper preventive care during pregnancy can help reduce some pregnancy losses. He cited, among other factors, medical monitoring during pregnancy and the detection of potential vitamin or hormonal deficiencies.This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.
Read More

‘An unborn child is a child’: Lawyer questions lack of empathy regarding pregnancy loss #Catholic Ecuadorian lawyer Pablo Proaño questioned the lack of empathy for families who lose a child during pregnancy and called for protocols to support them.His remarks followed the death due to a pregnancy complication of Stefano, the son of Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa and his wife, Lavinia Valbonesi.On Aug. 15, Interior Minister Nataly Morillo announced the news and offered her condolences to the presidential family.Many comments appeared on social media questioning the characterization of the loss as the death of a “child” rather than an embryo or fetus, or arguing that the matter should have remained private.For Proaño, a lawyer with the firm Dignidad y Derecho (Dignity and Law), these reactions reveal “a lack of understanding regarding pregnancy loss and a lack of empathy that goes beyond the political debate over the way the president is running the country.”“Many people approached this topic by first claiming it’s a ‘fake news’ story — arguing that it’s not a child, but rather an embryo or a fetus — and secondly, by insisting that it’s a matter that should remain private. And this reveals, as I said, a profound lack of empathy,” he noted in an interview with ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News.‘There’s already an expectation’ of welcoming the childThe lawyer explained that regardless of gestational age, “parents who already know, long for, and look forward to welcoming this baby are already forming an expectation, both on the psychological and social level.”He said there can be “severe psychological impact following the loss” but also “long-term effects when the time comes to decide whether or not to try for another child.”The lawyer also noted that this suffering can arise in everyday situations, particularly when the mother encounters other women with babies.Proaño said he believes the scale of the phenomenon makes it important for society to learn how to support those going through this type of grief. “According to the World Health Organization, 1 in 4 women has experienced pregnancy loss at some point in her life,” he stated.The lawyer noted that while the circumstances of a miscarriage or an abortion may differ, both situations can involve suffering and grief.“Induced abortion often entails a greater sense of guilt,” he said.Regarding miscarriage, he said there is also “a great deal of suffering regarding why the pregnancy could not be carried to term.” “Many questions remain unanswered, and this creates a great deal of anxiety and can even lead to cases of severe depression in women and families going through this grief,” he continued.The need for protocols regarding pregnancy lossProaño said he believes healthcare systems should have protocols in place to care for women who lose their babies during pregnancy.“The first and most important aspect is institutional support from a medical standpoint. In many Latin American countries, there are protocols known as ‘butterfly protocols’ for the care of women experiencing pregnancy loss,” he explained.In this practice, the silhouette of a butterfly is placed on the headboard of the patient’s bed, alerting the hospital staff to be particularly sensitive to her emotional state. The butterfly symbolizes a brief life, fragility, and transformation.Ecuador does not currently have an official protocol from the Ministry of Health. “There are foundations promoting these types of protocols, and individual hospitals may implement them, but it largely depends on whether the hospital authorities choose to adopt them,” Proaño stated.These protocols, he explained, aim to prevent situations that could increase the suffering of a woman who has just lost her child.“What do these ‘butterfly protocols’ mean? It means healthcare staff are sensitized that they don’t say things like, ‘Oh, right. Well, it would have been better if you’d done this or that, and then you wouldn’t have lost the baby,’” he explained.He also emphasized the need to avoid placing a woman who has just suffered a loss “in the maternity ward, where you can hear and see other women with their babies.”Proaño even proposes identifying these patients: “They should be given a separate room and identified by a symbol or a sign on the door, so that when a nurse or doctor walks by, no one makes the mistake of asking, ‘And where is your baby? Why haven’t they brought your baby to you?’” he said.In addition, the woman should receive psychological care, he noted.Employers should also have to make allowancesAccording to Proaño, families also need “social recognition that extends to the workplace.”“In Ecuador, these cases often only qualify for three days of leave for a family emergency, and three days is not enough,” he maintained.“Many of these people go through episodes of severe depression, return to work, and are then fired because the enhanced job protection afforded to pregnant women because they are carrying a child does not apply. But if the baby dies, they don’t benefit from this leave,” he added.Parents' right to say goodbye to their childAnother aspect the lawyer deems necessary to review is what happens to the babyʼs remains following a pregnancy loss.Measures should be in place “to ensure the baby can be given a proper burial," he stated.Proaño explained that, according to Ecuadorian regulations, there is a distinction regarding the release of remains based on whether the pregnancy has reached 22 weeks of gestation.“In Ecuador, up to the 22nd week of pregnancy, hospitals are not required to hand over the child — the body or remains of the fetus — and may simply dispose of it, donate it for research, or even sell it to institutions,” he stated.He said this situation can deprive parents of a step that is important for the grieving process.“This baby is the child of a family that deserves and needs, for the sake of their grieving process, to bury him and have a place to go to mourn his death,” he noted.In his view, families should receive clear information about their rights and be able to decide what happens to their childʼs remains.“Parents should be provided with informed consent that explains this possibility and their rights, so they can make a decision. And if they ultimately decide not to take the fetus, they should also be able to decide on its final disposition,” he explained.‘An unborn child is a child’Beyond the legal and medical aspects, Proaño said he believes there is a cultural challenge: “A great deal of work to raise awareness and foster understanding” needs to be done, he noted.“Because an unborn child is a child; it’s not merely a fetus,” he emphasized.The lawyer lamented that many families do not even receive condolences after losing a child during pregnancy. He also questioned certain responses that may seem well-intentioned but ultimately minimize the pain.For example, he said, “there are many doctors who say, ‘You can get pregnant again; there’s no problem.’ As if that loss could simply be erased from a mother’s heart.”An issue that also involves the stateProaño maintained that the response should include public policies focused on prevention, support, and family protection.“At the state level, there are these three points: promoting the implementation of support protocols; ensuring proper informed consent when the disposition of the fetuses is to be decided; and enacting workplace reforms to grant parents more time to grieve the loss of their child in accordance with the law,” he explained.“And also, having awareness-raising campaigns. Furthermore — taking it a step further — it would be very important for the state to take up this issue as a public policy necessity,” he added.Proaño said he also believes that proper preventive care during pregnancy can help reduce some pregnancy losses. He cited, among other factors, medical monitoring during pregnancy and the detection of potential vitamin or hormonal deficiencies.This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.

