Serve The Lord With Joy

Browsing News Entries

Browsing News Entries

House Republicans include slew of pro-life bills in 2025 budget proposal

null / Credit: lazyllama/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Mar 22, 2024 / 16:27 pm (CNA).

The Republican Study Committee (RSC), of which over 80% of House Republicans are members, dedicated a section of its “Fiscal Sanity to Save America” 2025 federal budget proposal to “measures designed to advance the cause of life.”

Released on Wednesday, the proposal, titled “Fiscal Sanity to Save America,” does not have any immediate legislative impact but does set the stage for House Republicans’ goals in the coming year.

Signed by RSC chair Rep. Kevin Hern, R-Oklahoma, and 12 other RSC members representing the committee’s 179 total members, the budget specifically “applauds” 38 different pro-life bills championed by Republican members of Congress.

Most notably the proposal applauds a wide range of bills House Republicans have advanced to limit abortion, including the Life at Conception Act, Heartbeat Protection Act (establishing a six-week limit with rape, incest, and physical health exceptions), and the Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act that establishes a 15-week limit with similar exceptions.

Other pro-life measures highlighted by the RSC include bills permanently banning tax-dollar funding for abortion, prohibiting the military from paying for abortions, and banning the distribution of abortion drugs without a doctor’s examination.

The RSC’s proposal has received a warm welcome from several pro-life groups, with Students for Life Action calling it “the most pro-life congressional budget ever proposed.”

Republicans stand by pro-life policies 

The Biden administration has expressed confidence that abortion will be a winning issue for Democrats in 2024. Yet, rather than backing away from the issue, the RSC budget proposal blasts the Biden administration’s pro-abortion policies and points out that “current federal policies fail to uphold the 14th Amendment and protect the right to life for our nation’s most vulnerable.”

“The gift of life is precious and should be protected,” the RSC budget proposal states. “The boundless potential of each life cannot be prejudged,” it continues, going on to affirm that “conservatives believe in creating a culture of life, compassion, and opportunity.”

The RSC proposal pointedly celebrates the overturn of Roe v. Wade as a “historic victory in the effort to defend innocent life and to return to the Constitution as it was written.”

“Since this landmark decision, several states have attempted to implement laws that further protect life within their borders. The RSC budget supports the efforts of these states.” 

Likely priority legislation

Though the RSC proposal applauds the bills of several members limiting abortions, since former president Donald Trump recently signaled support for a 15-week limit, with exceptions for rape, incest, and the physical health of the mother, it is that measure that is currently receiving the most attention.

On March 19, Trump signaled his tacit support for a 15-week measure while speaking on the radio show “Sid & Friends in the Morning.” 

“We’re going to come up with a time — and maybe we could bring the country together on that issue,” he said. “The number of weeks now, people are agreeing on 15. And I’m thinking in terms of that. And it’ll come out to something that’s very reasonable. But people are really, even hard-liners are agreeing, seems to be, 15 weeks seems to be a number that people are agreeing at. But I’ll make that announcement at the proper time.”

The RSC proposal’s inclusion of the Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act indicates that many Republicans would be willing to support it.

Introduced by Rep. Chris Smith, R-New Jersey, the bill would make it a criminal offense, subject to a fine and prison time, for performing or attempting to perform an abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

The bill includes exceptions for when the life of the mother is in danger and cases of rape and incest. The bill also specifically states that women obtaining abortions cannot be prosecuted.

Four Freedom Caucus members object to Veterans Affairs IVF funding plan

Rep. Matt Rosendale, R-Montana, speaks at a press conference on the debt limit and the Freedom Caucus's plan for spending reduction at the U.S. Capitol on March 28, 2023, in Washington, D.C. / Credit: Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Mar 22, 2024 / 14:00 pm (CNA).

Four congressmen in the conservative House Freedom Caucus voiced “strong objections” to a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) plan to expand its coverage of in vitro fertilization (IVF) to unmarried veterans, including those in same-sex relationships.

