Should a Mother Risk Her own Life ?

[BAFRIEND]

Jesus chose what he did out of love.

Where is the flaw in that argument ?


"The greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion, which is war against the child. The mother doesn't learn to love, but kills to solve her own problems. Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want."
- Mother Teresa

 

[bliz]

Jesus chose what he did out of love.

Where is the flaw in that argument ?

If, somehow, your death will enable your unborn child to live (you have yet to explain that scenario, Dad) you will not have accomplished anything at all close to what Jesus accomplished by His death.

"

The greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion, which is war against the child. The mother doesn't learn to love, but kills to solve her own problems. Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want."
- Mother Teresa

The specific topic of this thread is mothers whose lives are at risk because of their pregnancies. This is a very small percentage of all pregnancies. Do you have a pro-life quote handy for these specific pregnancies?

 

[BAFRIEND]

If, somehow, your death will enable your unborn child to live (you have yet to explain that scenario, Dad) you will not have accomplished anything at all close to what Jesus accomplished by His death.

"

The specific topic of this thread is mothers whose lives are at risk because of their pregnancies. This is a very small percentage of all pregnancies. Do you have a pro-life quote handy for these specific pregnancies?

Certainly, I do :

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]"No one has greater love than this, to lay down one's life for one's friends." John 15[/FONT]​

 

[ShiningSonBeam]

Here's a twist: does anyone know about Tubal pregnancies? I realize that most of the time, they either naturally miscarry or the doctor must end the pregnancy (let's say it the way it is: the doctor advises he kill the embryo). But do some babies make it all the way without rupturing the mother's fallopian tube?

I should look this up because I'm curious, but I'm afraid of what I might find. Could this be a true scenario where a mother's life is (9 times out of 10) in danger if the pregnancy continues? I sincerely hope not.

 

[ShiningSonBeam]

I answer my own question: "Death from rupture is rare" as stated in WikiPedia under Ectopic Pregnancy, specifically treatment.

 

[BAFRIEND]

I answer my own question: "Death from rupture is rare" as stated in WikiPedia under Ectopic Pregnancy, specifically treatment.

I love Veggie Tales. You have to get the Christian versions from Wal-Mart now. NBC bought Veggie Tales telling the creators that they would not edit out the Christian content. Then NBC said they would remove the Bible verse at the end. Next thiong you klnow NBC is saying that they are editing out the name, "God" out of all episodes. NBC did this because they were concerned about offending anyone.
Next thing you know NBC is sending an Army of lawyers out to fight the Gov't to fight for the right to use the "F" word in their programming.

The name "God" and Bible verses is offensive to NBC but the "F" word is worth fighting for as well as all the simulated sex and gory violence...

Anyway, thank you, ShiningSonBeam for the great information. vbmenu_register("postmenu_32762103", true);

 

[bliz]

Here's a twist: does anyone know about Tubal pregnancies? I realize that most of the time, they either naturally miscarry or the doctor must end the pregnancy (let's say it the way it is: the doctor advises he kill the embryo). But do some babies make it all the way without rupturing the mother's fallopian tube?

I should look this up because I'm curious, but I'm afraid of what I might find. Could this be a true scenario where a mother's life is (9 times out of 10) in danger if the pregnancy continues? I sincerely hope not.

An ectopic pregnancy is any pregnancy that occurs outside of the uterus. Most frequently this occurs inside of a fallopian tube. It can also occur on the ovary or the outside of the uterus or on the bowel.

First, there is limited nourishment for the baby in any location other than inside the uterus. Second, no other location in the abdomen is able to expand as the fetus grows. There are large arteries that run along the fallopian tubes. Should the tube rupture, so will the artery and major bleeding will occur.

If an ectopic pregnancy is left on it's own, both mother and baby will die. The only other choice is to remove the fetus, long before the baby would be able to survive on it's own.

This is a scenario where 10 times out of 10 the mother's life will be lost, and the baby also.

I suppose that somewhere somebody is going to argue that it must be God's will and therefore both schould die rather than remove the baby. Throughout history there have been some very strange ideas about women and pregnency... When you get to heaven ask - Oh! I can't think of her name! A 1600s Scottish woman who had a very long and difficult labor with twins. They were eventually delivered in fine health. Someone told the officials that she had chewed a leaf supposedly to provide some pain relief during the 3 days of labor. For that, she was sentenced to death because women were to give birth in pain, as the Bible said. They took her from her children and hung her. (I'll look up her name later in the day...)

 

[bliz]

I'm sorry, I got it wrong. Eufeme was not hung but burned to death for for taking ?/ requesting ? some mediation to minimize the pain of childbirth.

It is recorded in the history of Scotland that in the year of 1591 a lady of rank by the name of Eufame Macalyane was burned alive on the castle hill of Edinburgh. She was burned alive because while giving birth to her twin sons she asked the midwife, whose name was Agnes Sampson, to give her something for pain. Now, Agnes Sampson, out of Christian love for this suffering woman, must have reported the incident to the church authorities.

http://ffrf.org/fttoday/1999/April99/whatley.html

Then we have one of my favorite families, the Chamberlains with lots of male doctors in the family. One invented the forceps to help ease a baby out of the birth canal if labor ceased. (C-sections were not used at this time because mothers tend to die from them.) The forceps began to be used in the early 1600s, but only by members of the Chamberlain family who used them in great secrecy. All of the best households wanted Chamberlains to assist with births because they saved so many babies and mothers.

But they did not share the secret of these life saving devices with other doctors. Forceps were not widely in use until the mid 1800s. That's 250 years of women and babies dying in childbirth so that these men would have a monopoly on their invention. http://momsquawk.wordpress.com/2006/10/06/where-have-all-the-forceps-gone/

Not to mention the modern fact of why and how most pregnant women die.

It seems that homicide is the or a leading cause of death for women who are pregnant or recently gave birth - usually at the hands of husbands and boyfriends.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10074-2004Dec18.html

http://www.now.org/issues/violence/043003pregnant.html

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=20316

So here in our little thread we have a man advocating that women should be willing to die so that their unborn children can live. He says that he is perfectly willing to do so, but since he will never be pregnant, he will never be faced with that choice, which makes his offer a hollow one. Men have long been trying to tell women what they should do when it comes to birthing children. But they have an historically terrible record of looking after women's best intersts.

I am not advocating that women risk their lives or not. I am advocating that any woman who faces such a horrible choice be permitted to make her own decision and not have a room full of mostly men make the decision for her. One mother may choose to risk her life. May God bless her. Another woman may decide that her other 4 children need their mother and choose to not take the risk. May God bless her.

 

[MissLady]

Actually many women with tubal pregnancies don't die if the tube ruptures but of course lose a tube and ovary and the bleeding is dramatic even if it doesn't result in death.

And there have been cases of ABDOMINAL pregnancies where the child and mother have both survived. Sorry I don't have any links to the info atm, I'll look later. I have read about it in Women's magazines and seen it talked about on TV shows. In the case of the tubal pregnancy yes there is a 100% chance the baby will die and I see no problem removing it before the tube ruptures. It'd be nice if science could figure out some way to just remove it from the tube and transfer/attach it in the womb where it's supposed to be.

 

[bliz]

Actually many women with tubal pregnancies don't die if the tube ruptures but of course lose a tube and ovary and the bleeding is dramatic even if it doesn't result in death.

My prefacing statement was that the mother will die without medical treatment.

