Significant Other or a Child?
 

Two things. First I could not find any topics on this subject. Secondly, I did not know which forum was the most appropriate for this question. So, mods, please move it to a forum you see fit. Thank you.

-------------------------------------------------

I've been having an ongoing argument with a certain person I know. My stance is that in a child delivery situation where either the mother or the child's life could be saved, I would choose the mother because that way I will have a chance of procreating once more. His stance is that it is illogical on the grounds that you cannot justify replacing an existing child with a future one.

Could I please have some opinions on this subject? Also, if you be so kind, please state whether you're a man or a woman when you post a responce.

EDIT: He did not specify whether he would chose the wife or the child. Simply pointed a flaw in logic where an existing child would be expendable.

I can't imagine a tougher decision to make. As a man, I'd have to say that I would be more likely to save my wife for the sake of the child we have now than one being born. Still, it's something I would always second-guess.

This is the type of question that one really can't answer untill their in the situation.

I think that I would choose the mother because in a family relationship, the man and woman need to be the center, that the children revolve around for it to healthy and balanced. When one parent chooses a child over the other parent it makes the dynamics whacky. I hope I'm making sence.

However some might say that the child should be chosen because they have potentialy more life in them, and it would be to much of a waste of potential life vs. the mother who has already had a chance to live.

Perhaps it is because I don't have children, but I don't see any difficulty to the decision.

I would choose my SO's life over the unborn child, with no hesitation.

I can't have children, but taking the hypothetical in the OP as a given--I'm pregnant, it's possible to save my life or the baby's, and I'm not able to decide on my own, I'd want Grace to choose the baby over me. She wouldn't (we've discussed this very issue as a part of our preparation for starting our own family); she'd choose to save my life, and I can hardly blame her as I'd make the same choice with her.

This very situation has occurred. There have been a handful of young pregnant women who suffer an injury and end up in a coma. One became a big issue case in the abortion debate when the husband wanted to abort the fetus to try to save his wife.

It isn't exactly parallel because in the case of comatose pregnant women, those who've attempted to take the baby to term have more often resulted in a miscarriage with stillborn child and a dead mother. Only when the mother is near term has the child survived, but this inevitably is fatal for the mother.

The other case is one in which a pregnant woman is diagnosed with cancer and requires chemotherapy to treat the cancer, but that chemo will kill the fetus. Treat the cancer or carry the child to term? I've read cases where both decisions were made.

I think the key here is that it's a decision that can and should only be made by the person in the situation and politics and outside opinions should be left out of it.

Gilda

Yeah, I'm with the callous non-child-havers on this one. I don't see any difficulty in this decision. The fetus isn't a person yet. There are still all sorts of natural things that could prevent it from ever becoming a whole human being. It's the potential of a human being, but it's not done cooking yet. If it has to lose that potential so that someone I love can live, then that's what's going to happen.

By the way, I'm keenly aware that I'm doing the cha-cha in a minefield here. The above is MY OPINION, and, like assholes, we all have them and they all stink.

Okay. Changing subject from the fetus to a full term baby birth of whom will threaten the mother's life. Who would you choose in that case?

I am not married and I dont have a child but I was talking to a three married friends with children and they all agreed they would save their wifes life over their childs. I know I would the same thing once I marry my lady. A wife is forever. No matter what, she and I till the day we die.

I would want him to save me, were it possible. Because well... as heartbreaking as it might be to lose a baby, it would be worse to lose a partner. We could have another baby. We could adopt. We would heal. But you can't heal death.

I'd chose my SO over an unborn baby.

Where exactly is the logical flaw? Your friend simply justifies exchanging an expendable baby for an expendable SO.

My mother tells a story, that a long time ago, in a galaxy far away... (well, OK, 83 years ago in a Catholic hospital in Hoboken New Jersey) her older brother was born with some major complications during the birth -where they didn't think my grandmother woudl survive the delivery... Those days, that wasn't an uncommon event.

