Aibu for choosing mother rather than unborn baby?

[Bells3032]

I'm currently 20 weeks pregnant. Having one of those hypothetical conversations regarding what would your partner do if something happened and it was your life v unborn baby's life. I said 100% he should chose me. Friend was surprised and said she'd chose her unborn baby over her.

Said it makes more sense to choose the mother as she's less "replaceable" for lack of a better sense (not that a baby is replaceable but hopefully you know what I mean) and the only person who'd be more upset at losing the baby than me would be me.

Am I just a horribly in maternal person.

Which would you chose?

It's a very hard question and I don't think there is a right answer. But I think I would choose myself. I don't think I could bear to bring a child into the world knowing I wouldn't be there to raise it. And certainly if I had other children I would choose me. The baby won"t know what happened if it doesn't survive, but the older children would be devastated by losing me.

@htkb my husband has been at both births and will be at this one. My husband would allow the doctors and consultants to save me without arguments my sister however would fight them with my wishes. Like she did with my first DC. This has happened with a family member when they said they were going to cruh the skull of the baby to save the mother. But her mother said no you are not, your going to try and save them both....thankfully they did manage to save them both but it was touch and go for the mother.

This thread is very interesting and shows some different understanding/practices around Catholic faith.

When I was pregnant my mother (brought up Catholic in England) anxiously asked my husband (also Catholic) to prioritise me over baby in labour.
He said he would (also Catholic) and asked why.. Her reply was Catholic teaching was baby over mother as I'd already been christened and other reasons.

My husband had never heard this. My mum's sister and cousin also baby boomers both confirmed that was their understanding too. All attended same church (Irish priests if that's relevant)... So it might not be Catholic teaching now but it obviously was taught at that church at least...

[quote Sarbears28]@htkb my husband has been at both births and will be at this one. My husband would allow the doctors and consultants to save me without arguments my sister however would fight them with my wishes. Like she did with my first DC. This has happened with a family member when they said they were going to cruh the skull of the baby to save the mother. But her mother said no you are not, your going to try and save them both....thankfully they did manage to save them both but it was touch and go for the mother.[/quote]
So they're both going to be in the labour room, one who'll choose you, and the other who'll choose the baby.
What would they do, fight it out at the foot of the bed? Toss a coin? Phone a friend?
This is honestly the weirdest post I've ever read, and it has some stiff competition.

I have always believed that the mother should take priority. However, it would be a very sad scenario.

Not really, it happened in my first labour and dh just nodded his head at what the consultant said my sister said no and argued with them. The consultants and doctors will always try and save mum first and baby if they can. Unless they are argued with. That's my experience

I told my DH before delivery to save whoever has the best chance of life. He never had to make a choice thank goodness, but our daughter passed at one day old. After that experience, in a future pregnancy I would tell him to save the baby.

If it were an emergency I presume the medical team would try their best to save both if possible, if not prioritise the mother. It wouldn't be a decision for your DH to make?

Sarbears, there is no need for the melodrama. What you are referring to simply would not happen. In obstructive labour, the baby would be delivered by C-section which has now become so safe as to have even become routine.

@Sarbears28

Not really, it happened in my first labour and dh just nodded his head at what the consultant said my sister said no and argued with them. The consultants and doctors will always try and save mum first and baby if they can. Unless they are argued with. That's my experience

Your sister argued that they should save the baby instead of you?

Many years ago a friend of mine delayed cancer treatment while pregnant, knowing she would probably die but she still made that choice. Sadly she did die. Also very sadly, in years to come, it led to that child feeling a lot of guilt. Plus they had to grow up without a mother. So I personally don’t think a mother should be sacrificed for an unborn child. It causes more hurt in the long run.

Definitely choose the mother... not to sound horrible but then there is the potential for more babies plus the baby isn't born yet, and otherwise you're setting the baby up for life without a mother and all that baggage...just wouldn't make any sense to choose the unborn baby.

If it were me in that position having to make the choice...honestly it would be the most difficult thing ever but I would have to choose me for those reasons.

At 20 weeks pregnant I was diagnosed with cancer. You don't get to choose. You get medics telling you you are the patient and your life will take priority. You get advice to terminate. It's not a game.

Ive been in the position where my life was in the balance at 37 weeks pregnant, while my body was going down hill my unborm baby was my priority, but actually at the point where i was seriously ill and then on the operating table, i went into survival mode and as soon as my baby was (thankfully) safely delivered by EmCS i didnt want anything to do with her and told my husband to take her away, i was on the edge of conciousness i suppose though. It took a lot of therapy to get over that as i felt like the worlds worst mother once id recovered and was out of danger and i ended up with severe PTSD. My therapst said it was a natural instinctive reaction, when our life is really on the line instincts you didnt know you had kick in, she said we revert back to being animals. I did have another child at home but im not sure if that made a difference, in all honestly, as all i could think of was surviving, it was bloody terrifying.

Anyone “enjoying” this thread may also enjoy the Penelope Cruz Spanish melodrama “mama”

I'd choose the mother, every time, no problem. Henry IIIV chose the baby and lost the wife which I always think was a big mistake. I think he would have been happier with Jane and might have had more children by her. Her baby might even have survived (I know, not likely).

So, yeah, I'd choose the person over the ante-neonate(?).

What an impossible choice 😭 I have two babies and if we had another I would choose that baby over me. Even though it would leave my others motherless. Being a mother doesn’t start at birth for me. I could never live with myself otherwise. I know others have abortions and I support their right to choose that but I couldn’t. I think my partner would choose me over the baby though 😕

Henry the VIII had six wives and only three of his babies made it past pregnancy infancy (excluding an illegitimate son who lived to 17 years I believe).
He thought " I can always get another wife, it's not as easy to get a living child" and in his case he was right.

I already have a DD so I would say save me she needs her mum. If it was first born I think I would say save the baby I'm not sure though.

In Milli Hill's book Give Birth Like a Feminist she states that most prospective mothers and fathers would choose the mother's life over the baby's life. My uncle's wife died of post-partum haemorrhage so he was left to cope on his own with a toddler and a two-day old baby. He was only 18 at the time. In his case no choice was made - it was sheer bad luck - but it was extremely difficult for him to manage. His family do not have good relationships and I'm sure that was a contributing factor.

@Youseethethingis

Henry the VIII had six wives and only three of his babies made it past pregnancy infancy (excluding an illegitimate son who lived to 17 years I believe). He thought " I can always get another wife, it's not as easy to get a living child" and in his case he was right.

And this is relevant how?

Not a bad person at all, I wouldn't think twice. You're a live human being who can't be replaced in your husband's life and can have another baby. That baby and any other children can't replace their mother.

This is a pointless discussion anyway. In real life the medics would always prioritise the mother over the unborn child.

Before I went for my EMCS the MW explained that the women’s life was always prioritised over the foetus. She said she knew it was upsetting to hear but that they had to tell us before I went in to theatre. This was in the U.K. within the last ten years. The doctors always make the call in emergency situations.

@JaninaDuszejko

I know someone who (herself) chose to save the baby. And that kid and all the previous kids are severely damaged.

That is so fucked up and the impact on her children was inevitable. To put your unborn baby's life before your own is romantic nonsense that does not bear any logical examination. It's obviously the woman that is more important, e.g. the majority of countries in the world allow abortion to preserve the mother's life.

I could only understand this if you just had the one child and felt this was your only chance at a lasting legacy or something.

What a tragic outcome for that family. Did her sacrifice mean anything?