Medical reasons to abort a pregnancy

[GodLovesCats]

That does not make sense. No one is made to carry a stillborn.

If abortion is illegal for all reasons except to save the mother's life, that scenario is possible.

 

[redleghunter]

If abortion is illegal for all reasons except to save the mother's life, that scenario is possible.

No it’s not. If the child is dead in the womb they must be removed.

 

[GodLovesCats]

No it’s not. If the child is dead in the womb they must be removed.

And if a child is not dead yet, but expected to be stillborn, is there any reason not to hurry it up?

 

[redleghunter]

And if a child is not dead yet, but expected to be stillborn, is there any reason not to hurry it up?

Someone is not dead until they are.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

The mother and doctor know her baby will be be born dead anyway.
The baby is diagnosed with a problem that kills babies shortly after birth.

The doctor is not God. He or she doesn't know everything.

I was seven months pregnant with my first child when my former OB/GYN told me that I had to abort because my test results came back showing that my unborn son had Downs Syndrome. The OB/GYN proceeded to lecture me about how it would be more humane for my son to abort him than allow him to be born with Downs. I was then fervently told that my son would be up against great odds if he was born and it would be extremely expensive for my husband and I to care for a Downs child.

Of course, I outright refused to abort my unborn child and I gave birth to a HEALTHY baby boy, who is now 25 years old. My son didn't have Downs Syndrome as the medical doctor insisted that he did.

 

[redleghunter]

The doctor is not God. He or she doesn't know everything.

I was seven months pregnant with my first child when my former OB/GYN told me that I had to abort because my test results came back showing that my unborn son had Downs Syndrome. The OB/GYN proceeded to lecture me about how it would be humane for me to abort my son rather than allow him to be born with Downs. I was then fervently told that my son would be up against great odds if he was born and it would be extremely expensive for my husband and I to care for a Downs child.

Of course, I outright refused to abort my unborn child and I gave birth to a HEALTHY baby boy, who is now 25 years old. My son didn't have Downs Syndrome as the medical doctor insisted that he did.

We had similar experiences. I was in the exam room when the OB told my wife “the bad news.” Yep the “so tell me what do you want to do” speech. We got a second sonogram and opinion. We were told my son was normal with a left clubbed foot. He had a surgery to correct it and one minor surgery to adjust at age 12. He now bats clean up for a competitive teen baseball team.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

No it’s not. If the child is dead in the womb they must be removed.

I'm sad to say that happened to me once during my first miscarriage. It was a traumatic nightmare for me that still haunts me to this day even though it was over 14 years ago. My husband rushed me to the ER and I had to have an emergency DNC. I had to just wait out my second miscarriage because I wasn't that far along. I can't imagine wanting to end the life of any of my unborn children on purpose.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

No, I am saying it is morally better not to wait nine months for a baby to live that many days.

I would have given any of my unborn children the change to live if it was just for a few minutes. I would have carried my unborn child to term and after my baby was born, I would have held my child as they took their last breath, knowing full well they were going to Heaven to be with the Lord.

 

[GodLovesCats]

The doctor is not God. He or she doesn't know everything.

I was seven months pregnant with my first child when my former OB/GYN told me that I had to abort because my test results came back showing that my unborn son had Downs Syndrome. The OB/GYN proceeded to lecture me about how it would be more humane for my son to abort him than allow him to be born with Downs. I was then fervently told that my son would be up against great odds if he was born and it would be extremely expensive for my husband and I to care for a Downs child.

Of course, I outright refused to abort my unborn child and I gave birth to a HEALTHY baby boy, who is now 25 years old. My son didn't have Downs Syndrome as the medical doctor insisted that he did.

That is nothing like what I was talking about. Downs syndrome does not kill babies within a week. I never suggested or implied a fetus should be aborted because it will be born with a chronic disability.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

That is nothing like what I was talking about. Downs syndrome does not kill babies within a week. I never suggested or implied a fetus should be aborted because it will be born with a chronic disability.

My point was that doctors are not God and they don't know everything. Doctors are human. They are flawed and they have limited knowledge and understanding, no matter how smart they appear to be.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Apparently no pro-lifers want to accept the fact that saving a mother's life is not the only medical reason. FWIW I oppose all "partial birth" third trimester abortions, but draw a line at "viable" where most posters don't.

 

[HatGuy]

And if a child is not dead yet, but expected to be stillborn, is there any reason not to hurry it up?

A child cannot be expected to be stillborn until the child is, in fact, stillborn.

No doctor can tell you a child is expected to be stillborn. No one can tell you with absolute certainty that a child will die. This example is weird.

If a child is stillborn, though, then it needs to be removed - either through DNC or through medication at home. My wife has had both of these (we've had two miscarriages) and I cry when I think about it too long. These were terrible experiences for my wife and I hated seeing her go through this - not to mention our pain of losing a child which we very much wanted to come into this world.

Apparently no pro-lifers want to accept the fact that saving a mother's life is not the only medical reason.

Perhaps if you could provide a better example it could be discussed, but as it stands I can't think of an example and you have, unfortunately, not provided one that makes sense yet.

 

[grasping the after wind]

The mother and doctor know her baby will be be born dead anyway.
The baby is diagnosed with a problem that kills babies shortly after birth.

Then wouldn't abortion be superfluous and totally unnecessary?

 

[grasping the after wind]

Apparently no pro-lifers want to accept the fact that saving a mother's life is not the only medical reason. FWIW I oppose all "partial birth" third trimester abortions, but draw a line at "viable" where most posters don't.

If you replace "medical" with "moral" in your sentence that would be a correct statement.

 

[StillGods]

And if a child is not dead yet, but expected to be stillborn, is there any reason not to hurry it up?

I know a lady whose baby would not live outside the womb. she chose to love the baby for the nine months she was able to provide the baby life in the safety of her womb. she and her husband loved that baby, talked to her, played music, rejoiced in her life. the baby was born lived only a little while. but her life was cherished, she was given her name, and a funeral honoring her life dearly loved (two things aborted babies often never get to be given) she has a headstone. her life mattered deeply to all those who hear her story.
should she have been aborted and her parents denied the chance to shower her with love and to know her and write to her as her mum did all her thoughts toward this precious life inside her.
a mothers womb should be a safe place like this mothers womb was for her daughter.

 

[Archivist]

Because Grandpa had a 'full life' he is considered morally superior to the baby?

In the United States Grandpa is a citizen and is therefore protected by law. The fetus is not a citizen--citizenship begins at birth. And for the record I am not commenting on who is or is not morally superior, I am simply commenting on legal rights.

 

[chilehed]

Here is one you might find more acceptable: The mother has cancer and can't live without chemotherapy, which is passed to the fetus through the placenta and umbilical cord. UCs have two arteries and one vein. In this situation, the mother must choose between her own life or the baby's life. It is a no-brainer.

It certainly was a no-brainer to Gianna Beretta Molla. Now she's a saint, and her baby is alive.

Besides, it is also not abortion.

 

[redleghunter]

In the United States Grandpa is a citizen and is therefore protected by law. The fetus is not a citizen--citizenship begins at birth. And for the record I am not commenting on who is or is not morally superior, I am simply commenting on legal rights.

Your morals are guided by secular law?

 

[Archivist]

Your morals are guided by secular law?

If you read what I wrote you would know that I was not commenting on moral worth. My comment was limited to legal status. I very clearly said that.

 

[chilehed]

Apparently no pro-lifers want to accept the fact that saving a mother's life is not the only medical reason.

Apparently no pro-baby-murders want to accept the fact that no one has the right to intentionally kill an innocent human being.