Maternal-fetal conflict

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maternal-fetal_conflict

Maternal-fetal conflict, also known as obstetric conflict, occurs when a pregnant woman's (maternal) interests conflict with the interests of her baby (fetus). Legal and ethical considerations involving women's rights and the rights of the fetus as a patient and future child, have become more complicated with advances in medicine and technology. Maternal-fetal conflict can occur in situations where the mother denies health recommendations (e.g. blood transfusions, surgical procedures, cesarean section) that can benefit the fetus or make life choices (e.g. smoking, drinking alcohol, drugs, hazardous exposure) that can harm the fetus. There are maternal-fetal conflict situations where the law becomes involved, but most physicians avoid involving the law for various reasons.

Background

Prior to technological advances and current obstetric practices, the fetus was viewed as part of the mother and they were viewed as one entity rather than separate entities. With advances in technology, healthcare providers are able to access the fetus directly (e.g. sampling fetal blood, urine, other tissue, etc. and high-resolution ultrasonography) resulting in the fetus being defined as a separate patient from its mother. This shift from a perspective of 'unity' (referred to as the maternal-fetal dyad) to 'duality' of the mother and fetus has created a maternal-fetal conflict. With this shift, fetal interest has been taken into consideration separately from the mother's interest. Since the fetus can only be accessed through the mother, this change in perspective has become more complicated. In the perspective of the mother and fetus as one patient (a dyad), it is necessary to consider if the combined benefits of the mother and fetus outweigh the combined burdens. When making these decisions from the perspective of 'duality', it is necessary to determine the burdens and benefits of the mother and fetus separately.

Maternal rights

While a woman's right to privacy, right to autonomy, and informed consent are valued and prioritized during decision-making for the mother and fetus, there are various difficulties that arise with the perspective of the viability of a fetus, including "personhood". For example, the question of whether or not it is ethical to "gently persuade" a woman to make a decision she may not want to make because she is pregnant. In another example, a woman can receive a court-ordered cesarean section to save a fetus, but this is usually viewed as coercion, which is why most physicians avoid involving the court when helping make decisions for the mother and fetus.

Fetus

Fetus as a patient

There are many factors that define whether a fetus is a patient of its own or an entity involving its mother including: the fetus's independent moral status, the future fetus as a child, and the viability of the fetus. One view is that a fetus has rights when it has an independent moral status from its mother, but some ethicists cannot agree on when this occurs. A fetus has the right to become a child and the future of that child is taken into consideration when determining the independence of the fetus as a patient and in decision-making for the mother and fetus, (i.e. whether or not the health decisions will benefit the fetus when it becomes a child). A fetus has rights separate from its mother once the fetus is viable. Prior to viability of the fetus, the mother's autonomy and rights are prioritized.

Defining a healthy fetus

One perspective of decision making for maternal-fetal conflict is to prioritize the health of the mother and fetus, but it is difficult to determine what 'healthy' means for a fetus, especially without infringing on the basic rights of the mother. For those that define 'healthy' as 'perfect' or 'near-perfect' the implication is that a less than perfect fetus should not be born. Some of the people who are most opposed to prioritizing fetal rights are those with disabilities. The thought of a 'healthy' or 'perfect' child does not consider what a child with a disability would feel about how their mothers would be treated for choosing to bear them.

Maternal-fetal relationship

Experience, circumstance, and shared interest

With viewpoints shifting from the mother and fetus being a single unit to two individual units, understanding the mother's experiences and circumstances are necessary in decision-making. Not all women have direct control over their situation, which makes it difficult for a woman to make the best decision for their fetus. For example, a low-income mother may not be able to afford nutritious meals resulting in circumstance playing a role in maternal-fetal decisions. Instead of viewing the maternal-fetal relationship as a conflict, there are viewpoints that have shifted the perspective to maternal-fetal shared interest.

Protection of the fetus

There are different perspectives that value the protection of the fetus, but opposing viewpoints ask "what/whom is the fetus being protected from?" Most things a mother does can harm her fetus, even things that may not seem harmful (e.g. eating feta cheese or owning a cat). It is difficult to prove causality as development is multi-factorial, making it difficult to define what or who the fetus needs to be protected from. Although some may view the mother and fetus as separate entities, they are a unified dyad where the baby needs the mother to survive and their physiology is shared. This mentality allows decision-makers to best understand both patients's perspectives, and acknowledge the best interests for both the mother and their fetus.

Decision-making

The mother's autonomy and rights almost always are respected in decision-making. Decision-making is individualized based on prognosis, gestational age, and the pregnant woman's life and values. A variety of perspectives (e.g. pediatric, obstetric, etc.) are important to incorporate in decision-making process to best avoid being biased. Many ethicists have argued that women should have the same rights as non-pregnant women, which includes making decisions. It is also important to acknowledge that a mother generally will make the best decision for both herself and her fetus as she made the decision to have and continue the pregnancy. In cases where unwanted circumstances arise, it is difficult to blame a mother for uncontrollable, unfavorable fetal outcomes (e.g. birth defects) so giving the mother the benefit of the doubt is important. In order to make the best decisions for the mother and fetus, a physician-patient relationship is valuable as well as other maternal-fetal relationships (e.g. relationship to the father of the fetus, family members involved, etc.). Addressing the gestational age also affects decision making. Although, it's important to understand there is also very little information about early gestation periods, which makes it difficult to make decisions early on in the pregnancy.

