Just to make clear, Catholic theologians who hold the view that resolving an ectopic pregnancy is morally acceptable don't believe this because the baby has no chance to live. Rather, it is because there is a normal medical treatment for an inflamed or infected fallopian tube - removal of the tube.
It is the unintended effect that this also causes the unborn child to die as a result of being cut off from his sustenance.
Thus, it is because there is a legitimate illness, and a treatment that is directed toward curing the illness that is NOT a direct, intentional abortion that this is licit.
Similarly, when women receive chemotherapy or radiation therapy for cancer, or when women undergo hysterectomies to remove a diseased uterus, it is the attempt to cure a real physical illness or disease that has the unintended effect of causing the death of the unborn child that makes the action licit.
Cancer is a disease. An inflamed or infected fallopian tube is a disease. Pregnancy is not a disease, and thus, it is not legitimate to "cure" it through direct abortion, especially as that directly and intentionally kills an innocent human being.
MeOnTheBeach,
I'm not sure where you got the idea that an ectopic pregnancy is not a “real pregnancy.” Upon conception within the body of the woman, the woman is a pregnant mother.
sitetest
I used the terms “unfortunate consequence” and “secondary result” rather than “unintended effect,” but the meaning of what I said is basically the same.
Perhaps I should have said that a fallopian pregnancy is not a NORMAL pregnancy, since that was what I intended.
Catholic theologians speak of primary intention—to cure a health problem—and secondary, unintended consequences. Nonetheless, if the baby’s life could be saved by a different procedured, then it would be wrong to use a procedure that killed the baby—primary intention or not. It is certainly a significant aspect of the case that a baby in the fallopian tube cannot be saved, as well as that its continued presence would result in the death of the mother. So there really isn’t any doubt what to do, whereas in a case of lung cancer, for instance, there would be questions of how much more risk there would be to the mother in postponing chemotherapy for another month or two to give the baby a chance. Instead of proceding with no real doubts, that would be case for the mother to discuss with the doctor, and perhaps get a second opinion, before making the choice of whether or not to wait.