LIFE DIGEST: British mother gives her life for unborn child

By Tom Strode - Jan 29, 2008 - comment

Lorraine Allard literally gave her life for her unborn son.

Allard, 33, died Jan. 18, exactly two months after giving birth to Liam and approaching three months after learning she was in the advanced stages of liver cancer. She was 23 weeks pregnant with Liam when doctors gave her the diagnosis and recommended abortion so she could begin chemotherapy treatments, according to The Daily Mail, a British newspaper.

She refused, telling her husband, Martyn, “If I am going to die, my baby is going to live.”

The doctors planned to perform a Caesarian section 26 weeks into her pregnancy, but she went into labor and delivered Liam the week before. She began chemotherapy but was unable to overcome the cancer.

“Lorraine was positive all the way through,” Martyn said, The Daily Mail reported. “She had strength for both of us. I can’t begin to describe how brave she was. Towards the end we knew things weren’t going well but she was overjoyed that she had given life to Liam.”

She stayed at home while seeking to recover from the treatments but made four visits to the Norfolk and Norwich University NHS Hospital in Norwich to see and hold her son.

Liam weighed only 1 pound, 11 ounces at birth but hopefully will go home from the hospital in early March, according to The Daily Mail.

The Allards already had three daughters: Leah, 10; Amy, 8, and Courtney, 20 months.

British destroy 1.2 million IVF embryos

Great Britain destroyed more than one million embryos created in fertility clinics during a 14-year span.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority reported more than 2.1 million embryos were produced from 1991 to 2005 but about 1.2 million were never used, according to a Dec. 31 report in The Telegraph, a British newspaper. There were only 85,500 live births, or four percent, from the embryos created during that time period.

Multiple embryos typically are created during in vitro fertilization (IVF) in order to save on the cost and to establish a storehouse of tiny human beings to use for possible implantation in the future. Many of these embryos are destroyed or frozen for storage.

It is estimated there are about 400,000 embryos in storage in the United States.

“Far too many evangelicals seem to turn a blind eye to this reality,” said R. Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Jan. 10 on his weblog. “While we celebrate the birth of a child and the gift of life, we cannot blind ourselves to the harsh and grotesque reality that this technology means the destruction of human life.

“Many evangelicals fail to see what many proponents of human embryonic stem cell research have noted—a glaring inconsistency in condemning the destruction of human embryos through stem cell research, while ignoring or dismissing the destruction of embryos in IVF clinics.”

New rule to protect scholarships for pregnant athletes

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has approved a rule to protect pregnant athletes from having to choose between their babies and their scholarships.

The NCAA Board of Directors endorsed a measure barring member schools from revoking scholarships because of “pregnancy, depression, addiction, mononucleosis and eating disorders,” according to The Daily Aztec of San Diego State University. The rule, however, only applies in the year the female athlete becomes pregnant, making it possible for her scholarship to be withdrawn the following year, the newspaper reported

The board approved the rule Jan. 14 at the annual NCAA Convention in Nashville, Tenn. The Division I Management Council passed the proposal the day before by a 46-5 vote, according to The Daily Aztec. The rule will take effect Aug. 1.

The action came after ESPN reported in May NCAA female athletes had undergone abortions in order to retain their scholarships.

The report said seven women at Clemson University in South Carolina had received abortions in recent years, largely because they feared losing their athletic scholarships. The cable sports network also reported Cassandra Harding, a triple jumper at Memphis University, lost her scholarship when she gave birth after considering an abortion.

At both schools, athletes had to sign statements that threatened loss or reduction of financial aid if they became pregnant and could not compete, according to ESPN.

Court forces Missouri to transport inmates for abortions

A federal appeals court ruled Jan. 22 the state of Missouri must transport prisoners to clinics for abortions.

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in St. Louis, decided a 2005 state policy prohibiting transportation of inmates for elective abortions was unconstitutional. The three-judge panel unanimously ruled the policy violated the 14th Amendment, which provides “equal protection” under the law. A federal judge had invalidated the rule in 2006.

Gov. Matt Blunt said in a written statement, “State law prohibits the use of state tax dollars to facilitate abortions and I am very disappointed by this decision.”

There have been 14 inmate abortions since 2000, each costing about $350 in transportation expenses, a state official said, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. The state does not pay for the procedure, the newspaper reported.

German opposition to ESCR grows

A new public opinion survey has found Germans are increasingly opposed to embryonic stem cell research (ESCR), which results in the destruction of a human embryo when stem cells are extracted.

The poll, conducted in January, showed: 27 percent of Germans support ESCR, contrasted with 33 percent in 2007. In addition, 61 percent back research using only adult stem cells or induced pluripotent stem cells, an increase from 56 percent last year.

Induced pluripotent stem cells are the functional equivalent of embryonic stem cells, but their procurement does not harm the donor. They have been converted from adult skin cells in recently reported research through a method know as somatic cell reprogramming.

Results of the survey were reported at bioethics.com.

Further Learning

Learn more about: Life, Abortion, Stem-Cell Research, Science, Bioethics

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com