unitedyam

Ecuadoran lawyer Pablo Proaño’s remarks followed the death due to a pregnancy complication of Stefano, the son of Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa and his wife, Lavinia Valbonesi.

Read More
How Trump’s new FDA pick could be monumental in the fight for life #Catholic In the wake of U.S. President Donald Trump’s appointment of Dr. Heidi Overton, a medical doctor with a history of fighting for life, as head of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), pro-life groups are urging her to end mail-order abortion.Since January 2025 and up until now, Overton has worked as deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy. Before that, she spent more than three years at the America First Policy Institute (AFPI), a conservative think tank. On Aug. 19, Trump appointed her to head the FDA, though she will need to be confirmed by the Senate first, which is likely given the Republican majority.She has a doctorate in clinical investigation from Johnson Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health as well as a medical degree from the University of New Mexico School of Medicine. Overton has been outspoken about the dangers of chemical abortion for women and babies, according to a 2023 AFPI brief she authored where she criticized federal policy that made abortion pills available via telehealth.“Abortion is corrosive to children, women, and society broadly because it devalues and extinguishes innocent human life,” Overton wrote in 2023. “Unfortunately, federal policymakers have recently expanded access to abortion pills, also called chemical abortions, which are far more dangerous to women, enabling rapid access to abortion.”About two-thirds of abortions in the United States are chemical, meaning they happen via mifepristone and misoprostol pills. These pills are available via mail in any state, even states where these drugs are illegal. Abortion by mail is highly unregulated, creating danger for female patients.The abortion pill has continued to be left largely unregulated by Trump’s Food and Drug Administration, in spite of the documented danger to women, including coercion, poisonings, and physical harm.Advocates for unborn children highlight the importance of opposing chemical abortions and protecting unborn children across state lines, as chemical abortion pills make state pro-life laws moot.Hope for limitations on chemical abortionsLeading voices for life agree that the FDA should regulate mail-order chemical abortions. After being deeply disappointed so far by Trump’s FDA, they hope Overton is the woman for the task.The American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), an organization of medical doctors who believe in protecting unborn children and their mothers, “applauds the nomination,” said CEO Dr. Christina Francis.“Dr. Overton has a track record of recognizing the dignity of all of our patients (including our fetal patients) and recognizing the value of life-affirming healthcare,” Francis told EWTN News.“We are hopeful that Dr. Overton will reinstate vital safeguards around the dangerous abortion drug mifepristone,” Francis said. “Too many tragic incidents continue to pile up in which women have been left to handle the consequences of these potentially fatal drugs on their own.”“As physicians, we demand the FDA do its job and reinstate essential safeguards for our patients,” Francis said.Live Action, a group seeking to shift the culture and law on abortion, also viewed the nomination positively.“Live Action is encouraged by President Trump’s nomination of Dr. Heidi Overton to lead the Food and Drug Administration,” said Live Action spokesman Noah Brandt.“During Dr. Overton’s time at the America First Policy Institute, she helped lead important work exposing the dangers of chemical abortion and the serious risks posed by the abortion pill,” Brandt told EWTN News.“We pray that if Dr. Overton is confirmed that she brings that same courage and leadership to the FDA, which has an enormous responsibility to protect the health and safety of America’s women and children,” Brandt said.Brandt called on Overton to put a halt to chemical abortion pills entirely, beginning with mail-order abortions.“If confirmed, Dr. Overton should pull the deadly abortion pill from the market completely by first ending mail-order abortions, which are killing babies across the country,” he said.Kristi Hamrick, spokeswoman for Students for Life Action, called for Overton to take serious action against mifepristone.“It’s a good thing to have a nominee who has been skeptical of the kinds of policies the FDA has been pushing, but we are not looking for words; we are looking for deeds,” Hamrick told EWTN News. “The reckless rubber-stamping of chemical abortion pills has implications for babies in the womb, their mothers, and even the environment.”“We are looking for a first-ever review of chemical abortion pills, the abusers' dream drug, that is now being mailed illegally into many states with pro-life laws in place,” Hamrick said.Hamrick also urged Overton to investigate the environmental impact of chemical abortion drugs in the nation’s drinking water supplies.“The FDA has never looked into the environmental risks of allowing abortion water pollution nationwide, and you donʼt have to be pro-life to want clean drinking water,” Hamrick said.“We would ask Dr. Overton to do the work never done before — really evaluate mifepristone, its distribution, and risks to babies, women, and all life, endangered species included,” Hamrick said.
Read More

