- I just want to clarify some medical misconceptions about the life of the mother exception. In these modern times, according to medical experts, there isMessage 1 of 302 , Feb 9, 2002View SourceI just want to clarify some medical
misconceptions about the life of the mother exception.<br><br>In
these modern times, according to medical experts, there
is no medical condition where one would have to
choose between the life of the mother or the life of the
baby.<br><br>If emergency treatment is needed to save the life of
the mother, if the child is sufficiantly developed,
the best course of action would be to deliver
prematurely and cross your fingers that both mom and baby
will survive.<br><br>If immediate emergency surgery is
needed in order to save the life of the mother and the
baby is not sufficiantly developed, there are only two
scenarios: either you treat the mother, the inevitable
consequence of which is that the baby dies, or you don't
treat her and in all likelyhood the baby won't survive
to maturity as the mother will also die.
<br><br>(The above scenarios usually involve eptopic pregnancy
- where the fetus is growing inside the fallopian
tube which will rupture and kill the mother if it is
not removed soon enough, or acute cancer where
radiation treatment is needed immediately.) <br><br>If
these are the case, it is better to save one life than
to loose two, even if the unfortunate result of
saving one life is that another is lost in the process.
(This is known in philosophy circles as 'the law of
double effects', where doing one action innevitably
causes another action.) Again you need to ask is it
better that both die or that one is saved? The intention
is not to take a life, but to save one.<br><br>So
next time you hear of the 'either or' scenario, please
remind your friends that modern medicine makes the risk
of death during childbirth almost unlikely. (Thanks
to Cesarians and other problem detection methods)
- ... years... Welcome to the club. Have you heard the term cognitive dissonance ? It is used to describe the malady of living in a Pro-Choice, Abortion onMessage 302 of 302 , Jun 28, 2004View Source--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Debbby88 wrote:
> Ive been debating abortion and thinking about it for nearly 8years...
Welcome to the club.
Have you heard the term "cognitive dissonance"?
It is used to describe the malady of living in a Pro-Choice,
Abortion on Demand, nation with the knowledge of the abortion
industry's activities and not being able to reconcile that activity
with the rest of our society's activities.
I have studied and researched this area for a long time myself,
looking for a way wto live comfortbaly in the USA with the current
legality of abortion on demand, and it just does not happen foe me.
My desire to produce for such a system is so limited because of this
I haev no desire to be associated with Pro-Choice people, and I know
after 30 years of this acitivity the possibility that I am not
somehow seeing these people in scoiety is very slim on a day to day
I think it tarnishes our entire nation so badly and makes us very
untrustworthy of our own people.
I do not even recite the Pledge of Allegiance now because it does
not ring true enough to me.
Our system is fast becoming antiquated here with this abortion on
We sing a national anthem that is over 200 years old.
Imo, we are stuck in the mud of old glory and remembrance and we are
not facing up to the realisms of today's society.
I have noticed much correlation with 1973's Supreme Court decision
and other malevents within our nation. Increased single motherhood,
more divorce, and now same-sex marriage.
Who really wants to pay taxes to such a government?