Any woman died from lack of abortion?

[Frogwarrior]

So, pretty much one of the last resorts I've seen for the pro-abortionists is to claim that anti-abortion laws will prevent abortions even when it would save the woman's life... a while ago, I had the honor to see Brian Sapient pwned (a post-debate video) because he brought up this argument and he couldn't give any examples of anyone who died because they couldn't get an abortion.
Do any of you know of any such examples?

[Teallaura]

No. Lack of a C section, yes; lack of an abortion, no.

That's only going to be an issue in an ectopic pregnancy - which is non-viable for both mom and baby.

[Little Shepherd]

There are extremely rare cases where something goes wrong early in a pregnancy, putting the mother's life in danger as well as that of the unviable child. This is increasingly rare, though, as medical science has made it possible for children to be considered viable outside of the womb earlier and earlier. In such a rare case, though, it would become a self-defense issue. The choice in such a case would be child alone, or both mother and child, to die. And I've yet to come across a reasonable pro-life advocate who would want abortion disallowed in such a case.

What most pro-abortion advocates are talking about is the "wire hanger" abortions, which any reasonable person would know is only one step removed from urban legend material. Prior to abortions being legalized, most women simply had the baby. Those who chose to have an abortion, however, were almost always able to find qualified physicians willing to do the procedure under the table. Only a tiny, tiny fraction of people were desperate(and stupid) enough to take matters into their own hands and use means such as the aforementioned wire hanger.

Of course, I am in the camp that says that committing murder should be at the least inconvenient, and in the best circumstances dangerous, to do. So those who cry out about the dangers of wire hangers wouldn't get my sympathy even if their cries were based on reality. "Women who commit murder are putting their lives in danger with the methods they choose to employ? Call the waaaahhhmbulance."

[Storico]

No. Lack of a C section, yes; lack of an abortion, no.

That's only going to be an issue in an ectopic pregnancy - which is non-viable for both mom and baby.

I was going to say it, and then you did. Oddly enough, some people who are against abortion 100% of the time fail to take ectopic pregnancy into consideration, which is a shame. One common view that the Catholic church holds, for example, is that it's an evil that such a pregnancy would kill a woman, but it's a greater evil to murder a baby just because "nature will take its course" -- apparently, it's better to just let both mother and baby die. :no: Now, maybe I'm not being fair by saying the Church holds this position now. I know some individual Catholics do hold it, and I know it was an official position about 25 years ago. My own mother, pregnant for the first time, first sought help at her preferred hospital of choice... a Catholic one... and was turned away because they refused to give an abortion for an ectopic pregnancy. She ended up going to the city's main hospital and having it done there. And it wasn't something she wanted done at all. She said she wanted that baby so much. But when it's legitimately your life you're talking about, you don't have much of a choice. It isn't as though you could somehow save your baby's life by dying yourself. With an ectopic pregnancy, you both die, 100% of the time, unless by some miracle you can live when your fallopian tubes burst open. Babies growing in places they just weren't meant to grow in means they'll never be viable. I don't think that should EVER be a reason to say "abortion's wrong in this case!" That wouldn't make sense, to me.

I wish there was more support for women who ARE in this situation. My mother told me, not long ago, that she felt so much grief and so much anxiety, but at the time there wasn't adequate counseling. It was treated like a standard medical procedure, and that was that. I'm ignorant as to whether or not counseling's provided for women now when they have to deal with an ectopic pregnancy, but I sure hope it is, and I sure hope the Church has changed its view, too.

[Storico]

I'd like to add something, to be fair. And I'm happy to be able to do it. I did an evil deed and went forum hopping (sorry, Deedee! :teeth: ) to do a little research on the Catholic position on ectopic pregnancy, and I found answers from a few different Catholic priests. It seems that, thankfully, the Church recognizes an ectopic pregnancy not to be something unendable, but instead they see the removal of that pregnancy the same way they see the removal of a diseased organ -- something necessary in saving a woman's life. I'm glad that view's changed, and I'm glad to report that and get that straight now. :thumb:

[Little Shepherd]

I like that they don't view it as a sin, but I hate the comparision to a diseased organ. I much prefer viewing it as an act of self-defense, something that can't be seen to ignore the personhood of the fetus.

[Storico]

I like that they don't view it as a sin, but I hate the comparision to a diseased organ. I much prefer viewing it as an act of self-defense, something that can't be seen to ignore the personhood of the fetus.