How Trump’s new FDA pick could be monumental in the fight for life #Catholic In the wake of U.S. President Donald Trump’s appointment of Dr. Heidi Overton, a medical doctor with a history of fighting for life, as head of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), pro-life groups are urging her to end mail-order abortion.Since January 2025 and up until now, Overton has worked as deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy. Before that, she spent more than three years at the America First Policy Institute (AFPI), a conservative think tank. On Aug. 19, Trump appointed her to head the FDA, though she will need to be confirmed by the Senate first, which is likely given the Republican majority.She has a doctorate in clinical investigation from Johnson Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health as well as a medical degree from the University of New Mexico School of Medicine. Overton has been outspoken about the dangers of chemical abortion for women and babies, according to a 2023 AFPI brief she authored where she criticized federal policy that made abortion pills available via telehealth.“Abortion is corrosive to children, women, and society broadly because it devalues and extinguishes innocent human life,” Overton wrote in 2023. “Unfortunately, federal policymakers have recently expanded access to abortion pills, also called chemical abortions, which are far more dangerous to women, enabling rapid access to abortion.”About two-thirds of abortions in the United States are chemical, meaning they happen via mifepristone and misoprostol pills. These pills are available via mail in any state, even states where these drugs are illegal. Abortion by mail is highly unregulated, creating danger for female patients.The abortion pill has continued to be left largely unregulated by Trump’s Food and Drug Administration, in spite of the documented danger to women, including coercion, poisonings, and physical harm.Advocates for unborn children highlight the importance of opposing chemical abortions and protecting unborn children across state lines, as chemical abortion pills make state pro-life laws moot.Hope for limitations on chemical abortionsLeading voices for life agree that the FDA should regulate mail-order chemical abortions. After being deeply disappointed so far by Trump’s FDA, they hope Overton is the woman for the task.The American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), an organization of medical doctors who believe in protecting unborn children and their mothers, “applauds the nomination,” said CEO Dr. Christina Francis.“Dr. Overton has a track record of recognizing the dignity of all of our patients (including our fetal patients) and recognizing the value of life-affirming healthcare,” Francis told EWTN News.“We are hopeful that Dr. Overton will reinstate vital safeguards around the dangerous abortion drug mifepristone,” Francis said. “Too many tragic incidents continue to pile up in which women have been left to handle the consequences of these potentially fatal drugs on their own.”“As physicians, we demand the FDA do its job and reinstate essential safeguards for our patients,” Francis said.Live Action, a group seeking to shift the culture and law on abortion, also viewed the nomination positively.“Live Action is encouraged by President Trump’s nomination of Dr. Heidi Overton to lead the Food and Drug Administration,” said Live Action spokesman Noah Brandt.“During Dr. Overton’s time at the America First Policy Institute, she helped lead important work exposing the dangers of chemical abortion and the serious risks posed by the abortion pill,” Brandt told EWTN News.“We pray that if Dr. Overton is confirmed that she brings that same courage and leadership to the FDA, which has an enormous responsibility to protect the health and safety of America’s women and children,” Brandt said.Brandt called on Overton to put a halt to chemical abortion pills entirely, beginning with mail-order abortions.“If confirmed, Dr. Overton should pull the deadly abortion pill from the market completely by first ending mail-order abortions, which are killing babies across the country,” he said.Kristi Hamrick, spokeswoman for Students for Life Action, called for Overton to take serious action against mifepristone.“It’s a good thing to have a nominee who has been skeptical of the kinds of policies the FDA has been pushing, but we are not looking for words; we are looking for deeds,” Hamrick told EWTN News. “The reckless rubber-stamping of chemical abortion pills has implications for babies in the womb, their mothers, and even the environment.”“We are looking for a first-ever review of chemical abortion pills, the abusers' dream drug, that is now being mailed illegally into many states with pro-life laws in place,” Hamrick said.Hamrick also urged Overton to investigate the environmental impact of chemical abortion drugs in the nation’s drinking water supplies.“The FDA has never looked into the environmental risks of allowing abortion water pollution nationwide, and you donʼt have to be pro-life to want clean drinking water,” Hamrick said.“We would ask Dr. Overton to do the work never done before — really evaluate mifepristone, its distribution, and risks to babies, women, and all life, endangered species included,” Hamrick said.

unitedyam

Commissioner appointee Heidi Overton has criticized the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s chemical abortion policies in the past. She is now poised to be in a position to change them.

