Posted on 08/30/2005 1:53:58 PM PDT by fortunecookie
Obviously no ultrasound or even X ray.
I know, especially since they pegged her as a high risk pregnancy, a woman thought unable to have a baby. It seems pretty obvious. That's what caught my eye about this story. The article didn't say if she had regular prenatal care, but what kind was it? She mentioned it was a painful pregnancy. Is this the byproduct of a 'universal' or rationed healthcare system? It really is a miracle they're both alright.
Nothing at all, even prior to surgery, they were even surprised at the baby's position when they went in surgically, after hours of induced labor. This is amazing to me.
And your sign is Pyrex.
"And your sign is Pyrex."
And and daughter named Crystal! :)
lol
The fallopian tube fans out at the end, clasping the ovary like your hand loosely clasping an egg. Normally the ovum is directed into the tube (corresponding to your arm in this picture) and travels to the uterus, but sometimes it gets into the abdomen. (After fertilization, or do the sperm swim after it?)
I read about one woman who had an ovary but no tube on the right side and a tube but no ovary on the left side - an ovum crossed her abdomen, entered the tube, and she had a normal uterine pregnancy.
Actually it is not that hard considering the fallopian tubes are not directly attached to the uterus and they hang loosely around the ovaries.
Moreover, from a biological standpoint, I am surprised that ectopic pregnacies are not more common than they are.
This and similar situations are the reason I can't go along with the anti-abortion absolutists. There are indeed situations where the pregnancy is a major threat to the life of the mother. In most of those the dilemma is simplified by the fact that the baby is highly unlikely to survive if the pregnancy is not terminated. Thus the choice is between losing one life or losing two. Although tragic, I think the proper choice in such a case is pretty much a no-brainer. Luckily, these cases are quite rare.
The really difficult situations are the even more rare ones where the baby has some chance to make it to viability, but the mother's life is severely threatened if it is tried. In such a situation, I think I would advise my wife to terminate the pregnancy. But it would be an extremely difficult choice to have to make.
Few can. As a Catholic and anti-abortion person, I can say, and people like myself have discussed it from the Church perspective (often misunderstood), that abortion is an evil, but in what should be rare cases, a necessary evil. Clearly the mothers life should always be protected. In some cases, a mother will waive that and go forward with the pregnancy. I can't imagine having to choose like that, but with the ectopic pregnancies, the abortion is a necessary evil. Sometimes a baby is deemed not viable but that doesnt always mean abortion is the best choice. Sometimes it is known that the baby will or may die shortly after birth, but that doesn't make abortion necessarily the right choice or any easier on the mother, especially if the situation is discovered late in the pregnancy.
But it would be an extremely difficult choice to have to make.
I have to agree.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.