Under the previous rules, the VA only covered IVF treatments for married couples who produce their own eggs and sperm for the fertility treatment. The new policy will allow donor eggs and sperm and cover treatments for unmarried people who require such donations to create an embryo.

The lawmakers, led by Rep. Matt Rosendale, R-Montana, expressed their dissent in a letter to VA Secretary Denis McDonough on March 20. He was joined by Caucus Chairman Bob Good, R-Virginia; Rep. Mary Miller, R-Illinois; and Rep. Josh Brecheen, R-Oklahoma. 

“An IVF embryo is the earliest stage of life that exists outside of the womb,” Rosendale said in a statement accompanying the letter.

“Through this expansion, a surplus of embryos will be created, which are likely to result in abandoned or cruelly discarded human life,” Rosendale said. “Accompanying that, legislation has been introduced previously to expand IVF at the VA, meaning the legality of this decision is questionable at best.”

IVF is a fertility treatment in which doctors extract eggs from the woman and fertilize the eggs with sperm to create human embryos in a laboratory without a sexual act. Clinics create a surplus of embryos to maximize the likelihood that the mother can bring one healthy baby to term — the remaining embryos are often discarded, which ends a human life, or frozen indefinitely. 

The letter from the lawmakers notes that expanding IVF “creates a plethora of ethical concerns and questions” and calls the treatment “morally dubious.” Because most human embryos are either destroyed or abandoned, the signatories conclude it “should not be subsidized by the American taxpayer.”

Rosendale and his three colleagues also requested information from the VA pertaining to what the department does with surplus embryos, how many are destroyed or frozen, how much the IVF expansion and embryo storage will cost taxpayers, and what specific law grants them the authority to take this action.

Rather than expanding IVF, the lawmakers suggested the VA provide reimbursements for adoption efforts instead. 

“There are around 400,000 children in foster care nationwide, and approximately 117,000 are waiting to be adopted,” the letter adds. “The VA also provides fertility and infertility care to help veterans who struggle with infertility. It would make more sense to use the funds that the expansion of IVF will cost to bolster adoption efforts at the VA.”

Under its current policies, the VA can provide up to $2,000 for adoption expenses, but only if the veteran has a service-connected disability that causes infertility. The law does not allow coverage for surrogacy. 

Access to IVF became a major political issue after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos created through IVF are covered under the state’s “Wrongful Death of a Minor Act.” After several clinics stopped providing IVF, Republicans and Democrats in the state quickly passed legislation to grant clinics immunity in the deaths of human embryos, which was signed by Gov. Kay Ivey, who claims to be pro-life.

A large number of Republicans, including lawmakers who are outspoken on other pro-life issues, distanced themselves from the ruling and embraced IVF despite the destruction to human life that is integral to the industry. Few have spoken out against the process. 

The Catholic Church opposes IVF because it separates the marriage act from procreation and destroys embryonic human life. Acknowledging the advances in science available today to those seeking help having children, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops warns Catholics on its website of the ethical issues involved.

“The many techniques now used to overcome infertility also have profound moral implications, and couples should be aware of these before making decisions about their use,” the guidance reads.

European bishops call for inclusion of Christian principles in Europe

The European Parliament in Strasbourg, France. / Credit: JLogan via Wikimedia/ Public Domain

Rome Newsroom, Mar 22, 2024 / 10:45 am (CNA).

The bishops bemoaned what they see as the political and institutional marginalization of Christian voices.

Pope Francis laicizes Belgian ex-bishop and abuser Roger Vangheluwe

Pope Francis on March 21, 2024, laicized Bishop Emeritus of Bruges, Belgium, Roger Vangheluwe (center), years after the former prelate admitted to repeatedly sexually abusing his nephew when the latter was a minor. / Credit: Carolus, CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Rome Newsroom, Mar 22, 2024 / 09:40 am (CNA).

The apostolic nunciature to Belgium said in a statement on Thursday that “serious new elements” had come to light regarding Vangheluwe.