Read More
Bishops issue new calls for recognition of immigrants’ human dignity and immigration reform #Catholic In response to increased immigration enforcement measures throughout the country, two U.S. Catholic bishops have issued fresh statements affirming the human dignity of immigrants as children of God and calling for immigration reform.Both prelates said Americans should understand why people flee their home countries in search of a better life while acknowledging the nation’s right to enforce its immigration laws. The current situation, however, is unjust, immoral, and must be fixed, both men emphasized.On Aug. 3, the centennial anniversary of the elevation of San Antonio to a metropolitan archdiocese, Archbishop Gustavo García-Siller released a pastoral letter expressing the Church’s solidarity with migrants and calling for the “careful and well-formed moral discernment of every Catholic conscience” in response.Meanwhile, on Aug. 1, Bishop Robert Gruss of the Diocese of Saginaw, Michigan, issued a statement in which he reminded the faithful of the “inherent human dignity” of every person.Gruss said the current “challenge” facing the United States, which has “consistently received immigrants, refugees, exiles, and the persecuted from other lands” throughout its history, is “how to deal with a situation when one administration has allowed individuals and families to migrate … freely and the next administration wants their removal.”The bishop wrote that the removal of “immigrants who have caused harm to society by participating in criminal activity” is understandable, but asked if it is “fair to remove those who are and have been contributing to society in a positive way, oftentimes for many years?”He said that a “just and civil society” would not allow the deportation or detention of people “without cause” or “meaningful legal representation, without access to family or a supportive community, and without basic human needs being met.”He urged the faithful to “push for public policy changes that secure civil rights for all immigrants” and “humane border enforcement policies” that simultaneously uphold national security while protecting the “safety and dignity” of those who come to the country to work.‘We will come to you’García-Siller promulgated his letter, titled “We Will Come to You: United in Solidarity with Our Brothers and Sisters in Migration,” at a Mass at San Fernando Cathedral in downtown San Antonio.“We are living in a world of war,” the letter began. “Across continents, people are dying every day. Across borders, survivors are forced to migrate. They do not leave by choice, but because of violence, hunger, fear, and oppression.”In the 56-page letter, composed of five sections and concluding with a prayer to Our Lady of Guadalupe, García-Siller said he prayed “for a long time” before writing, saying he wanted to write from “the right place, one of accompaniment and solidarity.”He said the letter addresses an “unprecedented” time in the country, writing that “a convergence of structural and legal tactics … calls for the careful and well-formed moral discernment of every Catholic conscience.”“I write to comfort the afflicted, to ignite the comfortable, and to confront injustice with the full conviction of the Gospel.”He went on to cite his personal experience of “years walking alongside” migrants, many of whom are living in so much fear they rarely leave their homes, as well as his own story as a migrant himself.The archbishop wrote that he has witnessed a “fear that has taken root” across the archdiocese, saying he and other pastors “pray with parents who embrace their children each morning unsure if they will be home at night,” and describing parents who avoid taking children to the doctor or to go to work “because each mile carries risk.”“The community bears this cross, and the Church cannot be silent,” he wrote, describing declining Mass attendance and the worsening physical health of those who suffer fear related to immigration.“The people have not lost their faith,” he wrote. “Many, however, have lost their sense of safety and belonging.”The Church must “defend the dignity of those caught in the machinery of removal,” he emphasized.García-Siller described visiting three detention centers in the area, including the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley, the largest family detention center in the nation, saying he’s witnessed "firsthand, violations of human dignity within their walls.”He went on to quote Bishop Steven Biegler of the Diocese of Cheyenne, Wyoming, who wrote in a pastoral letter in April that “‘the current campaign of mass detention and deportations is immoral.’”García-Siller accused private corporations of profiting from the processing and movement of large numbers of detained immigrants from one site to another.He also cited an investigation by U.S. Sen. John Ossoff, D-Georgia, which documented more than 1,000 “credible reports of human rights abuses since January 2025, including “medical neglect, denial of food and water, overcrowding, sleep deprivation, and the separation of breastfeeding mothers from their infants,” as well as similar abuses in privately-run sites.García-Siller called the public narrative that only criminals are being removed “misleading,” writing that “73% of those in immigration detention have no criminal conviction, and only 5% have been convicted of a violent crime.”He described how pastors, deacons, extraordinary ministers, and trained catechists are developing “active ministries of accompaniment” in the archdiocese, visiting migrants in their homes, bringing the sacraments along with medicines and other supplies, as well as in detention centers.“If your family has been detained, tell us. We will go to them. The Body of Christ does not abandon its members in chains,” García-Siller declared.The archbishop went on to lament that existing legal pathways take years to navigate, years that families cannot afford to wait as they seek safety and stability. He called for more accessible legal pathways, saying migrants would take those pathways if they were available. Migrants’ “contribution to the common good of our nation” demands such, he wrote.At the end of the letter, García-Siller entrusted the situation to Our Lady of Guadalupe, who herself crossed borders of culture and race and walked the road of exile with the Holy Family: “Long before she was Queen of Mexico … she was a mother who crossed a border. She knows this road; she walked it with her own feet.”
Read More

