Woman dies after declining cancer treatments to save the life of her unborn child

This is such an inspirational story of complete sacrifice for the ones you love. To sacrifice your life, so another may live. What a story!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/wom...atments-to-save-the-life-of-her-unborn-child/

 

Wonderful and blessed story.

But hang on here come the haters….who will rip it apart.

 

Her choice. May her soul rest in peace. May whatever god she believed in look after her soul.

 

Murder is only seen as a "choice" by selfish people. To a noble person it's not a "choice", because it's unthinkable.

 

I don't care what your opninion of this is. It was her choice. She was given the choice of cancer treatments, and she declined them.

 

Well I don't care that you don't care.

You have no idea what the Hell you're talking about. Doing the right thing is never a choice.

 

I don't care, because it's legal.

Yeah I kind of do. No sense in arguing with the courts.

 

Then obviously had you been living in Germany circa 1940 you wouldn't have cared about all those Jews going up in smoke either.

No, you're completely clueless.

Since when do they write the laws of human nature?

 

This woman's decision might have been right for her, but women's circumstances are different, so what is right and unselfish for one woman is not necessarily right for another. She had no other children to consider, but a woman with existing children would have to consider the ramifications of leaving them motherless. Corbella's decision is compatible with Catholic dictates, but those are not universal religious beliefs. According to Jewish beliefs, and others, if pregnancy threatens a woman's life, abortion is mandated, and by refusing an abortion to save her life, she is committing suicide.

 

Beating your wife and refusing her metical treatment is "legal" in Saudi Arabia. What a wussy position.

 

I'm sure that those who claim to value "choice" will soon be saying she's "stupid" or a "religious nut", ha ha

 

She made a choice to postpone her treatment. Big deal. It is her choice. If she had other children, then it would be selfish for her to risk her life and leave her other kids without a father. But she had no other living children so whatever decision she made is fine by me.

 

Ha ha, but if she'd made the selfish decision to kill the brother/sister of her other children that'd be totally fine. So much for respecting her choice. That's why pro-choice is a misomder, it's a pro-abortion movement and nothing more.

 

No, because I believe that if she had a family already, that family should come first, and she should terminate in order to continue being a mother to her children. You cannot say it is selfish and wrong to abort in that instance because you would be saying it is selfish to put your family first.

 

She kills one child so that the other children can live more comfortably, how "altruistic".

Taking your child's life is not putting your family first.

I actually believe that when the mother's life is in danger, abortion should be allowed as a necessary evil, but ultimately she made the least selfless decision for her family, much more selfless than most would have the courage to. Trying to downplay her as "foolish" is what I expected that abortion supporters would pull.

 

Allowing yourself to die and leaving your existing kids without a mother is not putting your family first either, so how do lifers see this one? Either choice you make, you are not putting your family first. Is it really better to leave kids without a mother than to abort and save your own life? Isn't your life valuable? If so, why wouldn't you choose to save your life first?

 

I am pretty sure Makedde, puttin your own life on the line to save someone else's is ALWAYS a selfless act. You will never understand this because you give 1 life more credit then another. That is where the disconnect is on your part. You will always value the woman over the baby, so from there, you can't possibly understand the idea of the woman sacrificing her own life to save her child's, because you have already decided that the woman's life is ALWAYS more valuable.

This is why you claim she is being "selfish". I am pretty sure she is putting her family first Makedde. Afterall, she just died so her family can live. But you don't see it. Her husband and child will carry on knowing that "till death due you part" was the oath they swore before God. A marriage asked on self-sacrifice, it's what it's all about.

 

You are not even a believe and yet you say what the majority of Catholics or another religious person would do. How can you do that? Did you interview everyone?

 

In this case, we aren't talking about "someone else." We are talking about a fetus. Some religions believe abortion to save the woman's life is mandated, and to refuse abortion in that case is committing the sin of suicide.

 

A very ironic post coming from one who claims to know what other posters think.

 

Idiotic comment of the year. Child's name is Fransisco is it not? And since when do feminists use "mandates" for abortion to defend women's rights?....lmfao!

 

How does that prove a fetus is a person?

I don't know of any feminists who do, funny man.

 

As a grandmother I would have strongly advised my daughter to have treatment, having first of got all the information and so on. If you read the story you will see that it is not talking about having an abortion simply that the treatment may be risky for the unborn baby. It also does not say what her cancer was but recent research has shown that treatment for breast cancer, with the exception of radiotherapy which can be done after the birth, has been found not to adversely affect the unborn child.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...cancer-chemotherapy-surgery-birth-safely.html

I do not find it inspirational that someone's daughter decided to die rather than take treatment which might have saved her life. I do not find it inspirational that a woman refused treatment and brought into the world a child who would never know it's Mum.

I believe that the Mother is the first person who deserves care and while it always is a personal decision, I would find hate to live in a world where young women thought morally they had to die rather than receive life saving treatment.

 

Anytime someone willingly dies to save another human being, it's courageous. What could be more selfless or courageous?

 

If she is religious, trusting treatment would be all right or having treatment and allowing 'god's will'. Not having treatment was suicide. Like I said, this was not even about the need to have an abortion. It is a much bigger picture and we simply do not know why she chose to die but that is what she did do. That is not commendable. It really isn't. A young woman of 28 refusing life saving treatment is a poor choice. Maybe she had a death wish or maybe she believed she was doing the 'right thing' or maybe she was so depressed at her previous losses that she could not bear to lose another but this is not an inspirational story. Had she chosen treatment she might be alive now with a healthy child to love.

It is a very sad story and the baby may be some consolation to her relatives but it is not inspirational and it has precious little to do with abortion.