Texas Right to Life Defends Life of Mother and Unborn Child


A lady who blogs recently posted an account of her experience with placental abruption, the detachment of the placenta from the uterine wall during pregnancy.  The pieces of her account are ill-fitting:  The doctor refused to provide an abortion as she lay bleeding in the emergency room.  In her words, “I don’t know if his objections were religious or not, all I know is that when a bleeding woman was brought to him for treatment, he refused to do the only thing that could stop the bleeding.  Because he didn’t do abortions.  Ever.”  Another physician was called in for the abortion. 


Texas Right to Life believes doctors should take all necessary strides to ensure that the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child are protected.  In rare situations in which the mother's life is indeed endangered by the pregnancy itself, sound medical practice would dictate that every effort is made to save both lives.  When both lives cannot be saved, Texas Right to Life holds that the life of the mother must be preserved until that day when technology will allow for both mother and unborn child to live.


Since the posting, debate has erupted over the issue and the veracity of the blogger’s post.  Though the circumstances are odd, the telling of her story has afforded a venue to clarify positions about the hard cases often used to justify abortion on demand.  While medical emergency abortion is nuanced and sensitive, public discourse cannot be avoided.  Pro-Lifers have questioned the genuineness of the blogger’s piece and the seemingly incongruent chronology of events, while abortion proponents have struck back calling Pro-Lifers liars and women-haters.


The questions that have arisen over the accuracy of the post are not unwarranted.  She claims the need for the medical emergency abortion was because of the placental abruption, but standard medical treatment for placental abruption includes an emergency cesarean section if the child has reached viability, and bed rest until the child is considered viable to be delivered.  If she was indeed bleeding to death, the doctor would have been required to take the necessary steps to save her life. 


Not only is her story inconsistent, it is a direct attack on the Pro-Life movement.  She states that she doesn’t know if the doctor’s reasons were religious, but at the end of her story she solidifies why she believes the doctor refused.  “Well after the news hit my family that I’d aborted I got a phone call from a cousin who felt the need to tell me that I was wrong to have interfered with God’s plan.  In that moment I understood that the kind of people who will judge a woman’s reproductive choices are the kind of people that I don’t want to be.” [sic]


The blogger has yet to release the name of the doctor who allegedly refused to treat her and the hospital at which the abortion was performed. 


Comments are closed.