Bishops issue new calls for recognition of immigrants’ human dignity and immigration reform #Catholic In response to increased immigration enforcement measures throughout the country, two U.S. Catholic bishops have issued fresh statements affirming the human dignity of immigrants as children of God and calling for immigration reform.Both prelates said Americans should understand why people flee their home countries in search of a better life while acknowledging the nation’s right to enforce its immigration laws. The current situation, however, is unjust, immoral, and must be fixed, both men emphasized.On Aug. 3, the centennial anniversary of the elevation of San Antonio to a metropolitan archdiocese, Archbishop Gustavo García-Siller released a pastoral letter expressing the Church’s solidarity with migrants and calling for the “careful and well-formed moral discernment of every Catholic conscience” in response.Meanwhile, on Aug. 1, Bishop Robert Gruss of the Diocese of Saginaw, Michigan, issued a statement in which he reminded the faithful of the “inherent human dignity” of every person.Gruss said the current “challenge” facing the United States, which has “consistently received immigrants, refugees, exiles, and the persecuted from other lands” throughout its history, is “how to deal with a situation when one administration has allowed individuals and families to migrate … freely and the next administration wants their removal.”The bishop wrote that the removal of “immigrants who have caused harm to society by participating in criminal activity” is understandable, but asked if it is “fair to remove those who are and have been contributing to society in a positive way, oftentimes for many years?”He said that a “just and civil society” would not allow the deportation or detention of people “without cause” or “meaningful legal representation, without access to family or a supportive community, and without basic human needs being met.”He urged the faithful to “push for public policy changes that secure civil rights for all immigrants” and “humane border enforcement policies” that simultaneously uphold national security while protecting the “safety and dignity” of those who come to the country to work.‘We will come to you’García-Siller promulgated his letter, titled “We Will Come to You: United in Solidarity with Our Brothers and Sisters in Migration,” at a Mass at San Fernando Cathedral in downtown San Antonio.“We are living in a world of war,” the letter began. “Across continents, people are dying every day. Across borders, survivors are forced to migrate. They do not leave by choice, but because of violence, hunger, fear, and oppression.”In the 56-page letter, composed of five sections and concluding with a prayer to Our Lady of Guadalupe, García-Siller said he prayed “for a long time” before writing, saying he wanted to write from “the right place, one of accompaniment and solidarity.”He said the letter addresses an “unprecedented” time in the country, writing that “a convergence of structural and legal tactics … calls for the careful and well-formed moral discernment of every Catholic conscience.”“I write to comfort the afflicted, to ignite the comfortable, and to confront injustice with the full conviction of the Gospel.”He went on to cite his personal experience of “years walking alongside” migrants, many of whom are living in so much fear they rarely leave their homes, as well as his own story as a migrant himself.The archbishop wrote that he has witnessed a “fear that has taken root” across the archdiocese, saying he and other pastors “pray with parents who embrace their children each morning unsure if they will be home at night,” and describing parents who avoid taking children to the doctor or to go to work “because each mile carries risk.”“The community bears this cross, and the Church cannot be silent,” he wrote, describing declining Mass attendance and the worsening physical health of those who suffer fear related to immigration.“The people have not lost their faith,” he wrote. “Many, however, have lost their sense of safety and belonging.”The Church must “defend the dignity of those caught in the machinery of removal,” he emphasized.García-Siller described visiting three detention centers in the area, including the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley, the largest family detention center in the nation, saying he’s witnessed "firsthand, violations of human dignity within their walls.”He went on to quote Bishop Steven Biegler of the Diocese of Cheyenne, Wyoming, who wrote in a pastoral letter in April that “‘the current campaign of mass detention and deportations is immoral.’”García-Siller accused private corporations of profiting from the processing and movement of large numbers of detained immigrants from one site to another.He also cited an investigation by U.S. Sen. John Ossoff, D-Georgia, which documented more than 1,000 “credible reports of human rights abuses since January 2025, including “medical neglect, denial of food and water, overcrowding, sleep deprivation, and the separation of breastfeeding mothers from their infants,” as well as similar abuses in privately-run sites.García-Siller called the public narrative that only criminals are being removed “misleading,” writing that “73% of those in immigration detention have no criminal conviction, and only 5% have been convicted of a violent crime.”He described how pastors, deacons, extraordinary ministers, and trained catechists are developing “active ministries of accompaniment” in the archdiocese, visiting migrants in their homes, bringing the sacraments along with medicines and other supplies, as well as in detention centers.“If your family has been detained, tell us. We will go to them. The Body of Christ does not abandon its members in chains,” García-Siller declared.The archbishop went on to lament that existing legal pathways take years to navigate, years that families cannot afford to wait as they seek safety and stability. He called for more accessible legal pathways, saying migrants would take those pathways if they were available. Migrants’ “contribution to the common good of our nation” demands such, he wrote.At the end of the letter, García-Siller entrusted the situation to Our Lady of Guadalupe, who herself crossed borders of culture and race and walked the road of exile with the Holy Family: “Long before she was Queen of Mexico … she was a mother who crossed a border. She knows this road; she walked it with her own feet.”

