That has historically not been the RCC position. The mother has already had the chance to be saved by faith in Jesus Christ, therefore it is the babe that holds the preference about who is to survive.
You may not like it, but that's the catechistic doctrine, IIRC.
It should be fine if the individual chooses that; but Law can’t deal in religious principles. Trying to satisfy them all would be impossible.
The Catholic doctrine does not give preference to the baby over the mother. It says that neither may be killed directly for the sake of the other. When a Caesarian was death for the mother, you could not perform it unless the mother was dead already. You could not dismember a child in utero that the mother was unable to deliver.
As medicine advanced, the teaching allowed for the removal of a pathology as long as the direct intent was not the killing of the baby, if that was an unintended effect.
Hence, a cancerous uterus, fallopian tube on the point of bursting, infected placenta, preeclamptic placenta, can all be removed, even if the baby is removed too early to have a chance.
IN Catholic teaching, you can remove the swollen tube, (pathological tube) but technically, not baby from the tube (pathological location) even though the latter gives the best chance of having another child. Sometimes the teaching seems more quibble than sense, and absolutely wrenching to the poor woman facing the choice.