Physician role

As an obstetrician and caregiver for the mother as a patient, it is important a physician acknowledges how their role and decisions affect both the mother and fetus, although the mother is ultimately their patient. Physicians must prioritize the mother's rights and autonomy as well as understand the value of beneficence and non-maleficence. Those that view the fetus and mother as one entity, acknowledge the overall benefit of a decision in regards to both the fetus and mother. Those that view the fetus and mother as separate entities, cannot overlook the mother's rights for the benefits of the fetus and vice versa. Other perspectives include overriding maternal autonomy if there is a more reliable option. For example, a cesarean section could save the baby and mother's life, but the mother wants a natural birth that will kill both entities so the mother's decision could be overruled. This is not always the case as there are other factors that are taken into consideration.

Mediating the conflict and honoring the patient

Physicians are not allowed to harm one patient for the benefit of another patient (i.e. a physician cannot harm a mother for the sake of the fetus and vice versa). If there is harm to one patient, that patient must volunteer to take treatment and not be influenced by the physician's bias. This causes difficulty as the fetus cannot voluntarily take a treatment and the fetus must be accessed through the mother. To avoid issues, physicians always prioritize the pregnant woman's autonomy as the physician's obligation is to the mother. The physician should refrain from unwanted procedures and treatments mentioned by the mother. It is important to establish that her autonomy cannot harm others. In the viewpoint of a maternal-fetal dyad, the mother is both a proxy for the best interest of the fetus and also separately the decision maker for herself as a patient. According to Susan Mattingly, a mother who denies treatment that benefits the fetus can no longer be an appropriate proxy for the fetus, but physicians still have to respect her as a separate patient with her own rights and autonomy. In the viewpoint of a maternal-fetal relationship being a one-patient model, a mother would only be harming herself if she denies treatment for fetus that may benefit fetus. These situations are normally avoided because punishment based on how a woman behaves in regards to her fetus could make women avoid medical care. The best way to establish a patient-physician relationship is by following best practices, conducting informed consent discussions, preparing for any situation that may arise, offering an alternate provider, compromise, providing documentation (e.g. medical record of information, treatment options, recommendations, etc.), and providing supportive resources for both the physician and provider, if problems are to arise.

Legal issues

Physicians are not required to obtain legal approval for decisions on mother and fetus, nor will a physician be in trouble with the law if they decide to make a decision on behalf of the mother and fetus. There are legal obstacles that make it difficult for the law to be involved in decision making for maternal-fetal conflict, which include the fetus having no rights, court standards being vague and flexible, discrimination towards disadvantage women, and the inability to force a woman to do things that are not required from anyone else (e.g. non-pregnant women, men, etc.). Lawmakers find it difficult to make exceptions to the law just because someone is pregnant (e.g. lawmakers find it difficult to forbid alcohol during pregnancy when non-pregnant women are permitted to drink alcohol). Allowing the fetus to have rights is difficult when it's dependent on a mother who has her own rights and autonomy. Even in the case where court-ordered cesarean sections seem necessary, most physicians and law-makers avoid it altogether as court-orders can be deemed as coercion. Women who have decisional capacity should be able to use it and refuse treatment if wanted. Because of these legal obstacles, law-makers and judges tend to prioritize women's rights to make their own decision.

Legal inequalities

The best interest of the fetus is established by the physician, but decided on by the mother. The problem is that there tends to be prejudices and inequalities when it comes to what is in the best interest of the fetus, especially in healthcare. According to Kelly Lindgren's journal, Maternal–Fetal Conflict: Court-Ordered Cesarean Section, “poor, minority women are affected most often by court-ordered c-section [...] which include: 47% Black Americans, 33% from Asia or Africa, and only 20% White.” It is also important to address that no other group of people are forced to do anything, so it is questioned why a woman who is pregnant should be forced. The court system is also reluctant to give the fetus and child the same rights. Women are burdened by laws resulting from their ability to be pregnant.

Legal case examples

Case name	Summary
Roe v. Wade	This United States Supreme Court decision ruled that it was unconstitutional to ban abortions as it goes against a woman's rights. It formulated the trimester framework: during the first trimester there can be no restrictions on abortions; during the second trimester there can be restrictions on abortions, but only for the sake of health and safety; and during the third trimester there are restrictions with exceptions
Planned Parenthood v. Casey	This United States Supreme Court decision shifted away from the trimester framework as an undue burden
Prince v. Massachusetts	This United States Supreme Court decision ruled that “Parents may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow that they are free, in identical circumstances, to make martyrs of their children”

Ethics

"Good ethics begins with good facts." An ethical framework (e.g. principle-based theories, conflict-based theories, feminist theory, and ethics of care) acknowledges the pregnant woman's competency to make her own decision for her and her body, including the fetus, but with the fetus’ well-being in mind. Acknowledging what happens after the fetus is delivered is the post-delivery perspective of pediatricians.

