Without commenting on this woman’s situation, this is one of those situations where I say selfishness gets a bad rap. “Selfishly” choosing to have your cancer treated and possibly have a child later doesn’t make you an unfit parent- it doesn’t even make you selfish as most people would use the word.
It is the greatest act of self sacrifice a person can do.
Again, I wouldn’t make this choice. But the concept of giving up your life so another can live; a choice not made in a hectic moment, but one that was made every day that woman refused treatment and felt her life slipping away- that is a noble, even heroic, act.
Given what website is running this story, I can’t help but wonder if there’s an agenda at work in framing it this way. But putting that aside, it’s worth noting that it sounds like this woman’s odds of living were not great to begin with. For some reason it bothers me to hear people talk about this situation like one choice is better than the other. I can’t imagine that giving up a pregnancy when you’ve already been told you won’t be able to have children is easy either, and that certainly isn’t the wrong thing to do. What’s sad here is that this child won’t have a mother and that this woman was having serious health problems for months - including some that are classic brain tumor symptoms - and didn’t find out what was happening until months later, and by then it was probably too late.
An accident that he caused by failure to yield, no less, and the other driver was unable to stop in time as a result, and now that other driver’s wife has a broken neck and internal bleeding. It’s almost a real-life reproduction of the old joke that you want to die in your sleep, like your dad - rather than screaming in terror like the passengers on his bus.
The Australian marathoner Kerryn McCann had a similar story to the OP. She won the Commonwealth Games marathon in 2002 and 2006. The cancer was detected during pregnancy, and labor was induced to deliver a 6 week premature child. I think that she refused chemo while still pregnant. She died about 6 months after giving birth.
I know a family with a similar story, but a happier ending. Advanced cervical cancer was found at the first prenatal exam; she was told to abort and get treatment or she would almost surely die. She decided to continue the pregnancy instead, had a section at 30-some weeks (and I believe a complete hysterectomy), and though she came close to dying she went on to beat the cancer in her daughter’s first year of life. She is 13 now and mom is still cancer-free. Daughter is probably the hugest genius I have ever met, wouldn’t be surprised if this kid cures cancer someday.
Glad that she had the choice to make. Sad her kid didn’t get a better start in life. Hope there’s not a guy out there unaware that he has a daughter and not included in all the choices made with regard to his child.
No, she’s starting it having as her father the uncle who would have been the closest thing to a father figure if her mother had lived. Your parents and your progenitors are different things.
That’s true and I have nothing against adoption or non genetic parents but it’s hard to tell from this story if Uncle would have chosen this if he had an option.
It’s fine that some people make this decision I just don’t think it makes them better people or more heroic, they’re just frightened of different things.
From what I gathered from this link and a couple of others, she found out she was pregnant in March, was diagnosed with a very aggressive cancer in July, collapsed/baby born in August and she was dead by September (23 days after the baby was born).
IANAD, but seeing the speed at which the cancer took her, I doubt she would have had a chance even if she did abort and had treatment.
Even orphans deserve to live.
From comments I’ve read from a family member, it wasn’t the case of get treatment and live, or have no treatment and die. By the point they discovered the cancer it was get treatment and still almost certainly die, or have no treatment and maybe give her daughter a shot. If that’s true, then I think she made the right call.
My sister went through something very similar. She had a brain tumor and was approx 6 months pregnant at the time. The fetus survived my sisters brain surgery and doctors told her she needed to start radiation treatment immediately which would be fatal to her unborn baby. My sister told me she would have refused treatment to save her baby if she didn’t already have a 3 year old daughter. They induced labor and the baby was stillborn. My sister lived 6 more years in remission until the tumor returned and she died 4 months later.
Now that I recently became a mother, it’s even more heartbreaking to understand what my sister went through.
I’m so sorry about your sister, MissSwitac, that is so unimaginably horrible 
hugs
When I read this article I wondered to myself if the mother would have lived at all had she chosen to abort. Neck/head cancers are generally pretty bad - chemo and radiation might have bought her some time, but I suspect death was more of an issue of “when” and not “if.” Not to diminish her sacrifice at all - that’s some hardcore love right there.
I’m about as pro-life as it gets, but in this situation … damn. I’m not a fan of situational ethics at all but in this one, I really don’t think there is one “right” answer. I can’t imagine how terrible of a choice this must be.
Hear, hear. I hope this little girl has a happy life 
No, according to Christian theology, it’s pretty much exactly the same thing. The only difference is that a “chance to live” applies to the afterlife. People who still have sin have either no afterlife or a very torturous one (aka Hell). No Jesus, no heaven.
And I seriously doubt it would affect the child’s belief system one way or the other. Far more likely to influence them is whatever the mom believedand what the uncle or whoever raises her believes.