From the story that was told, by my grandmother's sisters, the doctors worked so furiously to save my grandmother's life after the birth that the child was basically passed off to a nurse and almost forgotten about... at that point they had the choice to save my grandmother (who was a 22 year old female at the time) over the life of the baby... Because by someone's explanation the life of an adult was worth more than the life of a baby. (odd rules given a catholic hospital)

What would I want done? I'll never be in that situation so I won't have to make that choice...

Me over the baby, I would hope. My mother losr my father before I was born, and had to raise me by herself (before my stepdad came into the picture)... the trauma of that death will never leave her. They say losing a spouse is one of the highest stressors a person can ever experience; losing a child is obviously very hard, too, but I think the spouse one is even harder.

Say, if I had died, somehow, and my father had lived (obviously the events were unrelated), I think my mother might have been a lot more mentally stable than she is today. Then again, I wouldn't exist, but they might have had another child. So it goes.

I'm the one on the bottom. I thought about it for a long time a while back and decided that in this nightmare Sofie's Choice situation, I would choose the baby. I came to this decision because I couldn't make the decision myself, and my wife made me promise.

I cant really say... I would have to choose spur of the moment. I would probably be selfish and choose myself though... so many people depend on me for thigns that I would feel selfish if I let myself die... So I would feel selfish no matter what I did..... Oh well, gods willing I wont ever have to deal with it.

As painful as losing a child would be, it could not compare to losing my SO.

As a single guy, I would have to agree that it is a no brainer for me. It would mean that my genes wouldn't get passed down to the next generation at this time. But, once you have another child, you should be able to get over the first one.

And being a single parent wouldn't be fun.

i have no children, so I do not feel that my choice is even remotely valid. How could I consider making this decision when I don't have all of the pieces.
I think that a person's age has a lot to do with the choice they will make on this one. If you're a woman who is post-menopausal, it seems natural to choose the child over yourself since there would be little chance for offspring. But for someone between the age of 18 and 35, it would make more sense to choose the woman over the child. Unless of course they would be rendered infertile from whatever processes were necessary to save their life.

In any case, it is a difficult question and one that will keep me thinking for quite some time. I do not think that the poll will be very accurate, though, since you will most likely have responses from folks like me with no perspective to accurately vote.

No partner and no mother for the child...

No brainer here as well.

Talk to parents who've lost a child -- they don't just "get over it"... I've had friends who have had miscarriages both early on in the pregnancy and later in the pregnancy... and they don't ever stop thinking about what might have been with this child.

I think this is the most telling answer.

There are millions of already born children who need parents and those who don't have the direction of a parent could use the ones that have difficulty having one natrually.

I would chose my wife over my unborn child. Maybe since I already have two little ones that plays a hand in my decission, or perhaps that I dont know this child yet, and have no bond with him/her.

Now if that child was a year old or maybe even a few months, and I had to make the choice between him/her and me/spouse. I would chose the child over my wife and even myself.

When I think about it, my ex and I never had this conversation once, either time she was preggers. So glad nothing ever happen, I would hate to have to make that decission on my own without her input.

That's a hard question to answer. I, as a woman & mother, would do anything for my daughter, but if I had a partner, I would want for them to be on the same par. It really depends in what context I think.

Already being a mother of two, with a husband that would hate being a single parent, I *know* he would choose me over the unborn baby. What would I *want* him to do? Knowing what I know now and feeling the way I do about my children? It is very hard to choose. My heart says choose the child, my brain says choose me. I am leaning more towards choosing me, so that is how I voted.

edited to add: I can't shake the selfish feeling that my vote leaves in my heart.

A very good friend of my wife discovered that his wife had breast cancer four months into pregnancy. She opted to not take the full spectrum of treatment as it would/could harm the fetus.

She died four months after giving birth to a wonderful little boy.


I don't know that I would want to ever have to make that kind of decision, but if I had to, I would opt to save my wife.

Definitely one of the most difficult decisions I never wanna have to make.

Let's say the decision was all mine - she was unable to say what she wanted for some reason - how would I balance my personal view with what I think my SO would've wanted?

Let's say I choose her over the baby, and she would've wanted it the other way around. I'd have an SO that'd resent me for the rest of our lives, wouldn't I?

