Jan 30, 2010

Manchester, Disunited, by Gail Besse in NOR

Manchester, Disunited
January-February 2010
By Gail Besse

Gail Besse is a Boston freelance writer. Her work has appeared in daily newspapers and national Catholic media. please support Gail, and New Oxford Review

As medical practices grow more hostile to the sanctity of life, Catholic-secular hospital affiliations can become ethical minefields. The Diocese of Manchester, New Hampshire, could be facing one now, with its proposed alliance between its Catholic Medical Center and Dart mouth-Hitchcock Health, a secular conglomerate. Since February 2009, when plans for a "regional healthcare delivery system" were unveiled, prolifers have been waving red flags.

According to Kathleen Souza of New Hampshire Right to Life, "Dartmouth is involved in abortions throughout the state, heavily involved in fertility research, em­bryonic stem-cell research, selective-reduction abortion — almost everything the Church is against." The diocese is in danger of surrendering the independence of its 330-bed hospital, she said, in a convoluted agreement that integrates it with Dartmouth-Hitchcock.

But John McCormack, the bishop of Manchester, counters that, although he gave preliminary approval to the affiliation in July so the review process could start, he won't sign off on the deal if it violates Catholic ethics. "I am committed to preserve Catholic Medical Center to be a true Catholic healthcare institution, one that fulfills all the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic hospitals," he said in a statement posted at www.AHealthierTomorrow.org, a website promoting the plan.

These directives were set forth in the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' 2001 document, "Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care." A section of the document on "Forming Partnerships with Health Care Organizations and Providers" reads like an ethical roadmap for such ventures. It is careful to note, "The risk of scandal cannot be underestimated when partnerships are not built upon common values and moral principles."

Although abortions are not performed at Dart mouth-Hitchcock's medical-group practice in Manchester, they are performed at affiliates in other cities. Dartmouth-Hitchcock is clear that its members won't curtail such current reproductive "health services," said spokesman Jason Aldous. Dartmouth-Hitchcock also promotes end-of-life protocols that violate Catholic ethics. "If you partner with Dartmouth-Hitchcock and give them credibility, it's a weak moral argument to say, ‘They do [abortions] under a different roof, so we won't be culpable,'" said Souza.

"A Catholic institution doesn't only have an obligation to serve healthcare needs but also to preach the Gospel," added New Hampshire Right to Life's Barbara Hagan. "Partnering with an entity that stands in direct philosophical opposition is a breach of the Catholic com munity's support and trust. Dartmouth-Hitchcock has no re li gious purpose — only charitable, scientific, and educational."

Dartmouth-Hitchcock encompasses two hospitals in Lebanon and group medical practices in four New Hampshire cities. It is affiliated with the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice and Dartmouth Medical School. A partnership with Catholic Medical Center would give Dartmouth-Hitchcock a hospital presence 60 miles from Boston.

Catholic Medical Center (CMC) would receive more Medicaid and Medicare revenue from an affiliation with Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, a teaching hospital in Lebanon, according to Andre Martel, a former state senator and leader of the ad-hoc "Save CMC" movement. Martel testified at one of three public hearings last fall that CMC is thriving — with a $99 million surplus — so it could easily continue independently, without a secular partner.

The hospital's roots go back almost 120 years. In the 1890s Manchester Catholics scrimped and saved in order to build two hospitals, both run by religious sisters: Sacred Heart on the city's east side and Notre Dame on the west side. In 1978 the two hospitals combined into CMC. And now it is "being handled like a financial asset rather than a sacred trust," said former state representative David Welch.

Led by Souza and Hagan, both former state legislators, the 25,000-member New Hampshire Right to Life has filed a "Memo of Opposition" with the New Hampshire attorney general and submitted more than 500 pages of documentation contending that the merger violates both Catholic ethics and charitable public-trust laws.

The medical boards of both CMC and Dartmouth-Hitchcock must sign off on a final affiliation agreement. Federal and state anti-trust approval is also needed. Ultimately, Bishop McCormack and the New Hampshire attorney general's office have final say over the plan, which could still be amended.

The reorganizational structure is intricate enough that in November the state hired a law firm, to be paid for by CMC and Dartmouth-Hitchcock, to unfold its complexities. Souza likened it to "Russian nesting dolls" in that when one layer opens, another is revealed. For example, one section of the agreement, posted online, stipulates that most decisions are "expected" to originate locally by CMC and its Dartmouth-Hitchcock Manchester affiliate. But another section calls for Dartmouth-Hitch cock to become the new "sole member" of CMC's parent company, which means that the diocese basically relinquishes the hospital's independence.