Fetal homicide law used in New Hampshire for first time in murder of mother and child

null / Carl Ballou / Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Mar 21, 2024 / 18:30 pm (CNA).

A New Hampshire man was charged with the murder of a pregnant woman and her unborn child, which is the first time the state’s fetal homicide law has ever been invoked.

William Kelly, 38, was charged with second-degree murder on allegations that he recklessly caused the death of 33-year-old Christine Falzone. He also faced another count of second-degree murder on allegations that he recklessly caused the death of her unborn child. 

The indictment from the Carroll County Grand Jury was announced on March 15. 

According to the New Hampshire Department of Justice, Falzone was somewhere between 35 and 37 weeks pregnant at the time of her death, which means she was only a few weeks away from giving birth. Authorities have not disclosed a suspected motive for the alleged murder but noted that Falzone and Kelly lived together. 

The double murder charges present a first-of-its-kind case in New Hampshire. This is the first time any person has been charged under the fetal homicide law enacted in 2018, which allows homicide prosecutions when a third party commits a violent criminal act that causes the death of a preborn child of a woman who is more than 20 weeks pregnant.

In most situations, New Hampshire law does not recognize the rights of preborn children — the state allows abortions through the 24th week of pregnancy. The fetal homicide law only applies when there is a violent criminal action taken by a third party that causes the preborn child’s death — not when a woman procures an abortion or takes an action that causes the death of her preborn child.

According to National Right to Life, 38 states have laws that allow homicide prosecutions when a violent criminal act causes the death of a preborn child. In 30 of those states, this applies at every stage of pregnancy. The other eight, including New Hampshire, only apply in the later stages of pregnancy. 

Falzone was found dead on Dec. 17, 2023, after authorities received a phone call about a woman who was unconscious and not breathing, according to the state’s Department of Justice. An autopsy found that the cause of death was a homicide caused by multiple blunt force injuries. Kelly, who was the immediate suspect in the homicide, was taken into custody.

‘Women should be outraged’: Lawmakers urge Supreme Court to restore abortion pill restrictions

Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Mississippi, urges the Supreme Court to restore abortion pill restrictions at a Capitol Hill press conference hosted by Reps. Chris Smith, R-New Jersey, and August Pfluger, R-Texas, Mar. 21, 2024. / Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Mar 21, 2024 / 18:00 pm (CNA).

With the Supreme Court set to hear arguments in a high-stakes abortion case next week, pro-life House members are urging the court to restore what they believe are necessary restrictions on the abortion drug known as mifepristone.

Speaking at a Capitol Hill press conference on Thursday, lawmakers and activists said it was crucial that the court rule in favor of the pro-life groups in the case Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food and Drug Administration (AHM v. FDA), which is set to be heard by the Supreme Court on March 26.

Rep. Chris Smith, R-New Jersey, claimed that “in addition to killing an unborn child,” chemical abortion “presents significant health risks to pregnant women that is at the core of the lawsuit.”

Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Mississippi, said at the press conference that in loosening restrictions on mifepristone, the Biden administration is “endangering lives.”

“I’m praying for the justices as they hear these oral arguments next week for all women and unborn children who have suffered from these drugs,” she said. “I’m praying that the right decision will be made.”

“Women should be outraged that other women are put in danger like this,” she continued. “This just is not right, and women deserve better than this.”

What’s at stake?

Represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), several pro-life groups sued the FDA in 2022 to restore abortion drug restrictions, most notably requiring in-person doctor’s visits and prohibiting obtaining mifepristone by mail.

The Fifth Circuit Court ruled in 2023 that the FDA had to restore those restrictions but the Biden administration quickly appealed, leaving the ultimate decision with the Supreme Court.

On March 26 the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case before deciding whether to restore the mifepristone restrictions.

What is mifepristone? 

Mifepristone is the drug most used in chemical abortions, which now accounts for 63% of all U.S. abortions. Mifepristone works by cutting off the nutrients necessary for an unborn baby to continue growing, essentially starving the baby to death.

