Nope, this is false because medical treatment saves women’s lives not an abortion which sole purpose is to end the life of the unborn child.

Who says this lie? Is it medical professionals? Or is it the pro-choice advocates who seek to repeal the 8th Amendment to the Irish Constitution?

Let’s set things straight. Abortions are never medically necessary to save a woman’s life. 

Medical treatment saves women’s lives, and if that medical treatment causes the death of the unborn child this is not the purpose of but the rather a consequence of the medical treatment. The difference between seeking medical treatment and getting an abortion is intent: the ending of the life of the unborn child as a result of medical treatment  is unintentional.

If we look at what an abortion is, then we see that the intention is to end the life of the unborn child. Merriam-Webbster defines abortion as: “a medical procedure used to end a pregnancy and cause the death of the fetus.”¹ Does anywhere in that definition say that it is to save the life of the mother? No, abortion is to kill, not save.

As one of the leading figures in Irish medicine, Prof. Eamon O’Dwyer, states, “There is a fundamental difference between abortion and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child.”²

This is the pro-life stance, do all that is possible to save mother and baby, but what do other medical experts have to say about the necessity of abortion?

It is written clearly in the Irish Medical Council’s Guide to Professional-Conduct-and Behaviour for Registered practitioners that:

“In current obstetrical practice, rare complications can arise where therapeutic intervention (including termination of a pregnancy) is required at a stage when, due to extreme immaturity of the baby, there may be little or no hope of the baby surviving. In these exceptional circumstances, it may be necessary to intervene to terminate the pregnancy to protect the life of the mother, while making every effort to preserve the life of the baby.“ 3

Does that sound like the intention of the treatment is to end the life of the unborn child? NO, it upholds the dignity of the mother and the child.

In 2012, at the International Symposium on Maternal Health in Dublin, a Select Panel of maternal healthcare experts issued the Dublin Declaration. It reads: “As experienced practitioners and researchers in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn in the termination of pregnancy – is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.”4 

Many arguments pleading the truth of this Irish pro-abortion lie occurred before a Oireachtas Committee hearing. At one of these hearings Dr. Sam Coulter Smith, Master of the Rotunda Maternity Hospital, said:

“When we are talking about saving mothers’ lives, we should not use the terms ‘abortion’ and ‘saving mothers’ lives’ in the same sentence, full stop. It is a dreadful reflection on anyone who would actually do that. This is about saving mothers’ lives, preserving dignity and not stigmatising anybody. These are wanted pregnancies, loved pregnancies, and intervention has to be made to save the mother’s life. To call it an abortion is wrong.”5

Again at a Oireachtas Committee hearing, Professor John Bonnar, the then Chairman of the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, testified:

“It would never cross an obstetrician’s mind that intervening in a case of pre-eclampsia, cancer of the cervix or ectopic pregnancy is abortion. They are not abortion as far as the professional is concerned, these are medical treatments that are essential to save the life of the mother.”6

So then, why are we fed the lie that necessity of life is a reason for getting an abortion?

It’s simple really, pro-abortion, pro-repeal the 8th, pro-choice advocates want women who are having life-threatening pregnancies to choose to terminate the unborn’s life through abortion, this is simply not the way. We owe more to women in these situations then to intentionally kill their child.

We close with testimony by an ex-abortionist who performed over 1,200 abortions, he is proof that abortions are not necessary to save a woman’s life.

On May 17, 2012, Dr. Levatino testified before the US Congress in support of the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. He said:

“In cases where a pregnancy places a woman in danger of death or grave physical injury, a doctor more often than not doesn’t have 36 hours, much less 72 hours, to resolve the problem. Let me illustrate with a real-life case that I managed while at the Albany Medical Center. A patient arrived one night at 28 weeks gestation with severe pre-eclampsia or toxemia. Her blood pressure on admission was 220/160. A normal blood pressure is approximately 120/80. This patient’s pregnancy was a threat to her life and the life of her unborn child. She could very well be minutes or hours away from a major stroke.

This case was managed successfully by rapidly stabilizing the patient’s blood pressure and “terminating” her pregnancy by Cesarean section. She and her baby did well. This is a typical case in the world of high-risk obstetrics. In most such cases, any attempt to perform an abortion “to save the mother’s life” would entail undue and dangerous delay in providing appropriate, truly life-saving care. During my time at Albany Medical Center I managed hundreds of such cases by “terminating” pregnancies to save mother’s lives. In all those cases, the number of unborn children that I had to deliberately kill was zero.”⁷

If you want to listen to more from Dr Levatino we recommend watching this interview.