I voted for saving my SO. Selfish maybe, but if it was possible for us to have more kids later, I'd make that call.

I think, outside of a context that brings other complications into the equation, I'd vote for the woman and not the child to be saved. As long as you can have other children later, I think the more important relationship, in the case of an unborn child, is between the mother and the father.

Since I have never had children, my opinion can only be a rational one.

Oh, shit... that is awful. Is that what her husband wanted, too? I wonder what other women in that situation have done, since surely she is not the only one that's happened to.

4 months along... god, I still think I would end up choosing my own health over the baby's life, but that basically means I would have to have an abortion... which would destroy me emotionally for a long time.

And who knows if she would still have lived, even with the abortion and subsequent treatments for cancer? The cancer might have gotten her in the end, anyway. Then the SO wouldn't have me or a child... what a tragedy.

Goddamn, that's a rough situation.

I would choose my SO life over the life of my child... but I am prepared for that answer to change should I ever have kids.

Fuck that shit. Kill the little runt and keep the wife.

What an ugly situation! My wife and I have 2 beautiful daughters and a son that's only 9 days away. If it was my decision, and mine only, I'd have to say I'd choose my wife. As was mentioned earlier, the husband-wife relationship is paramount over that of the children. Although, if the choice was my wife's and she chose the baby over her, I'd stand by her (and would spoil that child silly for the rest of my life!).

Me: Single, no babies. Don't want any. Asides from that, if I was a man and faced that situation, I'd choose the wife, because I had made such an emotional investment in my wife already, I'd know her, she'd know me, we'd have lots of big and small things in common. How could I not choose that over someone I don't even know?

Furthermore, I would not wish that fate on any child, that of growing up knowing that your mother gave her life for you. Talk about pressure!

I've also been told that having a baby changes everything.

This wouldn't even register as a thought in my mind, it would go right to decision- you save the SO.

Why in the hell would you save a fetus when you can save an adult? That's totally nonsensical.

This really reminds me of one of my old threads that I started, about almost the same thing...

Thread: The Value of A Baby's Life...

I would save the wife, and hope that the misplaced guilt\anger the wife gives me doesn't destroy our relationship. :)

man here.
I would choose SO to live, unless I did not like her or I would inherit millions :-)
At the point of decision the baby is a dumb animal.
Of course I'v never been a father or really a part of a family for that matter.

Wow, I'm still the only dude to choose child over wife. If the roles were reversed and I was pregnant and my wife had to make the same decision, I'd hope she'd give our child the opportunity to live.

It disturbs me that anyone would choose the baby over your wife. The baby isn't developed and probably not even named. It's not aware of what's going on and no one in the world has a relationship with the baby outside of the womb. The wife is your lover, your significent other, your best friend. The wife has dozens of family members and friends and would seriously crush many people's lives if she passed away. The baby would be missed but it simply isn't as important as the wife by a long shot. Save the wife.

This is really a tough one, but my partner having a son from a previous relationship I would choose her life for his sake even so I have lost already 2 babies...

I voted before I read the OP so I chose to keep the baby. I was under the assumption that it was an already born child. Up until delivery you haven't met or formed a bond with the baby so you aren't as attached. Based on how the OP was worded, I'd chose my wife. The first months are so important and I don't think I'd be in a place where I'd be well enough to provide proper care.

However, now that she's almost 2, I'd keep her over my wife and I'd hope my wife would do the same. Adults have had their chance in life, you should ALWAYS keep the existing kid over the adult.

I hope it isn't a threadjack, but what is the cutoff between saving the child over the partner?

Am I the only one reading the OP to say that its a child delivery situation and interpreting that to mean....the child is being BORN, its not a fetus, it IS a life? (Im assuming the intent was to mean a full term baby, maybe Im wrong)

in any case...I would want Dave to choose me, selfish as it may seem to some people, I would not want him raising a life that existed because of my death

I'm a man and I chose SO . . . my reasoning being that I have other children, they need a mother. It would hurt me greatly to have to make the choice, but the greater good would require that I make sure my children that already depend on their mother are cared for (now I just have to find a SO).