Abortion to Save the Mother

[lynnvinc]

Hello all,

I have always considered myself pro-life and anti-abortion. However, is abortion to save the mother’s life okay? Why or why not?

There’s a good fictional movie, The Cardinal, in which the beloved sister of the priest is in labor and unconscious, and the doctor tells they will have to crush the head of the baby to save the life of the sister (who has already lost too much blood to withstand giving birth). The priest is in a serious dilemma as the closest relative who must make the decision. He finally says, I can’t let you kill the baby. The movie forwards to 16 years later and we see the beautiful girl who was born (while her mother died in delivery).

I’ve thought to myself if I were pregnant and it were the choice between me or the baby, I would hope to be brave enough to sacrifice my own life.

As for practical considerations, I don’t think a law could ever be passed that would force a woman to give up her life for the sake of the baby. However, I would hope the very rare cases that the woman would be brave enough to sacrifice herself for the baby.

 

[_Abyssinia]

The Irish Times is correct, to a point. But there was a way that Halappavar could have lived without deliberately killing her child. That is, if the doctors had proper procedure clarified at the hospital, if proper sepsis management guidelines were enacted (how that happened in an Irish hospital, given their otherwise spotless record surprises me, but I’m going with the BBC), procedures could have been done that did not involve abortion but would have saved the life of Halappavar.

Page 11 of Irish Medical Councils guidelines say

In current obstetrical practice, rare complications can arise where therapeutic intervention (including termination of a pregnancy) is required at a stage when, due to extreme immaturity of the baby, there may be little or no hope of the baby surviving. In these exceptional circumstances, it may be necessary to intervene to terminate the pregnancy to protect the life of the mother, while making every effort to preserve the life of the baby

medicalcouncil.ie/Registration/Guide-to-Professional-Conduct-and-Behaviour-for-Registered-Medical-Practitioners.pdf

 

[livingwordunity]

Hello all,

I have always considered myself pro-life and anti-abortion. However, is abortion to save the mother’s life okay? Why or why not?

Abortion by definition is the direct intentional killing of the unborn baby (aka fetus). So by definition, abortion has nothing to do with trying to save the life of the mother. And it’s a myth that making abortion legal makes it medically safe for the woman since many women die on the abortionist’s table due to lack of regulation and the fact that abortion is a medically traumatic ordeal.

 

[manualman]

Is Red Herring an actual species of fish or just a mythical creature? Just wondering…

 

[lynnvinc]

Is Red Herring an actual species of fish or just a mythical creature? Just wondering…

I don’t think women dying in childbirth is a red herring. It probably doesn’t happen very often today, but I think it still happens. I remember going to some 19th c. gravesites in Florida; several had the man, then his 1st wife and their baby (died the same day), and 2nd wife, sometimes with a baby (died the same day). One even had a 3rd wife…

Perhpas abortion in those days (which were less hygenic) would not have been able to save the mother, but I’m thinking nowadays there may be some rare cases in which abortion would save the mother. To me, in those cases in which the mother really does believe (and doctors concur) that giving birth would be a huge risk to her life, having an abortion would be kin to self-defense.

And many states do have laws that allow a man to kill another man in self-defense. If there were strong abortion laws, there would still have to be a trial (just as for the man killing another in self-defense), and the mother would have to give proof that her life was in serious jeopardy. I don’t think there would be an absolute law banning all abortions, even if the woman’s life were at stake.

I would just hope that in such rare cases the woman would have the courage to sacrifice (or risk sacrificing) her life for the sake of her child’s life. People are pretty selfish nowadays and don’t even do good for their children they’ve had with them for some years – they are willing to let the world go to trash, gobbling up everything for themselves as much as they can, leaving a much impoverished world to their kids – so I doubt there would be such self-sacrifical women. But there could be.

 

[devoutchristian]

I don’t think women dying in childbirth is a red herring. It probably doesn’t happen very often today, but I think it still happens. I remember going to some 19th c. gravesites in Florida; several had the man, then his 1st wife and their baby (died the same day), and 2nd wife, sometimes with a baby (died the same day). One even had a 3rd wife…

Perhpas abortion in those days (which were less hygenic) would not have been able to save the mother, but I’m thinking nowadays there may be some rare cases in which abortion would save the mother. To me, in those cases in which the mother really does believe (and doctors concur) that giving birth would be a huge risk to her life, having an abortion would be kin to self-defense.

