Abortion to save mother's life - A canard?

[Eileen_T]

Here’s a good quote

Alan Guttmacher said in his book “Abortion Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow” The Case for Legalized Abortion Now which was published in 1967:

“Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless she suffers from a fatal disease such as cancer or leukemia, and if so, abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save the life”

Of course, many abortion advocates would agree with abortionist Lise Fortier who said: **“Each and every pregnancy threatens a woman’s life. From a strict medical viewpoint, every pregnancy should be aborted.” **

If you want to read more, we covered this issue on our website life.org.nz/abortionethicalkeyissuesmotherslifeatrisk.htm

 

[fix]

“It is always safer to try to deliver a baby rather than abort it. Thie child might not be developed enough to survive on its own and may die, but premie technology is improving all the time.”

It seems to me that is a MEDICAL judgement best left to the doctors and the parents involved. And what is your medical qualification for this claim? Are you an MD?

These comments all need to be seen in context and with proper understanding of the underlying moral principles. Proper medical judgment never includes intrinsic evil.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

fix:

These comments all need to be seen in context and with proper understanding of the underlying moral principles. Proper medical judgment never includes intrinsic evil.

Yes, this is something that we need to keep in mind but something else has come to mind. As brought up by JMJ.
JMJ Theresa:

MBut does premature delivery count as abortion?

Is it an intrinsic evil to induce the delivery of a baby that one knows for a fact will not survive?

Lets say a woman has a very aggressive form of cancer. The medical opinion is that she should start chemo therapy immediatly but she is 10 weeks pregnant. The doctor knows that the chemo will kill the baby and knows that inducing labor will also end in the baby’s death. What is to be done?

Can labor even be induced at such an early state?

I think a c-section would be out as its sole purpose would be to remove the child which would kill it.

 

[fix]

ByzCath:

Yes, this is something that we need to keep in mind but something else has come to mind. As brought up by JMJ.

Is it an intrinsic evil to induce the delivery of a baby that one knows for a fact will not survive?

Lets say a woman has a very aggressive form of cancer. The medical opinion is that she should start chemo therapy immediatly but she is 10 weeks pregnant. The doctor knows that the chemo will kill the baby and knows that inducing labor will also end in the baby’s death. What is to be done?

Can labor even be induced at such an early state?

I think a c-section would be out as its sole purpose would be to remove the child which would kill it.

I am no expert in moral theology, but I am aware that all moral acts have an end, a means and an intent.

In thinking about your question I would say first that each medical case presents different issues and the only blanket statement we can make is that one may never do evil, like direct abortion, for any reason.

Indirect abortion is licit when speaking of the principle of double effect. So, I would think in your case the mother could refuse chemo threapy or use it under the principle of double effect?

Perhaps someone will correct me if I have it wrong.

 

[LeahInancsi]

John Kearns:

I seem to remember reading once that there aren’t really any fatal medical conditions for which abortion, in and of itself, is the cure. For example, tubal pregnancy requires the removal of the tube, the death of the unborn child is an unintended, albeit unavoidable consequence.

But, I’m not sure that this is true, so I’m asking here. Is anyone aware of such a condition?

The example you sited isn’t considered an abortion. If the tubal pregnancy is not corrected, both mother and child will die. The child will die either way.