Principle of double effect

[tony mattar]

If a lady has cancer, and requires chemo therapy, but at the same time is pregnant, and there is a possibilty that the baby could die as a result of chemo... is she allowed to proceed with treating herself if this is the only way to save her life?

[DavidObeid]

The short answer is yes.

The chemo is not being taken with the intention of harming the baby, nor is the harm in any way desired. It is an unavoidable consequence of a therapy that is aimed at achieving a great good with reasonably sure chances of success.

[jzeitouni]

Ok David now im going to ask the opposite of what Tony was asking... Would it be ok if the woman chose to not undergo the chemo therapy until the baby is born even though that could be fatal for her in the long run?? Would it be irresponsible of her to do that or would it be ok??

[DavidObeid]

If her intentions are for the good of the child then what she is doing is heroic. This was the case with St. Gianna Molla (http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/saints/ns_lit_doc_20040516_beretta-molla_en.html) who refused a therapy that would have resulted in the death of her baby.

[jzeitouni]

Ok awesome :)
Thanks heaps David

[jzeitouni]

Ok awesome :)
Thanks heaps David