Principle-based and conflict-based theories

Principle-based theory is defined as "respect for patient autonomy, beneficence non-maleficence, and justice to guide conflict resolution." Conflict-based theories emphasize women's rights to autonomy and the physician's moral obligation to both the woman and the fetus separately. Conflict arises as pregnancy is only unique to women, which is why it is necessary to prioritize women's autonomy and rights. When the fetal interest is prioritized, it imposes on social and racial equality.

Feminist theory

Feminist theory (also known as feminist ethics) is a gender-based perspective, which acknowledges that women are treated differently in decision-making.

Ethics of care and relational ethics

Ethics of care and relational ethics acknowledges human relationships (i.e. relationship of patient to fetus, physician, community, society, etc.) as well as a woman's life experiences (e.g. age, political view, religion, lifestyle, etc.) and how that affects a person's decision-making. In terms of maternal-fetal conflict, it emphasizes understanding the patient's values and experiences to best support her decisions.

Sample of conflicting health problems affecting mother and fetus

Health problem	Summary
Pre-eclampsia	Pre-eclampsia is a pregnancy disorder where maternal hypertension and proteinuria can occur.
Cancer	The most common types of cancers associated with pregnancies include malignant melanoma, lymphomas, and leukemia as well as cancer of the cervix, thyroid, ovary, breast, and colon. Maternal cancer therapy (e.g. chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgical oncology) tends to cause risks for fetus.
Immunological diseases	The mother and fetus have their own individual immunological interfaces, which can cause immunological diseases.

The case of Medea

M. C. Reid's journal, "The case of Medea—a view of fetal-maternal conflict" alludes to the Greek Myth of Medea as it addresses maternal-fetal scenarios. The myth of Medea is about a woman named Medea who killed her two children as revenge against her husband. M. C. Reid compares Madea to several maternal-fetal scenarios, those of Meilssa, Nada, and Olga through the use of conflict analysis based on:

1. the reason for the act.
2. the life of the moral patients.
3. the rights of the moral agent.

The reason for the act

There could be several reasons behind an act: is it inherently vicious (e.g. based on hatred, cruelty, greed, etc.); is it a morally commended act (e.g. based on respect, consideration, compassion, etc.); or is it a neutral act (e.g. based on no motives, accidental situations, etc.). Certain acts can seem good, but with vicious motives. For example, a surgeon does an intervention because they are sadistic, but the procedure helps the patient resulting in a good act, but with vicious intent. Reid argues that a mother would unlikely act purposely vicious toward her fetus.

The life of the moral patients

There are many different views of the maternal-fetal relationship:

• One point of view addresses how the fetus affects the mother as they share a physiology, which is a counter-view to the fetus being separate from its mother.
• Another perspective is the fetus being part of the mother as one unit, but the fetus gradually increases in moral value as a patient.
• A third perspective is that the fetus is not of moral value until birth.

The rights of the moral agent

Women have rights and autonomy; some argue that these rights are under threat during situations involving abortion. As long as a woman is competent to make decisions regarding her own body and fetus, she is considered eligible to make decisions and retain her autonomy and rights.

Conflict analysis

The case of Medea uses conflict analysis to address and compare Medea's story to three other fictional women: Melissa, Nada, and Olga.

The case of Medea conflict analysis

	Background story	Reason for the act	Life of the moral patient	Rights of the moral participants
Medea	As an act of revenge against her husband, Madea killed her two children.	While clear and understandable, the act as not justifiable.	Considering the status of a woman in Greece in Medea's era, where she sacrificed a lot for her husband, this act was a way for her to reclaim her personhood.	The children are innocent, yet their mother killed them.
Melissa	Melissa is 30 weeks pregnant with twins, and wants to terminate her pregnancy	The justification is similar to Medea's situation.	Denying termination of the pregnancy means denying Melissa's rights.	The difference between Melissa's situation and that of Medea's is that the fetal twins have different moral value than born children, but there is no justification for the termination other than Melissa not wanting to continue the pregnancy.
Nada	Nada, at 24 weeks of pregnancy has HTN-of-pregnancy (HOP) syndrome, where there is a risk of brain hemorrhage and seizures to the mother. She has to terminate the pregnancy to save her life, but is upset about it.	In order to save the life of the mother, the termination is justifiable.	No one is expected to sacrifice one's own life for another.	Based on the gradualist point of view, the moral status of the fetus is less in value at early gestational age.
Olga	At 22 weeks of pregnancy, Olga has mixed feelings, but no strong dislike for the fetus. She prefers to not go through with pregnancy because she believes the pregnancy is becoming a burden.	While there is no absolute wrong in this situation, it cannot be quite justifiable.	Denying termination of the pregnancy means denying Olga's rights.	This is a very nebulous situation because if the fetus is a burden, but not a health problem, it is necessary to weigh the needs of the fetus and mother.