A Dartmouth-Hitchcock Leadership Council, composed of officials from all regional members, could wield final say over CMC finances and appointment of its trustees and president.

While the plan does stipulate that Catholic directives be followed, it acknowledges elsewhere that sometimes they might not be. In those cases, CMC officials on the Leadership Council could "recuse [themselves] and have no involvement in such issues." Hagan asked quite pointedly whether this approach resembles Pope John Paul II's exhortation to "stand up and proclaim the Gospel."

Bishop McCormack has requested three ethical reviews, but has drawn fire for not releasing the findings. "Keeping these reviews secret is more than monumentally bad public relations," the Manchester Union Leader editorialized on November 24. "If he doesn't [release the reports], this deal will be tainted forever by the secrecy."

Diocesan spokesman Kevin Donovan responded to that charge in a December 10 e-mail. "The opinions from Catholic ethicists are advisory and not definitive," he said, and were meant to remain confidential. Also, the final agreement may change before it reaches the bishop, so previous analyses would be outdated. "When the bishop reaches his determination, he will clearly indicate the reasons for his decision," Donovan said.

Hagan is hopeful that once the bishop studies the whole package, he'll conclude the affiliation is "an ethical impossibility."

This localized controversy has national implications. "Washington is dying to squelch conscience protections," said Colleen McCormick, a Manchester anesthesiologist with a degree in medical ethics. "Once Catholic entities have physicians who have no problems with the Culture of Death, rights of conscience will be easier to overcome."

According to a leading bioethicist, Catholic-secular hospital mergers are possible "as long as the Catholic healthcare provider is clear about the meaning of its Catholic identity and remains intent on upholding that identity in all negotiations and arrangements leading to the merger and subsequent to its realization."

To avoid problems in Catholic-secular hospital mergers, parties would be wise to specify in writing the actual terms of ethical practice required, suggested Fr. Tadeusz Pacholczyk, director of education for the National Catholic Bioethics Center.

His advice was followed in Rhode Island, where the Diocese of Providence under Bishop Thomas Tobin recently merged St. Joseph Health Services with the secular Roger Williams Medical Center. On October 29 the Rhode Island attorney general approved the new holding company, CharterCare Health Partners.

"You can't assume the pieces will come together, so we discussed everything," said Msgr. Paul Theroux, vice-chairman of St. Joseph's board. "We wrote in reserved powers for the bishop in terms of preserving Catholic identity. We were upfront with Roger Williams, and they were willing to make some concessions. They agreed never to perform abortions, euthanasia, or embryonic cell destruction. It's written into the bylaws of CharterCare. They agreed they would not accept funding for embryonic stem-cell research. If others joined in the future, they'd also be bound by these restrictions."

Roger Williams can perform sterilizations, which the Church opposes, as long as St. Joseph's neither participates in nor profits from them.

In Manchester, Bishop McCormack's next move will be a monumental one — one that could have national and historic implications. For all who care about the increasingly tenuous future of Catholic health care, it is a situation that bears watching — and praying about.

"It is spiritual warfare that we're engaged in," said Elizabeth Breuder, vice president of New Hampshire Right to Life. She was among a group of Catholics holding a prayer vigil outside CMC on December 8, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, the Union Leader reported. Breuder held a banner of Our Lady of Guadalupe, patroness of the unborn. "We're just begging our protectress to make sure the affiliation will not go through and that our hospital will remain Catholic and become more authentically Catholic," she said.

Skier Brian

Brian the Skier, aka SkierBrian has been nice enough to post my Fitchburg doesn't need Planned Parenthood post. Thanks Brian, keep up the good work and see you on either Main St. Fitchburg or Pleasant St. Worcester.

A Picture's worth

Jan 27, 2010

Protest NEW Fitchburg Planned Parenthood 1/28/10

Protest NEW Fitchburg Planned Parenthood

Thursday, January 28 -- 12 Noon
391 Main Street, Fitchburg, MA

Planned Parenthood has a federal grant [surprise!] and wants to start three more PP Expresses -- Fitchburg, Marlboro and Milford. The first office that they want to open is in Fitchburg. We think the address is 317 Main St.

