Right now? Yes. But there are some who want that changed.

 

This is such a low percentage that IF abortion was ruled illegal except in instances of saving the mother's life, you would see the protests drop off dramatically. But the Freedom of Choice Act would do just the opposite and that is why many pro-lifers, like myself, are nervous.

I can't answer your question since your hypothetical situation is all but impossible. In such a situation, the baby would NEVER be aborted. The doctor would perform an emergency Cesarean in order to save the life of the mother.

This was my initial thought when I first read the question posed.

 

I'm a hard-line pro-lifer. I would tell the Dr. to save my wife. Upon recovery my wife would be angry and depressed and we would then have to deal with that. The evidence of these types of things occurring, in today's day and age, is so miniscule that it is not even statistically relevant. If the Dr. was required to terminate the baby in order to prevent internal damage and death of my wife, it is not an "abortion." It also is not murder because the choice made, both by me and the doctor in carrying out my instructions, is justified as "defense of others."

 

Therefore, I do not believe that this is an abortion thread.

In the extreme case that something like this did have to happen this pretty much sums up my thoughts. I would want anything possible done to save my wife.

I can't answer your question since your hypothetical situation is all but impossible. In such a situation, the baby would NEVER be aborted. The doctor would perform an emergency Cesarean in order to save the life of the mother.

 

 

I was confused about this too. Wouldn't the required abortion be a partial-birth, given the late term of the baby? If a woman can withstand the partial birth of her child, then why wouldn't she be able to deliver the baby fully? The emergency C-section makes much more sense.

 

Back to the original question though...If I had to make a choice, I would choose the life of my baby. Though relatively small these days, pregnancy does still have its risks--possible loss of life being one of them. Any woman who willingly participates in acts that could possibly result in pregnancy should be aware of these risks and accept all possible outcomes, however unlikely they may be.

 

By the way, just so you know which perspective I am coming from, I am a woman.

I can't answer your question since your hypothetical situation is all but impossible. In such a situation, the baby would NEVER be aborted. The doctor would perform an emergency Cesarean in order to save the life of the mother.

 

 

And you think it always works? Studies suggest that women who have undergone several previous C-sections are at particularly high risk of dying from excessive bleeding.

Abortions are VERY illegal at this point of the pregnancy. Maybe a C-section at birth to save both but this hypothetical situation is quite impossible.

And you think it always works?

 

What I think is that you are trying to justify your position on abortion by saying it should be legal based on a worst case scenario that is very, very unlikely to happen.

 

I think abortion for convenience is a morally repugnant act and those that use it as a means of birth control are people of questionable morality.

 

I would be OK with very restrictive limitations on abortion in documented cases of rape and incest or to save the life of the mother (if she so chooses) but abortion on demand because the parties involved in the act of conception are not willing to accept the consequences of their actions should be outlawed.

And you think it always works? Studies suggest that women who have undergone several previous C-sections are at particularly high risk of dying from excessive bleeding.

You're proposing an abortion on a full-term pregnancy over an emergency C-section??? How do you think that abortion would work? Wave a wand over her belly and the baby disappears? Methinks you should do a little research.

And you think it always works? Studies suggest that women who have undergone several previous C-sections are at particularly high risk of dying from excessive bleeding.

 

Since you added this on after my quote I'll add this. A woman who has had multiple previous C-Sections would likely deliver via C-Section regardless since (and correct me if I'm wrong please) her abdominal wall and uterus would be at risk of rupturing along the scars from the previous C-Sections during labor contractions. It seems to me that in that situation, if as you say, the woman is at increased risk anyway then she would have already made her decision as to whose life should be saved.

And you think it always works? Studies suggest that women who have undergone several previous C-sections are at particularly high risk of dying from excessive bleeding.

 

No. My wife will be undergoing her 4th Cesearean in April and the literature she has been given says they are at a higher risk for adhesions, but the risk for hemorrhage is no different than vaginal birth except that which is caused by giving birth at higher ages.

Incidentally, I am opposed to abortions performed as a result of rape.

My answer would be... I would choose my wife right now, for the sake of this conversation.

 

In the unlikely scenario that this actually happened, though... If I was truly put in that situation, I don't know. I have never had a child, so I can't account for what my mindset would be.

Incidentally, I am opposed to abortions performed as a result of rape.

 

I'm really torn on this one.

 

1st, I recognize that the baby did nothing wrong so why should it's life be forfeit.

 

That said I also recognize that forcing a woman to carry a child that was the result of rape to term would be extremely traumatic if not cruel. I also recognize that in the case of rape the woman did nothing willingly that caused her pregnancy.

I'm really torn on this one.

 

1st, I recognize that the baby did nothing wrong so why should it's life be forfeit.

 

That said I also recognize that forcing a woman to carry a child that was the result of rape to term would be extremely traumatic if not cruel. I also recognize that in the case of rape the woman did nothing willingly that caused her pregnancy.

The abortion itself can cause additional PTSD along with the rape. Abortion is a short term fix for rape. Its also a long term millstone.

I'm really torn on this one.

 

1st, I recognize that the baby did nothing wrong so why should it's life be forfeit.

 

That said I also recognize that forcing a woman to carry a child that was the result of rape to term would be extremely traumatic if not cruel. I also recognize that in the case of rape the woman did nothing willingly that caused her pregnancy.

This is where I am on the rape issue. I am more no the fence for this topic then just about any.

You're proposing an abortion on a full-term pregnancy over an emergency C-section??? How do you think that abortion would work? Wave a wand over her belly and the baby disappears? Methinks you should do a little research.

 

The bottom line is this. I ask a question on something that can and does happen. Now, I have heard a lot of what if's and different spins. In my honest opinion, I believe there is a lot of folks who say they would do one thing, but if it came down to it, most would save their wife.