In 2021 the FDA under the Biden administration loosened mifepristone restrictions allowing the pill to be mailed to women and taken without any in-person examination by a doctor. The administration also issued new guidance allowing retail pharmacies to dispense mifepristone, which allowed CVS and Walgreens to begin selling the drug in certain states this month.

Lawmakers and leaders speak up 

In November 2023, over 100 members of Congress signed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to rule in favor of the pro-life groups in AHM v. FDA. On Thursday, several of those lawmakers spoke in front of the U.S. Capitol, continuing to press the Supreme Court to restore mifepristone restrictions.

“This is about protecting the safety of Americans from a politicized FDA,” said Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas.

“The FDA’s disregard for federal law and patient safeguards is appalling, and it’s unacceptable,” he continued. “We cannot allow politics to dictate health care decisions, especially when it comes to matters as critical as the health and safety of women.”

Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tennessee, said that “the White House should be ashamed” and that “this is about profit, this is about a predatory industry that preys upon young girls.”

Also present at the press conference were several pro-life leaders including Dr. Christina Francis, an OB-GYN and CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

“As an OB-GYN,” Francis said, “it is appalling to me that the FDA would leave women to perform their own chemical abortions at home, alone, without even one in-person visit to the doctor.”

“What’s even more shocking is that the FDA removed its safeguard despite its own label, stating that roughly 1 in 25 women who take these drugs will end up in the emergency room,” she said.

According to Francis, in-person doctor’s visits are especially vital to check for ectopic pregnancies and to verify the unborn baby’s level of development. Without knowing this information, Francis said, the likelihood of serious complications increases dramatically.

Abortion groups plan protest

Several lawmakers at the press conference mentioned that this case would not ban mifepristone and expressed hopes that increasing protections would be a unifying factor. Several pro-abortion groups, nevertheless, are vehemently opposed to any restrictions on mifepristone.

The Women’s March is one such group and has organized a demonstration outside the Supreme Court on the day of the hearing.

In a statement obtained by CNA, Women’s March executive director Rachel O’Leary Carmona said that “with the 2024 election approaching, and the GOP’s attack on women’s bodily autonomy growing disturbingly stronger every day — it’s crucial to shine a national spotlight on access to mifepristone and for Americans to understand what is at stake for women.”

“The reality of a nationwide abortion ban and limited access to reproductive health care is not a hypothetical — it’s happening right in front of us for all Americans to see,” Carmona said. 

‘I have never worked on a case like this’

In an exclusive interview with CNA, Erik Baptist, the lead ADF attorney on the case, said that the FDA’s decision to drop the mifepristone restrictions was “unprecedented” and based on “reckless” politics instead of science.  

“I have never worked on a case like this where a federal agency tasked with securing the safety of the general public, in particular here, women, has callously disregarded health without basis,” he said. “That is unprecedented what the FDA did here.”

With the hearing fast approaching, Baptist, who is Catholic, said he is grateful for the U.S. bishops’ recent national call for prayer for the case.

“It would be great to have millions of Catholics across this country in union saying a prayer for the outcome of this case, for women’s health, for their protection, and for everybody involved in this case on the issue of chemical abortion in general,” he said.

Baptist said that he expects the Supreme Court will not issue a final ruling until the end of its 2024 term in June.

U.S. Catholic school report highlights steady enrollment, school choice

null / Credit: Billion Photos/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Mar 21, 2024 / 13:30 pm (CNA).

Following three years of modest growth, enrollment in Catholic education has remained stable since 2023, according to new data made public Wednesday by the National Catholic Educational Association (NCEA).  

The NCEA, which gathers statistics on Catholic school enrollment in the United States each year, reported that enrollment remained steady with a 0.0% change in enrollment from 2022-2023 to 2023-2024.

Following two straight years of notable growth, Catholic school enrollment had again risen slightly nationwide in 2022-2023.

“Although the national enrollment decline since 2013-2014 school year has been 281,251, a 14.2% loss of the student population, enrollment in more recent years has stabilized,” the report read. 

