Ivy League Ethics?

Ivy League Ethics?

We’ve been shocked and very troubled by the report coming out of Italy of a newborn baby who was subject to an attempted abortion and then left by the abortionist/physician to die.  The UFI Daily also passed on a follow-up story.  One’s mind has to be flooded with questions:  What kind of a person, let alone a physician, could walk away and leave a newborn child on a table to die?  How often does this happen?  And the biggest question of all:  How can civilized people (not just in Italy, but around the world) continue to allow abortion to end the lives of their unborn children?

We noted a quote from Italy’s under-secretary of state in the health department, Eugenia Roccella, who said that if the initial information is correct “this would be a case of deliberate abandonment of a seriously premature neonate, possibly also with some form of disability, an act contrary to any sense of human compassion but also of any accepted professional medical practice”.

We draw your attention to that quote and invite you to read the below account of what is being taught at one of the most highly regarded academic institution in the world.  This one should give everyone pause, particularly if you have students enrolled in college courses.  It also makes clear that the tragic event that occurred in Italy last week, may not be an isolated incident.

So this is Ivy League Ethics

I was a student in a mid-career Masters of Public Administration graduate program at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government (HKS).  My experience took place on the very first day of a graduate course on Ethics.  In advance of the first class we were required to read an actual case study regarding a physician in Singapore where abortion is legal up to 24 weeks.

Synopsis of the Case Study

Dr. Chin is Chinese, reared in the religion of Zen and then converted to evangelical Christianity.  He now lives in Singapore.  He had applied for a conscience clause in regard to performing abortions and was able to trade work with other physicians and thus avoid any abortion procedures.  One day while working in a hospital, he was contacted by a nurse who was in a panic because an abortion had been performed on a baby that was just a few days shy of 24 weeks.  The aborted baby, after 15-20 minutes, was still alive on a table in a side room and struggling to breathe.  The nurse didn’t know what to do.  The mother was fine and the physician performing the abortion had already left.

Dr. Chin was the only doctor available in the small hospital at the time.  He had to make a split second decision:  Do I get involved?  With every second counting in the life of the baby he had to decide.  Had the baby already suffered irreversible harm?   Would the baby be blind?  Mentally handicapped?  His mind raced with accounts of preemie babies that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to treat.  What would the mother say?  Should he ask her?  What would his employer say?  Was he violating some type of professional ethic by not honoring the wishes of the mother?  Was he violating his personal ethics by engaging at all?

Dr. Chin chose to save the baby.  The parents upon seeing the baby alive eventually chose to keep the child.  Dr. Chin left the field of OB/Gyn work.  (End of the case study.)

Reaction of the class

The case study itself was so upsetting to me that I struggled to even read it.  I walked into my “Ethics” class the next morning prepared to have my comment on the case be this:

“There is no ethical dilemma here.  Dr. Chin did exactly what his professional ethics (not to mention his humanity!) would require him to do—save the baby.  The nurse called him in to be a physician to the new-born child—not because the mother needed care.  He had been summoned for the baby and thus was professionally obligated to help the child.  He did.”

The class consisted of about 50 people with an equal mix of men and women.  It was taught by a professor that many consider to be the premier teacher at Harvard on the topic of ethics.  He prefaced the discussion with directions to “keep the story in context” and evaluate all of the factors that come into play:  the doctor’s personal integrity, his professional ethics, the common morality.  He remarked that often there is a conflict between what he termed “right vs. right.”  As he opened the class to discussion, many hands went in to the air.

I was stunned by the responses that followed, the essences of which were “HOW DARE the physican treat that baby!”

Voice after shrill voice (particularly the women) said things like:

  • Did Dr. Chin NOT consider the feelings of the parents?
  • He violated the Dr. /patient relationship by going against the parent’s wishes to have the baby aborted.
  • He violated professional ethics.
  • Was HE going to pay the bills?  Was HE planning to raise the baby?
  • The hospital is liable for not controlling their doctors.  The parents should sue the hospital for what he did.
  • No doctor should be allowed to have a conscience clause to anything.  If you are a professional, you will perform ALL procedures.  “If you can’t do it, then get out of the profession.”

