I chose to have a late-term abortion because I love both my daughters

So my pro-choice daughter posted this article (dailydot.com/irl/late-term-abortion-twins-story/?fb=dd%3Dreshare )in FB (she didn’t write it, just posted it). How do we who are pro-life answer this?

A good start might be to talk to your daughter as your daughter rather than a “pro choice daughter” who needs to have her erroneous views corrected with the right answer.
And if you are unable to talk with her on that level then pushing “truth” isn’t going to go far I think.

By acknowledging that there are some very difficult situations out there and that we don’t have perfect answers for all of them. That mother had an excruciating choice to make. We don’t judge her for it, and we should pray for her and for both her babies.


God is pro choice, He chooses life
Dt 30: 19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live,

Mm I get that it’s a hard decision and all that. But the article basically talked about how much she loved her child and then she had an abortion. She was upset. But the article basically showed that she essentially killed a human being. And she knew it. The argument isn’t “they aren’t alive” but more of “I had to get rid of her because ______”. I honestly find that pro choicers tend to go all over the place with their arguments. I feel sorry for the woman, but this article doesn’t really show a good argument for pro choice.

Side note: i thought late term abortion are already banned unless the woman’s/baby’s life is in danger and democrats wants late term abortions to be legal regardless of the reason. Am I wrong?

This was Sophie’s Choice. The woman had the option of aborting one child who was unlikely to survive long after birth or risk losing both her children. It is an excruciating decision, and we cannot judge her for it.

Of course.

The last line of the essay:

Quality of life is just as important as a beating heart.

You can justify killing anyone with that rationale.

Will pray for her!!!

How very sad.


It’s a moving story. Unfortunately it’s wrapped in a lot of the usual rhetoric. It seems like she’s externalizing her anger, and projecting it upon everyone who is pro-life now.

We answer by first acknowledging the woman in the article had an excruciating situation placed upon her and our sympathy. (Personally I believe a pro-life legislation would be reasonable to allow an abortion in such a scenario where it’s truly a matter of life and death in the decision. While we as Catholics can see why it’s wrong to abort, I believe this gets to where people can make an argument for allowing an abortion and not have a twisted logic.) But while acknowledging sympathy for this woman and her family, we also need to remind others that most abortions are not chosen because someone’s life is threatened, but for other reasons. So while the article is truly heartwrenching, it is an outlier and not reason to allow abortions in the absence of life-threatening circumstances.

Yes indeed. That’s a very dangerous position for one to take.

The woman in the article mentions donor eggs-is this like IVF?
If it is,I thought the Catholic Church didn’t agree with the use of IVF?
Could one of the babies health issues stemmed from the “method” she chose to have a baby?
IOW,perhaps this woman had weight and hormonal issues,Vitamin B12 or folate deficiency that made her infertile and maybe if she treated them instead it might have caused the couple to be able to conceive ONE baby naturally and then she never would have had to make the heartbreaking choice of aborting one baby to save the other.

This is just a guess but perhaps if the woman had a folate deficiency, baby one might have took all the limited nutrients available and therefore in turn baby to was deprived of nutrients.
Or perhaps,there was a Genetic disorder involved like Merkel-Gruber Syndrome.

So the original choice to use the donor eggs caused sort of like a cascade effect (if that makes sense).

Could you say to your daughter that it is because you would love both daughters equally is precisely the reason why you wouldn’t choose one daughters life over the others (as opposed to the reasoning in the article)?


From the article: “Our daughters’ lives are the lives they claim to value even though Cate wouldn’t have had a life, and Olivia might not have either.”
Actually, Cate did have a life. According to the article, she wasn’t as pretty as her sister: cleft palate, possible webbed hands, microcephalic head- but she did have a life. Her doctor and mother decided that her life had less value vis-a-vis that of her sister. They decided to kill the baby that was developmentally disabled.
What a shame.
Olivia will grow up knowing that, but for an accident of genetics or fetal development, her mommy might have decided to get rid of her the same way she got rid of her sister. She may wonder how committed mom is to her on those days when she is less than perfect.
Mom made a choice, a choice to kill, and now the living are going to be dealing with that choice for a long time-and the dead will be lingering in the shadows in their minds- and, please God, in His mercy.

Does your daughter agree with this mom that some the lives of some kids are less worthy than the lives of others?

According to the article, it was not a matter of life and death. It was a matter of a possible early delivery and of the child with the birth defects being born with birth defects. Mom chose to kill the child with birth defects.

From the article: (my italics)
"Our doctors counseled us throughout the ordeal. If I carried to term, the restriction on Olivia’s sac would likely mean an early delivery. If Catherine survived delivery, she would face a barrage of surgeries, starting with removing the encephalocele and placing her brain tissue back inside her skull. She would be severely disabled if she wasn’t a vegetable. And we didn’t know what an early delivery would mean for Olivia. "

It seems that the abortion was at roughly 6 months. the doctor should have a pretty good idea of what that would mean for Olivia.
Babies are born at 6 months all the time.
Perhaps visiting some of the amazing videos of fetal development: here’s one that goes to six months.

In (Orthodox) Judaism, this choice of aborting one unborn baby, whose life would have been horribly painful if she had been born alive, for the purpose of saving the life or quality of life of the other baby, is permitted, even late-term. It is nonetheless an excruciating decision on the part of any loving mother. But a decision such as this is and MUST be the family’s, NOT the government’s, in consultation with their physician, their pastor, and their own conscience. And they must have the right to make such a decision without being thought of as a criminal or an immoral person. How can any conservative legislator, who abhors the undue influence of government on the individual, think otherwise?

It’s not an uncommon coping mechanism for people who are in pain.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.