On one hand this is an amazing story of how medical science has advanced to the point where we can preform surgery in-utero, and then they ruin it by adding this pro-life rhetoric to it.
In my opinion what this story comes down to is choice... the woman in this story chose to undergo a surgery to give her unborn child a better opportunity, but the risk of the surgery could very well have been the life of the fetus. See the woman had a choice, she also had the right to terminate the pregnancy and try again if she was not able to find a solution to the problems of her fetus, or not seek surgical treatment at all. It is all about choice.
I happen to be a pro-choice advocate because I believe that a woman has the right to chose if she has a child or not. Pro-choice does not mean pro-death, or pro-abortion, it just means that we are extending the right for a woman to chose, and that is all. We should leave things like this up to the individual who is in the position and not to people who may not have her best interests at heart.
I also believe that we should not force a person into a role that they may not want, or may not be ready to accept. I also think that it is unfair to claim that a fetus has more rights than the woman carrying it. Many women who seek abortions are women who already have several kids and cannot afford another. Would you force an entire family to starve for the sake of one fetus? How about the life of the woman? If she is desperate enough for an abortion and there is no provider available she will seek an illegal and dangerous abortion and put her own life at risk...
I really don't believe that pro-life means pro-life, because if we buy into the pro life rhetoric we are condemning desperate women to death, and countless families to starvation.
That's all for now,