The current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders has created a paradox in the treatment of gender dysphoria, in part by redefining the disorder. The new definition implies that the individual’s body, not his or her mind, is disordered, regardless of whether the body shows any sign of abnormal development. Thus, the manual has created a situation where a perfectly healthy body is considered disordered, while a mind that perceives that healthy body to be wrongly sexed (...) is considered healthy. This leads to erroneous and dangerous treatment of the individual. (shrink)

The moral act consists of object, intention, and circumstances. The word intention, as commonly used, is often mistaken for the technical meaning of the word intention as employed by philosophers. This produces confusion in the description of moral acts. The common use of intention signifies motive, or one's reason for action. We commonly say that someone has a good intention even though what he or she does is wrong. For example, we describe someone who wants to alleviate suffering, and so (...) euthanizes a patient, as having a good intention. To the contrary, in the Catholic moral tradition, intention means an action that is done voluntarily and knowingly. A nurse who kills a patient has a bad intention because he or she acts freely and with knowledge. Alleviating suffering is indeed a good motive for action, but motives are formulated through deliberation prior to action. (shrink)

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders is the guidebook for psychiatric practice in medicine. In the fifth edition, published in 2013, the American Psychiatric Association significantly revised the section on gender identity disorder, which it renamed gender dysphoria. In previous editions, the conviction that one’s sex did not match one’s gender was treated as a mental disorder in need of psychiatric treatment. In DSM-5, the remedy for that same conviction was changed to hormonal and surgical procedures to give (...) the patient the appearance of the opposite sex. A complete reversal of this sort is surprising, as it implies that all previous guidance on this question was in error. The change is even more perplexing given that little evidence shows that hormonal or surgical interventions actually improve the psychological health of the sufferer. (shrink)

The recent moral analysis of Therese Lysaught concerning the death of a child by dilation and curettage is emblematic of a wider trend in Catholic moral theory that has forgotten Western metaphysics. Lysaught’s analysis depends on seeing the world as a mechanical system, lacking in all teleological order and thus incapable of providing the mind with moral guidance. The rejection of the traditional philosophical conviction that nature is under the governance of God, and its replacement with the view that nature (...) is a merely physical order, explains why the new theorists do not see that direct killing of the innocent is wrong. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 11.1 (Spring 2011): 53–62. (shrink)

Although the Catholic philosophical tradition speaks of the generative faculty as one of the vital powers of the soul, this power is not described, in its own right, as either male or female. The generative faculty exists generically within the soul and only manifests as male or female in a given body. That is, the generative power may be male or female depending on the body in which the soul is infused. If we do not take this view, then we (...) must either assert that it is possible for God to infuse a sexed soul into the wrong body or hold that the body–soul union does not bring the individual substance into existence. The doctrinal teachings of the Church and the Catholic philosophical tradition would seem to bar any claim that the soul can be infused into the wrong body. (shrink)

The question of embryo adoption remains unresolved. Dignitas personae expresses reservations about the practice, but does not reject it. A proper interpretation of Dignitas personae n. 19 shows that the Vatican does not hold that human embryo adoption is intrinsically immoral, but that the question of its morality depends on the circumstances that surround the practice. Embryo adoption as practiced today is often compromised by illicit cooperation with objectionable reproductive technologies; nonetheless, it is possible to identify a best case scenario (...) which may lessen or even eliminate these concerns. That best case is when a Catholic couple, who have not previously utilized in vitro fertilization to overcome a problem of infertility, adopt an abandoned embryo and choose to raise that child as their own. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10.2 (Summer 2010): 329–347. (shrink)

The materialistic premise supposes that a patient’s reduced brain activity indicates that the mind is beginning to approach nonexistence. Such persons may not be brain dead, but they have a life that is close enough to death to allow us to treat them with a certain disregard. For the Catholic, this overlooks the enduring presence of the soul and its two spiritual powers of intellect and will. St. Thomas Aquinas is our best guide to exploring the implications of this view (...) for patients in states of diminished consciousness. The externally observable activity of the brain, even when dramatically lessened, does not represent any loss of the powers of the soul, which continue to function through a combination of natural and divine influences. (shrink)

Carol Bayley’s double-effect reasoning in defense of sex-reassignment surgery fails at the opening. The first condition of the principle is that the act in itself must be morally good or at least neutral. She says, without argument, “the surgery itself is neutral.” How so? The surgery is a direct assault on the physical integrity of a person whose sexual organs are perfectly healthy. Is it reasonable to say that a person who wants to change gender has a body that is (...) in fact seriously deformed or diseased? Where is the evidence? If reality is defined by the mind, then the imagination may freely think of personal identity in any conceivable way. Nature is set aside and in its place is put, at best, a delusion and, at worst, an ideology that seeks to do violence to nature. Catholic hospitals should not participate in this assault upon God’s creation. (shrink)

Catholics have been at the forefront of efforts over many years to secure universal access to health care in the United States. These efforts suf­fered a serious setback when the federal government enacted the Affordable Care Act and then quickly used it to assault rights of conscience. This assault has brought into serious question the once promising hope that a partnership might be forged between church and state to benefit those at the margins of society. Given recent events, Catholics and (...) others are compelled to reassess their willingness to trust the power of government to carry out this aim in a manner that respects fundamental human rights, including the rights of religious believers. The words of our founders and framers, who warned against the dangers of an overbearing government, merit renewed attention. (shrink)