The pro-lifers in Firchburg are going to picket with signs and as many folks as possible on Thursday , January 28 at 12 noon. We would like lots of folks.

One purpose is to make the prospective landlord and business people and other neighbors very uncomfortable about having such a death dealing and controversial tenant moving into downtown Fitchburg.

The City Council will be meeting on the following Tuesday to vote on a petition, initiated by some Councillors rejecting the PP move to Fitchburg. From what I understand the vote holds no real power. It's just a vote of the opinion of the Council. The demonstration will help to get the Council's vote because they will see it as ongoing trouble with picketers in downtown.

Aborted baby signs, megaphones, the Grim Reaper, and many people milling about with signs, causing a slow down in traffic and a real nuisance will do wonders. Public opinion seems to be against PP moving downtown.

Be there January 28 if you can!!

Jan 24, 2010

37th anniversary

Scene last Friday evening in front of Planned Parenthood on Pleasant St. in Worcester, MA, on the 37th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton Supreme Court Decisions that legalized abortion on demand with the loophole exemption of a mother's health (not life).

Fitchburg doesn't need Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood has been given a $387,000 federal grant to provide Health Awareness Services in an office at 317 Main St., Fitchburg, MA. Six members of the Fitchburg City council have “slammed” these plans according to a Fitchburg Sentinel report, specifically voting “to draft a resolution urging Planned Parenthood to abandon plans to open a Fitchburg chapter.”

We agree with this resolution, and with Councilor-at-large Dean Tran, who said "there already exist many social services providing help to women and we do not need another one in Fitchburg." Tran wants to combat the “reputation of Fitchburg as the epicenter of social services.”

But more importantly, we disagree with the Planned Parenthood concept of "health awareness." When we see the Planned Parenthood signs and their hot pink Toyota Scion with the tag line "Sexual Health Matters" we want to know exactly what they mean. We get that meaning from their Web site teenwire.com, where such topics as "Will the Gyno (gynecologist) tell your mom that you are having sex?" assure young girls not to worry, but to check first and avoid those gynecologists who might inform their parents. The “Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgendered and Questioning” link claims that we are either gay or bisexual from birth, yet we may take a long time to question our sexual orientation. In other words, try it, all of it.

Planned Parenthood has had a generation to work to reduce sexually transmitted disease, and we do not believe their approach has worked. We believe the promotion of promiscuity, the mocking of monogamy, and the band-aid of safe-sex has been totally ineffective. Couple this colossal ineffectiveness with the fact that the Fitchburg Planned Parenthood office will be a feeder to the Worcester Planned Parenthood abortion center and you have all the reason Fitchburg needs to keep Planned Parenthood out of town.

Jan 16, 2010

Thanks for not being so scary

This morning at the prayer vigil protest outside Planned Parenthood on 472 Pleasant St. in Worcester, MA, we noticed a young girl, whom we did not know, cross the street and walk towards us. Linda asked if she were joining us. She apologetically said no, she actually had an appointment, "but not for an abortion." She went on to explain that she had to go to Planned Parenthood as her health insurance had run out in a kind of a catch-22 situation. She was on Masshealth (Medicaid) but when she enrolled in a State college she was removed from Masshealth, and required to either show proof of health insurance or pay the State school for health coverage. I think the State's reasoning is that college kids can take college loans to pay for health coverage. Under Massachusetts Law, if you do not have health coverage they will fine you when you do your tax return. But this girl had financial aid, could not get any more loans, and therefore had no insurance.

Aside from our scepticism that Planned Parenthood gives away free care (we assume they get some type Federal reimbursement for this), we engaged this young girl in conversation for about 10 minutes, where she impressed us with her wherewithal, stating she understood that a pregnancy was a child, even asking how could someone not understand that? Also that she knew artificial contraception is never fool-proof, so she decided that the best way to avoid pregnancy at this point in her life was to not engage in promiscuous sex. We discussed how it seemed odd that a person would have sex with someone they would never consider having a baby with, and that the culture seems to think the approach to this great "marriage act" is simply how to minimize risk. As I have said previously, Planned Parenthood wants young people to think they can put a condom on their hearts - but sex does not work that way, certainly not when it is new, though possibly after one becomes desensitized to the "becoming one flesh" aspect of the marital act.