And many states do have laws that allow a man to kill another man in self-defense. If there were strong abortion laws, there would still have to be a trial (just as for the man killing another in self-defense), and the mother would have to give proof that her life was in serious jeopardy. I don’t think there would be an absolute law banning all abortions, even if the woman’s life were at stake.

I would just hope that in such rare cases the woman would have the courage to sacrifice (or risk sacrificing) her life for the sake of her child’s life. People are pretty selfish nowadays and don’t even do good for their children they’ve had with them for some years – they are willing to let the world go to trash, gobbling up everything for themselves as much as they can, leaving a much impoverished world to their kids – so I doubt there would be such self-sacrifical women. But there could be.

The Church opposes the horrific notion that self-defense can apply to people who are not deliberate aggressors.

 

[lynnvinc]

The Church opposes the horrific notion that self-defense can apply to people who are not deliberate aggressors.

You’re right – it’s one thing to kill a deliberate aggressor and quite another to kill someone who is unwittingly causing death to others, even if that person cannot be stopped short of killing him.

However, I was not speaking of Church teachings, only a hypothetical gov law – one in which abortion were illegal, except when the mother’s life is at stake (bec I’m thinking that would be about as far as any law in most Western societies would go).

However, the way things are going, people becoming more and more selfish, it doesn’t even seem such a law would get passed. And even if it did, there’d probably be plenty of illegal abortions going on, as in the old days, when my father and husband were nearly aborted, and my uncle/aunt was aborted.

Of course, acc to Church teachings, it is a sin to commit abortion no matter what – whether or not there are laws against it and even if the mother’s life is at stake, even if the prognosis and result is both the mother and child die.

I also think it is probably a sin (or considered bad or less than ideal) to kill someone in self-defense, even a deliberate aggressor. I’m sure the Church would be saying that it is always best to sacrifice one’s own life for the life of the other, than to kill. That’s what Jesus did. But I know for most people that would be very hard and take great courage.

 

[devoutchristian]

I also think it is probably a sin (or considered bad or less than ideal) to kill someone in self-defense, even a deliberate aggressor. I’m sure the Church would be saying that it is always best to sacrifice one’s own life for the life of the other, than to kill. That’s what Jesus did. But I know for most people that would be very hard and take great courage.

No. Neither justice nor charity compel one to sacrifice one’s life for someone who is deliberately trying to take it, since one is obliged to take more care of one’s own life than that of others.

 

[Cojuanco]

Page 11 of Irish Medical Councils guidelines say

medicalcouncil.ie/Registration/Guide-to-Professional-Conduct-and-Behaviour-for-Registered-Medical-Practitioners.pdf

Well, that seems to be a little unclear, depending on whether terminate simply means to end the pregnancy, or as a euphemism for abortion. One would be ethical, the other would not. I am of course assuming the writer is not attempting to contradict himself in the same sentence.

 

[casey_cates]

I am one of those few. I had an ectopic (pregnancy) a long time ago. We waited and watched. A normal baby doubles the hcg level ( ex. 2, 4, 8 , 16. 32, 64) every day. As they monitored me it was going 2, 4, 7, 12, 14, 15 etc. Finally, they told me I would need to terminate the pregnancy. They told me of this drug that would “melt” the pregnancy. PC huh? No need for surgery. They told me if you don’t have an abortion the chances of your hemorrhaging and death are very high and your baby will die anyway. If you do this injection, we can at least save your life. I had a four year old daughter at home at the time. I accepted what my dr. said and had the injection. (BTW - ended up having surgery only weeks later due to hemorhhaging on the other ovary which the dr. said was not related to this drug.)

Do I regret my decision? Yes. I should have looked to the Church and been a better Catholic at that time. Maybe I could’ve waited a bit longer and they baby would have miscarried naturally. Or I should have opted for the tube removal rather than the injection. Those are the things I have to l live with even almost 20 years later. But nothing I do will allow me to re-do this decision.

Funny thing is, I always considered myself pro-life and encouraged others not to have an abortion for less grave reasons. I didn’t think at the time that this decision conflicted with that belief.

My point in telling this personal story is that many women feel they are doing the best thing under the circumstances so it is not always selfishness that motivates. My thoughts were not only toward my life, which I will not lie it was, but also my 4 year old daughter and my husband versus a child who would die no matter what I did. I regret that I did not consider my child in the womb more.

I try to tell my story when needed to encourage people to learn all the facts and become pro-life. Also to set the record straight on this issue as not many people know about this type of pregnancy. I sure didn’t.