 

Paradise

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise

Paradise by Jan Bruegel

In religion, paradise is a place of exceptional happiness and delight. Paradisiacal notions are often laden with pastoral imagery, and may be cosmogonical or eschatological or both, often compared to the miseries of human civilization: in paradise there is only peace, prosperity, and happiness. Paradise is a place of contentment, a land of luxury and fulfillment. Paradise is often described as a "higher place", the holiest place, in contrast to this world, or underworlds such as Hell.

In eschatological contexts, paradise is imagined as an abode of the virtuous dead. In Christian and Islamic understanding, Heaven is a paradisiacal relief. In old Egyptian beliefs, the otherworld is Aaru, the reed-fields of ideal hunting and fishing grounds where the dead lived after judgment. For the Celts, it was the Fortunate Isle of Mag Mell. For the classical Greeks, the Elysian fields was a paradisiacal land of plenty where the heroic and righteous dead hoped to spend eternity. In Buddhism, paradise and the heaven are synonymous, with higher levels available to beings who have achieved special attainments of virtue and meditation. In the Zoroastrian Avesta, the "Best Existence" and the "House of Song" are places of the righteous dead. On the other hand, in cosmogonical contexts 'paradise' describes the world before it was tainted by evil.

The concept is a theme in art and literature, particularly of the pre-Enlightenment era, a well-known representative of which is John Milton's Paradise Lost.

Etymology and concept history

The luxurious palace and gardens of Neo-Assyrian king Ashurbanipal (ruled 668-631 BCE) at Nineveh, with original color reconstitution. Irrigation canals radiate from an aqueduct. The king appears under the porch. British Museum.

The word "paradise" entered English from the French paradis, inherited from the Latin paradisus, from Greek parádeisos (παράδεισος), from an Old Iranian form, from Proto-Iranian*parādaiĵah- "walled enclosure", whence Old Persian 𐎱𐎼𐎭𐎹𐎭𐎠𐎶 p-r-d-y-d-a-m /paridaidam/, Avestan 𐬞𐬀𐬌𐬭𐬌⸱𐬛𐬀𐬉𐬰𐬀 pairi-daêza-. The literal meaning of this Eastern Old Iranian language word is "walled (enclosure)", from pairi- 'around' (cognate with Greek περί, English peri- of identical meaning) and -diz "to make, form (a wall), build" (cognate with Greek τεῖχος 'wall'). The word's etymology is ultimately derived from a PIE root *dheigʷ "to stick and set up (a wall)", and *per "around".

By the 6th/5th century BCE, the Old Iranian word had been borrowed into Assyrian pardesu "domain". It subsequently came to indicate the expansive walled gardens of the First Persian Empire, and was subsequently borrowed into Greek as παράδεισος parádeisos "park for animals" in the Anabasis of the early 4th century BCE Athenian Xenophon, Aramaic as pardaysa "royal park", and Hebrew as פַּרְדֵּס pardes, "orchard" (appearing thrice in the Tanakh; in the Song of Solomon (Song of Songs 4:13), Ecclesiastes (Ecclesiastes 2:5) and Nehemiah (Nehemiah 2:8)). In the Septuagint (3rd–1st centuries BCE), Greek παράδεισος parádeisos was used to translate both Hebrew פרדס pardes and Hebrew גן gan, "garden" (e.g. (Genesis 2:8, Ezekiel 28:13): it is from this usage that the use of "paradise" to refer to the Garden of Eden derives. The same usage also appears in Arabic and in the Quran as firdaws فردوس.

The idea of a walled enclosure was not preserved in most Iranian usage, and generally came to refer to a plantation or other cultivated area, not necessarily walled. For example, the Old Iranian word survives as Pardis in New Persian as well as its derivative pālīz (or "jālīz"), which denotes a vegetable patch.

Biblical

Hebrew Bible

Nicolas Poussin, Four seasons of paradise, 1660–1664

The word pardes does not appear before the post-Exilic period (post-538 BCE); it occurs in the Song of Songs 4:13, Ecclesiastes 2:5, and Nehemiah 2:8, in each case meaning "park" or "garden", the original Persian meaning of the word, where it describes to the royal parks of Cyrus the Great by Xenophon in Anabasis.

Later in Second Temple era Judaism "paradise" came to be associated with the Garden of Eden and prophesies of restoration of Eden, and transferred to heaven. The Septuagint uses the word around 30 times, both of Eden, (Gen. 2:7 etc.) and of Eden restored (Ezek. 28:13, 36:35 etc.). In the Apocalypse of Moses, Adam and Eve are expelled from paradise (instead of Eden) after having been tricked by the serpent. Later after the death of Adam, the Archangel Michael carries the body of Adam to be buried in Paradise, which is in the Third Heaven.

