The National Catholic Register portal (EWTN) reports on a study published in the Journal of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine which claims that “abortion providers” commit “medical negligence” by failing to screen women for coercion prior to procuring abortion. The article cites Michael New of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, “Father” Tadeusz Pacholczyk of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, and Kelsey Pritchard of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, all of whom frame the deliberate slaughter of the unborn as a manageable risk factor for maternal mental health rather than a crime crying to heaven for vengeance. This humanitarian reductionism, masquerading as Catholic witness, betrays the integral Faith by substituting the Social Kingship of Christ and the absolute prohibition of murder with secular standards of “informed consent” and “patient well-being.”
The Naturalistic Reduction of Infanticide to ‘Medical Negligence’
The cited study, authored by Reardon, Shuping, and Giebink, declares that “the failure to screen for these risk factors is medical negligence” and that “screening and informing women of their personal risk factors as required by ethical and legal standards may lead to consideration of alternatives to abortion.” Here the conciliar “pro-life” establishment reveals its true master: not the lex divina, but the lex humana of secular bioethics and tort law. The crime of abortion—crimen abominabile, a sin that cries to heaven for vengeance (Gen 4:10)—is downgraded to a procedural failure in “risk assessment.” The study’s premise accepts the legitimacy of the “abortion provider” as a medical practitioner bound by “ethical and legal standards,” thereby conceding the false premise that the killing of the innocent can be rendered “safe” or “ethical” through better screening protocols. This is the hermeneutic of continuity with the world: the adoption of the enemy’s categories—“mental health outcomes,” “quality of life,” “coercion screening”—to manage a slaughter that the Church, in her immutable doctrine, condemns as intrinsece malum (Council of Trent, Sess. XIV, can. 5; Pius XI, Casti Connubii).
Conciliar ‘Ethicists’ Substitute Dialogue for Divine Law
“Father” Pacholczyk, a senior ethicist at the neo-church’s National Catholic Bioethics Center, urges physicians “to provide full disclosure of the risks and side effects to their patients” and suggests “a candid discussion about the broad range of potential bad outcomes from the procedure provides an excellent starting point for dialoguing with their patients in a moment of crisis.” Note the vocabulary: “dialoguing,” “disclosure,” “risks,” “decision-making.” Absent is the language of the Magisterium: mortale peccatum, excommunicatio latae sententiae (Canon 1398, 1917 Code; Cum ex Apostolatus Officio), the duty of the confessor to deny absolution without firm purpose of amendment, the duty of the civil magistrate to punish the parricide (Pius XII, Address to Midwives, 1951). The “ethicist” of the conciliar sect functions as a chaplain to the culture of death, offering “accompaniment” and “referrals for pre-abortion counseling” rather than the correccio fraterna that calls the sinner to conversion lest he perish eternally (Ez 33:8). This is the fruit of the Modernist error condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu (Prop. 26, 65): the reduction of dogma to “practical function” and the transformation of Christianity into a “broad and liberal Protestantism” devoid of binding moral absolutes.
The ‘Pro-Life’ Industrial Complex: Servants of the Secular Order
Michael New praises the study as “methodologically strong” and draws the lesson that “coerced abortions are not uncommon” and that “mental health risks are substantially higher among the subset of women who are emotionally conflicted.” Kelsey Pritchard declares “The abortion industry prioritizes profit — not women’s well-being, informed consent, or health.” This rhetoric—“industry,” “profit,” “informed consent,” “women’s well-being”—is the language of consumer protection litigation and democratic politics, not the language of the Regnum Christi. These organizations (Charlotte Lozier Institute, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America) operate entirely within the framework of the Masonic secular state condemned by the Syllabus of Errors (Prop. 39, 55, 77, 80). They seek not the restoration of the Reign of Christ the King over legislation—as Pius XI commanded in Quas Primas: “Let rulers of states therefore not refuse public veneration and obedience to the reigning Christ… if they wish to maintain their authority inviolate”—but rather the mitigation of the regime’s atrocities through regulatory tweaks and lawsuit enablement. They are the controlled opposition of the synagoga Satanae, diverting Catholic energy from the supernatural remedy (prayer, penance, the restoration of the True Mass and true hierarchy) into the futile project of “making abortion rare” or “safer” within a legal order that defines the unborn as non-persons.
Silence on the Supernatural: The Gravest Accusation
The article—and the study it promotes—maintains a total silence on the supernatural order. There is no mention of the soul of the murdered child, baptized by blood or deprived of the vision of God; no mention of the mother’s immortal soul in danger of eternal damnation (1 Cor 6:9-10); no mention of the Sacraments, the state of grace, the Four Last Things, or the Kingship of Christ the King (Quas Primas: “His reign encompasses also all non-Christians… the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ”). The “study” treats the human person as a biological-psychological unit to be processed by a healthcare system. This is practical atheism. By adopting the anthropological premises of the Enlightenment—that man is an autonomous agent whose primary good is “mental health” and “absence of coercion”—the conciliar “pro-life” movement capitulates to the laicism Pius XI identified as “the plague that poisons human society” (Quas Primas). They have accepted the Syllabus-condemned error that “The civil government… has a right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs” (Prop. 41) and that “The Church ought to be separated from the State” (Prop. 55), functioning as mere lobbyists begging the secular Moloch for “screening mandates.”
Subjection to the Antichurch’s False Magisterium
Every figure cited—Pacholczyk, New, Pritchard—operates under the jurisdiction of the usurping hierarchy of the conciliar sect (John XXIII through Leo XIV/Prevost). As St. Robert Bellarmine teaches (De Romano Pontifice, cited in Defense of Sedevacantism), “A manifest heretic… by that very fact ceases to be Pope and head… a non-Christian in no way can be Pope.” The “bishops” and “priests” of the neo-church, having promulgated the heresies of Vatican II (religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality, new mass), are ipso facto deprived of jurisdiction (Canon 188.4, 1917 Code; Cum ex Apostolatus Officio). Their “bioethics centers” and “pro-life institutes” are instruments of the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place (Matt 24:15), providing a Catholic veneer for the demolition of the moral law. The study’s publication in the Journal of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine—a secular, natural-law vehicle—further demonstrates the total assimilation of the conciliar “pro-life” project into the Civitas Diaboli. True Catholic action begins with the recognition that the current Vatican is occupied by an antipope and that the solution to abortion is not “better screening” but the Restauratio Omnium in Christo—the restoration of the True Mass, the True Priesthood, the True Hierarchy, and the public confession of Christ the King by the State. Until then, every “pro-life” victory within the conciliar framework is a defeat for the Faith.
Source:
Study: Doctors Don’t Screen for Abortion Coercion — and It Hurts Women (ncregister.com)
Date: 14.09.2026