A question of abortion, how would you handle this situation?

[Punchy]

Tonight the wifey was on the phone with a friend of hers. The friend relayed a story about another friend's sister, her situation is absolutely gut-wrenching.

This lady had a miscarriage last year but found out recently that she was pregnant again. Then, six weeks into the pregnancy she finds out that she has stage seven breast cancer. Since the cancer is so advanced any sort of treatment would probably kill or seriously damage the unborn child. To top it all off she has a one and a half year old little boy.

So her options are to get an abortion after already experiencing a miscarriage or not treat her cancer and possibly leaving her husband alone with two babies.

I can't imagine going through a decision like that. I think the obvious decision is to abort the unborn child as terrible as that sounds.

I don't want to turn this into a raging political discussion per se, I would really like to know how you folks would handle a situation like this especially if you are against legalized abortion.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I honestly don't know that this sort of situation has a right or wrong answer, save what the individual decides is right or wrong for her/her relationship and situation.

Nor do I have any answer as to what I'd do in such a situation, since I really can't know what it is like to be a mother or to bear a child within me.

[bert]

well. .

I'm a guy, so it' s impossible for me to have a child. . but if I could

and IF I was in the above situation?

I'd have the child, and then start the treatments after.

(and I'm extremely Pro-Choice, but if it were my body?. . I'd have the child. After all, I may lose the baby in a 2nd miscarriage anyways. . but I'd have to give the child a chance to grow. Of course, that would be MY choice for ME and my family.

also factoring in. . and I may be mistaken. . but Stage 7 is pretty serious. There's no guarantee that the treatments are going to extend my life. . so I'd want to give my partner another thing to remember me by).

[Corrina]

If it were me, I think I'd have the abortion.

Because right now, I have a responsibility to the one kid I have to be well, the one that is here and knows me. If I have a chance to stay alive and be my child's mother, I have to take it.

But that's me.

In the case of this poor woman, she's going to have to make that call herself. So sorry to hear what she's going through. Very sad.

[phoenixrising]

It's a terrible decision to have to make...but if it were me, I'd likely choose to abort, if only because I'd want to be there for the family I *already* have...to have a small child I'd likely have to leave behind in death would be unbearable, especially if I couldn't even try.

[Matt Algren]

Tonight the wifey was on the phone with a friend of hers. The friend relayed a story about another friend's sister, her situation is absolutely gut-wrenching.

This lady had a miscarriage last year but found out recently that she was pregnant again. Then, six weeks into the pregnancy she finds out that she has stage seven breast cancer. Since the cancer is so advanced any sort of treatment would probably kill or seriously damage the unborn child. To top it all off she has a one and a half year old little boy.

So her options are to get an abortion after already experiencing a miscarriage or not treat her cancer and possibly leaving her husband alone with two babies.

I can't imagine going through a decision like that. I think the obvious decision is to abort the unborn child as terrible as that sounds.

I don't want to turn this into a raging political discussion per se, I would really like to know how you folks would handle a situation like this especially if you are against legalized abortion.
My grandmother faced this exact decision, except that it was around four weeks after she found out she was pregnant. At age 45. With five kids at home.

Of course, this was 1951, so medical science was far far far behind where we are now, and abortion was no doubt less of a hot-button issue. From what I'm told, every expert told her to abort so that they could start extremely aggressive treatment. She decided to carry the baby to term (another six months) before they started any treatment.

After she delivered a baby girl (on her own birthday---one of those cosmic winks), they went to work on the cancer, eventually removing her entire left breast and most of the tissue around it. I'm a little fuzzy on the details at that point because the degree of removal isn't something you tend to discuss. I do know that she lived another 47 years (and three more bouts of cancer) with one breast. I'm so glad reconstructive surgery is available now. I can't imagine what that was like.

It'd be poetic to say that the baby was my mom, but it wasn't. My dad's sister is, however, one of the nicest people you'd ever meet. From what I know, there was no major second guessing of the decision.

Regardless of which side of the Big Issue people are, I hope we can all agree with you about the tragedy of this story. How heartbreaking.