New Testament

The New Testament use and understanding of paradise parallels that of contemporary Judaism. The word is used three times in the New Testament writings:

• Luke 23:43 – by Jesus on the cross, in response to the thief's request that Jesus remember him when he came into his kingdom.
• 2 Cor.12:4 – in Paul's description of a man's description of a third heaven paradise, which may in fact be a vision Paul himself saw.
• Rev.2:7 – in a reference to the Gen.2:8 paradise and the tree of life

Judaism

See also: Paradise in Judaism

According to Jewish eschatology, the higher Gan Eden is called the "Garden of Righteousness". It has been created since the beginning of the world, and will appear gloriously at the end of time. The righteous dwelling there will enjoy the sight of the heavenly chayot carrying the throne of God. Each of the righteous will walk with God, who will lead them in a dance. Its Jewish and non-Jewish inhabitants are "clothed with garments of light and eternal life, and eat of the tree of life" (Enoch 58,3) near to God and His anointed ones. This Jewish rabbinical concept of a higher Gan Eden is opposed by the Hebrew terms gehinnom and sheol, figurative names for the place of spiritual purification for the wicked dead in Judaism, a place envisioned as being at the greatest possible distance from heaven.

Rabbinic Judaism

In modern Jewish eschatology it is believed that history will complete itself and the ultimate destination will be when all mankind returns to the Garden of Eden.

In the Talmud and the Jewish Kabbalah, the scholars agree that there are two types of spiritual places called "Garden in Eden". The first is rather terrestrial, of abundant fertility and luxuriant vegetation, known as the "lower Gan Eden". The second is envisioned as being celestial, the habitation of righteous, Jewish and non-Jewish, immortal souls, known as the "higher Gan Eden". The rabbis differentiate between Gan and Eden. Adam is said to have dwelt only in the Gan, whereas Eden is said never to be witnessed by any mortal eye. In Rabbinic Judaism, the word 'Pardes' recurs, but less often in the Second Temple context of Eden or restored Eden. A well-known reference is in the Pardes story, where the word may allude to mystic philosophy.

The Zohar gives the word a mystical interpretation, and associates it with the four kinds of Biblical exegesis: peshat (literal meaning), remez (allusion), derash (anagogical), and sod (mystic). The initial letters of those four words then form פַּרְדֵּס – p(a)rd(e)s, which was in turn felt to represent the fourfold interpretation of the Torah (in which sod – the mystical interpretation – ranks highest).

Christianity

See also: World to Come, Kingship and kingdom of God, and Hades in Christianity

 

Mead Bradock, Paradise According to Three Different Hypotheses, 1747

 

Abraham in paradise, Gračanica Monastery, Serbia

In the 2nd century AD, Irenaeus distinguished paradise from heaven. In Against Heresies, he wrote that only those deemed worthy would inherit a home in heaven, while others would enjoy paradise, and the rest live in the restored Jerusalem (which was mostly a ruin after the Jewish–Roman wars but was rebuilt beginning with Constantine the Great in the 4th century). Origen likewise distinguished paradise from heaven, describing paradise as the earthly "school" for souls of the righteous dead, preparing them for their ascent through the celestial spheres to heaven.

Many early Christians identified Abraham's bosom with paradise, where the souls of the righteous go until the resurrection of the dead; others were inconsistent in their identification of paradise, such as St. Augustine, whose views varied.

In Luke 23:43, Jesus has a conversation with one of those crucified with him, who asks, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom". Jesus answers him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise”. This has often been interpreted to mean that on that same day the thief and Jesus would enter the intermediate resting place of the dead who were waiting for the Resurrection. Divergent views on paradise, and when one enters it, may have been responsible for a punctuation difference in Luke; for example, the two early Syriac versions translate Luke 23:43 differently. The Curetonian Gospels read "Today I tell you that you will be with me in paradise", whereas the Sinaitic Palimpsest reads "I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise". Likewise the two earliest Greek codices with punctuation disagree: Codex Vaticanus has a pause mark (a single dot on the baseline) in the original ink equidistant between 'today' and the following word (with no later corrections and no dot before "today"), whereas Codex Alexandrinus has the "today in paradise" reading. In addition, an adverb of time is never used in the nearly 100 other places in the Gospels where Jesus uses the phrase, "Truly I say to you".

In Christian art, Fra Angelico's Last Judgement painting shows Paradise on its left side. There is a tree of life (and another tree) and a circle dance of liberated souls. In the middle is a hole. In Muslim art it similarly indicates the presence of the Prophet or divine beings. It visually says, "Those here cannot be depicted".

Jehovah's Witnesses

See also: Jehovah's Witnesses and salvation

Jehovah's Witnesses believe, from their interpretation of the Book of Genesis, that God's original purpose was, and is, to have the earth filled with the offspring of Adam and Eve as caretakers of a global paradise. However, Adam and Eve rebelled against God's sovereignty and were banished from the Garden of Eden, driven out of paradise into toil and misery.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that disobedient and wicked people will be destroyed by Christ at Armageddon and those obedient to Christ will live eternally in a restored earthly paradise. Joining the survivors will be the resurrected righteous and unrighteous people who died prior to Armageddon. The latter are brought back because they paid for their sins by their death and/or because they lacked opportunity to learn of Jehovah's requirements before dying. These will be judged on the basis of their post-resurrection obedience to instructions revealed in new "scrolls". They believe that resurrection of the dead to paradise earth is made possible by Christ's blood and the ransom sacrifice. This provision does not apply to those whom Christ as Judge deems to have sinned against God's holy spirit.