We even joked around some with her, but finished up suggested she may want to find another place to have her medical exams, and offered the help of Problem Pregnancy to see if we could find some free medical care for her. She did not spend more than 5 minutes in the Planned Parenthood building, however before she left us, she hugged Linda and thanked us, "for not being so scary."

Pro-Choice vs. Pro-Abortion this Jan. 19

Perhaps I was engaging in hyperbole when I endorsed Scott Brown for US Senator from Massachusetts in my previous emails, as the only “pro-life” vote. For the record, Scott Brown is Pro-Choice. In past voter guides MCFL has listed Brown as Pro-abortion while NARAL Planned Parenthood has listed Brown's Pro-Choice voting as “mixed.” My point was that despite his Pro-Choice stance, Scott Brown is against government funding for abortion, against minors getting abortions without parental consent, against partial birth abortion, and for strong conscience clause protection for health and pharmacy workers so they will not have to engage in abortions in any manner against their beliefs. This puts Scott Brown light years ahead of Pro-Abort Martha Coakley, who as a lawyer did pro-bono work getting minor girls to judges so they could get abortions without their parents consent or knowledge, and who in the debate with Brown tried to claim that Brown was against medical treatment for rape victims because he supports a conscience clause. Libertarian Joseph L. Kennedy is running as an Independent, is Pro-same-sex marriage and did not reply to Massachusetts Family Institute Voter Guide questions about his views on abortion.

Coakley insists National HealthCare fund abortions, which the Guttmacher Institute (Planned Parenthood) admits will increase abortions in the US by 250,000-420,000 per year. This is why the Democrats removed that old canard “Safe, Legal and Rare” from their 2008 party platform! Martha Coakley is clearly an abortion zealot, and we cannot allow her to go to Washington. It makes sense to vote for Scott Brown in this election. If there were a Pro-Life candidate, I'd vote for him or her, but there is not.

Please Vote for Scott Brown on Tuesday Jan 19

Jan 14, 2010

Push comes to Shove

AG Martha Coakley's 'Communications Director' Michael Meehan knocked a reporter from the National Review, John McCormick to the ground after he asked her about her debate statement that there were no terrorists in Afghanistan.

The Democrats are dirty, more than we knew. That's what happens from pushing an agenda of abortion on demand, for any reason, at any time.

Jan 8, 2010

THE WEIGHT OF ONE HOLY MASS

The following true story was related to Sister Mary Veronica Murphy by an elderly Nun, who heard it from the lips of the late Reverend Father Stanislaus, SS.CC.

One day, many years ago, in a little town in Luxembourg, a Captain of the Forest Guards was in deep conversation with the butcher, when an elderly woman entered the shop. The butcher broke off the conversation to ask the old woman what she wanted. She had come to beg for a little meat but had no money. The Captain was amused at the conversation which ensued between the poor woman and the butcher.

"Only a little meat . . ."
"But how much are you going to give me?"
"I am sorry I have no money, but I'll hear Mass for you."

Both the butcher and the Captain were very good men, but very indifferent about religion, so they at once began to scoff at the old woman's answer.

"All right, then," said the butcher. "You go out and hear Mass for me, and when you come back, I'll give you as much meat as the Mass is worth."

The woman left the shop and returned later. She approached the counter and the butcher seeing her, said, "All right, then, we'll see,"

He took a slip of paper and wrote on it, "I heard a Mass for you." He then placed the paper on the scale and a tine bone on the other side, but nothing happened. Next he placed a piece of meat instead of the bone, but still the paper proved heavier. Both men were beginning to feel ashamed of their mockery but continued their game. A large piece of meat was placed in the balanced, but still the paper held its own. The butcher, exasperated, examined the scales, but found they were all right.

"What do you want, my good woman? Must I give you a whole leg of mutton?"

At this, he placed the leg of mutton on the balance, but the paper outweighed the meat. A larger piece of meat was put on, but again the weight remained on the side of the paper. This so impressed the butcher that he was converted, and promised to give the woman her daily ration of meat.

As for the Captain, he left the shop a changed man, an ardent lover of daily Holy Mass. Two of his sons became Priests, one a Jesuit and the other a Father of the Sacred Heart.

Father Stanislaus finished by saying, "I am the religious of the Sacred Heart, and the Captain was my father."


