- 9 years ago
Me. Absolutely me.
No if/ands/or buts.
Me. Absolutely me.
No if/ands/or buts.
DH and I agree on this one– he should save me. We can always have more children. That doesn’t mean we wouldn’t be heartbroken over losing a baby, but we would have each other to lean on.
I would want to be saved first, but my husband would choose the baby over me. We’ve had many a tearful conversation over this subject. It bother s me so much that I’m debating giving medical power of attorney to someone else, perhaps my mother.
Just saw this and thought of this thread. http://jezebel.com/5935734/the-pregnant-teen-cancer-patient-who-couldnt-get-chemo–or-an-abortion–is-dead Be glad that we have the freedom to even have this conversation. If certain people currently running for office had their way, this would not be an option. Remember that on election day.
It’s interesting to read that one could recover from the loss of a child. But my sister died and my parents, 26 years later have NOT fully recovered. My understanding is that you never recover from losing a child. And I could honestly say that when I’m pregnant I would rather sacrifice myself than my child. But, since most of us haven’t been faced with this dilemma its difficult to speculate.
I’m also not sure about some of the comments stating that a baby could be replaced and that their husbands couldn’t. SERIOUSLY?
I had always told DH to save the baby if it came down between saving one or the other but then my opinion changed after we had our DD. In the event something happens in my next pregnancy, I want them to save me. I can’t imagine leavng DH & DD behind because like other PP’s have said we could always work on having another baby but they wouldn’t be able to replace their wife and mother.
I honestly don’t know what I would pick. I think I would have to be in that moment to decide. But I know, without even talking to him, that my husband would pick me.
@Janaic88: I’m sorry for your and your parents’ loss.
I don’t think anyone means “replaced” in a casual sense, or thinks that the loss wouldn’t be devastating. I think the overall theme I’ve gotten from those types of posts is that it is better to try again than for the father to raise the child/children alone. And yes, there may be some thinking that since moms have xyz going for them in life, they would like the opportunity to continue with that, whereas the baby does not. (On the other hand, others were using the exact same logic to say that they would choose the baby because they’ve already had a chance to do xyz, so now it’s the baby’s turn). One size doesn’t fit all.
My father had a brother that died as a newborn. My dad was one of 5. I don’t know the circumstances of that baby’s death, or if my grandmother’s health was impacted at the time. There is simply no. possible. way. that his family would have functioned if she had died in order to save that baby (again, don’t know if that was ever a concern). There is no way my grandfather could have been a single father to 6 kids. Sure, perhaps he could have remarried, but my grandmother was perhaps the most amazing woman ever (I’m sure I’m not the only one who thinks that about her grandmother :), and I’m so very glad that I got to know her.
@EastMeetsBarn: Thanks for sharing. And +1000 to the ridiculousness of this.
The part that baffles me is that some of the laws being drafted in the U.S. right now actually do take these rights away. The idea that I might have my baby (currently 10 weeks along) and then in 2-3 years be pregnant with another and (god forbid) be diagnosed with cancer (or similar) and be required BY LAW to continue carrying the second child, risking or ensuring death and leaving the first without a mother??? So much for family values. So much for American values.
I’m sorry for making this pollitical, but it is hard for me to read the OP’s question and not react that way.
I’m done. Apologies again.
I had a meltdown at the hospital (think irrational freakout) where I was convinced I was dying. It was really dramatic and dumb, but it was out of my control. I told my husband that if it came down to one or the other I wanted them to save the baby so that my daughter would always have her sister with her.
Rational me knows that my older daughter will have a better life with both parents alive. But emotional me could never say I’d save myself over one of my children. So I’d have to say “Try and save us both, and however it works out…”
This is an awfully hard topic. Being emotional you think about the little baby who deserves a chance to live, but being rational…
My friend and I had this conversation a while ago. Her mother had an apendectomy while pregnant with her sister (she already had 2 kids at home) and when faced with he decision her dad chose to save the baby, luckly nothing happened and they’re both good but my friend talked about how hard he life would have been growing up with two little siblings, an in school dad and without her mother.
@EastMeetsBarn: Its actually my fault for not reading the options for the poll. I honestly thought that this was between a mother and a baby who had taken a breath of air and was alive, not an unborn baby. My apologies to everyone. My parents didnt lose an unborn baby, she lived, breathed, cooed, etc so thats why I was so confused because both of my parents said that either one of them would’ve taken her place if given the opportunity. And I would imagine that if I had a child, I would feel the same.
As far as an unborn baby, I feel like I would probably want to be saved. Completely different spectrums, I guess.
@iRun2004: I was also reluctant to take this into the political realm, but that is the reality of this topic. If certain people who will be on November’s ballot had their way, this thread would be pointless because they would make the choice for us. The same people who say that government shouldn’t make healthcare decisions want to do just that for women. And so many women are happy to vote for them. But then, God forbid, some find themselves in a situation where they need to make this choice. And given how sensitive the subject is, and how stigmatized it is, most women who have been through that just sit quietly so their stories do not come to public consciousness (not that I blame them!). Look how late term abortion is so demonized. Some people even claim to be pro-choice except for late term. But while we hear the gory stories, what we don’t hear are the horrible situations that made women wait until that point in their pregnancies to abort. I’m a bit odd in that when I see those gory photos, they make me even more pro-choice. They make me grieve for the family that had to make that horrible decision to end a pregnancy they most likely very much wanted (otherwise they’d have terminated early), and grateful they were able to preserve the life and health of the woman. I have seen some blogs from formerly “pro-life” women who change their tune when they were in the position to realize that had their political will been the law of the land, they would have died. It’s a scary situation that the Supreme Court has said that the health of a woman is not important when it comes to late term procedures(!!). Life, yes, health no (so in certain situations, the woman just has to wait it out until her life is on the line? And if a pregnancy will leave her blind, permanently disabled, or infertile, too bad, so sad). Even if the baby cannot survive outside the womb. The Supreme Court has said that the safest abortion method can be outlawed (and abortion is always safer than childbirth). Ryan also thinks that if a woman’s life is on the line, hospitals should still be able to tell her that they will not terminate. He would let her die.
As someone who will likely have a high risk pregnancy (if I’m lucky enough to get pregnant), it all scares the bejesus out of me.
The topic ‘Who would you save?’ is closed to new replies.