DES MOINES, Iowa (LifeSiteNews) — A Catholic hospital in the Midwest is arguing that an unborn baby who died in utero at 35 weeks’ gestation should not be viewed as a legal “person” in order to limit its financial liability in a medical malpractice case.
The assertion by Catholic Health Initiatives-Iowa (CHI), a “faith-based” health care provider, appears to be in direct conflict with its ethics guidelines, which state that the organization is committed to respecting “the sacredness of every human life from the moment of conception until death,” a fundamental tenet of Catholic teaching.
An unborn child “must be treated from conception as a person” and “must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being,” the Catechism of the Catholic Church declares (2274).
The failure to recognize the unborn child – named Eloise by her parents – as a person may also call into question CHI’s status as a nonprofit, tax-exempt entity whose stated mission is to provide healthcare “in the spirit of the gospel.”
The malpractice lawsuit that CHI now faces was filed in Polk County District Court by Miranda and Landen Anderson after the stillbirth of Eloise in April 2021.
According to the Iowa Capital Dispatch (ICD), on April 13, 2021, when she was 34 weeks’ pregnant, Miranda Anderson went to Pella Regional Health Center because she was experiencing elevated blood pressure, headaches, and edema – symptoms that can indicate a serious condition known as preeclampsia, which can require an early delivery.
Miranda was transferred via ambulance to CHI’s MercyOne’s Obstetrics Emergency Unit where, after two days of observation and testing, she was discharged and sent home.
Despite ongoing monitoring of her condition, on April 21, Miranda’s doctors were unable to detect her baby’s heartbeat. Eloise was delivered the following day by cesarean section.
At the heart of the Anderson’s is their claim that CHI and its physicians were negligent for having failed to recommend early delivery, a decision that could have saved Eloise’s life.
The defendants have denied any wrongdoing.
At issue is Iowa’s $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages in malpractice cases, established in 2017.
CHI and MercyOne have asserted that while the cap on damages includes an exemption for “loss or impairment of mind or body,” the exemption should not apply to the loss of an unborn baby.
In recent court filings, CHI and MercyOne insist that “finding an unborn child to be a ‘person’ would lead to serious implications in other areas of the law.”
They further state that Eloise should not be considered a “patient” when it comes to calculating damages in the Anderson’s malpractice case, arguing that “there is no statute or binding case law finding an unborn child to be a ‘patient’ under the law,” and, as such, “there can be no recovery (of damages) on behalf of, or for, a nonexistent person.”
The Anderson’s case is slated to go to trial on May 12. In the meantime, lawyers for the CHI have asked the court to enforce the $250,000 damages cap.