The Ethics of Medical Homicide and MutilationO'Malley, Austin
Religion
The Ethics of Medical Homicide and Mutilation
O'Malley, Austin
Medical ethics
Vasectomy is a grave mutilation because (1) it removes from the
man the power of generation; (2) it inhibits the function of the
testicle, which is an important organ of the body. Although they
are not the entire organ of generation, the testicles are together
a complete organ in themselves, the function of which is to produce
the spermatozoa essential to the procreation of the human species.
If by a wound one inhibits the function of the testicles, he gravely
mutilates the human body, for a grave mutilation is nothing but an
inhibition of the function of a distinct organ through a wound.
A mutilation of this kind, since it frustrates the production and
action of the human generative semen and prevents generation, is
what is technically called a mortal sin against nature, unless
there is sufficient cause to necessitate the frustration, such as
to save life, to restore as a sole means the health of the whole
body, to protect society, or a similar reason. What is said here of
vasectomy is true for fallectomy or other methods of sterilizing the
woman. Fallectomy, however, is in itself a dangerous operation, and
oöphorectomy is never justifiable as a mere method of sterilization
because of its very injurious effects on the whole body and mind of
the woman.
Among the decretals of Gregory in _Corpus Juris_ (lib. v, tit.
xii, c. 5) is the following canon: "If any one, for the sake of
indulging lust, or through revenge, does anything to a man or woman,
or gives them anything to drink, whereby they cannot generate, or
conceive, or bear children, he is to be treated as a homicide." Any
one who sterilizes a man by vasectomy or a woman by fallectomy or
oöphorectomy, for an improper motive, _ipso facto_ falls under this
decree, and is before the canon law classed in the same category as
a murderer; that is, the agent is deemed guilty of a grave crime
against nature.
If a man has vasectomy done upon himself, his intention may be (1) to
use the debitum without the inconvenience of having children; or (2)
to avert from a wife with a narrow pelvis the dangers of the cesarean
section or other obstetrical operation to herself and the child; or
(3) to avoid the transmission to possible offspring of a hereditary
disease like Huntington's chorea or one of the others mentioned at
the beginning of this chapter; or (4) to cure himself of some malady.
1. If vasectomy is done merely to be able to use the debitum without
the inconvenience of having children, it is evidently illicit. It is
in that condition the same as onanism; it is contrary to the basic
justification of marriage; it is a frustration of nature; and so on.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account