 

[MissLady]

"The maternal mortality rate is estimated between 0.5 and 18%. The perinatal mortality rate ranges between 40-95%."

http://www.thefetus.net/page.php?id=1032 (warning that site contains graphic images)

And here's a case study: "
A 22-year-old primiparous woman was admitted to the hospital in labor at 38 weeks of gestation, with a diagnosis of transverse lie. She had a history of vaginal bleeding in the first trimester but no other complaints. Apart from the transverse lie, physical findings were normal. Fundal height was 38 cm. The cervix was dilated 2 cm but not effaced, and no presenting part was palpated. Because of the transverse lie, the patient was taken to surgery for cesarean delivery. When the abdomen was opened, a gestational sac was found superior to the uterus. The sac was incised and a female infant, weighing 2.6 kg (5 lb, 12 oz) was delivered. The infant had Apgar scores of 2 and 6.
The placenta was attached to the right superior margin of the uterus, the right tube and ovary, and the broad ligament. The placenta was removed because of massive hemorrhage, with blood loss of 3,900 mL. The postoperative course was complicated by a transfusion reaction. The mother and the normal infant were discharged 16 days after delivery."

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3225/is_n1_v41/ai_8773331

 

[ShiningSonBeam]

Actually many women with tubal pregnancies don't die if the tube ruptures but of course lose a tube and ovary and the bleeding is dramatic even if it doesn't result in death.

And there have been cases of ABDOMINAL pregnancies where the child and mother have both survived. Sorry I don't have any links to the info atm, I'll look later. I have read about it in Women's magazines and seen it talked about on TV shows. In the case of the tubal pregnancy yes there is a 100% chance the baby will die and I see no problem removing it before the tube ruptures. It'd be nice if science could figure out some way to just remove it from the tube and transfer/attach it in the womb where it's supposed to be.

That's exactly what I was thinking... there should be a way to remove the baby and developing placenta from a fallopian tube (or other abnormal place) in order to re-attach somehow inside the uterus.

 

[ShiningSonBeam]

My prefacing statement was that the mother will die without medical treatment.

Well, who wouldn't seek medical treatment if they were bleeding to death? There's a Grand Canyon of difference between being treated in order to live (thereby losing the life of the child) vs. going in to the doctor specifically to have the baby killed.

Loss of life happens. We just have to quit doing it on purpose. By all means, seek medical treatment... that's exactly what I mean when I say there is no scenario to fit that abortion loop-hole. If the baby is going to die, it will die... THAT is not abortion, even if it is by the hand of the doctor who must save the mother (at that final moment of imminent danger -- not 5 months earlier).

 

[SallyNow]

I just hope no woman who has had an ectopic pregnancy wanders into this thread. Or a woman who has had to abort an incomplete miscarriage or has been in an accident while pregnant and had to abort the child

None of us, not one of us, has the right to decide. It is between the doctor and the patient and not between me or you and the doctor and the patient. We are not experts. There are OBGYNs for a reason.

 

[HeyJupiter]

So are you guys saying that if a woman has an etopic pregnancy she should just do whetever she can do to try and save the baby? where they will almost defiently both die?

im sorry but that is rediculous

My friend from church who is very "christian" had an etopic pregnancy and lost one of her ovaries from it. She wasnt even supposed to be able to get pregnant after that but she now has a beautiful baby...

 

[bliz]

Well, who wouldn't seek medical treatment if they were bleeding to death? There's a Grand Canyon of difference between being treated in order to live (thereby losing the life of the child) vs. going in to the doctor specifically to have the baby killed.

Loss of life happens. We just have to quit doing it on purpose. By all means, seek medical treatment... that's exactly what I mean when I say there is no scenario to fit that abortion loop-hole. If the baby is going to die, it will die... THAT is not abortion, even if it is by the hand of the doctor who must save the mother (at that final moment of imminent danger -- not 5 months earlier).

I can't believe I'm reading this correctly...

Correct me if I'm wrong...

You are advocating that women with ectopic pregnancies should not have the baby removed until the fallopian tube has actually ruptured and the woman is bleeding. This will put the mother's life at risk, and almost guarantee scarring, making future pregnancies less likely and future ectopic pregnancies more likely. Usually the first sign of an EP is pain - so you want to have these women wait, in pain, until their lives are at risk and the doctor can then save her.

And apparently you want things done this way so that you can take the position that there is never a reason for an abortion.

Please tell me I misunderstood you.

