How do I respond to those who heard of cases where someone was in the situation where a doctor said that abortion was the only way for that person to survive?
The situation varies. First identify if it is absolutely certain that there is life or death danger to the parent. Many times the “recommendation” from a doctor is sometimes misunderstood as the necessity.
Secondly the treatment to the mother for that specific issue that is not intended for the death of the unborn can be applied. For instance in the cases of cancer where treatment needed is chemotherapy. Now the treatment may very likely cause the unborn to die, however that is not the intention of the chemotherapy (unless the mother took it without cancer or deliberately got cancer somehow to take chemotherapy for the specific purposes of killing the unborn, however these cases are extremes).
It really depends on the situation and the kind of treatment applied to the situation.
Have them give you an example of such a diagnosis— that the only way to save Mom is directly killing the baby
I understand. However in this article it seems like one of the cases shows that abortion is somehow medically necessary:
I found an article that shows a testimony (see above).
Thanks for the link—I read the article.
However, over 400 doctors in the article refuted the idea that abortion is necessary and signed a petition to that effect…
And the conditions they listed could be treated by antibiotics, blood pressure medicines, dialysis, etc
There is also the Dublin Declaration that affirms abortion isn’t medically necessary
But im wondering, why did they resort to abortion is what im wondering, if it could be avoided
Doctors, just like everybody else, have their own prejudices.
And when you’re a scared and vulnerable patient , it’s easy to get railroaded through decisions you don’t really want.
I have read the case with the women with preeclampsia at 6 months pregnant.
First I do not know the situation entirely but I do know that a 6 month birth, while risky, is possible.
Second, there are treatments to that specific disease and I am not too certain whether or not it was administered.
I would be not absolutely definitive considering I do not know the exact situations of both cases that were linked, however we must remember that sometimes the right choice can sometimes be the hard choice, thus moral culpability wouldn’t be too emphasized if it’s literally life or death on short notice or information.
You aren’t going to argue against something someone “heard”.
What you can do is discuss facts about such situations and make reasoned arguments from logic and facts. I can suggest Randy Alcorn’s book Pro Life Answers to Pro Choice Arguments.
That is definitely something to consider
Yes, I’ve read up on the treatments, which is why I’m confused about the final choice (but then again, we don’t know everything about this case) .
Thank you for the resource and I agree
Another recommendation is Persuasive Pro Life By Trent Horn.
CA sent a free e-book and it was absolutely fantastic. Nearly 800 (digital) highlights I made into it.
How do I find that!?
They sent me an email with it a loooooooooong time ago. If you’re on their e-mailing list you might’ve gotten it without noticing it.
I’m not sadly. Oh well
Persuasive Pro Life is rather good, in my opinion. Worth picking up. Not too expensive. On main Catholic.Com website.
How would it benefit the mother more to deliver a dead baby than it would to deliver a live baby?
I do recommend getting it. Trent invokes a lot of charity to be done with this kind of work and lays down an effective strategy to approaching a topic such as abortion. He covers nearly all the possible objections