One common argument made in favor of legalized abortion is that they are sometimes necessary to save the life of the mother.
However, in the developed world, life-threatening pregnancies are incredibly rare.
In fact, it has been said that the alleged 3% of abortions committed to “save the life of the mother” include cases that do not actually involve abortion, such as operations have unintentionally resulted in the death of the fetus [1].
In modern times, “there are no situations where abortion is medically or psychiatrically justified to save the life of the mother…. with the advancement of medical science, today’s doctor is never faced with the dilemma of choosing between the life of the mother and the life of the baby” [2].
This being said, there are areas in the world that do not possess the same level of technology and medical expertise as America.
In these situations, the focus should not be on allowing more abortions, but instead making every effort to make the risky pregnancies more safe in these less developed countries.
—————
References
[1] J.C. Willke, M.D. (2000). “‘Life of the Mother:’ Is It Needed In Legislation?” Life Issues Connector.
————–
I just found your website 6 days ago and I have really enjoyed seeing yet another member of the pro-life team. However, on this article, I fear that you have over-stated your case. You are correct that in developed countries, doctors face virtually no instances in which the pregnancy is truly life threatening for the mother. However, there is one condition that I have been made aware of which is in fact, fatal to both the fetus and the mother if not operated on as soon as possible. This condition is called an ectopic pregnancy. In this extremely rare, yet threatening medical condition:
“More than 95 per cent of ectopic pregnancies implant in one of the fallopian tubes, which is why it’s also known as a tubal pregnancy. As your pregnancy grows, it causes pain and bleeding. If it’s not treated, the tube can rupture and cause internal bleeding. This is a medical emergency and can be fatal if not treated. Sadly, the pregnancy won’t survive, and can’t be moved to your uterus. A doctor will remove the pregnancy tissues. The affected fallopian tube is usually also removed.”(1)
In this case then, the mother’s life is truly in danger. An answer to this dilemma though, is provided by the Pro-life Training Institute2 (This was a downloadable PDF File which is no longer on their website):
“When the mother’s life is truly in danger, we must treat both the mother and child as human beings worthy of protection, for that is what they are. I’m aware of only one medical circumstance when abortion is necessary to save the mother’s life: ectopic pregnancy. In an ectopic pregnancy, the newly conceived human being implants on the wall of the fallopian tube (or some other tissue) instead of on the wall of the uterus. As the embryonic human being grows, the fallopian tube will rupture causing severe blood loss and probably death. In these cases, there is no way to save the child’s life. If we do nothing, both human beings will die. Because we believe it is better to save one life than to lose two, we remove the child (causing his death) and save the mother. The death of the child is an unintended, although foreseen, consequence. So abortion in this instance is the killing of an innocent human being WITH proper justification. Notice though, this is not because the child is not human, but rather because the child is going to die no matter what. The child’s death is unavoidable, so protecting the mother becomes our primary concern.”(2)
Thank you for providing a service in defence of the unborn, and I look forward to the day when abortion is no longer seen as a fundamental right of women, and only preformed in such a case as mentioned above.
(1)http://www.babycenter.ca/a549381/ectopic-pregnancy#ixzz2ZPUCfBBi
(2)www.prolifetraining.com