Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
What did woman do before Roe V. Wade? What did Roe V. Wade Bring to the table?
|
Roe vs Wade gave women the right to choose, it also protected them from causing harm or even death to themselves, in their desperation to end their pregnancies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
Contrary to popular opinion, if Roe v. Wade were over turned today, woman would not be dieing in the streets and back alleys. This is a complete myth and scare tactic used to rile people up. Abortion didn't bring anything new to the table, they only offered the murder of children as a form of birth control.
|
See Here
That is just one of many sites easily accessable. We have evidence that women have died from such 'back alley' abortions, or at the very least, seriously injured themselves. This cannot be denied.
What Roe V Wade did was prevent this from happening, as it gave women the right, and access to a safe, and legal abortion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
Before Roe v Wade, doctors would fight for both the lives of the mother and the baby. Abortion never saved one single life!
|
Before Roe V Wade, however, there must have been instances when the fetus could not be saved, and the womans life would have been deemed more 'important' if you will, leading to an abortion, in order to save the life, or preserve the health, of the mother.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
The first deals with prior medical problems of the mother, such as cancer or heart disorders or other conditions that could be worsened by carrying the child. Doctors, afraid of a lawsuit, often pressure women into having an abortion. Yet, we all know stories about mothers who trusted God enough to carry the child and were blessed with a healthy baby.
|
Doctors do not yet know everything. They can tell you that you have a healthy baby, yet your child could be born with severe defects, likewise, a doctor could tell you that your child has severe defects, and the child is born, and is deemed perfectly healthy.
Medical science has progressed so far, but we still have a long way to go.
I guess you have to decide whether the risk is great enough for you to continue with a pregnancy.
It would, I imagine, be a very hard decision to decide whether to abort, or continue a pregnancy if you were told that your unborn child was ill, or was suffering from a fetal disfigurement, for example?
You could continue with the pregnancy, despite what you may have been told, and you may well be blessed with a healthy baby - but before the child is born, before you actually see that child - how can you be sure? Can you really trust someone that much to ensure the survival of your unborn child?
For some, that is indeed a lot to ask.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
Medically and morally, doctors must deliver Equal Care to mother and child. The doctor must consider the needs of both patients in treatment decisions, doing his best to save both lives.
|
True, the doctor must do all he can to ensure survival of both mother and baby, but there may come a time when only one life can be saved, and thatlife will always be the mothers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
Abortion is the direct, deliberate destruction of the unborn child. In the Equal Care concept, no one ever seeks to kill a child.
|
As I mentioned above, there may come a time when the fetus cannot be saved, and must be aborted.
Would Equal Care still apply if the fetus must be aborted?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
The next case is more common. It is called an ectopic pregnancy. The baby never reaches the womb, attaching instead to the wall of the Fallopian tube. That section of the tube must be removed or it will rupture, causing the deaths of both mother and child. There are no other treatment options. Again, the baby dies a natural death because we do not know how to save its life, too.
|
Ectopic pregnancy is something I would never wish to experience. A friend of mine suffered from one a few years ago, and although she was only a few weeks pregnant, it is simply horrifying how much pain can be caused by one tiny embryo. Thankfully, she has fully recovered, and had two more children since.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
The difference between these cases and abortion is the intent and actions of the doctor. In abortions, the intent is to destroy the child, and the actions directly carry out that intent. In Equal Care, the intent is to save as many lives as possible, even though we don't always succeed in saving them all.
|
I understand where you are coming from - but, as I have mentioned, not all lives can be saved under Equal Care - there may come a time when the pregnancy must be terminated to ensure the survival of the mother. Knowing this, isn't the intent of the doctors administering Equal Care to remove the fetus, thus aborting it?
__________________
Why is it that, as a culture, we are more comfortable seeing two men holding guns than holding hands? ~ Ernest Gaines
|