 

[MissLady]

Removing a tubal pregnancy where the baby will for a fact die no matter what is not the same as killing a life that has a chance. Removing the remains of an incomplete miscarriage which means the baby is dead is not the same as taking a life. Removing a dead fetus (I'm assuming that's what was meant by if a woman has an accident) is not the same as taking a life. I don't see in here where anyone has said that a woman should carry a tubal pregnancy until her tube ruptures. I darn sure didn't. All I did was point out when someone said that there is a 100% chance a woman will die if her tube ruptures that that isn't the case. And said that it would nice if science could figure out a way to transfer the baby to where it should be in the womb, but since that isn't possible for the time being it's a moot point I guess.

An abdominal pregnancy is different and in those cases lots of times mom and baby both survive just fine. Would I (God forbid it ever happen) remove a tubal pregnancy before I lose the tube and ovary and lots of blood? Yes cause there is NO way to save the baby. Would I carry an abdominal pregnancy as long as I possible could to the point the baby had a good chance of surviving? Yep.

 

[Sascha Fitzpatrick]

deleted

 

[teishpriest]

Ectopic pregnancies are a tricky question. From my understanding, a baby cannot survive to term or even to the point of having a chance of survival.

I was told by a doctor that he thought I might have an ectopic pregnancy. He wanted to give me a drug to "take care of the problem" immediately. The thing is, he couldn't tell me with ANY degree of certainty whether I really DID have a tubal pregnancy. He just said that I "might". After much prayer, my husband and I decided to wait it out. The doctor was not happy. In the end I did need a D & C to stop my bleeding. However, at that point, my HCG counts had dropped and I had passed so much tissue that we felt that the baby had died already. So, we had no issue with doing whatever we needed to to make me get better. Apparently, the D & C I had was quite similar to some early abortions, and I have to tell you, it was the most HORRIBLE experience of my life!

If I was diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy, I'd get a second opinion, and they would have to be SURE that it was ectopic, not just that it might be. At that point, I don't know what I'd do, and I hope I never face that decision again! I can't think of any other situation where I would even consider intervening. Even if they told me that my baby wouldn't be able to survive once born, well, at least I might get to hold them once.

Besides, you can't be sure about anything. My cousin's little girl was diagnosed with some serious problems before she was born, and her parents were told that she would never be even close to normal. Even when my cousin was in labor the doctors urged her to have a partial-birth abortion. Now, their little girl is five. She is perfectly healthy, with NO health or mental problems whatsoever. She's actually one of the brightest, most personable little girls that I know.

My point is, you really can't be SURE about diagnoses before birth. I couldn't base such a decision on such un-certain information. Definately not on the opinion of only ONE practitioner!

 

[ShiningSonBeam]

Even if they told me that my baby wouldn't be able to survive once born, well, at least I might get to hold them once.

This happened to my friend. She was induced a few months early because her son had not developed a brain and would therefore only live about 5 minutes outside of the womb. He was otherwise totally healthy. I've wondered what I might do in that situation. I hope I might be strong enough to carry the baby to term in order to donate as many organs as possible and save handfuls of other struggling infants. My little boy would have done more in five minutes of life than most of us ever will.

Besides, you can't be sure about anything. My cousin's little girl was diagnosed with some serious problems before she was born, and her parents were told that she would never be even close to normal. Even when my cousin was in labor the doctors urged her to have a partial-birth abortion. Now, their little girl is five. She is perfectly healthy, with NO health or mental problems whatsoever. She's actually one of the brightest, most personable little girls that I know.

WOW, that is amazing. Thank you for posting this (and the rest of your post, too). I cannot imagine being urged to have a partial birth abortion. It's barbaric.

And to the responses to my Ectopic pregnancy question, you're right... I don't have as much information as I'd like in order to decide something so huge myself. This is why there need to be rules/definitions in place for abortions. Prior to Roe v. Wade, there were plenty of legal exceptions and medical reasons to take care of an imminent miscarriage before it got dangerous, for example. There was absolutely no reason to expand those laws into an "Open Season" type policy, if you will.