Thirty years ago, on March 25th, 1995, Pope Saint John Paul II promulgated Evangelium vitae, an encyclical of significance to anyone in health care. In it, he coined the term culture of death, which is one that “…actively fostered by powerful cultural, economic and political currents which encourage an idea of society excessively concerned with efficiency.” The culture of death goes about “creating and consolidating actual ‘structures of sin’ which go against life.”
In health care, one such force erecting these structures of sin are medical associations. All it takes are a few activists dedicating their time and effort to obtaining leadership positions to turn a medical association into a means of promoting political agendas and mandating clinical practices that are not approved by its membership, not supported by research, and counter to genuine human dignity.
The most recent example of this is detailed in an article published by JLPP: Per Curiam, the online companion journal to the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy. The Façade of Medical Consensus: How Medical Associations Prioritize Politics Over Science is written by Chloe K. Jones, Appellate Fellow at Alliance Defending Freedom. She identifies the influence of private medical associations in United States v. Skrmetti, a case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court to determine if Tennessee’s prohibition of transgender treatments for minors violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
Medical associations, including the Catholic Medical Association, often file an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief to present their expert medical viewpoint on an issue before the court. Jones compares briefs submitted for two juvenile issues, transgender treatment and criminal defendants, comparing the medical opinions regarding the reliability of their decision making. As you might have guessed, juveniles must be allowed to access transgender treatment because they have decided that is what they want, but they should never be given life sentences without parole for crimes committed because of their great capacity for change and their prominent vulnerability to environmental influences.
I have seen a similar situation in which activists take leadership positions to wield the organization’s reputation and membership for influencing legislators and voters. In the battle to prevent the legalization of physician-assisted suicide (PAS), this tactic is being used by physicians working with Compassion and Choices, a prominent PAS advocacy organization, to drive support for legalization. It began in states where bills had been filed that medical societies would switch from “opposed” to “neutral” positions, meaning they neither supported nor opposed PAS. Now, two have gone on record supporting it, including New York, where the legislature just passed the bill on June 8th and now awaits the governor’s signature. Still, a vast many more medical associations remain opposed; the American Medical Association reaffirmed its opposition the same day the New York legislature passed its bill.
The MMS provides a good illustration of how activist coopted organizational political power. In 2017, the activist leadership created a membership survey dedicated to the PAS issue disseminated by email, unless you requested it to be mailed. It was sent to 22,597 members; the response rate was an abysmal 13%. Of these, 970 supported PAS, 443 voted for neutrality, 700 voted against, and 536 didn’t answer the question. Based on those conflicted results, during an interim meeting, the leadership voted to change the MMS position from opposing to neutrality. This made headlines, and legislators continue to point this out at public hearings. (I suggest you read Physician-Assisted Suicide: Why Neutrality by Organized Medicine is Neither Neutral nor Appropriate by Sulmasy, et al.)
The most substantial medical association influence comes from the American Academy of Neurology regarding the determination of brain death guidelines. (That will be the subject of a future post.) The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ranks a close second with its misinformation about using natural progesterone to counteract the effects of mifepristone (Abortion Pill Rescue) and Abortion Language Guide, among other things.
All this highlights the importance of establishing a medical association focused on supporting the unique needs and challenges of Catholic Physician Assistants, Advanced Practice Nurses, and other advanced practice clinicians. Medical association politicization is just one of the many reasons why we need CAPPA. We – all of our members – are dedicated not to political parties and passing fads but to Jesus Christ, the Eternal Word, and striving to live as He taught. CAPPA was formed to help us all do just that. It can also join its voice with the growing number of other Catholic medical associations in upholding true human dignity in health care. Thank you for joining and supporting this mission!
Leave a comment