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?

I’ve heard some cases where women have prioritised their unborn baby’s life over their own- for example a woman in a magazine who postponed chemotherapy because she was pregnant.

But again, this is never the father’s decision. Women always make the choices about their own body and who they wish to prioritise. In cases where a woman is unconscious and unable to consent then her life is always given priority by medics. Seems to be a bit of widespread myth that men are asked ‘who to save’ judging by these replies.

Unborn child has no legal status. Doctor will prioritise the woman
A foetus doesn’t have any rights. An unborn baby doesn’t become a separate person with legal rights until they are born and draw breath by themselves.

The woman is always the priority in any emergency situation.
The unborn child has no rights until born.
During the height of Covid we had two women have emergency caesarean sections prematurely to save their lives. The babies went to NNU and are both doing well.
The mother is always the priority as she is the patient .

A doctor would always prioritise mothers life if it came to it. Of course they’d try and choose both. I doubt any father to he would be asked baby or mother

On the way to theatre to save our baby I told dh he had to chose the baby over me. He wanted to save me. I was very clear the baby came first. Thankfully we were both okay but when I had baby number three we both nearly didn't make it and I've no idea what would have happened as we didn't have the chat then, no time.

Definitely the mother

Well you'd hope so. But sadly that's not how it works in many countries. Due to beliefs about abortion.

Not sure why they'd ask DH which one of us he wanted to save? That's a bit scary. I assumed they'd have a protocol in place to make that decision clinically and calmly.

My aunt resisted getting an early c-section, because her baby would have been premature. Her doctor wanted to deliver the baby because my aunt blood pressure was very high despite taking medication. Until dm visited her in hospital and convinced her to agree with her doctor.

After a stillbirth where I already knew baby was dead, I would choice baby. Call me selfish, but I would not want to be in that position ever again, or worse feel or hear my baby die.

My original ds2 is not replaceable. If another baby is born, it would have a different soul and body.

If a baby can be replaced then so can I. There are many different types of women out there, who could be excellent stepmother if they want to. I would pray he find a kind woman to help raise our dc.

It’s a non-choice in an obstetric emergency the mother is the patient she’s the patient.
It’s irrelevant whether people are having these fraught conversations about whom to save. Unborn baby or mum? It will always be mum

I told my husband to prioritise the baby- go with it to NICU/do the skin to skin/ whatever was needed, and leave me with the surgeons

Realistically they would never be asked, but I've had the conversation with my DH. While pregnant with DS1 I'd have wanted him to save the baby, as I'd already experienced a loss and it threw me into such a depression I wouldn't have wanted to live if I'd lost DS as well. With DS2 I'd have wanted myself to be saved, as DS1 (18 months at the time) needed his mum more than a sibling.

I'd have saved me. I rather think DH would have saved DC....

For most of the animal kingdom (and most of human history) it would be a no brainer - the mother is saved over the baby every time. You can always have more babies. Choosing the baby first is a very modern and first world thing.

@EspressoDoubleShot

It’s a non-choice in an obstetric emergency the mother is the patient she’s the patient. It’s irrelevant whether people are having these fraught conversations about whom to save. Unborn baby or mum? It will always be mum

Good to know thanks

@Changethetoner

How many of us have declined a paracetemol when pregnant, despite a banging headache? Chose to avoid certain risky foods (soft cheeses, pate). How many chose to come off eg. anti-depressants when pregnant, just in case the medicine damaged the foetus? Or chose to delay chemo, despite having agressive cancer, because it likely would harm the foetus?

I can see the thinking behind "saving the baby over the mother" as an extension of scenarios like these, which many of us have already been through. The maternal instinct is (often) strong, and lots of us would rather we suffer, even die, rather than our baby.

I had chemo whilst pregnant. The doctors were very, very clear that the priority was that I received the correct treatment.

I don''t see this as evidence that I am lacking in maternal instinct. I had to make incredibly difficult decisions, and my first obligation was to my existing child, not the unborn baby.

I think the only people who can make grandiose statement about how they would rather die than risk a pregnancy are those lucky ones who have never had to make any such choices.

I was aware that the mother’s life is always saved as she is the patient. And I definitely think that’s right.

But if there was a house fire I would want my children, or any baby I might have, to be saved rather than me. But those babies/ children are already in the world and are to a greater of lesser extent aware. An unborn baby isn’t.

When I was in labour with pre eclampsia/HELLP Sydnrome and things became dangerous I begged the midwife midwife save my baby over myself if it came to down to it and was told that if they can't do that and it was me who was the priority . Luckily both of us survived but it was close.

Choosing the baby first is a very modern and first world thing

It makes no logical sense and is probably rooted in the competitive parenting phenomenon. ‘Look how much of a perfect mother I am - I’d die to save my child that doesn’t even exist yet’

Some people will say what they think is morally the right answer I.e baby over mother.

YANBU

Aside from in situations where a woman herself delays treatment to avoid harm/premature delivery to her baby i can't think of a situation where you could choose to save the baby over the mother ? Don't most obstetric emergencies call for the baby to be delivered to save the woman?

My husband and I had this conversation when I was pregnant with my first and we agreed we would both choose to save me if it came down to it.

I’ve been a midwife for many years abd I can’t even imagine an obstetric situation where it’s a possibility that you could save a baby but leave a mother to die? Can anyone else?

I can only think of

1. cancer in pregnancy and woman declining chemo (we have had this, she consented eventually to delivery at 32 weeks, but it was too late for her sadly)

2. maybe a rural homebirth where both mother and baby needed active resus just after birth?

But I can’t think of anything that might occur in a modern obstetric hospital, where you’d have to choose.

So save yourselves a fraught and melodramatic conversation, it’s a bit….. cringe? Soap opera? Saving mother or baby is not a thing, your husband/partner/mum will not be asked their opinion. The medics will get on with saving you and if baby lives as well then that will be brilliant.

@Wole

Not sure why they'd ask DH which one of us he wanted to save? That's a bit scary. I assumed they'd have a protocol in place to make that decision clinically and calmly.

Medical professional will save the mother in most circumstances.