Each time the Professor would commend them for their response and list their comments on the board.  I was not called upon, but there were three different people during the hour-long discussion that brought up the needs of the baby and made my points.  Each time the Professor would just politely listen and then call on the next person.  He never wrote their response on the board—just moved on without giving comment.  One woman in particular (an international student who is also an attorney and a judge) deftly and professionally articulated the points for the baby’s life being saved.  The professor challenged her by saying:  “The only thing that matters here is:   Who are the decision makers?”  Then he mockingly replied:  “Can the fetus make a decision?”

I sat there with my heart in my throat, stunned into silence.  The professor had effectively silenced anyone who opposed his clearly established (although never stated) viewpoint.  Could it be true that there were only four people in that room that recognized that a human being, a BABY, had been born and was laying there on a table, and should be helped?  I have worked in the pro-life/pro-family world for many years and I’ve heard all the voices that try to rationalize abortion and even partial birth abortion—but, as horrific and demented as that position is, I had never heard anyone openly make the case that it is OK to end the life of a already born, living, breathing baby.

I thought that promotion of infanticide was reserved for only the sicko few. (Like ethicist Peter Singer of Princeton University who advocates for allowing parents to kill their babies up until the baby reaches 28 days old.)  I NEVER anticipated seeing virtually an entire classroom full of people—women mind you!—who could be so callous, so cold-hearted, so soul-less as to have looked at that situation and with barely concealed rage castigate a physician who saved a baby’s life.  It was very clear—the baby mattered not at all.

Have we really moved that far past the pagan cultures who sacrificed their children?

(Account written and shared by a UFI Daily reader)

8 Comments
  • Choice and Accountability
    Posted at 20:08h, 03 May Reply

    Sodom and Gomorrah. Yes, we really have reached that state. Methods may have changed, technology may be different, but human nature never changes, and there will always be those who worship at the alters of self and ego.

  • Deb Bacon
    Posted at 13:43h, 04 May Reply

    The students and professor must have felt safe that their well being wouldn’t be in the hands of someone who didn’t value their lives. But if we’re not there for someone in a vulnerable position they will not be there for us when the spectrum of human value devalues us (when we are old, disabled, sick, female, unarmed or whatever).

  • emilia
    Posted at 14:24h, 04 May Reply

    It is hard to believe that people can call the same newborn “fetus” or “baby” depending on their wanting the baby or not. I think Dr. Chin should be commended for doing the right thing. It is very scary to think that there are profs that teach like that. And the student’s answers just show how far we have gone from the basic morality in our society. God have mercy on us.

  • Sorrowful
    Posted at 15:03h, 04 May Reply

    There is another sorrowful story here…the killing of ethics, not just a baby. That room full of men and women had been trained and taught for years to develop such an attitude. Professors, through actions like the one displayed in the story, know how to (and do) manipulate their students–all under the guise of open-mindnesses. Teachers and parents also do the same thing. They train their children and students to develop the attitudes they espouse. That loss of caring did not start at the moment the dilemma was present. It was displayed at that moment–but it had grown in them for years. A university lecture hall is not where we make a difference to change hearts and minds. We do that in the home long before they ever go to a university.

  • Susan
    Posted at 15:44h, 04 May Reply

    A baby is a minor, a helpless person who needs a guardian to act on its behalf. To the professor’s question, “Can a fetus make a decision,” the answer is no, but a responsible adult can legally speak for it, just as guardians do for incompetent people in the courts. ALSO, a baby is innocent and has done no wrong – so how can it be sentenced to death? The doctor and mother are not qualified judges, so how can they pronounce a death sentence? They are both guilty of abandonment and derelection of duty as a doctor and a mother and should be the ones punished – NOT the baby! Who walks away from a gasping newborn baby?? Very, very sick. The evil and selfishness in this world is beyond sad.

  • thoughtful
    Posted at 17:34h, 04 May Reply

    So here is my question, why did you NOT speak up?

  • Prayer Warrior
    Posted at 07:14h, 05 May Reply

    The only solution to our world’s problem is Jesus, our Saviour. Let us pray for the conversion of people with this kind of thinking, distorting God’s truth, changing natural laws and deviating humanity from it’s true nature, that of being children of God, our Creator.

  • United Families International
    Posted at 20:32h, 07 May Reply

    In responses to the question: “Why did you NOT speak up,” the writer specifically states that she had her hand raised, but was not called upon.

Post A Comment