That poor woman and her bereft family.
"It's her choice"
I'm not judging her. She lives in a world that tells women the most adorable act we can do is to be self sacrificial in service to another, preferably with our bodies.
I'm judging the 'commissioning parents" whose choices led directly to the death of a woman, a risk easily anticipated as an eventuality of pregnancy and childbirth. A risk they decided she could take not in service to saving their own lives, or health. No, because they wanted to become parents in a particular way, using a particular method that necessarily creates risk to two other lives that is entirely avoidable.
I'm judging the medical staff who created her pregnancy knowing that such pregnancies are higher risk, and knowing that the embryo they were implanting would be created into a baby by the body of this woman and at risk to her health but for someone else's interests, not her own.
I'm judging the society that treats both the woman who creates a new person, and that new person, as inconsequential in comparison to a man who made a sperm and a woman who made an egg.
I'm judging the agencies who make big money from transactions that exploit women and their bodies, that trade their babies, and that milk the desperation of women who can't have their own children, or the arrogance of men who reduce the importance of motherhood down to the production of their ordered product.
I'm judging the politicians who create the laws that permit people to be produced to order like farmstock, by women treated like farmstock.
I'm judging the whole system. The one that already declares you can donate a pint of blood in one sitting, but not three. Why, if personal choicy choice is paramount? Because the risk to a person's health becomes unacceptable. You can donate a kidney to an ailing patient, but not two kidneys to two patients. Why? Choicy choice says you could live on dialysis yourself. Because the sacrifice to yourself cannot be justified against the gain to others, it is weighted too heavily. A system that places limits on how much one person can take from another, on how much society can prevent individuals from sacrificing themselves too much, yet such a system has a purposeful blind spot when it comes to a particular type of exploitable body, the female type.
Choice is properly limited by the fairest societies.
Because at the other side of the equation from choicy choice is always takey take.
It is those people, the takers, who we should seek to rein in. Those who see other people's bodies as resources to exploit.
I don't judge the woman who died.
I judge everyone else who let her be statistical collateral damage in a system that exploits women's bodies for the wants of others and cynically markets it as 'choice'.