I know this has been discussed about a million times, but I need a refresher. I know abortion is always a morraly impermissable act and if done with full knowledge and full consent puts one's soul in grave danger. But what are those circumstances where performing certain medical procedures save the mother's life but end the child's?

I know that in the case of an eptopic pregancy, cutting off a portion of the fallopian tube is morraly permissable, even if it terminates the child's life. But a situation was presented to me by a friend to which I wasn't sure how to respond.

A young girl, 20 yrs old, went to her gynecologist for a check up. Out of that check up, she found out that she was pregant and that she had cervical cancer. The doctors told her that they would not perform the procedure required to treat the cervical cancer because it would terminate the pregnancy (they scrape the inside of her uterus and treat it with chemicals). The doctors said that she would have to consent to a procedure that ends the life of her child first, and then treat the cancer.

I know that a woman is never morally obligated to put her own life at risk for the life of her child, though it is her free decision to choose so, and an admirable one. But what about this particular case? What should she do?

And remember, the doctors have refused to treat the cancer untill she terminates the pregnancy. I cannot even begin to imagine what I would do in that situation.

-- brian (brian@brian.com), March 06, 2005

Answers

The doctors have no right to refuse doing the surgery, which is completely morally permissible, even though it would inadvertently result in the death of the unborn child. What would NOT be morally permissible is what they are proposing - performing a direct abortion for the PURPOSE of killing the baby, BEFORE beginning cancer treatment. What she should do is find a new doctor, preferably one who is better versed in moral ethics.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), March 06, 2005.

I agree Paul, something sounded fishy. Furthermore, I believe the doctor is not telling her how dangerous the cancer is and making her feel as if she must abort the baby or die from the cancer.

-- brian (brian@brian.com), March 06, 2005.

"scraping the inside of her uterus and treat it with chemicals" is not a treatment for cervical cancer in any stage of the disease.

If a woman has cervical cancer in the very early stages and is pregnant,she can usually safely carry the pregnancy to term, deliver a healthy baby and then receive treatment for the cervical cancer which would be either surgical removal of the cancerous part of the cervix by laser or, if the cancer has advanced beyond the cervix and into the uterus, a total hysterectomy would be done.

If a woman had advanced cervical cancer and was found to be pregnant, the treatment for the cancer would be a complete hysterectomy (among other additional treatments).

In either case, there would be no medical need whatsoever to consider aborting the unborn child. In case #1, the woman would be followed closely during her pregnancy for any signs of advancement of the disease. In case #2, the treatment for the disease would indirectly cause the death of the unborn child if the mother chose to be treated for the advanced cancer.

-- Lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), March 06, 2005.

It was probably endometrial cancer, not cervical. D & C (dilation and curetage) is standard treatment for early stage endometrial cancer.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), March 07, 2005.

with an ectopic pregnancy the fetus cannot survive, if the mother doesn't get treatment she will die, slow and painfully. Believe mei had one. There is no way for the baby to grow, it finally will get big enough to the point of the tube bursting. when that happens the mother bleeds to death, but it will take a couple of hours of extream pain first. There is no way for the baby to be saftly removed from the tube. Cervical cancer is a totally different story. There is chance for the baby to survive and most likely the mother.

-- kat (riesoracle@hotmail.com), March 07, 2005.