 

[ladymlee]

I have had TWO tubal pregnancies. I would like to correct some severe misunderstandings in this forum. Number 1; in a tubal pregnancy, the baby WILL die no matter what is done. It has implanted in an incorrect spot where it cannot receive nourishment even if there was room to grow (which there isn’t. Think of a baby growing inside of a hair as opposed to inside of an expandable womb, and that’s what happens). And eventually, if the baby is left in the tube, the woman’s tube WILL rupture and she WILL hemorrage and bleed to death unless surgery is done, or methotrexate is given. It is NOT currently medically possible to transfer the baby to another site for it to grow. I know, because I begged my doctor to please try both times. Also, the HCG count rises very abnormally (not nearly as fast as it should), and then it steadily drops as the tube begins to rupture and the baby begins to die. And this before any intervention. Number 2: I was hemorraging and losing blood pressure fast whenever I had my first tubal pregnancy back in 1991. All of the surgeries scheduled for the rest of that morning were cancelled so that I could be rushed in from my doctor’s office. I was 20 at the time, and my doctor was concerned about saving my life; I was concerned about saving my baby. I remember begging the doctor to please not hurt my baby; but I also, without fully understanding what it meant, signed papers that any “emergency treatment” that I needed when I was opened for exploration would be given. So, in 1991, I had major abdominal surgery, and the entire tube containing my ectopic baby was removed.

In 2003, I again had a tubal pregnancy. I was sent to the emergency room by my obgyn because an ultrasound did not show a pregnancy where one should be, yet my count was rising. I insisted on waiting to be sure, then, after nearly 3 months, I again had severe pain and knew what it was and returned to the ER. Sonogram tests were run again and HCG had been extremely abnormal. It was definitely another tubal pregnancy. I was given methotrexate, which according to the doctor did not work, and a couple of months later, after daily blood tests and excruciating pain, I had a laparoscopic surgery, during which they found that my tube, which was supposed to be thinner than a hair on your head, was bigger around than a thumb. Let me tell you if you don’t know; the pain of an ectopic pregnancy is excruciating, and I dealt with it for months, not once, but twice. Again, I started bleeding badly, and the entire tube with my baby in it was removed.

Now, I am NOT saying that abortion is right. I am NOT saying that the CC is wrong. And knowing what I know now, I would have left methotrexate out of the equation. At the time it was given to me; I did not know what it was or how it actually worked- or in my case, did not work, since I needed surgery again in the end.

However, I think of my babies every single day of my life, and have even wondered in the past (but no longer) if I was being punished by getting tubal pregnancies to begin with; however, I have accepted that GOD willed that my two children would not live. If he had wanted them to be born, they would have been implanted in the right place, or he would have allowed for a miracle to happen before I started hemorraging and needed life saving intervention. His will is not comprehensible to me. I just pray for the grace to accept it. I still mourn for my lost children every single day-- but I want to make it clear that ectopic pregnancies absolutely DO pose a risk or threat of imminent death to a woman.I know, because I had to endure it not once, but twice. I think it is only for medical doctors to explain what is a life-threatening condition; and I believe that it is up to GOD alone to judge women who are in this position. As for me, I pray every day for baptism by desire for my babies. It would be helpful for women in my position to receive prayers, not condemnation, and not people spreading misinformation about what is or what is not a true medical danger of death. This loss is always with me. I neither chose nor wanted my children to die.

 

[casey_cates]

Ladymlee,

I am so sorry for your losses. You are a strong woman. I fell into depression with my one and only. Recovering from major surgery three weeks later, grieving the loss and trying to take care of a 4-year old. I did not experience the excruciating pain that you went through. God bless you lady.

I am glad the Church has direction on these issues. I just wish I had known all my options but because it’s rare it’s just not on the radar. I guess you don’t know what you don’t know. That’s why I try to encourage people to learn about this issue. We can always learn from others’ experiences. I hope I can do some good, showing some why abortion is so hard and others to have mercy and compassion.

I believe God has mercy on all of us if we ask Him.

 

[lynnvinc]

I have had TWO tubal pregnancies. I would like to correct some severe misunderstandings in this forum…

There was a neighbor lady in India who had a tubal pregnancy, but didn’t know she was pregnant. The pain was becoming unbearable, but bec she was a good India wife she didn’t complain much, and her husband thought whatever the problem was it would self-correct. Maybe they were self-treating her for stomach problems, etc.

