[fleagle]

Excellent. You and Gandu have so far been the only two people to explain to me a condition that would pose a threat to the life of the mother. In all of the conversations I’ve had with pro-choice/abortion types, none have ever identified that condition.

[wagglebee]

There have been cases where pregnant women have cancer and are told that their chances of survival MIGHT improve or they MIGHT live a little longer if they abort the baby. However, it is the cancer and NOT the baby which threatens the mother's live and the pregnancy DID NOT cause the cancer.

Tennessee Woman Chooses Child’s Life over Her Own

[Mrs. Don-o]

Ir a pregnant woman has cancer of the uterus or cervix, any of her treatment options --- surgery, chemo, or radiation --- might kill the baby. But here's the way a pro-life doctor would manage that: you make your best estimate of how long you could delay the cancer treatment (or opt for very conservative cancer treatment --- in consultation with the woman, of course, and with other doctors) and then you go for earliest possible delivery of the baby followed by hysterectomy or whatever the mother's cancer treatment option is.

If it was too soon and the preemie baby dies, you at least know that you tried to save both. And that's just what most pregnant mothers want: they want the doctor to make a good-faith effort to save them both, understanding that the outcome is never certain.