Best to your friend's family. They'll be in my prayers tonight.

[Punchy]

It's a terrible decision to have to make...but if it were me, I'd likely choose to abort, if only because I'd want to be there for the family I *already* have...to have a small child I'd likely have to leave behind in death would be unbearable, especially if I couldn't even try.

That's my attitude as well. Not only that but there is a high liklihood that the infant would never even get a chance to know its mother.


Best to your friend's family. They'll be in my prayers tonight.

They are family of friends of friends so it's no one I'm close to or have even met. Just so you know its not hitting me close to home.

But the situation is tragic and is indeed worthy of prayer.

[Rachel Grey]

I'd say abort, but I dont envy the poor girl. There are more than enough whackos out there willing to say "Better that you die in grace than live as a babykiller!!! Hallelujah!!"

My sincerest condolences.

[Winslow]

That's tough.

I'm pretty sure my wife and I would choose to carry the baby to term, and hope for Necktie's story.

[Rabid Trekkie]

If I was married and my wife was in that situation I don't know what I would tell her. Like Jeff said, in this situation there is no right and wrong answer. If you choose one the baby lives but you may lose your wife, if you choose the other you lose a child and the wife bears that guilt for a long time. Both just need to agree on what they think is best for them and go from there.

[DarlingNikki]

what an absolutely tragic situation.

i would probably be inclined to not abort. i guess that means the choice would be to have faith that the child will make it to term and that afterwards, they'll be able to treat the cancer.

even if the child ultimately won't know me if i die as a result, he or she will know life.

that's just me, though. i wouldn't force someone else to make that decision herself.

[MacQuarrie]

I'd say abort, but I dont envy the poor girl. There are more than enough whackos out there willing to say "Better that you die in grace than live as a babykiller!!! Hallelujah!!"

My sincerest condolences.
I'm about as pro-life as you can get, and I say that if you ever hear anybody say that, you have my permission to kick them hard in the groin. That's horrible.

As for this situation, I'd look into every other possible treatment for at least the six months or so to deliver the baby. Call City of Hope and find out what new treatments they're developing. Fight like hell to save the baby if possible. Maybe have surgery now to remove what they can, then radiation/chemo after the baby is delivered.

But if it's not to be, I would certainly not be one to condemn this poor woman in these circumstances.

And prayer is definitely in order.

[DarkBlade]

There's a woman in the news recently in a somewhat similar situation... she has been braindead for a few weeks, and the cancer is still spreading. They're trying to keep her body functioning through mid July, which will put the pregnancy at 25 weeks. That seems to be the earliest they can deliver the baby and have even half a bit of hope that the child would survive...

However, in this instance the option for change didn't declare itself ahead of time. The husband and parents discussed it, and decided she'd have wanted them to keep her on ventilators and feeding apparatus until the child can be delivered.

[Mike Smash!]

That really is a horrible situation and honestly, there isn't going to be a happy solution to this problem.

Were I in her shoes, I'd probably abort and take the chemo. The alternative of putting off the chemo or putting the baby at risk during treatment could leave not just one, but two children without a parent.

She has a responsibility to survive for her other child's sake, so she needs treatment. God only knows how she'll feel in nine months and what childbirth could do to her in this condition.

[Guapo Méndez]

My prayers go out to both of them.

I'd keep the child. If she misscarriages, well, then you can go all out with the chemo. If she doesn't, you can begin treatment after birth.
I wouldn't abort because I still have no guarantee that I'm going to make it thru the cancer. I'd rather leave 3 people mourning my loss than 2 people mourning the loss of a wife and a son.

[Dreadstar]

Seems like you got to basically play the percentages on this one.

If the immediate treatment provides for a MUCH MUCH higher probabilty of survival or remission, you abort. If the difference between immediate treatment and treament 7 monts later is neglibile, you go through with it. Somewhere in between is where that difficult line is drawn.