By the time they finally took her to the doctor it was too late, she was in a coma and died. And it wasn’t because of poor medical facilities – we are near a university medical school with state-of-the-art facilities.

I have no idea how long this may have gone on, only that the husband came to see us about the funeral and was crying profusely about her death.

She was Hindu, so also anti-abortion, but I’m sure she and her husband would have preferred that she lived.

 

[Buck_Crosswhite]

When a tubal pregnancy occurs the correction of this problem results in the accidental termination of the fetus but it isn’t called abortion. It has another name. No one commits a sin in this situation.

 

[casey_cates]

@Buck - My understanding is that it is still not licit to use methotrexate injections or anything that harms the baby directly as I did but you can remove the tube which will indirectly obviously result in the baby’s death while sparing the life of the mother.

 

[ladymlee]

In 1991, the only way to treat a tubal pregnancy was through major abdominal surgery. I was told by a priest in 1991 that it was in Pope John Paul II’s Encyclical that it would have been “far better” for me to die with the child, then to live and allow the child to die.

I was told in 2004 when I had the second ectopic (after the fact and by a priest) that I should have had the tube removed by laprascope and it was ok that I did so in the end, but that methotrexate was wrong. So who changed what Pope John Paul the II wrote in the Encyclical??? Which is correct??

I do not clearly know what the CC doctrine is on this now, I was given conditional absolution for these sins, which I had to go home and look up. This caused a severe crisis of faith for me. I feel that I am excommunicated from the CC for the loss of these pregnancies, though I do believe that the loss was God’s will and that He has forgiven me any wrongdoing on my part. I’m just trusting that in His infinite mercy and love, he knows how much I have hurt and despaired over the loss of my children.

Like Casey, I also suffered major clinical depression from my losses. And since I was later diagnosed with bipolar disorder, maybe God had His reasons for what happened-- but in both situations, things happened so quickly that I did not know what to do and had no idea what the CC would want me to do. Methotrexate seemed like a reaonable solution at the time, and honestly, I did not want to die, either, since I knew for a fact that my baby would not live. However, methotrexate did a horrible lot of internal damage to me as well as to my baby, which I will always have to live with, and I had surgery again anyway. And in case you are wondering-- no, I was never able to have children. The damage done from the drug and the two surgeries ended all hope of ever having children. I wish the CC was more straightforward and forthcoming with its teaching so that the next woman in this crisis will know exactly what the CC expects her to do.

 

[casey_cates]

ladymlee -
ewtn.com/expert/answers/abortio2.htm
Check this out.
Maybe it will help you.
I did not know at the time that I could be excommunicated. If I am reading this correctly, you must be aware that you can be excommunicated for this and do it anyway in order to be excommunicated. I actually thought I was doing the best thing I could do at the time. Saving one life rather than losing two. I confessed my sin and the priest gave me absolution so I’m hoping I am okay.
I hope that is the case with you. I don’t think the number of times matters either from what I can glean. It seems more to me to be the open rebellion to Catholic teaching and gravity of the knowledge and disobedience of the sin. It might be beneficial for you to speak to a priest.

Like all mortal sin, you must be completely aware that it is a mortal sin and do it any way.

 

[Cojuanco]

In 1991, the only way to treat a tubal pregnancy was through major abdominal surgery. I was told by a priest in 1991 that it was in Pope John Paul II’s Encyclical that it would have been “far better” for me to die with the child, then to live and allow the child to die.

I was told in 2004 when I had the second ectopic (after the fact and by a priest) that I should have had the tube removed by laprascope and it was ok that I did so in the end, but that methotrexate was wrong. So who changed what Pope John Paul the II wrote in the Encyclical??? Which is correct??

I do not clearly know what the CC doctrine is on this now, I was given conditional absolution for these sins, which I had to go home and look up. This caused a severe crisis of faith for me. I feel that I am excommunicated from the CC for the loss of these pregnancies, though I do believe that the loss was God’s will and that He has forgiven me any wrongdoing on my part. I’m just trusting that in His infinite mercy and love, he knows how much I have hurt and despaired over the loss of my children.