unitedyam

“I write to comfort the afflicted, to ignite the comfortable, and to confront injustice with the full conviction of the Gospel,” San Antonio Archbishop Gustavo García-Siller wrote.

Read More
Massachusetts lawmakers pass bill removing all restrictions from abortion throughout pregnancy #Catholic The Massachusetts government this week moved to strip all restrictions from abortion and allow the procedure up until birth so long as a doctor approves of it.The state Senate passed Bill H.5595 on July 31, a little over a week after the state House passed the same measure. The bill now awaits Democratic Gov. Maura Healey’s signature. The legislation removes all of the state’s current restrictions on abortion after 24 weeks, instead dictating that a late-term abortion may be done based upon “the professional judgment of the physician” performing it. Current state law, which H.5595 would change, only allows late-term abortions if they are necessary to preserve the life or “physical or mental health” of the mother, or if the baby has been diagnosed with a fatal condition. Abortions are also allowed to be performed in the state if a baby would require “extraordinary medical interventions” to survive after birth. If signed into law, the bill would make Massachusetts the 11th state to impose no limits whatsoever on abortion. Healey, who has served as the state’s governor since 2023, is an outspoken supporter of abortion. The passage of the bill drew rebuke from SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser, who said in a July 31 statement that the state’s already-generous abortion policy “isn’t enough for Democrats whose party holds the position of no limits on abortion whatsoever.”“These extreme laws that only 10% of Americans support are enabled by the ‘states-only’ philosophy on abortion,” she argued. “The GOP must abandon the failed ‘leave it to the states’ position and move the country toward a national protection for unborn children across this nation,” she said. Ahead of the July 31 vote, the state’s Catholic bishops had also criticized the measure. “The proposed elimination of any legal restraint on late-term abortion is, in our judgement, a radical measure which is gravely immoral,” the bishops’ July 29 statement read. The bishops urged Catholics “to pray for a renewal of reverence for all human life.”
Read More

Massachusetts lawmakers pass bill removing all restrictions from abortion throughout pregnancy #Catholic The Massachusetts government this week moved to strip all restrictions from abortion and allow the procedure up until birth so long as a doctor approves of it.The state Senate passed Bill H.5595 on July 31, a little over a week after the state House passed the same measure. The bill now awaits Democratic Gov. Maura Healey’s signature. The legislation removes all of the state’s current restrictions on abortion after 24 weeks, instead dictating that a late-term abortion may be done based upon “the professional judgment of the physician” performing it. Current state law, which H.5595 would change, only allows late-term abortions if they are necessary to preserve the life or “physical or mental health” of the mother, or if the baby has been diagnosed with a fatal condition. Abortions are also allowed to be performed in the state if a baby would require “extraordinary medical interventions” to survive after birth. If signed into law, the bill would make Massachusetts the 11th state to impose no limits whatsoever on abortion. Healey, who has served as the state’s governor since 2023, is an outspoken supporter of abortion. The passage of the bill drew rebuke from SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser, who said in a July 31 statement that the state’s already-generous abortion policy “isn’t enough for Democrats whose party holds the position of no limits on abortion whatsoever.”“These extreme laws that only 10% of Americans support are enabled by the ‘states-only’ philosophy on abortion,” she argued. “The GOP must abandon the failed ‘leave it to the states’ position and move the country toward a national protection for unborn children across this nation,” she said. Ahead of the July 31 vote, the state’s Catholic bishops had also criticized the measure. “The proposed elimination of any legal restraint on late-term abortion is, in our judgement, a radical measure which is gravely immoral,” the bishops’ July 29 statement read. The bishops urged Catholics “to pray for a renewal of reverence for all human life.”

unitedyam

The measure, if signed by Democratic Gov. Maura Healey, will remove the last few restrictions on abortion in the state and replace them with “the professional judgment of the physician.”