Of the 5,905 Catholic schools in the U.S., enrollment in the southeast region of the U.S. has experienced the highest enrollment growth since the 2019-2020 school year, at a 3.6% increase, while the Great Lakes, West, and Far West regions account for almost half of the Catholic school population.

Catholic school closures — averaging about 130 closures a year since the early 2000s according to NCEA data shared with CNA in an email — have been lower in the past two school years. Only 55 schools closed or consolidated in the 2023-2024 school year, while 44 closed in 2022-2023. Meanwhile, 20 new Catholic schools have opened, and 38% of Catholic schools have a waiting list. 

Following record expansion of state “school choice” programs in 2023, the NCEA found that 13.7% of Catholic school students use school choice programs to help them attend Catholic school. 

In four states — Ohio, Florida, Indiana, and Arizona — more than half of Catholic school students are using a school choice program.

Those programs “offer families the ability to choose Catholic schools” by helping parents finance tuition and other educational expenses through programs including state educational savings accounts, tax credit scholarships, and private school vouchers.

“Catholic schools should advocate for the expansion of these programs, enhance awareness among families, and tailor their educational offerings to attract and retain students benefiting from school choice, ensuring access to Catholic education for a broader demographic,” the report noted. 

The NCEA also found an increase in the amount of students with diagnosed disabilities to 7.8%, from the previous year’s 6.9%, which “reflects a growing recognition and accommodation within Catholic schools.”

“The inclusion and support of students with disabilities are indicative of the Catholic education system’s commitment to serving all children,” the report noted. 

Catholic schools in the southeast had the highest percentage of students with diagnosed disabilities, at more than 11%, the NCEA found.

In addition to disability accommodations, 129 Catholic schools featured dual-language immersion programs designed to teach students in both their native and second languages in order to promote bilingual students.

Nineteen percent of Catholic school students are Hispanic or Latino, which the NCEA noted “reflects broader demographic shifts in the United States and the Catholic education system’s response to these changes.”

The NCEA also found an increasing trend of non-Catholic students enrolling in Catholic schools, making up 21% of Catholic school students, which, the report noted, presents both “opportunities and challenges.” 

Meanwhile, 16% of faculty are non-Catholic, and 12% have not reported a religious affiliation.

While the majority of elementary schools remain parish-sponsored, the NCEA found “notable growth” in elementary diocesan schools, from 2.4% in 1990 to 18% in 2023, “signaling a trend towards consolidation and centralized management within dioceses.”

St. Mary’s Gaels men’s basketball team makes history, heads to NCAA tournament

The St. Mary's mens basketball team wins the West Coast Conference, earning themselves a spot in the NCAA tournament. / Credit: Ryan Barnett

CNA Staff, Mar 21, 2024 / 12:30 pm (CNA).

The St. Mary’s Gaels men’s basketball team made history this season by winning the West Coast Conference regular season and tournament titles on March 12, earning them an automatic bid for the NCAA men’s tournament.

It’s the third time in program history that the team has won both titles in the same season. This is their fifth tournament title. Their previous tournament title wins came in 1997, 2010, 2012, and 2019.

Since the beginning of the calendar year, the Gaels have only lost one game, winning 17 out of 18 games and ended the regular season 26-7 overall. The Gaels going into the tournament as the No. 5 seed in the West Region. 

St. Mary’s will now face No. 12 Grand Canyon Antelopes in their first-round game at 10:05 p.m. ET on Friday, March 22.

St. Mary’s College, located in Moraga, California, was founded in 1863 by Father Joseph Sadoc Alemany, OP, who became the first archbishop of San Francisco. In 1868 the college was handed over to the De La Salle Christian Brothers, who still administer the school. The private Catholic liberal arts college has a student body of approximately 4,000 students. 

