[Tanniker Smith]

I don't think I've ever heard of a case where a woman has given birth were her "health" wasn't at risk in some way, shape or form. It's a meaningless standard, which is what it's meant to be.

"This baby could give you hemorrhoids! Your health is at risk!"

[Marie]

This is what baffles me.

Name ONE instance where an abortion is necessary in the THIRD trimester to save the life of the mom?

Third trimester means that the baby is viable. It has to come out *somehow* (via vaginal birth or c-section). Why not let it live?

Even in the cases of hydrocephalus, the baby can be delivered via c-section. When my son was a year old, he became critically ill and we spent a month in a high-risk children’s ward. We came into contact with babies dying of hydrocephalus (which is worse than most people can imagine), cancer, and cystic fibrosis.

ALL of these babies were dearly loved and doted on by their parents.

I cannot think of ANYTHING that would result in the NECESSARY death of a third trimester baby.