Read More
France legalizes euthanasia after forceful push through Parliament #Catholic The French National Assembly gave final approval on July 15 to a bill legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, making France one of the few European countries to legalize the practice along with Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Spain. The 291-241 vote came three years after President Emmanuel Macron, who had made it one of his key campaign promises, first opened the question to national debate.The vote ended an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate. Members of the National Assembly passed the bill three times over the course of 14 months — most recently on June 30 by a vote of 295 to 232 — and senators rejected it just as many times. On July 7, the Senate passed, by a narrow majority of 169 to 164, with 11 abstentions, a preliminary motion to outright reject the bill rather than debate it, and this motion itself called on the government to end the legislative process. Rather than heeding this call, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu invoked Article 45 of the Constitution, which allows the government to give the National Assembly the final say when repeated readings fail to produce an agreement between the two chambers. He then referred the bill back to the National Assembly for a fourth and final vote instead of a fourth reading in the Senate.The July 15 vote, however, did not close the matter. On July 14, Lecornu announced he would refer part of the text to the Constitutional Council, a step Senate President Gérard Larcher had also urged, citing in particular how the billʼs conscience clause would interact with health and social care facilities built around end-of-life accompaniment that exclude assisted dying. The council must rule within a month, or eight days if the government asks for an expedited review, meaning the law cannot be promulgated until that review is complete even though the Assembly has now adopted it.The end-of-life law covers both euthanasia, administered by a doctor or nurse, and assisted suicide, in which the patient self-administers a lethal substance, under five cumulative conditions: A person must be an adult, a stable resident of France, diagnosed with a serious and incurable condition, in an advanced or terminal phase of that condition, and suffering in a way current treatment cannot relieve, while remaining able to express a free and informed decision. Self-administration is supposed to be the default rule, with the law providing for intervention by a healthcare professional only when the patient is physically unable to act.A supporting measure aimed at expanding access to palliative care was adopted with much broader support, passing its first reading in the Senate by a vote of 307 to 17. To date, more than 20% of French departments still lack a palliative care unit, according to figures cited repeatedly by the Bishops’ Conference of France during the debate.The push to legalize assisted dying traces back to September 2022, when the National Consultative Ethics Committee reversed its earlier opposition to assisted dying and endorsed an “ethical” application of the practice. A citizens’ panel Macron had convened spent the following winter weighing the question and backed legalization.The French president unveiled the outline of a bill in March 2024, but the initiative stalled when he dissolved the Assembly in June the same year. Deputy Olivier Falorni, who had filed an earlier and unsuccessful end-of-life bill, revived it in 2025.Critics argue the newly adopted framework is among the most permissive of its kind in the world. Grégor Puppinck, a Catholic lawyer and director general of the European Centre for Law and Justice, has published a point-by-point analysis contending that the entire process rests on the judgment of a single physician, who may meet the patient for the first time on the day of the request and need not be the one already treating them.The two additional professionals that physician must consult are chosen by the same person, are not required to examine the patient in person, and may be consulted by videoconference. Puppinck noted the statute sets no minimum interval between the decision and the act itself beyond a two-day reflection window, relatives have no guaranteed right to be informed beforehand, and they cannot challenge the outcome in court. Doctors who object in conscience must still refer patients to a colleague willing to proceed, and private and religious institutions, including nursing homes, must accommodate mobile euthanasia teams under threat of administrative penalties. Oversight, in Puppinck’s account, comes only after death, based on a report filed by the same clinician who carried it out.The founders of the ethics collective Democracy, Ethics, and Solidarity, Laurent Frémont and Emmanuel Hirsch, wrote in Le Journal du Dimanche that the law’s eligibility criteria — primarily a “serious and incurable condition” causing “unbearable suffering,” are defined vaguely enough that a strict medical interpretation could make more than 1 million people eligible, including patients with chronic illnesses, psychiatric disorders, or advanced age, without requiring a prior written request, a peer review by medical colleagues, or a psychiatric evaluation.A 2025 study by the Fondation pour l’innovation politique estimated the measure could save the state around 1.4 billion euros (.6 billion) a year in health, eldercare, and pension spending, a projection critics have cited as evidence of the pressures vulnerable and elderly patients could face once the law takes effect.The French bishops’ conference called the text a threat to “the most fragile” among French citizens in a statement issued in May 2025 ahead of the Assembly’s first vote on the bill. The archbishop of Paris, Laurent Ulrich, has repeatedly urged lawmakers to reconsider their position, asserting that true solidarity is built through caring for others rather than through death. “More than assistance in dying, our society needs assistance in living,” he has repeatedly stated.In a video appeal to lawmakers released before the vote, Archbishop Vincent Jordy of Tours invoked François Rabelais’ centuries-old warning that “science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul.” What is underway, he said, is “an anthropological shift,” a new way of viewing life and its end that will gradually reshape the country, touching caregivers, families, people with disabilities, and the relationship between generations. He pointed to the Netherlands, where regulators had layered on safeguards for two decades and where health officials confirmed in June that a child under 12 had been euthanized for the first time, under a 2024 expansion of the law to children between the ages of 1 and 12. Making a law, Jordy said, is also opening doors toward things “one had perhaps not imagined” when it was written.
Read More

