So what about the instances when the women didn’t even know she was pregnant and thought the miscarriage was merely her mense? Short of examining every sexually active woman every time she has her mense, one can’t know if there’s a fertilized ovum in the discharge for every instance.
It’s called the Sacrament of the Sick now. It’s for those who are seriously ill or frail, or otherwise in danger of death (e.g. you can have it before a serious medical operation). The “first grace” of this sacrament is one of “strengthening, peace and courage to overcome the difficulties that go with the condition of serious illness or the frailty of old age.” It’s not normally administered after death, although it may be administered around the time of death, at a time when there might be some doubt as to whether a person has died, or even an hour or two afterwards.
I’m not sure what point you’re making, Monty. A funeral is not necessary, but the parents of a stillborn or miscarried child can have one if they want one. Obviously, if the mother was unaware that she was pregnant, the issue won’t arise.
My point is that the “full blown human” as the extreme pro-lifers tell us, has been ignored in this case. Their argument is merely one of convenience, not logic.
No…the “full blown human” has been ignored due to a lack of awareness. If the mother miscarried without her knowledge, she can’t be blamed for not having a funeral/service.
Unless you’re saying that ALL pro-lifers don’t have funerals for miscarriages. Do you have support for that statement?
And you’'rfe still assuming that, if a foetus is a “full-blown human”, it necessarily follows that disposal of a dead foetus must involve a funeral service, or a ritual of some kind. But this doesn’t follow at all.
I think that if you believe that a fetus is a person, it makes sense to mourn its loss in the same way you would mourn any other human. To me, that isn’t a ritual thing - rituals just help through the mourning process. And some people do, and some people don’t - and I don’t think this cuts straight down the pro-choice/pro-life line.
I think an argument can be made that societially we do differeniate between a miscarriage at 10 weeks and one at 20 weeks and one at 30 weeks and that this may be reflected in the acceptable-ness of abortion (within society, not at an individual level) at each of these times. The first seems to get charted up to “acceptable loss.” It may be tragic for the couple going through it (or people close to the couple), but nobody drops off casseroles or sends out sympathy cards (they will, if they learn, say “I’m so sorry to hear that.”) and your boss expects you to come back to work pretty quick (if he even knows). The second is perceived as a much bigger tragedy, with public expressions of sympathy, where the third is seen as nearly indistiguisable to the death of a child and often involves the full blown public rituals of mourning.
Now, each couple that a miscarriage happens to may have a different emotional response at each period, or they may have the same emotional response.
Monty seems to be getting at “if the tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound.” If a conception occurs, but no one realizes it, does it make a difference if it never results in pregnancy? Obviously, if you believe in a God that knows all, God knows and it may make a difference to Him. That argument doesn’t have a lot of pull for those of us without faith.
I don’t want to hijack this discussion, but I’d like to mention that we’ve debated the point at which a human life actually starts before, with no cut-and-dried answer; I don’t think there is an answer.
We’ve also mentioned that the law has to choose a sensible point at which a foetus is considered a baby and has done so, but that isn’t in recognition of any sort of fundamental truth, any more than an 18-year-old (in the UK) is fundamentally more suited to drinking alcohol than he was a day before his 18[sup]th[/sup] birthday.
As I’ve said, I wouldn’t want to be lumped in with either of the extremes on the abortion debate (although I happen to consider abortion due to unwanted pregnancy a terrible tragedy); it’s my personal belief that the tiny, perfect babies we buried were, in some way, people; I wouldn’t dream of imposing that belief on anyone, but conversely anyone who tries to insensitively tell me that I’m wrong or stupid to call them ‘babies’ (because they were only 22 weeks and that’s called a ‘non-viable foetus’) gets to see the nasty side of me.
(this emphatically *isn’t directed at anyone who has commented in this thread; I just wanted to state my position).
