BUT:
The media obviously are sensationalizing this sad event, just as they sensationalize so many other stories. The woman didn't lose her legs because she was sheltering her children. She lost parts of her legs because debris (reported in another account to have been steel beams) fell on her.
Here's the point: It's not really relevant to her loss that she was on top of the children. I think it's safe to assume she would have taken shelter in the same basement spot even if the children were away, in which case she still would have had basically the same injuries to her legs.
So, would you apply that same standard to a soldier who lost his legs by covering his companion in a foxhole during a grenade attack?
After all, He would have sustained the same injuries whether he saved his buddy’ life or not.
Whether or not the media is sensationalizing it, the children were unscathed due to this woman’s heroic actions.