Associated Press – July 1, 2008
RICHMOND, Va. – Catholic leaders in Richmond are apologizing after a mix up enabled a 16-year-old illegal immigrant in a Catholic charity’s care to get an abortion with help from charity staffers.
Richmond Diocese Bishop Francis X. DiLorenzo issued a statement in Monday’s edition of the Catholic Virginian apologizing for lapses that led to the procedure staunchly opposed by the church.
The incident involved a Guatemalan teenager being cared for by Commonwealth Catholic Charities, through a program that arranges foster care for illegal immigrant children in the country without adult guardians.
Officials fired four of the Richmond-based charity’s workers determined to have helped the girl travel to and from the January procedure, and who signed a consent form for the abortion.
“I express my profound apology for the loss of life of one of the most vulnerable among us,” DiLorenzo wrote. “And I apologize for the profound embarrassment this has caused the Catholic Diocese of Richmond, and Catholics throughout the United States.”
The bishop had advance knowledge of the January procedure, but he said he was told by the charity’s executive director, Joanne Nattrass, that there was nothing they could do to intervene.
Nattrass issued a statement saying she learned Jan. 17 that the girl was scheduled to have an abortion the next morning.
The information was relayed to the bishop, who Nattrass said replied that “I forbid this to happen.” But Nattrass said she and other authorities were led to believe they could not stop it.
It was unclear late Tuesday who told Nattrass the procedure was to take place or that it could not be stopped. Nattrass and a spokeswoman for the charity didn’t immediately return calls seeking further comment from The Associated Press.
Meanwhile, authorities are investigating whether the charity or the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops violated state and federal laws.
The conference receives $7.6 million a year in federal funds to place unaccompanied illegal immigrant children in foster care until they’re reunited with relatives, sponsored, or returned to their homeland.
Commonwealth Catholic Charities serves children in the Richmond area as a subcontractor of the bishop’s conference. The conference “appears to have been aware of Commonwealth Catholic Charities’ actions,” Siegel wrote in his April 23 letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ deputy inspector general, Timothy Menke.
Federal law bans the use of federal money to pay for abortions with exceptions for rape, incest or threats to the life of the mother. Virginia law requires parental consent for an abortion for a girl under 18.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.



posted July 2, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Gee! The almighty RCC goofed. That has never happened before! It’s done. Now we will see where the chips fall. How come they are so upset over this when the priests were just relocated when they were molesting children? This is so much more important? I don’t think so.
posted July 2, 2008 at 8:06 pm
The biggest uproar was that an abortion was performed against RCC laws. There is nothing here about how this teen-ager became pregnant. Was she enticed by a priest, someone working around her, or was she raped? That should be the concern and where the conversation should be first. The RCC said a life was lost, more like a soul was saved.
posted July 2, 2008 at 9:55 pm
It does make you wonder, doesn’t it.
It would not be good for a 16 year old to have a child so this was a good thing. Big oops for the RCC.
posted July 2, 2008 at 9:58 pm
It is very sad what happened to the child and the mother. I don’t think how the mother got the baby is as important as the fact that she had it. We should pray that our hearts are not so hard that we can only see our truth and not the truth. May the truth set us free.
posted July 3, 2008 at 10:14 am
If only the RCC was as quick to admit mistakes when dealing with clergy sexual abuse. They certainly seem swift and sure when dealing with lay employess. This is one of those instances when religion and secular institutions get in the way of caring for a child, rather than helping in any useful way. As the article is written, the Bishop is more concerned about the institution than he was for the girl (though this may be the writer’s fault). And as usual, thee are many dangling threads, for instance – why was she in foster care (I assume no parentla permission was possible for the abortion) and was the pregnancy the result of rape (thus within federal guidelines).
posted July 4, 2008 at 11:40 pm
This was mutiny at foot, no doubt about it. If you are going to work for an organization then you should follow it’s rules.
posted July 5, 2008 at 10:20 pm
This is the second time I’ve read about this. I am curious as to what the circumstances were that led to this.