One of Jesus' statements before he died were the words to a man hanging alongside him, "you will be with me in Paradise."^{[Luke 23:43]} The New World Translation places a comma after the word 'today', dividing it into two separate phrases, "I tell you today" and "you will be with me in Paradise". This differs from standard translations of this verse as "I tell you today you will be with me in Paradise". Based on scriptures such as Matthew 12:40, 27:63, Mark 8:31 and 9:31, Witnesses believe Jesus' expectation that he would be bodily resurrected after three days precluded his being in paradise on the same day that he died.

Mormonism

In Latter Day Saint theology, paradise usually refers to the spirit world, the place where spirits dwell following death and awaiting the resurrection. In that context, "paradise" is the state of the righteous after death. In contrast, the wicked and those who have not yet learned the gospel of Jesus Christ await the resurrection in spirit prison. After the universal resurrection, all persons will be assigned to a particular kingdom or degree of glory. This may also be termed "paradise".

Islam

Main article: Jannah

In the Quran, Heaven is denoted as Jannah (garden), with the highest level being called Firdaus, i.e. Paradise. It is used instead of Heaven to describe the ultimate pleasurable place after death, accessible by those who pray, donate to charity, read the Quran, believe in: God, the angels, his revealed books, his prophets and messengers, the Day of Judgement and the afterlife, and follow God's will in their life. Heaven in Islam is used to describe skies in the literal sense and metaphorically to refer to the universe. In Islam, the bounties and beauty of Heaven are immense, so much so that they are beyond the abilities of mankind's worldly mind to comprehend. There are eight doors of Jannah. These are eight grades of Jannah:

• 1. Jannah al-Mawa
• 2. Dar al-Maqam
• 3. Dar al-Salam
• 4. Dar al-Khuld
• 5. Jannah al-Adn
• 6. Jannah al-Na'im
• 7. Jannah al-Kasif
• 8. Jannah al-Firdaus

Jannah al-Mawa is in the lowest, Jannah al-Adn is the middle and Jannah al-Firdaus is the highest.

Imam Bukhari has also recorded the tradition in which the Prophet said,

'When you ask from Allah, ask Him for Al-Firdaus, for it is the middle of Paradise and it is the highest place and from it the rivers of Paradise flow.' (Bukhari, Ahmad, Baihaqi)

In this tradition, it is evident that Al-Firdaus is the highest place in Paradise, yet, it is stated that it is in the middle. While giving an explanation of this description of Al-Firdaus, the great scholar, Ibn Hibban states,

'Al-Firdaus being in the middle of Paradise means that with respect to the width and breadth of Paradise, Al-Firdaus is in the middle. And with respect to being 'the highest place in Paradise', it refers to it being on a height.'

This explanation is in agreement to the explanation which has been given by Abu Hurairah (r.a.) who said that

'Al Firdaus is a mountain in Paradise from which the rivers flow.' (Tafseer Al Qurtubi Vol. 12 pg. 100)

The Quran also gave a warning that not all Muslims or even the believers will assuredly be permitted to enter Jannah except those who had struggled in the name of God and tested from God's trials as faced by the messengers of God or ancient prophets:

Or do you think that you will enter Paradise while such [trial] has not yet come to you as came to those who passed on before you? They were touched by poverty and hardship and were shaken until [even their] messenger and those who believed with him said,"When is the help of Allah ?" Unquestionably, the help of Allah is near.
— Qur'an 2:214 (Al-Baqarah) (Saheeh International)

Gnosticism

On the Origin of the World, a text from the Nag Hammadi library held in ancient Gnosticism, describes Paradise as being located outside the circuit of the Sun and Moon in the luxuriant Earth east in the midst of stones. The Tree of Life, which will provide for the souls of saints after they come out of their corrupted bodies, is located in the north of Paradise besides the Tree of Knowledge that contains the power of God.

Fugacity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugacity

In chemical thermodynamics, the fugacity of a real gas is an effective partial pressure which replaces the mechanical partial pressure in an accurate computation of the chemical equilibrium constant. It is equal to the pressure of an ideal gas which has the same temperature and molar Gibbs free energy as the real gas.

Fugacities are determined experimentally or estimated from various models such as a Van der Waals gas that are closer to reality than an ideal gas. The real gas pressure and fugacity are related through the dimensionless fugacity coefficient φ.

${\displaystyle \varphi ={\frac {f}{P}}\,}$

For an ideal gas, fugacity and pressure are equal and so φ = 1. Taken at the same temperature and pressure, the difference between the molar Gibbs free energies of a real gas and the corresponding ideal gas is equal to RT ln φ.

The fugacity is closely related to the thermodynamic activity. For a gas, the activity is simply the fugacity divided by a reference pressure to give a dimensionless quantity. This reference pressure is called the standard state and normally chosen as 1 atmosphere or 1 bar.

Accurate calculations of chemical equilibrium for real gases should use the fugacity rather than the pressure. The thermodynamic condition for chemical equilibrium is that the total chemical potential of reactants is equal to that of products. If the chemical potential of each gas is expressed as a function of fugacity, the equilibrium condition may be transformed into the familiar reaction quotient form (or law of mass action) except that the pressures are replaced by fugacities.

