Skip to content
Breaking News Alert Report: Trump Rally Assassin Hid Gun On Site Before The Event

The Pro-Abortion ‘Life Of The Mother’ Argument Is A False Flag Operation

Women face many possible illnesses during pregnancy, but intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios.


As many states are fighting to codify abortion law, one of the greatest lies spread by the pro-abortion left in America today is that we need to intentionally end the life of an unborn baby in order to save the mother’s life in many of these cases.

Women face many possible illnesses during pregnancy, including premature rupture of membranes, severely high blood pressure, diabetes, hemorrhaging, cancers, and heart disease. As an obstetrician-gynecologist who used to provide abortions early in my training, I know that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios.

Take this example. A mother’s amniotic sac breaks prematurely at 14 weeks. While her doctor may offer elective abortion as an option, she does not need it. She and her baby have a better option. Mom and baby can be treated with antibiotics and close observation and even have a good chance of stabilization. If they make it to 22 weeks or more, the baby has a good chance of survival outside the womb.

The medical goal should be to care for both patients and to get them both as far along in the pregnancy as possible as long as the mom and baby are doing well.

But imagine the mother develops an infection before her baby reaches the age of viability. Unfortunately, this means she will have to have a preterm delivery. The doctor must empty the womb by early induction in order to attack the infection — similar to draining an abscess. The unborn baby may not survive because it’s not yet viable outside the womb. But ending the life of the unborn child was never the direct intention in treating the infection.

Dr. Byron Calhoun, a high-risk OB-GYN who serves much of the state of West Virginia and sees these severe cases daily, agrees there is never a need to directly end the life of the unborn child in order to save the mother. “The baby may be delivered prematurely and die from that but it is never necessary to kill the baby to save the mother’s life,” he wrote to me.

In fact, most conditions can be treated without preterm delivery. “The severe preeclamptic may be observed until the mother’s medical condition requires delivery,” he says. “Unless the mother is bleeding to death, severe heart failure, or septic; there is usually time to wait and see if the baby will make it to resuscitation age at 22+ weeks.”

Chemotherapy for a pregnant mother that tragically results in miscarriage is not an elective abortion. Treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is not an elective abortion. Preterm delivery for an infection is not an elective abortion. These women are and have been thoroughly cared for and treated for their pregnancy complications before, during, and after Roe v. Wade. But abortion advocates want you to think these cases are compromised in post-Roe America and bundled up in the wrongly dubbed “rights” they are fighting for, in order to keep the abortion-on-demand culture alive.

No Advantages to Mother’s Health

There are no advantages for a mother to end her pregnancy by an elective abortion, even in the most life-threatening circumstances. Elective abortions become more dangerous the further along in pregnancy, and that’s when the majority of these health complications arise. Abortions after 24 weeks cause massive fluid shifts, which can push the mom into heart, lung, or kidney failure. If the mother’s life is in immediate danger, a C-section takes one hour. A direct abortion after 24 weeks can take two to three days. The argument cannot be made that an abortion is necessary because it is faster than delivery.    

Dr. Calhoun noted the harm that an elective abortion can have on a woman’s health in the short and long term. When done after 20 weeks particularly, abortions subject women to greater immediate risk of death than childbearing, increase women’s risk of very preterm birth in subsequent pregnancies, and increase women’s risk of adverse mental health outcomes.

Justifying the Cash Cow of Abortion

If intentional feticide is not necessary to save the life of the mother, why do so many pro-abortion medical professionals continue to say it is?

Fifty years of Roe crippled the medical field by making abortion the commonplace solution to disease, personal needs, and conveniences. We have also become more risk-averse as a people and a profession. While pro-abortion advocates argue that first-trimester abortions could prevent the possible complications of pulmonary hypertension, lupus, and kidney disease from developing further along in pregnancy, this unnecessary “solution” is premature and violently attacks the unborn child as if he or she were the cause of the illnesses. The heart of the Hippocratic, healing profession of medicine should be that we hate the disease and love our patients.

Unfortunately, many pro-abortion medical professionals are intentionally creating confusion over medical definitions to justify abortion on demand and to scare voters. I believe they want to reserve the right to perform elective abortions in any circumstance because they worship the cash cow that stems from their patients’ ability to choose death. “Life of the mother” reasoning appears to come from a place of medical concern for women, but it’s really a false flag operation.

This lie — that elective abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother — unnecessarily pits the mother against her child. But mom and baby are on the same team. They are a part of the same family.

We must relearn how to hate the disease, yet love both of our patients in OB-GYN practice.

Access Commentsx