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

In "5 Things Marriage Isn't," Jason Boyett challenges some of the common expectations that can lead to disappointment in marriage.

We think we know what marriage is because we've seen it on TV. It's Monica and Chandler, all candles and sex and witty banter. It's the end-of-the-day slow dancing of Cliff and Claire Huxtable. It's the tuxedos and pigtailed flower girls and white chiffon spectacle of The Bachelorette on ABC. Then, when everything doesn't turn out exactly as we dreamed, we look for an out, blame it on irreconcilable differences, and scrap the covenant.

The differences aren't the problem, though; our irreconcilable expectations are. Let's look, then, at some of those predetermined ideas and dump marriage out of its box. Here's something you should know before you say “I Do”: not what marriage is, but five things it isn't.

Among the five things Boyett says marriage isn't: a cure for loneliness, an escape from boredom, an easy transition. Basically, he's saying that marriage might not fulfill your needs in the way that you think it will. After a somewhat depressing reality check, Boyett ends on a high note:

We've been discussing what marriage is not, but here's what marriage is: Marriage is wonderful. There is no better way to make it through life than with a partner who loves you despite your morning breath, despite your stinky Converse All-Stars, and despite your failure to clean coffee stains. Marriage is deeply satisfying, incredibly fulfilling, and loads of fun. It makes the harsh edges of life a little softer. It brings joy and hope and laughter. But it's not easy, and it's not something to rush into without thinking.

For me (and disclaimer: I'm only 10 months into marriage), Boyett's affirmation for marriage felt a bit like too little too late, but his call for realistic expectations is certainly valid. Do you think he got it right? What has been your experience with managing expectations in marriage?

My husband and I went through extensive pre-marital counseling prior to and during our engagement.

We completed "the packet" of 300 questions ranging from "How much fresh air do you like when sleeping?" to "What five to ten foundational biblical truths do you think should be stressed in the raising of children?" We met with mentors and talked through the differences in women and men and ways to meet each others' needs. And let's not forget the 12 actual counseling sessions we attended to take personality tests, discuss our conflict resolution styles, and either confirm or disconfirm our overall compatibility.

(Just writing all of that was exhausting!)

We thought we had it covered. We both knew (or thought we knew!) the exact way our future spouse would handle every situation, and we were both on board, since we ended up married.

The week after we returned to Colorado from an amazing honeymoon week in Jamaica, we found ourselves in the middle of a snowstorm (literally). On our way to a friend's house, we ended up sliding on black ice, going off the road, and rolling three times down a drop- off. Once we got to the emergency room, and found out we only had a few bruises, our logical brains began to kick back in.

"At least you have full-coverage car insurance," I say over coffee the next morning.

"Why in the world would I have full-coverage insurance?" he responds. "I've never needed full-coverage, and it's never been a problem."

This was not in "the packet"! How do I respond now? I learned in pre-marital counseling that my response and reaction to a situation is important; I want to express my own feelings, but also seek to understand my husband's point of view and validate him as well, despite our differences in thinking. I also learned that our responses early in marriage begin patterns and habits that we draw from throughout our lifetime.

As I calculated my own response, I felt a huge pull between my sinful nature that wanted to respond by placing blame on my husband, and also remembering the grace that God freely gives us that I am to reflect to others as well. I also thought about my husbands intentions; he did not deliberately forgo full-coverage car insurance to put us in a financial bind, he had simply been so busy helping me with wedding planning that he never changed his policy. How could I blame him for that? Although I told him I felt stressed with the situation we were in, I made sure to tell him I was not upset with him, and that we would figure this out together.

What unexpected differences have you run into in your marriage? How did you respond? How can you respond in a way that will begin a healthy pattern of communication in your marriage?