Yes, same here. Although, to clarify, the BABY is not considered the diseased organ. The fallopian tube is, which makes more sense. See here (http://www.sspx.org/Catholic_FAQs/catholic_faqs__morality.htm#ectopicpregnancy)
for a decent explanation of the Catholic position on ectopic pregnancy if you'd like one. It seems that, to the Catholic church, the removal of the actual fallopian tube the embryo is in is seen as acceptable, because it's the removal of something that's the inadvertent removal of some ONE. Personally, I think the role of personhood really SHOULD come into the argument in a strong way... although in the link I provided there, the priest who answered the issue didn't come across as denying the dignity of either the mother or the embryo/fetus.

[Crow]

I know of a case, only through a MD I used to work with, of a mother who had a hysterectomy while pregnant because on her 1st checkup all did not appear to be well, and testing confirmed that she was not only pregnant but that her uterus was riddled with cancer. The fetus was dying already as there was scant intact uterine tissue for the placenta to attach to. To give the mother some small chance of survival, the doctors removed her uterus. The fetus died as it was far too early in the pregnancy for it to survive outside the womb.

That's the one case I've ever heard of. I'm sure that there are others which are similar on rare occasions.

[Storico]

I also know of a young woman who was diagnosed with bad advanced acute leukemia when she was a few months pregnant. It was quick, it was fast, and it was merciless. She waited to start chemo, and she decided to have her son. I guess not having him would have given her the chance to live. As it was, she got three months with him after he was born, before she died. He's now a healthy, happy 7 year old being raised by his grandparents. I suppose you could say that she died because she didn't have an abortion, but that threat does NOT always scare every woman into compliance. The one I'm speaking of, Sarah, loved Matthew so much that she kept him even knowing the risk. Stories like hers ALSO aren't favoured highly by people who make the "but what about endangering a mother's life" arguments. Even when it's morally acceptable to end a pregnancy in self defense, not all mothers will want to anyhow. And that's the other side of that story.

[technomage]

So, pretty much one of the last resorts I've seen for the pro-abortionists is to claim that anti-abortion laws will prevent abortions even when it would save the woman's life... a while ago, I had the honor to see Brian Sapient pwned (a post-debate video) because he brought up this argument and he couldn't give any examples of anyone who died because they couldn't get an abortion.
Do any of you know of any such examples?

Theoretically, any woman who dies due to complications to her pregnancy/delivery could be considered "died from lack of abortion." However, for such a consideration to be accurate, one would have to be able to know that she would have lived, had she had an abortion. And last I knew, doctors weren't claiming omniscience on their diplomas.

That doesn't mean that some people won't use that kind of argument, but it's ... well, frankly, not a terribly honest argument.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Stories like hers ALSO aren't favoured highly by people who make the "but what about endangering a mother's life" arguments.I find that down right insulting. I'm hardly for mandatory abortions in the case of the health of the mother. Choice! I think a woman has the right to choose in such a situation.

Even when it's morally acceptable to end a pregnancy in self defense, not all mothers will want to anyhow. And that's the other side of that story.That other side of the story is hardly a secret.

[Smokering]

Abut ectopic pregnancies: is there any way the child could be re-implanted in the uterus? I've never heard of such a thing, so I assume it's not possible, but..? Obviously the uterus would have to be at the right menstrual stage to be able to accept the child, and I don't know if the implantation thing means the baby is inextricably wedded to the Fallopian tube... but does anyone know? I admit it's probably far-fetched, but while I agree that condemning both mother and baby to a 100% chance of death isn't the right decision, I hate the thought of just removing the baby without making some effort to save it. Really, really hope that's a decision I never have to make...

[DesertBerean]

That's a good question...my first thought is your first reaction is correct. For one thing, I would think that the Catholic Church would have mentioned it.

A quick Google on the treatment of ectopic pregnancies all say the same thing about the pregnancy...it must be ended.

[Sheepdog]

no doubt more women have died from abortions than lack thereof

its a more dangerous procedure than they'd lead us to believe.

[Crow]

Abut ectopic pregnancies: is there any way the child could be re-implanted in the uterus? I've never heard of such a thing, so I assume it's not possible, but..? Obviously the uterus would have to be at the right menstrual stage to be able to accept the child, and I don't know if the implantation thing means the baby is inextricably wedded to the Fallopian tube... but does anyone know? I admit it's probably far-fetched, but while I agree that condemning both mother and baby to a 100% chance of death isn't the right decision, I hate the thought of just removing the baby without making some effort to save it. Really, really hope that's a decision I never have to make...

At this time there is not a way to save a tubal pregnancy. Since the child cannot be saved, all efforts should be directed toward saving the mother, even if you cannot save her child. In the future if it becomes possible to save both, then that is the goal which should be pursued.

[Smokering]

Yeah, that's what I figured. :(