From that incident the Captain became a daily Mass goer and his children were trained to follow his example. Later, when his sons became Priests, he advised them to offer Holy Mass well every day and never miss the Sacrifice through any fault of their own.



“The Mass is the most perfect form of prayer!” (Pope Paul VI)

“The world could exist more easily without the sun than without the Mass.” (St. Padre Pio)

“If we knew the value of the Mass, we would die of joy.” (St. Jean Vianney, the Cure’d’Ars)

Once, St. Teresa was overwhelmed with God’s goodness and asked Our Lord, “How can I thank You?” Our Lord replied, “ATTEND ONE MASS.”

“The Holy Mass would be of greater profit if people had it offered in their lifetime, rather than having it celebrated for the relief of their souls after death.” (Pope Benedict XV)

“A single Mass offered for oneself during life may be worth more than a thousand celebrated for the same intention after death.” (St. Anselm)

“One Mass before death may be more profitable than any after it.” (St. Leonard of Port Maurice)

“My Son so loves those who assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that, if it were necessary, He would die for them as many times as they’ve heard Masses.” (The Blessed Virgin Mary)

Each time we receive Holy Communion, our venial sins are forgiven and our place in Heaven is raised forever, our stay in Purgatory shortened.

“Each time 1 person receives Holy Communion, something good happens to every being in heaven, on earth, and in purgatory.” (Jesus Christ as revealed to St. Gertrude)

Paralysis

It's better to be paralyzed from the neck down, than to be paralyzed from the neck up.

summary of a speech given by Dr. Charles Krauthammer


Dr. Krauthammer is on Fox News. He is an M.D. and a lawyer and is paralyzed from the neck down. A friend went to hear Charles Krauthammer. He listened with 25 others in a closed room. What he says here, is NOT 2nd-hand but 1st. The ramifications are staggering for us, our children and their children.

Last Monday was a profound evening, Dr. Charles Krauthammer spoke to the Center for the American Experiment. He is a brilliant intellectual, seasoned & articulate. He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fear monger nor an extremist in his comments and views. He is a fiscal conservative, and has received a Pulitzer Prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News and writes weekly for the Washington Post.


The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have summarized his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically and internationally.

If you feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded and have not drunk the Kool-Aid, feel free.

Summary of his comments:

1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming individual. He is not to be underestimated. He is a cool customer who doesn't show his emotions. It's very hard to know what's behind the mask. The taking down of the Clinton dynasty was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still do not understand what hit them. Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time.

2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan and Clinton. He has a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing with your position, while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he DOES!

3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism. He can't be straightforward on his ambitions, as the public would not go along. He has a heavy hand, and wants to level the playing field with income redistribution and punishment to the achievers of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain orCanada.

4. His three main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, and NATIONAL HEALTHCARE by the Federal government. He doesn't care about the auto or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education is his goal. Most scary is his healthcare program, because if you make it FREE and add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs will go through the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada . God forbid!

5. He has surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one around him has ever even run a candy store. But they are going to try and run the auto, financial, banking and other industries.. This obviously can't work in the long run. Obama is not a socialist; rather he's a far-left secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says.

6. Obama doesn't really see himself as President of the United States , but more as a ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to orchestrate & coordinate various countries and their
agendas. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was a prime example of how he sees America , as an imperialist nation that has been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies!

7. He is now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not come due until after he is reelected in 2012. He would like to blame all problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the future. He has a huge ego, and Dr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist.

8. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong. Republicans are pining for another Reagan, but there will never be another like him. Krauthammer believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty & Bobby Jindahl (except for his terrible speech in February) are the future of the party. Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and info if she is to be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and state's rights.

9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We are spending trillions that we don't have. This could lead to hyperinflation, depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. The media is giving Obama, Reid and Pelosi a pass because they love their agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the huge bailouts didn't work, nor will the stimulus package. These were trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama's allies, unions and the Congress to placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above.

10. The election was over in mid-September when Lehman brothers failed, fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people are in pain, and the mantra of change caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have won this election; it was surprising it was as close as it was.

11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If it's between 8-10%, it will be a dogfight. It will all be about the economy. I hope this gets you really thinking about what's happening in Washington and Congress. There is a left-wing revolution going on, according to Krauthammer, and he encourages us to keep the faith and join the loyal resistance. The work will be hard, but we're right on most issues and can reclaim our country, before it's far too late.