France legalizes euthanasia after forceful push through Parliament #Catholic The French National Assembly gave final approval on July 15 to a bill legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, making France one of the few European countries to legalize the practice along with Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Spain. The 291-241 vote came three years after President Emmanuel Macron, who had made it one of his key campaign promises, first opened the question to national debate.The vote ended an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate. Members of the National Assembly passed the bill three times over the course of 14 months — most recently on June 30 by a vote of 295 to 232 — and senators rejected it just as many times. On July 7, the Senate passed, by a narrow majority of 169 to 164, with 11 abstentions, a preliminary motion to outright reject the bill rather than debate it, and this motion itself called on the government to end the legislative process. Rather than heeding this call, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu invoked Article 45 of the Constitution, which allows the government to give the National Assembly the final say when repeated readings fail to produce an agreement between the two chambers. He then referred the bill back to the National Assembly for a fourth and final vote instead of a fourth reading in the Senate.The July 15 vote, however, did not close the matter. On July 14, Lecornu announced he would refer part of the text to the Constitutional Council, a step Senate President Gérard Larcher had also urged, citing in particular how the billʼs conscience clause would interact with health and social care facilities built around end-of-life accompaniment that exclude assisted dying. The council must rule within a month, or eight days if the government asks for an expedited review, meaning the law cannot be promulgated until that review is complete even though the Assembly has now adopted it.The end-of-life law covers both euthanasia, administered by a doctor or nurse, and assisted suicide, in which the patient self-administers a lethal substance, under five cumulative conditions: A person must be an adult, a stable resident of France, diagnosed with a serious and incurable condition, in an advanced or terminal phase of that condition, and suffering in a way current treatment cannot relieve, while remaining able to express a free and informed decision. Self-administration is supposed to be the default rule, with the law providing for intervention by a healthcare professional only when the patient is physically unable to act.A supporting measure aimed at expanding access to palliative care was adopted with much broader support, passing its first reading in the Senate by a vote of 307 to 17. To date, more than 20% of French departments still lack a palliative care unit, according to figures cited repeatedly by the Bishops’ Conference of France during the debate.The push to legalize assisted dying traces back to September 2022, when the National Consultative Ethics Committee reversed its earlier opposition to assisted dying and endorsed an “ethical” application of the practice. A citizens’ panel Macron had convened spent the following winter weighing the question and backed legalization.The French president unveiled the outline of a bill in March 2024, but the initiative stalled when he dissolved the Assembly in June the same year. Deputy Olivier Falorni, who had filed an earlier and unsuccessful end-of-life bill, revived it in 2025.Critics argue the newly adopted framework is among the most permissive of its kind in the world. Grégor Puppinck, a Catholic lawyer and director general of the European Centre for Law and Justice, has published a point-by-point analysis contending that the entire process rests on the judgment of a single physician, who may meet the patient for the first time on the day of the request and need not be the one already treating them.The two additional professionals that physician must consult are chosen by the same person, are not required to examine the patient in person, and may be consulted by videoconference. Puppinck noted the statute sets no minimum interval between the decision and the act itself beyond a two-day reflection window, relatives have no guaranteed right to be informed beforehand, and they cannot challenge the outcome in court. Doctors who object in conscience must still refer patients to a colleague willing to proceed, and private and religious institutions, including nursing homes, must accommodate mobile euthanasia teams under threat of administrative penalties. Oversight, in Puppinck’s account, comes only after death, based on a report filed by the same clinician who carried it out.The founders of the ethics collective Democracy, Ethics, and Solidarity, Laurent Frémont and Emmanuel Hirsch, wrote in Le Journal du Dimanche that the law’s eligibility criteria — primarily a “serious and incurable condition” causing “unbearable suffering,” are defined vaguely enough that a strict medical interpretation could make more than 1 million people eligible, including patients with chronic illnesses, psychiatric disorders, or advanced age, without requiring a prior written request, a peer review by medical colleagues, or a psychiatric evaluation.A 2025 study by the Fondation pour l’innovation politique estimated the measure could save the state around 1.4 billion euros ($1.6 billion) a year in health, eldercare, and pension spending, a projection critics have cited as evidence of the pressures vulnerable and elderly patients could face once the law takes effect.The French bishops’ conference called the text a threat to “the most fragile” among French citizens in a statement issued in May 2025 ahead of the Assembly’s first vote on the bill. The archbishop of Paris, Laurent Ulrich, has repeatedly urged lawmakers to reconsider their position, asserting that true solidarity is built through caring for others rather than through death. “More than assistance in dying, our society needs assistance in living,” he has repeatedly stated.In a video appeal to lawmakers released before the vote, Archbishop Vincent Jordy of Tours invoked François Rabelais’ centuries-old warning that “science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul.” What is underway, he said, is “an anthropological shift,” a new way of viewing life and its end that will gradually reshape the country, touching caregivers, families, people with disabilities, and the relationship between generations. He pointed to the Netherlands, where regulators had layered on safeguards for two decades and where health officials confirmed in June that a child under 12 had been euthanized for the first time, under a 2024 expansion of the law to children between the ages of 1 and 12. Making a law, Jordy said, is also opening doors toward things “one had perhaps not imagined” when it was written.

unitedyam

The vote, ending an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate, came three years after President Emmanuel Macron first opened the question to national debate.

Read More