Several other Catholic colleges will be joining St. Mary’s in the “Big Dance,” including Creighton University, Gonzaga University, Marquette University, St. Peter’s University, and the University of Dayton. There are also eight Catholic universities that made it to the NCAA women’s tournament — University of Notre Dame, University of Portland, Gonzaga University, Creighton University, Fairfield University, Sacred Heart University, College of the Holy Cross, and Marquette University.

Denny Bulcao, a St. Mary’s alum and former play-by-play announcer for the Gaels, told CNA that he believes the team has a “good chance of getting to the Sweet 16, possibly farther.”

“This would be our first Sweet 16 since 2010,” he said. “We’ve come pretty close about two or three times since. The last two seasons we lost in the round of 32.”

Bulcao was in attendance at the Gaels West Coast Conference Tournament championship game at Orleans Arena in Las Vegas, where the team beat Gonzaga 69-60.

“​​The energy and atmosphere in Las Vegas is always electric, especially the semifinal and final games because so many Gonzaga fans attend,” Bulcao shared. “This year there were more St. Mary’s fans than I’d ever seen, which was excellent!”

St. Mary’s “won the semifinal game against Santa Clara pretty easily,” he added, “and the final was a hard-fought win over Gonzaga, a team that usually wins the conference and tournament championship.” 

“St. Mary’s winning the regular season championship and the tournament championship is a really big deal, and it’s also especially fun to see St. Mary’s alumni and people that I worked with in the athletics department at the games.”

The former announcer highlighted the team’s defense and solid rebounding as its strengths.

“These are things that our head coach, Randy Bennett, has always stressed,” he explained. “We have a few talented shooters in guard Aidan Mahaney and forward Alex Ducas. Our ‘bigs,’ Mitchell Saxen and Mason Forbes, are usually solid. We also usually don’t make stupid mistakes or commit too many turnovers.”

Despite having a rocky start to their season, Bulcao said, “I think the team finally figured out who the true five starters would be and how they could play well together. Our point guard Augustas Marciulionis really stepped up and became the leader of the team, something we didn’t have and desperately needed for the first 10 games.”

Montana Supreme Court OKs pro-abortion measure for voters in 2024

null / Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Mar 21, 2024 / 11:35 am (CNA).

The Montana Supreme Court this week gave the green light to a pro-abortion amendment to the state’s constitution that may appear before voters in November. 

In a 6-1 decision issued on Monday, the court held that state Attorney General Austin Knudsen had “erred” when his office determined that the proposed pro-abortion ballot measure was “legally insufficient” to be placed on the ballot in this year’s election. 

The measure as described on the Montana secretary of state’s website would “[prohibit] the government from denying or burdening the right to abortion before fetal viability” and would further forbid any restrictions on abortion “when it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health.”

State Deputy Solicitor General Brent Mead said in a Jan. 16 letter that the measure fails the state’s “separate-vote requirement,” which mandates that multiple state ballot measures be prepared and submitted separately so that voters can distinguish between them. 

The measure would change Montana state law in numerous ways, Mead argued, including rules regarding fetal viability and medical regulations; the measure as it was written “creates an express right to abortion but denies voters the ability to express their views on the nuance of the right,” he argued. 

In their ruling, the justices disagreed with Mead’s assessment, arguing that the ballot proposal “effects a single change to the Montana Constitution on a single subject,” namely the right to abortion.

“If [the measure] is placed on the ballot, voters may ultimately agree or disagree with the proposed change that [it] offers,” the justices wrote, “but they will be able to understand what they are being asked to vote upon.”

The court ordered that Knudsen “prepare a ballot statement consistent with the applicable statutory requirements” and that his office “forward the statement to the Montana secretary of state within five days.”

In his dissent, Justice Jim Rice argued that the attorney general “properly determined that the initiative, in its totality, is legally insufficient.” 

He wrote that the measure makes “two or more changes to the constitution that are substantive in nature” and that it is “virtually impossible … for a voter to fully comprehend the effects of its multiple provisions.”

Abortion supporters and pro-life advocates have been battling at the ballot box in the nearly two years since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 repeal of Roe v. Wade. 