For a condensed phase (liquid or solid) in equilibrium with its vapor phase, the chemical potential is equal to that of the vapor, and therefore the fugacity is equal to the fugacity of the vapor. This fugacity is approximately equal to the vapor pressure when the vapor pressure is not too high.

Pure substance

Fugacity is closely related to the chemical potential μ. In a pure substance, μ is equal to the Gibbs energy G_m for a mole of the substance, and

${\displaystyle d\mu =dG_{\mathrm {m} }=-S_{\mathrm {m} }dT+V_{\mathrm {m} }dP}$,

where T and P are the temperature and pressure, V_m is the volume per mole and S_m is the entropy per mole.

Gas

For an ideal gas the equation of state can be written as

${\displaystyle V_{\mathrm {m} }^{\text{ideal}}={\frac {RT}{P}},}$

where R is the ideal gas constant. The differential change of the chemical potential between two states of slightly different pressures but equal temperature (i.e., dT = 0) is given by

${\displaystyle d\mu =V_{\mathrm {m} }dP=RT\,{\frac {dP}{P}}=RT\,d\ln P.}$

For real gases the equation of state will depart from the simpler one, and the result above derived for an ideal gas will only be a good approximation provided that (a) the typical size of the molecule is negligible compared to the average distance between the individual molecules, and (b) the short range behavior of the inter-molecular potential can be neglected, i.e., when the molecules can be considered to rebound elastically off each other during molecular collisions. In other words, real gases behave like ideal gases at low pressures and high temperatures. At moderately high pressures, attractive interactions between molecules reduce the pressure compared to the ideal gas law; and at very high pressures, the sizes of the molecules are no longer negligible and repulsive forces between molecules increases the pressure. At low temperatures, molecules are more likely to stick together instead of rebounding elastically.

The ideal gas law can still be used to describe the behavior of a real gas if the pressure is replaced by a fugacity f, defined so that

${\displaystyle d\mu =RT\,d\ln f}$

and

${\displaystyle \lim _{P\to 0}{\frac {f}{P}}=1.}$

That is, at low pressures f is the same as the pressure, so it has the same units as pressure. The ratio

${\displaystyle \varphi ={\frac {f}{P}}}$

is called the fugacity coefficient.

If a reference state is denoted by a zero superscript, then integrating the equation for the chemical potential gives

${\displaystyle \mu -\mu ^{0}=RT\,\ln {\frac {f}{P^{0}}},}$

Note this can also be expressed with ${\displaystyle a=f/P^{0}}$, a dimensionless quantity, called the activity.

Numerical example: Nitrogen gas (N₂) at 0 °C and a pressure of P = 100 atmospheres (atm) has a fugacity of f = 97.03 atm. This means that the molar Gibbs energy of real nitrogen at a pressure of 100 atm is equal to the molar Gibbs energy of nitrogen as an ideal gas at 97.03 atm. The fugacity coefficient is 97.03 atm/100 atm = 0.9703.

The contribution of nonideality to the molar Gibbs energy of a real gas is equal to RT ln φ. For nitrogen at 100 atm, G_m = G_m,id + RT ln 0.9703, which is less than the ideal value G_m,id because of intermolecular attractive forces. Finally, the activity is just 97.03 without units.

Condensed phase

See also: Vapor–liquid equilibrium

The fugacity of a condensed phase (liquid or solid) is defined the same way as for a gas:

${\displaystyle d\mu _{\mathrm {c} }=RT\,d\ln f_{\mathrm {c} }}$

and

${\displaystyle \lim _{P\to 0}{\frac {f_{\mathrm {c} }}{P}}=1.}$

It is difficult to measure fugacity in a condensed phase directly; but if the condensed phase is saturated (in equilibrium with the vapor phase), the chemical potentials of the two phases are equal (μ_c = μ_g). Combined with the above definition, this implies that

${\displaystyle f_{\mathrm {c} }=f_{\mathrm {g} }.}$

When calculating the fugacity of the compressed phase, one can generally assume the volume is constant. At constant temperature, the change in fugacity as the pressure goes from the saturation press P_sat to P is

${\displaystyle \ln {\frac {f}{f_{\mathrm {sat} }}}={\frac {V_{\mathrm {m} }}{RT}}\int _{P_{\mathrm {sat} }}^{p}dp={\frac {V\left(P-P_{\mathrm {sat} }\right)}{RT}}.}$

This fraction is known as the Poynting factor. Using f_sat = φ_satp_sat, where φ_sat is the fugacity coefficient,

${\displaystyle f=\varphi _{\mathrm {sat} }P_{\mathrm {sat} }\exp \left({\frac {V\left(P-P_{\mathrm {sat} }\right)}{RT}}\right).}$

This equation allows the fugacity to be calculated using tabulated values for saturated vapor pressure. Often the pressure is low enough for the vapor phase to be considered an ideal gas, so the fugacity coefficient is approximately equal to 1.

Unless pressures are very high, the Poynting factor is usually small and the exponential term is near 1. Frequently, the fugacity of the pure liquid is used as a reference state when defining and using mixture activity coefficients.

