El Salvador abortion row baby dies

0

The woman at the centre of an abortion controversy in El Salvador had her baby delivered by caesarean section to avoid an illegal abortion and to save her life, although the child did not survive.


El Salvador's Health Ministry said doctors performed the procedure on the 22-year-old woman, who uses the name "Beatriz" to protect her identity, on Monday.

Authorities banned all abortions in 1999, but Beatriz's baby had a serious condition known as anencephaly, which results in only partial brain development and severly limits the chances of survival after birth.

Beatriz, who was 27 weeks pregnant, was in stable condition but the child died five hours after the procedure.

Health Minister Maria Isabel Rodriguez said Beatriz was in good hands and being looked after well. She suffers from lupus and kidney problems, which posed a serious threat to her own health if the pregnancy had gone full term.


continue to source article at aljazeera.com

NO COMMENTS

  1. Very glad the Doctors did the right thing for this woman, its a shame that the loss of her child was unavoidable… Doctors are sworn to first save the life most likely to survive. That Ethical stance wins every time over the Religious prejudice that denies women their right to govern their own bodies…thats a human right !!!….how can Religions absurd, man made,, painful prejudice to women be allowed to invade Governmant, dominate Law and even try to medel in Medicine ??

    • A loophole? Is that how you would define a young woman who was forced to choose between her life and the life of her child? Making no mention of the fact that her death would have not saved the baby. El Salvador’s anti-abortion policy has stood since 1999, and it was by no means easy for this woman to have one. If she deliberately set out to have an abortion, she chose the wrong damn country to try her luck.
      In reply to #2 by Virgin Mary:

      Loophole found. Very nice.

      • In reply to #6 by dollandskug:

        A loophole? Is that how you would define a young woman who was forced to choose between her life and the life of her child? Making no mention of the fact that her death would have not saved the baby. El Salvador’s anti-abortion policy has stood since 1999, and it was by no means easy for this woman…

        Is abortion illegal? Yes. Are C-sections illegal? No. Are there consequences to having an abortion? Yes. Prosecution. So in order to get what you want without facing prosecution you take advantage of their flawed logic. If that procedure leaves you with a scar across your stomach and the inability to give birth naturally in the future but saves your life AND keeps you away from facing trial, then so be it. I’d choose that over death any day of the week. It’s a loophole, use it where religiously inspired bullshit laws prevent you from taking the logical course of action.

  2. Would there have been this hoo-ha if the baby wasn’t anencephalic and therefore might have had a chance at living? I’m pretty sure El Salvador have the facilities for very premature babies. Then I can see the rationale for waiting as long as possible so baby had a better chance. It’s unbelievable that doctors had to piss about this long just to avoid delivery being called ‘an abortion.’ I hope Beatriz is getting better. Some loophole when the price is a needless hole in your abdomen…

  3. At least some common sense applied here. Of course future contraception would be advisable for this woman but presumably therein lies another problem. By the way No 3 many women, particularly in the U.S. choose to have ‘needless holes in the abdomen’.

    • In reply to #4 by finchfinder:

      At least some common sense applied here. Of course future contraception would be advisable for this woman but presumably therein lies another problem. By the way No 3 many women, particularly in the U.S. choose to have ‘needless holes in the abdomen’.

      Common sense as applied to which bit finchfinder? I have nothing against Caesarian section if that’s what the mother wants (and Beatriz may have chosen this option anyway). 25% of births in the UK are Caesarian. Allow me to change my phrase to potentially unnecessary; I only meant needless in the sense that she might have been able to have an induced vaginal delivery and avoided having to heal from a large abdominal wound, which is what it is at the end of the day. I admit I don’t know the details. It may have been the best choice in the context of her lupus and kidney issues but the Caesarian was to provide ‘El Salvador with a way out of the legal wrangle’ and not ‘Beatriz a way out of a non-viable pregnancy that might kill her’. It sounds like she didn’t have a choice. This, I hope I’ve made clear, is what I am railing against.

  4. “El Salvador’s Supreme Court rejected Beatriz’s request for an abortion on the grounds it breached the constitution, which it said protected life from the moment of conception…… right up to the time they get pregnant.

    There, phrase finished off correctly.

  5. In response to comment 6 – You seems to have misunderstood the comment “Loophole found”…made by #2
    I took #2 comment to mean that the Caesarian actually saved the mother from possible death…..as an alternative to Abortion
    This article was the follow up to a previous article about the same women condemmed to Die if she was not given an abortion – the Doctors were willing but the Catholic rule of Law in her country refused. So the comment loophole found is entirely justified in that the doctors succeded in helping the woman escape this death sentence, Just a thought !

Leave a Reply