Letter to the editor: Can we save both mother and baby?
As the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision day approaches and the plethora of Roe defenses abound in the press, social media and religious circles, let us explore realities about that much referenced exception to preserving innocent life in Judaism — to save the life of the mother.
We’ve been told for years that torturing an unborn child to death is necessary in these rare situations. Not true, according to the experts at the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists. They say it is medically and morally preferable to humanely remove the baby from the uterus by cesarean section. The baby can be saved if viable. In truly life-threatening situations, the mother’s life is saved quickly by cesarean section delivery, rather than risking her life awaiting the two to three days of preparation required for an abortion.
Late-term brutal dismemberment of an unborn child is dangerous for the mother because of the possibility of the abortionist rupturing the uterus. Infertility often results. Post-abortion, many mothers experience long-term night terrors and remorse.
No informed rabbi would authorize a torturous death of an innocent, pain-capable infant when the baby can be saved or put a woman in danger when a safe alternative is available.
Let us encourage our rabbis to recommend saving both mother and child, if possible, in the exceptional cases rather than assume the moral liability that comes by authorizing a barbaric torture and death of an innocent child and the predictable harm to the mother.
Cecily Routman
Sewickley
Remove the ads from your TribLIVE reading experience but still support the journalists who create the content with TribLIVE Ad-Free.