Further, if you decide to abort, you also get the best estimates on the treatment "damaging" the fetus. I mean, I wouldn't try to keep the child if the treatments were guaranteed to result in birth defect, but if that percentage were low, and the probablity of a miscarraige was HIGH, I might still try to go to term. In which case the likely worst thing to happen would be a miscarriage, which would be end-result equivalent to an abortion.

Lots and lots and lots of probabilities to weigh in that decision. I'd be getting a quite a few second opinion estimates.

[Dee3]

I truly feel sorry for this women this stuation is really horrible I can't think or even imagine what's going tru her mind. I personally don't know what I'd do in this situation. But prayers are with her.

[Alex]

Figure id weigh it.
On the one hand, is she really against abortion? If so, i would assume she would be predisposed towards having the kid.
For the truly depressing side, chemo might not work, but if she has it, the kid definetly won't live, so going from the that, id probably go with having the kid, and doing the chemo after, because then at least you are positive one person lives.
Edit: For a more clear response, think of the father.
Lets say she aborts, and then the chemo doesn't work and she dies.
He lost a kid and a wife.

[Dreadstar]

Lets say she aborts, and then the chemo doesn't work and she dies.
He lost a kid and a wife.

Yeah, but I thought the whole point was that immediate attention would dramatically increase her chance for survival. Without this dramatic increase, the decision seems to lean toward following through on the pregnancy. But in the case that immediate treatment *does* make a difference, then he gains a wife, and they even have a chance at another kid in the future, perhaps.

[K'Nort]

I don't want to turn this into a raging political discussion per se, I would really like to know how you folks would handle a situation like this especially if you are against legalized abortion.

I'm not against legalized abortion but I don't think I could ever go through with it myself. That said, this is a very complex situation. My first grasp at straws is that, since she's already had one miscarriage plus is sick, it's entirely likely that she will have another. Six weeks is still pretty early. So that's another incentive to not rush a decision, I guess. If this was actually me as opposed to my spouse? I'd think about the kid that's already there. That would probably cause some long-term damage/resentment. That mom chose to take a chance on a second kid at the high risk of being able to raise him. Like he was inadequate. He just seems like a bigger responsibility/priority than an infant that could very easily not make it to term even without chemo.

[Rallura]

Punchy, are you sure they said stage seven? I did some research since I can't answer the question unless I know more about how far the cancer has spread, and there aren't seven stages of breast cancer, there are four.

[Solaris]

Personally, I'd have an abortion and go through the treatments. That decision hinges on both the obligation I already have to children and husband, and also on my own beliefs about fetuses, babies, ensoulment, and reincarnation/afterlife, etc.

No one's mentioned this yet, but this in particular is one of those situations where the idea of a person/family having it be their choice and their decision, is very important. I've noticed a lot of folks saying "If it were me/my wife"... now think about what it would be like if it were mandatory for either side: mandatory that an abortion take place, or mandatory that abortion is not allowed. The same thing, IMO, holds true for things like living wills. When there's a life or death situation involved, the government and/or anonymous people have no business making such a personal and vital decision for you through laws. You *ought* to have a choice, that gives you a chance to decide for yourself, based on your own personal beliefs.

My heart goes out to this woman and her family---it's a very tough and stressful decision and situation. I hope whatever she and they decide, it's something that will be the best decision they can make, by their own determination... and that no one pressures them to do something that they ultimately regret choosing. In this kind of thing, in some respects, you're shooting blind: there's no real way of knowing how things will turn out, either way. That in itself makes it more difficult.

[Solaris]

My prayers go out to both of them.

I'd keep the child. If she misscarriages, well, then you can go all out with the chemo. If she doesn't, you can begin treatment after birth.
I wouldn't abort because I still have no guarantee that I'm going to make it thru the cancer. I'd rather leave 3 people mourning my loss than 2 people mourning the loss of a wife and a son.


What if there's a strong possibility that both she *and* the baby would die before she could carry to term? I'm not being argumentative here, just throwing that out, because it might be the situation they're facing... :confused: Would it change your opinion at all?

And I'll say again: any way you look at it, this is a very tough decision for her/them to make. I would *not* want to be in her shoes, poor thing.