I can appreciate not wanting to be “lumped” into the pro anything camp. I agree that extremism on anything is usually a bad thing. What bothers me though, is that I for one can understand and support someone’s decision not to abort a child for whatever reasons, I in turn should be allowed the same freedom and right to decide for myself what is best for along with my family or SO. I have been derided lately, due to unfortunate circumstances, by people who are convinced they know what my best interest is. When I posed the question of the thread to them (having knowledge of a miscarriage by one of these people) I was called everything short of the anti-christ. I thought it was a fair question. For nice folks who want to have a service of some kind that is great! For others who do not follow the same train of thought, more power to you. For those who are “in your face” bible thumping, holier than thou, I truly think you should “walk the walk” and practice what you preach. To me, a full religious funeral should be in order, with all the trimmings that you would provide your 10 yr old child in a similar circumstance. As a rule I don’t solicite advice concerning my family’s personal affairs, nor would I be so inclined to tell you what your options should be. I very much dislike “convenience” arguments to support your position. Why is it so hard for some folks to agree to disagree?
In the past in Mexico, the Catholic Church considered a miscarried fetus or stillborn an “angelito”, and not needing burial rites.
I wonder if that is something other Catholics did as well or a local custom (maybe inherited from Indigenous people).
I do know of a tragic case where a pregnant woman was murdered by her husband, and the family had an obituary published for the unborn. It was very sad and disconcerting to see on many levels.
I don’t understand what you’re saying there; could you elaborate?
Hi sezyou
Just as nobody can tell you and your wife how you “should” react to your miscarriage, and whether you should have a ritual and what kind, so you should hesitate to suggest what is in order for others. It may seem logical to you that a firm pro-Life conviction should imply a funeral for a miscarried child, but what seems logical to you is not really relevant. What matters is what seems right to the grieving expectant parents, and if a funeral or other ritual doesn’t seem right to them, there is no inconsistency with a a pro-life belief. If you think that a fundamentalist Christian pro-Life belief necessarily implies a belief that a miscarried child must have a funeral, you haven’t fully understood Christian beliefs about funerals. That’s not a criticism of you, I hasten to add; I say this to show where I disgree with your reasoning.
I don’t want to personalise this, but my wife and I have suffered both a miscarriage of a wanted pregnancy and the death of a living child. There is simply no comparison whatsoever between what we went through on the two occasions, or how we needed to react, and to deal with what had happened. I am sure that this would be equally true for everybody, from the most extreme pro-life advocate to the most extreme pro-choice advocate. And mainstream Christian belief and practice has no difficulty in reconciling a belief that a foetus is fully human with a belief that our relationship to a foetus is entirely different to a relationship with a person who has been born, and that we can properly respond differently to the death of each.
(Incidentally, while I am deeply uncomfortable about abortion I am pro-choice to the extent that I am reluctant to impose my beliefs on a woman who doesn’t share them, so I cannot actually speak here for the more vocal pro-life advocates. But I don’t think what you point to is actually an inconsistency in their position.)
Hi sezyou
Just as nobody can tell you and your wife how you “should” react to your miscarriage, and whether you should have a ritual and what kind, so you should hesitate to suggest what is in order for others. It may seem logical to you that a firm pro-Life conviction should imply a funeral for a miscarried child, but what seems logical to you is not really relevant. What matters is what seems right to the grieving expectant parents, and if a funeral or other ritual doesn’t seem right to them, there is no inconsistency with a a pro-life belief. If you think that a fundamentalist Christian pro-Life belief necessarily implies a belief that a miscarried child must have a funeral, you haven’t fully understood Christian beliefs about funerals. That’s not a criticism of you, I hasten to add; I say this to show where I disgree with your reasoning.
I don’t want to personalise this, but my wife and I have suffered both a miscarriage of a wanted pregnancy and the death of a living child. There is simply no comparison whatsoever between what we went through on the two occasions, or how we needed to react, and to deal with what had happened. I am sure that this would be equally true for everybody, from the most extreme pro-life advocate to the most extreme pro-choice advocate. And mainstream Christian belief and practice has no difficulty in reconciling a belief that a foetus is fully human with a belief that our relationship to a foetus is entirely different to a relationship with a person who has been born, and that we can properly respond differently to the death of each.
(Incidentally, while I am deeply uncomfortable about abortion I am pro-choice to the extent that I am reluctant to impose my beliefs on a woman who doesn’t share them, so I cannot actually speak here for the more vocal pro-life advocates. But I don’t think what you point to is actually an inconsistency in their position.)
I do wish there was a term that implied middle ground. I’ve been known to refer to myself as an abortion-agnostic (although I portray myself as pro-choice on these boards).