Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Freepertwo
I could never, under any circumstance make a case for abortion. A baby is as human and vulnerable as Terri is right now...the killing of ANY innocent human being is heinous and cannot be defended.

Suppose a mother of three born children plus an unborn child of eight-week's gestation was found to have metasticizing cancer. Doctor's prognosis was that chemo may save her if issued immediately, but it would be unlikely the woman would live six months otherwise.

What course of action would you suggest?

I can see two possible courses of action: forego the chemo and hope to live long enough that the baby can be delivered alive, or take the chemo and hope to avoid leaving her three born children motherless, recognizing that the chemo would certainly kill the unborn child.

In such a situation, I don't think I could fault the mother for making either choice.

647 posted on 03/22/2005 8:33:20 PM PST by supercat ("Though her life has been sold for corrupt men's gold, she refuses to give up the ghost.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 588 | View Replies ]


To: supercat

Personally, I'd take my chances and let the baby live and leave that decision up to God. I don't think it's our place to decide which human life should be snuffed and which should be saved. Those three children could also be deprived of their mother if the mother got into a car accident or something similar. Taking a child's life is never acceptable.


670 posted on 03/22/2005 8:35:33 PM PST by Freepertwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 647 | View Replies ]

To: supercat
I don't think I could fault the mother for making either choice.

No way I'd kill my child to save my own life, and I could never respect... heck I could never stomach being in the same room with a woman who could do that.

678 posted on 03/22/2005 8:37:08 PM PST by Critter (America, home of the whipped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 647 | View Replies ]

To: supercat

An Italian doctor (woman) made the choice to forgo treatment and give life to her unborn baby. She was recently proclaimed a "Blessed" in the Catholic Church.


702 posted on 03/22/2005 8:41:42 PM PST by Lauren BaRecall (Freepertoo to Terri's Dad: "I told him God rarely telegraphs his punches....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 647 | View Replies ]

To: supercat
Suppose a mother of three born children plus an unborn child of eight-week's gestation was found to have metasticizing cancer. Doctor's prognosis was that chemo may save her if issued immediately, but it would be unlikely the woman would live six months otherwise.

My husband's best friend's mother was in exactly this position when she was pregnant with him. She chose to have him and not treat the cancer. She did die when he was almost a year old, not of cancer, though (her 'hopeless' cancer went into remission), she was murdered by the son of a diplomat who had immunity.

708 posted on 03/22/2005 8:42:47 PM PST by reaganaut (Not all Thanatologists are pro-death, abortion or euthanasia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 647 | View Replies ]

To: supercat

Wow, I want to answer that one. First of all your scenario states that the chemo MAY save her if issued immediately, that leaves the possibility that it may not save her. If the prognosis was that she would not live more than six months without chemo then chemotherapy would most likely only postpone the inevitable. Under those circumstances I would much rather continue the pregnancy in hopes that my child would live; but if unable, then I would want my unborn child to die within my womb, rather than ripped out and dismembered and we be buried together unseparated.


758 posted on 03/22/2005 8:50:33 PM PST by TSH1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 647 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson