Policy & Advocacy
Treatment of Infants Born with Handicapping Conditions, Statement of Rev. Edward M. Bryce (1982)
Treatment of Infants Born with Handicapping Conditions, Statement of Rev. Edward M. Bryce on behalf of the Committee for Pro-Life Activities of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Select Education of the Committee of Education and Labor , October 1982
Reverend Bryce, speaking on behalf of the U.S. Catholic Bishops’ Committee for Pro-Life Activities, submitted this statement supporting H.R. 6492, the Handicapped Infants Protection Act. The bill aimed to protect newborns with disabilities from medical neglect and denial of life-saving treatment. The testimony was prompted by the widely publicized “Infant Doe” case in Bloomington, Indiana, where a baby with Down syndrome was denied surgery and nutrition, leading to his death by starvation.
Reverend Bryce argued that the Supreme Court’s 1973 abortion decisions had eroded societal respect for vulnerable human life, extending from the unborn to handicapped newborns and the elderly. He warned that a “quality of life” ethic — judging some lives as not worth living — was leading to routine neglect in intensive care nurseries. The Church rejects this as incompatible with human dignity.
Unconditional Right to Life
- The right to life is the foundation of all other rights (“the right to have rights”).
- Handicapped infants deserve the same protection from neglect as other children.
- Federal laws already protect children from abuse and support handicapped individuals; this bill simply ensures those protections apply at the beginning of life.
Catholic Teaching
- The Church strongly opposes euthanasia (active or by omission intended to cause death).
- Patients have a duty to accept “ordinary” care (beneficial, not excessively burdensome). Extraordinary or burdensome treatments are optional.
- Decisions for incompetent patients (like newborns) should be based on what serves their best interests, not on discriminatory judgments about their disability or projected “quality of life.”
- The Infant Doe case was clear involuntary euthanasia/infanticide driven by discrimination against Down syndrome, not medical necessity.