Best “Choice” A Woman Can Make Is To Die For Her Fetus

If a woman refuses chemotherapy that would save her life in order to not endanger her pregnancy is that a choice to be celebrated? For the conservative website “Hot Air” the answer is a resounding yes.

When diagnosed with cancer and pregnant, Stacy Crimm faced a series of choices. She could terminate the pregnancy and undergo chemotherapy, treat the cancer and, presuming a positive outcome, try for another pregnancy. Or, she could refuse treatment in an attempt to save her developing fetus.

Crimm chose the later, dying three days after giving birth to a significantly premature infant. And the anti-choice supporters could not be more proud. They romanticize Crimm’s physical suffering, calling it “unimaginable” and point to Crimm as a hopeful example to help all mothers see “nothing is worth the sacrifice of their own child.”

Not surprising though, these anti-choice supporters are silent on the fate of Crimm’s premature infant now. The child is not being raised by her mother, and who knows what kind of medical complications she faces as a result of her mother’s decision.

Furthermore, the anti-choice crowd is silent on the fact that Crimm is lucky that she had a choice to make. Abortion was an option–not one that Crimm chose to take–but an option nonetheless. And the fact that the anti-choice crowd refuses to acknowledge that key fact while simultaneously holding up Crimm as a martyr for her choice shows just how little regard this “life” movement has for actual life.


Related Stories:

Are Anti-Choice Coming For Planned Parenthood’s Sex Ed Funding

Photo from infowidget via flickr.


Kate M.
Kate H7 years ago

Sorry, but I don't think the unborn should be treated with more respect than the already-born, and that seems to be the pro-life way of thinking. All this stuff about giving rights to a fetus...what happens if a woman dies in childbirth, but the baby survives? Will the baby be prosecuted for the death of its mother, because an abortion would have saved her life? I, for one, would certainly hope so, although it would be a sad reminder of the pathetic trials held hundreds of years ago in which chickens, leeches, and other such entities were the defendants.

Georgia L.
Georgia L7 years ago

I know one of them who was so proud she could die carrying a baby since she had been warned not to have anymore children. She lived but the baby died at 7 months. Since she was warned beforehand wasn't she responsible for it's death under their convoluted logic?

Despina V.
Despina Vekris7 years ago


Iva L.
Iva R7 years ago

That was her decision to make. I may not agree with it, I may not like it, I may not 'approve' of it, but I wasnt the one pregnant and it wasnt up to me to decide.

Claire Sayers
Claire Sayers7 years ago

That was her own choice to make. It did take a lot of courage for her to make that type of choice, but she had just as much a right to abort. Being pro-choice means that you're for having all the options on the table, having all the information available to you, and making a decision based on what you know. And that is exactly what Crimm did.

Lika S.
Lika P7 years ago

But see, it's not what choice she made that they should be celebrating. The fact of the matter is, this woman really had a choice! It was her own decision, and no one should have forced her to make that one. If she wanted to sacrifice for her own, that's her prerogative. If she had chosen to end the pregnancy to save her own life, that is also equally worth celebrating, because that too, was a choice. The choice should remain, and no one else has that right.

Martha Eberle
Martha Eberle7 years ago

Unbelievably stupid decision. No, the anti-choice crowd knows nothing of preserving life, an already existing life of an American adult female citizen.

Tina L.
Tina L.7 years ago

Sure, that's very selfless of her to die for her baby, but those antichoice people (including/especially the men) should try to picture themselves in such a situation. If they were going to die unless they did something that would harm the baby, would all of them actually choose to die? I'm sure that less than 5% of them would actually sacrifice themselves. Plus, If the mother's health is that bad, then it's probably likely that the fetus will also have bad health and might not live long after being born. In that case, 2 deaths will occur when there was actually a chance of preventing one of them (the mother's).
No matter what, those antichoice people shouldn't sign death sentences for all the women whose pregnancies threaten their lives! Why should all of those women die when 99.9999999% don't want to?

Jez wildmoon
jayne TURNER7 years ago

these nasty nosy right wingers must have a really messed up relationship with their own mothers. I'm sure if they had their way, we'd all be barefoot pregnant and tied to the stove! While I appreciate and support this woman's right to make that decision, the child will grow up with no mother, which can be extremely damaging. I'm sure the child's remaining family will do their very best though.

Sue H.
.7 years ago

Such a sad story.