Mixture

The fugacity is most useful in mixtures. It does not add any new information compared to the chemical potential, but it has computational advantages. As the molar fraction of a component goes to zero, the chemical potential diverges but the fugacity goes to zero. In addition, there are natural reference states for fugacity (for example, an ideal gas makes a natural reference state for gas mixtures since the fugacity and pressure converge at low pressure).

Gases

In a mixture of gases, the fugacity of each component i has a similar definition, with partial molar quantities instead of molar quantities (e.g., G_i instead of G_m and V_i instead of V_m):

${\displaystyle dG_{i}=RT\,d\ln f_{i}}$

and

${\displaystyle \lim _{P\to 0}{\frac {f_{i}}{P_{i}}}=1,}$

where P_i is the partial pressure of component i. The partial pressures obey Dalton's law:

${\displaystyle P_{i}=y_{i}P,}$

where P is the total pressure and y_i is the mole fraction of the component (so the partial pressures add up to the total pressure). The fugacities commonly obey a similar law called the Lewis and Randall rule:

${\displaystyle f_{i}=y_{i}f_{i}^{*},}$

where f*
_i is the fugacity that component i would have if the entire gas had that composition at the same temperature and pressure. Both laws are expressions of an assumption that the gases behave independently.

Liquids

In a liquid mixture, the fugacity of each component is equal to that of a vapor component in equilibrium with the liquid. In an ideal solution, the fugacities obey the Lewis-Randall rule:

${\displaystyle f_{i}=x_{i}f_{i}^{*},}$

where x_i is the mole fraction in the liquid and f^∗
_i is the fugacity of the pure liquid phase. This is a good approximation when the component molecules have similar size, shape and polarity.

In a dilute solution with two components, the component with the larger molar fraction (the solvent) may still obey Raoult's law even if the other component (the solute) has different properties. That is because its molecules experience essentially the same environment that they do in the absence of the solute. By contrast, each solute molecule is surrounded by solvent molecules, so it obeys a different law known as Henry's law. By Henry's law, the fugacity of the solute is proportional to its concentration. The constant of proportionality (a measured Henry's constant) depends on whether the concentration is represented by the mole fraction, molality or molarity.

Temperature and pressure dependence

The pressure dependence of fugacity (at constant temperature) is given by

${\displaystyle \left({\frac {\partial \ln f}{\partial P}}\right)_{T}={\frac {V_{\mathrm {m} }}{RT}}}$

and is always positive.

The temperature dependence at constant pressure is

${\displaystyle \left({\frac {\partial \ln f}{\partial T}}\right)_{P}={\frac {\Delta H_{\mathrm {m} }}{RT^{2}}},}$

where ΔH_m is the change in molar enthalpy as the gas expands, liquid vaporizes, or solid sublimates into a vacuum. Also, if the pressure is P⁰, then

${\displaystyle \left({\frac {\partial \left(T\ln {\frac {f}{P^{0}}}\right)}{\partial T}}\right)_{P}=-{\frac {S_{\mathrm {m} }}{R}}<0.}$

Since the temperature and entropy are positive, ln f/P⁰ decreases with increasing temperature.

Measurement

The fugacity can be deduced from measurements of volume as a function of pressure at constant temperature. In that case,

${\displaystyle \ln \varphi ={\frac {1}{RT}}\int _{0}^{p}\left(V_{m}-V_{\mathrm {m} }^{\mathrm {ideal} }\right)dP.}$

This integral can also be calculated using an equation of state.

The integral can be recast in an alternative form using the compressibility factor

${\displaystyle Z={\frac {PV_{\mathrm {m} }}{RT}}.}$

Then

${\displaystyle \ln \varphi =\int _{0}^{P}\left({\frac {Z-1}{P}}\right)dP.}$

This is useful because of the theorem of corresponding states: If the pressure and temperature at the critical point of the gas are P_c and T_c, we can define reduced properties P_r = P/P_c and T_r = T/T_c. Then, to a good approximation, most gases have the same value of Z for the same reduced temperature and pressure. However, in geochemical applications, this principle ceases to be accurate at pressures where metamorphism occurs.

For a gas obeying the van der Waals equation, the explicit formula for the fugacity coefficient is

${\displaystyle RT\ln \varphi ={\frac {RTb}{V_{\mathrm {m} }-b}}-{\frac {2a}{V_{\mathrm {m} }}}-RT\ln \left(1-{\frac {a(V_{\mathrm {m} }-b)}{RTV_{\mathrm {m} }^{2}}}\right)}$

This formula is difficult to use, since the pressure depends on the molar volume through the equation of state; so one must choose a volume, calculate the pressure, and then use these two values on the right-hand side of the equation.

History

The word fugacity is derived from the Latin fugere, to flee. In the sense of an "escaping tendency", it was introduced to thermodynamics in 1901 by the American chemist Gilbert N. Lewis and popularized in an influential textbook by Lewis and Merle Randall, Thermodynamics and the Free Energy of Chemical Substances, in 1923. The "escaping tendency" referred to the flow of matter between phases and played a similar role to that of temperature in heat flow.