California Catholic hospital apologizes after lawsuit claims it denied pregnant woman care

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 2, 2024 / 17:45 pm

The head of a Catholic hospital network in California has issued an apology after the state’s attorney general filed a lawsuit claiming Providence St. Joseph Hospital refused emergency care to a pregnant woman whose water broke prematurely at 15 weeks. 

“We are heartbroken over the experience this patient had while in our care and reached out to her today in an effort to express our profound apologies,” said the chief executive of Providence Northern California Service Area, Garry Olney, in a statement addressed to hospital employees that was provided to CNA on Wednesday. 

The lawsuit filed on Monday in Humboldt County Superior Court claims that Providence St. Joseph Hospital in Eureka violated several California state laws by allegedly refusing to perform abortive procedures on a patient, Anna Nusslock, 36, whom doctors diagnosed with a rare condition, preterm premature rupture of the membranes (PPROM).

According to the attorney general’s lawsuit, Nusslock was denied treatment by the hospital, which does not perform dilation and evacuation (D&E) procedures if a heartbeat is detected. Though it has issued an apology to Nusslock, the hospital has not publicly confirmed whether the detection of a fetal heartbeat was why she was allegedly denied treatment. 

Olney wrote in the hospital’s statement that Nusslock’s experience “was a tragic situation that did not meet our standards for safe, quality, compassionate care.” He further added that the hospital intended to revisit its training processes regarding emergency medical situations, “to ensure that this does not happen again.” 

“As devastated as we are,” he concluded, “we can’t begin to imagine what the patient and her family have been through. We will learn from this and renew our commitment to ensuring that the care and experience we deliver are aligned with our high standards, every time and in every care setting.”

A spokesperson for the hospital told CNA earlier this week that it had been unaware of the lawsuit until the morning it was announced and that it planned to investigate the incident further to determine what happened and how it relates to the allegations. 

“While elective abortions are not performed in Providence facilities, we do not deny emergency care,” the spokesperson told CNA, adding: “When it comes to complex pregnancies or situations in which a woman’s life is at risk, we provide all necessary interventions to protect and save the life of the mother.”

The attorney general also moved for a permanent injunction against the hospital, mandating it to provide “timely emergency services,” “including abortion care.”

“California is the beacon of hope for so many Americans across this country trying to access abortion services since the Dobbs decision. It is damning that here in California, where abortion care is a constitutional right, we have a hospital implementing a policy that’s reminiscent of heartbeat laws in extremist red states,” Attorney General Rob Bonta stated in a press release on Monday.

“With today’s lawsuit, I want to make this clear for all Californians: Abortion care is health care. You have the right to access timely and safe abortion services,” he continued. “At the California Department of Justice, we will use the full force of this office to hold accountable those who, like Providence, are breaking the law.” 

What does the Catholic Church teach on this issue?

Michael Pakaluk, a professor and ethicist at The Catholic University of America, told CNA that the D&E procedure in this case would be against natural law and therefore against God’s law and Church teaching.

“The natural law states that no one may directly take the life of an innocent human being. There are never any exceptions to this law,” Pakaluk said. “It is always better that we die than violate this law. So the Church has always taught.

“Abortion is not medical care,” he continued. “No physician has any competence to recommend trading one human life for another. Such a judgment is never a medical judgment but a utilitarian judgment, playing God, outside the competence of medicine.”