That is a huge, deep question that requires weighing percentages of survival (of each) in the sections. Sometimes the baby can be born prematurely and the treatment can “split the difference.” It is not always necessary to say “I’ll carry the baby full term and die!” How about carrying the child to 24 or 26 weeks, having a c/section, and then starting chemo? Again a question to be weighed with her doctors. And I’d call the Paul VI institute too. They have an ethicist on staff. I spoke to her extensively about some difficult decisions we faced pertaining to a miscarriage. She was phenomenal and very patient. I am sorry your friend is going through this!!From a friend’s personal experience: a cancer diagnosis where the baby is unlikely to survive chemotherapy, but the mother is unlikely to survive if it’s delayed. Do you start treatment or not?
Oh I’m so sorry to hear that!! Prayers for her grieving family and friends!!No, she went through it in the past. She chose to delay treatment. She died.
I used to feel that way too, but now I know I would weigh all my options very carefully. I have five other kids. If I found out tomorrow I had cancer and chemo would take the baby, I couldn’t in conscience automatically say “let me go & give the baby every advantage!” Who is going to help my husband raise six kids (one being a newborn) when I die of cancer then? I think I have an obligation to ALL of them. I’d probably try to have the baby as early as possible. But whatever I chose it’d definitely not be a “no brainer” for me like some of these saints you read about.I’ve always felt save the child to be the most noble, as I’ve already had the chance to live a full life, now it’s the child’s turn.