Embrioriduzione: kill one twin over three to preserve the" depression "of the mothers
This is the technical term used to conceal the most raw and less presentable selective abortion. A concept capable of evoking the chilling prophecy that the Christian genius of GK Chesterton, in 1922, resigned in his famous essay Eugenics and other evils.
is the reduction of the embryos, usually performed in the first trimester of a twin pregnancy, performed by injecting potassium chloride into the heart of the fetus to be deleted, so as to provide cardiac arrest, or occluding the umbilical cord, for example by laser, to block the flow of oxygen. The choice is between killing an embryo or kill choked by lethal injection.
This dramatic question is returned to the headlines in the aftermath of incidents reported in the interesting article on the release of 23 Gaetano Calabrese October 2009, the effective title "One of the three should not be born." It is related to the circumstances of at least four mothers during the last year, a fertility clinic who have decided to select their own fetuses, making the world come only two of the children of a triplets pregnancy.
The incident took place at the maternity hospital, Sant'Anna di Torino, that, so to speak, where it exerts Dr. Silvio Viale, a doctor and radical politician, known for his battles pro-choice. The selection of embryos to be deleted - it is all healthy - Was not actually random, left, that is, a tragic all'alea of \u200b\u200bRussian roulette. Calabrese explains well in his article, what are the selection criteria that are normally used: "What is suppressed is usually easier to reach the fetus with the needle of a syringe to inject potassium chloride into the heart: a rapid method that within a few seconds stops the heart. Or you choose the smallest of the three, after an ultrasound. We adopt a technique similar to that used for amniocentesis, but in this case the syringe and needle not levying the amniotic fluid to be analyzed for any abnormalities. The intra-cardiac injection instantly stops the development of one of the three fetuses.
For those who are not versed the intricate maze of Italian legislation on such delicate matters, you need a clarification.
The much-contested law February 19, 2004 # 40 on medically assisted procreation - also subject to the scrutiny of a referendum - the fourth paragraph of Article .14, in fact, specifically prohibits " the reduction in embryo of multiple pregnancies.
The question then arises of how it has been possible to selective abortions narrated by Calabrese.
The answer is recorded in the last of the aforementioned article 14, fourth paragraph: "except as provided by law May 22, 1978, No 194 'or the present law on abortion.
And that is precisely the point. Article. 4 of 194 permits abortion in the manner and terms established by law, whenever there is a "serious danger to the physical and mental health" of the woman.
For mothers of St. Anne, then, was sufficient to find a psychiatric medical examination which was highlighted that the 'triplets pregnancy represents a serious danger to the mental health of the mother. " It was enough, as pointed out by Calabrese, a mere threat of depression. A finding nothing, however, the fact that all three unborn children were perfectly healthy.
After some initial misgivings on the part of health care facilities (only the Sant'Anna di Torino has never had any doubts whatsoever), and the inevitable incursion of the judiciary (just remember the emergency decree issued in June 2004 by Dr. Emanuela Cugusi, judges of the People and the family of the Civil Court in Cagliari, with which it was imposed on the Dr.. Giovanni Monni, head of the Department of Obstetrics Microcitemico and Gynecology Hospital of the Sardinian capital, running un'embrioriduzione), this now seems the dominant interpretation: the Law 194 40 prevails over the law, including with regard to the reduction in embryo. And, once again, here's the rub.
Despite all the strenuous defenders of the law on interruption of pregnancy, including those in good faith, the concept of "mental health" of the woman is, in fact, a huge cauldron that can hold everything. By that criterion, the generic indefinite quantity, it can take the worst aberrations eugenic to Marie Stopes, the most unbridled individualism, caprice on the choice of a particular sex of the unborn, even in theory, a sadistic cruelty.
Once again we must reiterate that today in Italy, despite the petition of the principles of the Law 194, applies a full implementation of the concept of self-determination of women: in fact, no one can prevent a woman age not forbidden to have an abortion if it so wishes, whatever the reasons for his request.
