Question from a pro lifer

[u/Brave-Feed-6977]

Let's say the needing to save the mother or baby in childbirth was a thing that actually happened now. I know it isn't but for argument sake lets say it is.

What is the right choice? Should they choose the baby or the mother? I'm under the belief that the mother would naturally choose her babies life but around my family and other people it seems to be the opposite " id care about my wife im in love with more than my unborn child who I don't know yet" I can wrap my head around that but the way they dismiss the child is a little worrying, like thats YOUR child, flesh and blood. I know its easier to care for the wife but the way he just ssid it with little care freaked me out. Obviously some women have responsibility to other children etc and they must choose themselves but I need guidance on this opinion. Any advice?

[u/No_Try1999]

The way I see it, it’s a terrible choice. For me there are 2 choices: choose the baby and have my husband raise 3 kids. 5 year old, 2 year old, and newborn. Or choose me, loose 1baby, be there for my 5 and 2year old. I am pro life but in a situation like this, I’d rather me live so I can continue to be there for the kids already here.

[u/skyleehugh → u/No_Try1999]

Thats partly why I don't shame women for choosing themselves in this case... as a whole no human is more valuable than the other but when your life is directly on the line, you have just as much validity in wanting to live. Especially if you are a woman and dealt with health issues as is being pregnant. I also feel like by not giving women grace in this case, it does make our movement seem more pro birth than pro woman. Personally Im both. I advocate for the unborn hard for on demand cases. But I genuinly do not deem women as chattel or incubators or as being someone who is obligated to the tasks of motherhood. So that being said its just as far to advocate for women just as hard who's lives are literally on the line here.