I have always believed that it is never morally permissable to abort a fetus, even if the life of the mother is in danger. I had always believed that the only instance that a woman may do anything that results in the death of the fetus is when she has an eptonic pregnancy (When the embryo latches on to the fellopian tubes, threatening the mother's life). In that case, I believed, that the Church allows a procedure where the fellopian tube is cut and removed around the developing child, resulting in its death.

Yet, the other day, I heard that there are other instances where it is morally permissable for the mother to have an abortion when it threatens her life. I have never heard of any other situation? What are they? is it true?

-- brian (brian@brian.com), October 09, 2004

Answers

Bump.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), October 09, 2004.

The Church never requires a woman to place her life in genuine serious jeopardy for the sake of her unborn child. This does not include various complications of pregnancy which can be controlled by medication and/or bedrest. There are two fairly common conditions where surgery required to save the life of the mother may result in the death of the unborn child. One of them, as you said, is ectopic pregnancy. Here there is really no moral issue at all, because the developing fetus has zero chance of survival with or without the surgery, and if the surgery isn't done the mother may die as well. The other common situation is uterine cancer. Here the issue is not quite as clearcut because postponing surgery may very well result in the child being born normal and healthy; however, postponing surgery also directly increases the chances that the mother will die of cancer. In such a case the mother is not morally bound to risk her life by postponing surgery for the sake of the unborn child. Many women heroically choose to postpone surgery until the baby is viable. Sometimes this results in a happy ending, with mother and child both coming through it healthy. Other times the baby is born healthy but the mother has sacrificed her life. And in still other cases the mother elects to have the required surgery even though the unborn child will die in the process. This is completely acceptable morally because the death of the child is not the intent of the procedure, but only an unavoidable consequence of required life-saving medical treatment of the mother. This however does not constitute "having an abortion". "Having an abortion" means that the killing of the unborn child is the intended result, and that is never morally defensible.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), October 09, 2004.