Focus on the Family is strongly pro-life. In fact, one of our six guiding principles is:
We believe that human life is created by God in His image. It is of inestimable worth and significance in all its dimensions, including the preborn, the aged, the mentally disabled, those deemed unattractive, the physically challenged, and every other condition in which humanness is expressed from the single cell stage of development to natural death. Christians are therefore called to defend, protect, and value all human life.
Specifically, when it comes to life in the womb, we encourage women to carry their children to term, regardless of whether the pregnancy is deemed "inconvenient," or whether the child has been prenatally diagnosed with a birth defect or other such problem. A preborn child is a living human being made in the image of God, irrespective of the circumstances surrounding that child's conception or birth.
There are very rare instances, however, in which treatments necessary to preserve the life of the mother might result in the loss of the preborn child. In this type of situation, in which the life of the mother is at stake, some couples are faced with the heartbreaking decision to save the mother's life at the expense of the child's.
For the sake of precision, I'm simply going to copy-paste a response that Focus on the Family wrote, with guidance from our Physicians Resource Council, to one person who contacted us about these situations ...
What should a pregnant woman do if her physician tells her that carrying her baby to term will place her own life at risk?
From our perspective, this is one of those rare, agonizing situations in which there are no simple right-or-wrong answers. Our initial reaction would be to suggest that this mom seek a second opinion about her condition from a different doctor, preferably a doctor with strong pro-life convictions. If the diagnosis remains unchanged, then we would have to concede — though sadly and reluctantly — that this may be a case in which ending a pregnancy is a rightful consideration.
Why do we say this? Because we recognize that what this dilemma really entails is a conscious choice between two equally precious lives. If the baby lives, the mother dies, and vice versa. Is it right to sacrifice the woman — a woman who may be someone else's mother, wife, or daughter — in order to save the child? What kind of secondary factors and circumstances should guide us making this terrible choice? Obviously there is no easy solution. Either option carries painful and regrettable ramifications for everyone concerned.
Extreme medical emergencies may arise that threaten the life of both mother and child. In the case of tubal (or ectopic) pregnancies, the child has essentially no chance of survival, while the threat to the mother's life is very real, very high, and grows as the pregnancy progresses. In this case, a health care professional may provide treatment that results in the ending of the pregnancy in order to save the life of the mother — obviously with the patient's informed consent.
This is an agonizing situation, but it is nevertheless consistent with a pro-life ethic which seeks to preserve life. The action is taken to save one life where otherwise two lives will be lost. This is also completely different from elective abortion, which entails the purposeful killing of a preborn child for the sake of terminating an unwanted pregnancy.
That said, several of the pro-life physicians we spoke with mentioned that it is imperative that ultrasound be used to verify that a twin embryo is not present in the uterus, as any drug administered to terminate the pregnancy would affect both the ectopic and the uterine pregnancy. In the case where a uterine pregnancy is also detected, surgical treatment is considered a better option for an ectopic pregnancy, in order to give the twin in the womb the best chance for survival.
Please don't misunderstand. We're aware that there are many people who feel strongly that terminating a pregnancy is wrong in every instance, regardless of the circumstances. What's more, we agree one hundred percent with those who contend that the humanness of the child is not dependent upon the health or welfare of the mother. That doesn't change the fact that, in a scenario like this, a decision of some kind has to be made. There's simply no way around it.
We should hasten to add that we pointedly disagree with those who expand the phrase "life of the mother" to read "health of the mother." Under this broader interpretation almost any temporary discomfort during pregnancy can be used to justify an abortion. In fact, Doe v. Bolton, the United States Supreme Court case that along with Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in 1973, allows abortion for virtually any or no reason at all under the guise of "health of the mother." From our perspective, this is altogether different from those few cases in which the continuation of pregnancy places a mother's life in grave danger.
There you go. Even as I read over and edit this blog, I find myself heartbroken. I know what it's like to lose a baby before she's had a chance to take her first breath. The loss of life, including preborn life, is truly heartbreaking.
Sometimes, though, we're faced with unfathomably difficult scenarios ... and we weep alongside those women who've had to make that difficult decision to end their pregnancies under these circumstances.
* * *
For more information, consider the following:
- When the doctor says your baby has a fatal disability
- "I Will Carry You" slideshow
- Coping with Miscarriage
Focus on the Family also has counselors and care specialists who are available weekdays to talk with you, provide information and encouragement, suggest resources, give referrals and pray with you. If you are struggling, and would like to talk with one of them, you can find more information here.
For the sake of sensitivity toward those who are wrestling with this issue, we are not accepting comments. If you'd like to share your thoughts with us, you're free to e-mail them to editor@boundless.org