Voters in seven other states around the country — California, Vermont, Michigan, Kansas, Kentucky, Montana, and Ohio — have voted in favor of abortion since Roe’s repeal with residents either voting to expand abortion access or else voting down pro-life measures at the ballot box. 

Nearly a dozen other states, meanwhile, are considering various abortion measures, both pro-life and pro-abortion, in November. 

CUA panel: Prenatal testing poses unique threat to preborn children with Down syndrome

Carissa Carroll, pictured with her son Jack, founded the nonprofit organization Jack's Basket to celebrate babies with Down syndrome / Credit: Screenshot/EWTN Pro-Life Weekly

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Mar 21, 2024 / 09:00 am (CNA).

As many countries celebrate World Down Syndrome Day on March 21, a panel of pro-life leaders and scholars is calling attention to the threat that prenatal testing poses to preborn children who are diagnosed with Down syndrome in the womb.

“[The mother] often faces tremendous internal and external pressure to undergo an abortion,” said J.D. Flynn, who moderated the panel at the Catholic University of America’s Institute for Human Ecology and is himself the father of two children with Down syndrome. 

Prenatal screening within the first 11 through 14 weeks of pregnancy can determine whether a preborn child has a higher likelihood of having Down syndrome, but a follow-up diagnostic test can confirm whether the child has the condition. Although efforts to destigmatize the condition have had some success, the likelihood that a mother will abort her child increases dramatically after such a diagnosis. 

A 2012 study that compiled data from 24 studies between 1995 and 2011 found that more than two-thirds of preborn children who were diagnosed with Down syndrome in the womb were killed via abortion. Rates throughout Europe are even higher — more than 90%. In Iceland, nearly all preborn children diagnosed with Down syndrome are aborted and only about two or three children with Down syndrome are born every year.

Mary O’Callaghan, a visiting fellow at Notre Dame University’s McGrath Institute for Church Life, noted a disconnect between the “more positive” attitude the public expresses about people with Down syndrome and the “more aggressive targeting” of abortion for preborn children with Down syndrome.

“Those with Down syndrome are increasingly showing us their ability to flourish,” said O’Callaghan, who also has a child with Down syndrome. In spite of this, she said, “we’re in a much worse place in respect to abortion and Down syndrome.”

Bridget Brown, a 36-year-old woman with Down syndrome who serves on the National Catholic Partnership on Disability Council on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, expressed the same concern. 

Noting the trends in countries such as Iceland, Brown said she may be from the last generation of people with Down syndrome: “The world may never again benefit from our gifts.”

“This is genocide — the systematic killing of a whole people,” Brown added, citing a letter she wrote to Pope Francis about the situation in Iceland before meeting the pontiff in 2017.

Bridget Brown meets with Pope Francis in Vatican City on Oct. 21, 2017. Credit:  L'Osservatore Romano.
Bridget Brown meets with Pope Francis in Vatican City on Oct. 21, 2017. Credit: L'Osservatore Romano.

According to Tracy Winsor, who co-founded an organization to support couples who carry their children to term after a prenatal diagnosis called Be Not Afraid, many women consider abortion after a diagnosis because receiving the news is a “traumatic event” for most couples and is presented as a “worst-case scenario.” 

Winsor noted that doctors will present a lot of information, which “can be overwhelming” at the moment. She advises parents to immediately connect with parents who have children living with Down syndrome and to advocates for individuals with Down syndrome.

O’Callaghan agreed: “Meeting with other parents around this time is very helpful [in reducing abortion].” Prenatal testing, she noted, should be oriented toward preparing for their child.

“They need to think about prenatal testing oriented toward the health of their child,” O’Callaghan said.

Brown similarly noted that like everyone else, her “life is filled with hopes and possibilities” and encouraged couples who receive a prenatal Down syndrome diagnosis for their preborn child to approach the situation positively. 

“Make plans based on dreams and not on fears,” Brown said. “Believe in yourself and your child.”