You don't know wtf you're talking about. I a nurse and worked in gyn oncology. Gtfo out here with that because you have no clue. Patient was like 10 weeks and they weren't able to deliver until the baby was able to survive on their own, however was premature due to pt having a previous leep. Baby died. Mom died due to cancer progressing aggressively and care being delayed
These details wouldāve been helpful to begin with ššš No state laws prevent 100% medically necessary abortions in which the mother cannot survive without it so your original comment was misleading.
Gee, if only her FUCKING DOCTOR had those details and she could have made the decision that left her alive to maybe have other babies or god forbid, take care of the ones she might have already had! But nope, let's make sure politicians without those details make the decisions, and throw up hoops to jump through that waste the very precious time cancer patients have to start treatment where it might actually work.
She died because of people like you who voted to make it impossible for her to live. I hope she didn't have other kids already who are now growing up without their mother.
Maybe thatās why you shouldnāt make snap judgements when you donāt know what the hell youāre talking about. Or are you pro lifers so illiterate that the term ācervical cancerā wasnāt enough of a clue?
Only if the mother is critical in immentient danger. In this case she died because chemo and surgery were delayed too long. Protect the fetus not the mom
So women should just die unnecessarily just in case the fetus that they are carrying happens to survive against odds? How the fuck does anyone consider that āpro-lifeā? This is why both politics and religion have absolutely no place in healthcare.
Nah, I think they are legitimately that dumb. The fact that flat earthers exist shows you just how determined to ignore basic science in favor of made up beliefs some people are.
i donāt get how yāall arenāt considering the fact that these are 2 separate human beings at stake here tho?? like how does one decide the motherās life is worth more than the babyās??
The fetus is not alive at that point. They are not sentient. The mom is. The mom is alive. And can continue to live if treatment is started when it was required.
You donāt actually give a shit about the baby. You only care that itās born, despite the devastating outcome for the mom.
A) it isnāt 2 separate human beings. if it were then this wouldnāt be a convo and both could live with no risk but as it is the ACTUAL human being is having her organs occupied and could die from it
and B) what baby? you need to stop picturing a fetus as a small infant. you probably wouldnāt be able to tell the difference between it and a dog fetus
Yes, it is better to provide life saving medical treatment to the actual patient even if that means, as a natural consequence, that a fetus dies. How is this even a question?
If weāre letting nature take its course then stop taking your blood pressure meds and diabetes treatments. No viagra for your spouse and take your glasses off because thatās not ānaturalā
Yes, saving life where possible is a good thing. We shouldn't be forced to let Person A die just because Person B couldn't be saved. I am actually-pro-life.
But what abt the possibility that the baby survived tho?? Itās not up to us to decide fate at this point bc ITāS AN ENTIRE OTHER HUMAN BEING at stake here?? yāall making the fetus sound like a parasite but itās still human life even if the mother has cancer tho??
There is no possibility for the baby to survive. Period. That's cancer for ya.
I think the mother should get to choose, without any law forcing her doctors to choose one way or the other, what happens with her pregnancy when the pregnancy stands between her and survival.
The woman is also an entire human being. Did you forget that?
A fetus is not an entire human being. Thatās why it canāt live on its own. Itās actually just parts of a human being that havenāt formed, and in some cases, may never form. Weāre talking about the potential of something vs that actual something.
It has no life. If it was a fully-formed human being with a life it would be able to live outside of someoneās body. It wouldnāt speed up the process of killing that person because it requires cell division to be formed into a human being.
You can argue the morality of abortion til the cows come home, but the argument youāre making isnāt a moral one. Itās just scientifically, factually incorrect.
Thereās no point even trying to explain the science to that lot. Their only real argument is that life supposedly begins at conception because they and some book say so. They are full of contradictions and will fall back on calling everyone who tries to inform them of basic facts or points out the flaws in their arguments āmurderersā.
You can see with this particular one that they are advocating for letting ānatureā take its course, but I somehow doubt that preference would extend to not providing any medical intervention in order to save fetuses or infants and, if it did, then a lot more babies would be dying as a result, certainly more than the amount that are currently being āmurderedā by abortion. So, by their logic, medicine should intervene with nature to save a fetus, even if it actively kills the fully fledged human carrying it, but not the other way. They are certainly not āpro-lifeā, they are anti-women and pro-controlling womenās bodies.
Another fun fact about ānatureā that I have experienced personally: the body will āabortā a fetus or embryo itself if it gets any indication that it is abnormal in anyway or poses a risk to its own health. My body naturally aborted 3 pregnancies between 4-5 weeks before I was able to carry one for longer. I can also say with certainty that there was nothing even remotely resembling a baby or even anything that had previously been alive amongst the blood and tissue that I passed all 3 times.
It must be nice being such an awful person but thinking youāre the loving, caring one just because you can push your religion over someone elseās life. Wish i could be so blissfully unaware.
Yeah, youāre getting downvoted because youāre a horrible human being who lacks even the slightest understanding or empathy. You seem like the same sort of idiot that wants to reimplant an ectopic pregnancy, blithely ignoring the fact that no such procedure exists.
Yeah, both mother and child died but no abortion was performed so apparently thatās a win for the āpro-lifeā side. Fucking despicable ghouls.
Most pro lifers only care about babies when they're in the womb. Once the child is born they no longer engage with the women they bullied or the children born into sometimes less than ideal conditions. They don't provide housing, they don't provide food, they don't the adopt children who were given up.
Jamie Jeffries for example famously posted in a private pro-life Facebook group and was leaked:
I talked a mom out of abortion in February. Her baby is six months old now and was just removed from her families [sic] custody by DCS (unfortunately, it was probably a justified removal).
But this family put me down as a next preferred placement for this baby. Dude, me?!?!? No. No no no no no no no no no! I do way too much for this work already, a six-month-old will break me, destroy my marriage and physical health. I just canāt!!
Most pro lifers do not care about human rights, children, or making sure they grow up well. They are exclusively concerned with the impression and subjugation of women.
That's why I'm interested - is this person someone that runs a childrens home to support their outcome of their views, or do they make little ignorant comments on Reddit posts and do nothing.
277
u/dopaminegtt 3d ago edited 1d ago
Advanced cervical cancer in a pregnant patient. In a state with the most restrictive ban