If it was her choice to keep the pregnancy, then I would never call her dim-witted. I'd call her a hero. It was her choice, and I'm sure it was a frightening one. I thought you were pro-choice? Her body, her choice. Abortion can hurt those around her as well, but pro-choicers say "well they don't matter". Now here you're saying she's selfish for possibly abandoning her other child? You're quite the hypocrite. Her right to make a choice cannot be selfish just because it involves birth. Something tells me you don't like pregnancy or birth or childbearing. I'm willing to bet that in most cases you'd consider a woman who aborts to be more heroic than a woman who gives birth.

Would I put my life on the line? In some cases yes. Not if the chance of death was above 50% I don't think, but I would risk my life.

how can anyone say what they would do unless they are in that position themselves? you call her dimwitted but something like her situation isn't about smarts, it's about feelings, and obviously she loved her second child as much as her first because she chose not to sacrifice that child's life to potentially improve the first's. life is never a certainty anyway. it's very possible she could have terminated the fetus and still died of cancer. cancer has a way of killing people like that, you know. then her family wouldn't have her and they wouldn't have the second child either.

Killbill, the article (I'll ost the link when I find it again) stated the tumor was benign, but still dangerous because of where it was located - at the base of the brain stem.

I personally just find it extremely selfish to risk your life to save a pregnancy; if the mother die to save her child, that child will grow up without a mother. If the father was in the picture, he would get forced into single parenthood along with becoming a widower. The father may also harbor some resentment toward the child for killing the mother - he may not think it that way, but he will unconsciously make the association that "This child is the reason my wife died". I think if you already have lives depending on you, that they should be your main priority.

Yes, it's her choice, but when it comes to abortion, the only person involved is the woman. The fetus isn't a thinking, rationalizing person yet. In terms of dying to keep a pregnancy, there might be another child involved who would need their mother. There would be relatives and maybe spouses involved who would mourn the loss of the woman. So, while it might be her choice, I think dying for one person and hurting many others in the process is the most selfish of potential choices.

For some women, the urge to reproduce is so overpowering that life isn't worth living to them without doing it. For others (like myself), there is no desire to reproduce and utter horror at the thought of doing so. I can't judge a woman for risking her life to have children when I myself would risk my life to be rid of pregnancy. As long as I'm not expected to follow their lead and martyr myself, it's not really my concern.

You actually think the ONLY person affected by an abortion is the woman? What about her husband/boyfriend/partner? What about her mother and father? What about her friends or siblings? Or the doctor and nurses at the clinic? I can guarantee you that all of those people are affected too. Many of them mourn the loss of the potential child. Many of them are sympathetic for the woman being in that situation. Many are horrified by her decision; others are inspired.

An abortion is NOT an isolated decision.

If you find it selfish to risk your life for your child, then I assume you also disapprove of women going into burning houses to rescue their children? She might rescue the child but then die from her injuries, and then that child will grow up without a mother. Darn, she was so selfish!!

If I were not very far along and needed treatment to save my life that could not be performed because of my pregnancy, I would probably opt to terminate. I could not justify leaving my 21 month old daughter motherless if there were something I could do to try to save myself.

If I were quite far along (20 weeks or more, I'd imagine), I might try to wait as long as possible to give my unborn baby a chance to survive without serious complications from prematurity.

Both choices are mine, and I wouldn't appreciate being called dim-witted for considering either of them. I think that's extremely rude and judgmental.

I respect autonomous choices, even if I personally disagree with them.

I would have an abortion if my life were on the line. Which, for me, reads: I would have an abortion period.

Why was the surgery a risk to her fetus? I had major surgery when I was 22 weeks pregnant to remove a large (huge) benign tumour and my baby is alive and well. I had to have the surgery to save her life because the tumour was on my ovary and was growing rapidly. She couldn't grow properly unless it was removed but they might not have even found it if I hadn't been pregnant. I just don't see why a brain tumour would be different unless it was treated with chemo or radiation therapy.

Possibly it had to do with when they found it. If it was in the first trimester, maybe she wanted to wait until the baby was 16 weeks. The docs told me that after 16 weeks is the best time to operate because the nervous system and brain are developed and are less likely to be damaged during surgery.

If I had to (God forbid) choose between my life and my daughters it would be hers hands down. She would still be who she is whether I was alive to raise her or not and I know that her dad and her grandparents and everyone in my family would have helped to raise her and love her if I was gone. Part of us lives on in our children and I know that my partner would look at her and see me and be comforted that part of me would still be with him through her. That doesn't mean I want to die or to leave her. The thought of it makes me sick to my stomach because I need to be here to protect and raise her. It would be the most difficult and frightening decision I would ever make and I wouldn't make it lightly. I just don't think a mother is stupid for choosing the life of her child over her own. And to some of us our unborn child is just as alive as any born child and is just as loved. Just because you feel differently about that doesn't mean you are smarter or superior. I don't think it's a matter of right or wrong in a situation like that.

What did Birch do to you to deserve such a spontaneous and gratuitous snark, cmyked?

I wonder how common that situation is where all of those people would even know about the existence of the pregnancy before it was terminated?
All of the women I know who have aborted pregnancies only told their boyfriends or husbands.

Actually, I find it ridiculous to think that all of those people will be affected by a woman's private decision that she makes with her doctor and if she wants, her husband or bf.


Here's a great opening for a famous thought experiment:

An IVF clinic is burning and you can only save one of the following:
A two year old little girl OR a petri dish with 5 embryos in it. WHICH DO YOU SAVE?

If you think the pregnancy is equally important as a woman's existing child, then you should save the petri dish because you would be saving 5 CHILDREN vs. the one, single little girl.

I prefer born children over unborn children, because they're sentient for one thing, viable for another. An embryo is far from that.

But to a mother who WANTS to give birth, the unborn child often has AS MUCH WORTH as a born child.

Wasn't this not supposed to turn into an abortion debate? Oh gee that didn't take long, did it? People keep saying the same things over and over again about how they feel about it like they are going to change the other person's mind. Keep it in the abortion debate forum; that's what it's there for.

Cambion herself brought it up (in her second post!) so she has no one to blame but herself.

I didn't debate whether or not a fetus was a person - I brought up who (not what, but WHO) would be affected by someone making the choice of abortion. It was actually cmyked who brought up the abortion subject.

And re: surgery during pregnancy...certain kinds of anesthesia present risks to the fetus or may negatively affect the placenta. There's some kind of anesthesia that aren't bad, but some (like nitrous oxide) can be.

It is clear that you have misunderstood me. Here is what I have been saying:

A woman is in the position to determine for herself what is "life threatening".

You have chosen to narrowly define for others what is "life threatening" and discount all other opinions.

Have a nice day.

Life threatening is pretty easy to define: YOU ARE GOING TO DIE. Anything other than that is NOT threatening your LIFE, it's threatening your lifeSTYLE.

I mentioned it but not in the context of debating it.

See?

This narrow definition is a rough bit of business. There are many scenarios where the outcome could easily be death. Someone losing their job...follow the road here. Someone threatened or beaten...etc. It is very important not to define for others what is threatening to their lives or not.

Yeah, I think cmyked has a UNIQUE definition of the word "threat".