Presbyerians Pro-Life
Posted July 8, 2002

Report and Analysis of the 214th G.A. Actions on Life Issues

Item 13-03: Recommendation from the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy on interpretation of the General Assembly late term abortion policy
Commissioners were not provided with the comment from the year 2000 by the Advisory Committee on Litigation that gave rise to the move to reverse the 1997 General Assembly action that expressed moral opposition late term abortion. That comment made it clear that the intent of asking for clarification of the denomination's position was to achieve an approval of the unrestricted right of a woman to abort a baby who could live outside the womb. Both the PC(USA) Washington Office and the Stated Clerk's office had been lobbying in support of partial birth abortion prior to the action of the Assembly in 1997.

The recommendation submitted to this year's General Assembly by the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP) was subtle enough to obscure not only that intent but also the meaning of its own statement.

The operative statement in the ACSWP recommendation was the last sentence. Even after amendment by the committee it read:

The ending of a pregnancy after the point of fetal viability is a matter of grave moral concern to us all, and may be undertaken only in the rarest of circumstances and after prayer and/or pastoral care, when necessary to save the life of a woman, to preserve the woman's health in circumstances of a serious risk to the woman's health, to avoid fetal suffering as a result of untreatable life-threatening medical anomalies, or in cases of incest or rape.

The only exception mentioned in the 1997 statement was the physical life of the mother. In the 2002 statement none of the language is defined. The authors made it clear to the committee that the words are purposely left undefined: "health" does not distinguish between physical and mental; "serious risk" is left to the eye of the beholder; "life-threatening medical anomalies" are not specified (examples given in the committee ranged from cleft palate--a child will die without cleft palate repair, a simple procedure--to conditions where the baby develops without a brain--but a baby who cannot sustain life is not viable, so there is a failure of logic in the statement). No one explained why abortion as a treatment for rape or incest is necessary for a baby who can live outside the womb. Clearly, the additional exceptions reverse the G.A. statement of 1997 and leave viable babies with no moral protection from the Church. Only the Washington Office and the Stated Clerk's office are protected in their desire to lobby for abortion for babies who could live if the pregnancy were terminated by live birth.

A minority report presented by Youth Advisory Delegate Eric Richey and commissioner Donald Meekhof gave commissioners the opportunity to say that the church opposes the abortion of babies who could live outside the womb. The wording of their minority report statement was:

The church counsels women late in pregnancy to make a decision most likely to preserve both their own lives and the lives of their children. The ending of a pregnancy by an abortion after the point of fetal viability is a matter of grave moral concern to us all, and may be undertaken only when necessary to save the life of the mother. We urge our members to surround these families with their prayers and tangible support.

Pediatrician Patricia Lee June served as a resource for the minority in plenary, probably precedent-setting, and gave factual answers to questions about medical indicators for interventions late in pregnancy. Her conclusion: medicine agrees that it is always safer to deliver a viable child by C-section or vaginal birth than to perform abortion late in pregnancy--safer for both mother and child.

Presbyterians, United Methodists, and mainline Episcopalians all have expressed moral opposition to late term abortions. We Presbyterians are the only denomination to reverse that stand. The vote on the floor to approve the ACSWP statement was 394/112/4.

Item 13-04 (overture 02-48) on precluding coverage by the PC(USA) Board of Pensions' medical benefits plan for the abortion procedure known as intact dilation and extraction.
G.A. sustained the committee recommendation to disapprove with comment, the comment noting the relief of conscience provision, which commissioners on the floor pointed out is irrelevant to the overture. The vote was 326/154/9

Item 13-08 (overture 02-52) on asking Theology and Worship to develop resources for women who have experienced abortion.
The action was to refer the amended overture to the Advocacy Committee on Women's Concerns (ACWC) in consultation with the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP) with comment:

Instruct the Office of Theology and Worship to prepare, in conversation with ACSWP and ACWC and other PCUSA related groups including Presbyterians Affirming Reproductive Options (PARO), PASPM, PPL and other resource groups, pastoral resources for our Presbyterian congregations that are based on the knowledge that there are women and men in our local churches who suffer from adverse spiritual, emotional, psychological, and physical effects of abortion and are in need of the compassionate and restorative ministry of the gospel.

Approved 450/33/5

Item 13-07. On end of life issues.
The Office of Theology and Worship, in the Congregational Ministries Division, brought a request to the Assembly to delay implementation due to lack of funds of an action approved by the 213th G.A. (2001) to implement a churchwide dialogue on pastoral issues at the end of life. This year's Assembly's response was to direct the Office to find the funding and implement the dialogue.

 

214th GA index / Back to top


Home / About PPL / Contact PPL / Topical Index / PPL Publications / Pregnant? We’ll Help
Adoption Resources / Post Abortion Resources / PPL NEWS Articles / Order Resources / Prayer Calendar

© Presbyterians Pro-Life
3942 Middle Rd.
Allison Park, PA 15101
www.ppl.org