Out of all hypocrisy, we should admit that our legal system recognizes a human being (the mother) the absolute right to life and death on another human being (the unborn).
In this fits the embrioriduzione, and the episode of St. Anne makes it even more obvious that principle. Place, in fact, that the embryos be sacrificed were perfectly healthy, it was not really an operation eugenics, but only the mere exercise of individual rights of women, the introduction of a mere subjective desire. The essence of the principle of self-determination.
This, however, notwithstanding the provisions unanimously by the National Committee of Bioethics in the 'Identity e Statuto dell’embrione umano» approvato il 22 giugno 1996, al cui punto 10 si legge: «Il Comitato è pervenuto unanimemente a riconoscere il dovere morale di trattare l'embrione umano, sin dalla fecondazione, secondo i criteri di rispetto e tutela che si devono adottare nei confronti degli individui umani a cui si attribuisce comunemente la caratteristica di persone, e ciò a prescindere dal fatto che all'embrione venga attribuita sin dall'inizio con certezza la caratteristica di persona nel suo senso tecnicamente filosofico, oppure che tale caratteristica sia ritenuta attribuibile soltanto con un elevato grado di plausibilità, oppure che si preferisca non utilizzare il concetto tecnico di persona e riferirsi soltanto a quell'appartenenza alla specie umana che non può essere contestata all'embrione sin dai primi istanti e non subisce alterazioni durante il suo successivo sviluppo».
Si tratta degli stessi embrioni sottoposti a procedura di “riduzione” presso l’Ospedale Sant’Anna di Torino?
Due corollari alle considerazioni suesposte.
Uno è legato al rischio (variabile da 5 all’8%) che la procedura di embrioriduzione determini, come effetto involontario, la soppressione di tutti i feti. L’esistenza di tale rischio è stata confermata dal fatto che una delle quattro mamme che si è sottoposta all’embrioriduzione presso l’Ospedale Sant’Anna, ha perso tutti i gemelli, in seguito alla rottura delle membrane. Anche sulle percentuali di rischio c’è qualcosa da dire. Come ha spiegato Claudio Giorlandino, presidente della SIDIP (Società italiana di diagnosi prenatale e medicina materno-fetale) «nel feticidio selettivo gli errori sono possibili e, nella maggior parte dei casi, non se ne ha notizia per la delicatezza delle vicende umane che si accompagnano e per l'impossibilità di arrivare a un contenzioso legale in considerazione del fatto che le donne sono ben informate, prima di sottoporvisi, e sottoscrivono un pieno consenso informato. Tale prassi, e tali errori, sono tecnicamente possible and spread throughout the world. "
The second corollary concerns about the incredible story advanced by some abortion doctors on the same Sant'Anna hospital. Calabrese are a few statements in his article: "But in this case - they say - we are faced with another question: women who have done everything to become mothers, who have spent money and energy both physical and emotional, they decide to remove a Life suddenly became too much. " So explain why I support abortion but against embrioriduzione.
It is not clear, in fact, if the attitude of these eminent doctors - who have not opted for conscientious objection - is dictated more by a veiled form of hypocrisy that schizophrenia is a clear moral .
A feticide remains the same, regardless of how it is done (surgical abortion, lethal syringe, occlusion of the umbilical cord pill RU486) and, particularly, whatever the personal motives of the mother.
As infanticide remains so regardless of the manner of execution of the crime and the hidden reasons why the culprit. It is no accident, among other things, that one of the mothers who has undergone embrioriduzione after the operation and remorse, he is paid to Dr. Sara Randaccio, a psychologist and psychotherapist at Sant'Anna in these terms: "Doctor, I feel like Franzoni.
The removal of a fetus is objectively and intrinsically an immoral act, with no possibility of distinguishing some of the motivation to do it. This applies to everyone, but more so for an abortion doctor claiming a criterion in the differential removal of embryos. As if some of them have more right to live than others. introduce a distinction in this sense, the moral is to fall into incoherence.