Like Casey, I also suffered major clinical depression from my losses. And since I was later diagnosed with bipolar disorder, maybe God had His reasons for what happened-- but in both situations, things happened so quickly that I did not know what to do and had no idea what the CC would want me to do. Methotrexate seemed like a reaonable solution at the time, and honestly, I did not want to die, either, since I knew for a fact that my baby would not live. However, methotrexate did a horrible lot of internal damage to me as well as to my baby, which I will always have to live with, and I had surgery again anyway. And in case you are wondering-- no, I was never able to have children. The damage done from the drug and the two surgeries ended all hope of ever having children. I wish the CC was more straightforward and forthcoming with its teaching so that the next woman in this crisis will know exactly what the CC expects her to do.

I think you are not excommunicated based on what you have said, if indeed the procedure you described would have been considered an abortion (which does not). Ignorance of the law is actually a defense in canon law, for any sanction including excommunication. So is grave fear.

As to the actual ethics of procedures, it seems to me that one can take action to remove the tube without intending to hurt the baby, even if the baby’s death is a forseeable consequence. The Holy Father’s encyclical simply says that the decision to prioritize your child’s life above your own in such a situation is commendable, but it’s not a binding requirement. It’s simple triage.

The Church is actually as straightforward as it can be in terms of this complex subject. The problem derives from two issues:

a) secular doctors are not particularly aware of Church teaching. If the doctor happens to be a good Catholic and knowledgeable of Catholic medical ethics, he has likely done his research on his own time. But Catholic doctors will always be a minority in a Protestant country. So they may not be aware. Or if they are, they may think it superstitious Papist nonsense.
b) well-meaning Catholic pro-lifers who take one part of Canon Law and quote it completely out of context of the rest of Canon Law, often through no fault of their own. They fail to see that under either code of Canon Law, it is very, very difficult to be excommunicated or otherwise sanctioned.

Casey, you are okay. You confessed your sin related to the drug, you did your penance. You do not have to worry either way.

 

[ladymlee]

Casey- thank you so much for the link. In combination with Cojuanco’s in-depth response which I also really appreciate a lot, I think that I did not commit a mortal sin. I was just so confused by the conditional absolution in 1991 and the 2 different answers from 2 different priests. I was never sure if I was forgiven even though I confessed and did penance. Now I’m thinking that I likely didn’t sin in the first place.

Although I go to mass again now; and I have prayed a lot of novenas, hoping for the best and for some guidance, I have not been to confession (and therefore to Eucharist) in 23 *years *because I did not know if I was forgiven with a conditional absolution-- it made everything very unclear to me-- whether I sinned, whether I was forgiven, whether I was going to hell no matter what. I really don’t understand how priests can give conditional absolution. None of the apostles did it. And although this is off the subject, I only recently discovered on this forum that my marriage to another Catholic in a protestant church was lack of form and not valid-- and yet, since we are divorced now, I have to pay the church to look into the matter unless I want to stay single forever–and that is something I don’t want to do, and money that I simply do not have. I am also not sure why the CC has so many canon laws. I am going to have to read up on it in this forum and elsewhere.

Thank you both again for your help and responses. I will be talking to my parish priest and making a confession asap. I just hope that the rest can also be sorted out.

May God bless you both.

Michelle

 

[Cojuanco]

Casey- thank you so much for the link. In combination with Cojuanco’s in-depth response which I also really appreciate a lot, I think that I did not commit a mortal sin. I was just so confused by the conditional absolution in 1991 and the 2 different answers from 2 different priests. I was never sure if I was forgiven even though I confessed and did penance. Now I’m thinking that I likely didn’t sin in the first place.

Although I go to mass again now; and I have prayed a lot of novenas, hoping for the best and for some guidance, I have not been to confession (and therefore to Eucharist) in 23 *years *because I did not know if I was forgiven with a conditional absolution-- it made everything very unclear to me-- whether I sinned, whether I was forgiven, whether I was going to hell no matter what. I really don’t understand how priests can give conditional absolution. None of the apostles did it. And although this is off the subject, I only recently discovered on this forum that my marriage to another Catholic in a protestant church was lack of form and not valid-- and yet, since we are divorced now, I have to pay the church to look into the matter unless I want to stay single forever–and that is something I don’t want to do, and money that I simply do not have. I am also not sure why the CC has so many canon laws. I am going to have to read up on it in this forum and elsewhere.

Thank you both again for your help and responses. I will be talking to my parish priest and making a confession asap. I just hope that the rest can also be sorted out.

May God bless you both.

Michelle

Lack of form cases are handled routinely by the chancery. See your priest, and he’ll request the documents needed. Costs are negligible if I am correct, and are waived due to inability to pay. As a Catholic, you have the right to the ecclesiastical courts, irrespective of ability to pay.