Recently, a young mother faced the perilous combination of preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM) and umbilical cord prolapse during her seventh month of pregnancy.
But instead of succumbing to despair, she chose to fight for not only herself, but also for her preborn baby.
And in the end, they defied the odds by surviving despite many saying she should have had an abortion.
Rita Dharaviya’s harrowing experience took an unexpected turn when she sought help in the emergency room while in unbearable pain.
The medical team identified the rare condition of umbilical cord prolapse, where the cord protrudes through the cervix, exacerbating the challenges posed by PPROM.
Dr. Rajashri Tayshete Bhasale, recounting the urgency of the situation, emphasized, “Immediate delivery is crucial to prevent potential issues such as brain damage or death.”
The medical team wasted no time, performing a cesarean section within 20 minutes of the decision, resulting in the delivery of a healthy 1 kg baby who spent some time in the NICU but is now thriving.
This poignant case stands in stark contrast to the narratives circulating in pro-abortion media, where similar complications are often depicted as grounds for induced abortion, masquerading as a form of healthcare.
The media’s misleading portrayal of conditions like PPROM and umbilical cord prolapse as necessitating abortion misses the crucial distinction between early delivery for medical emergencies and the intentional termination of a preborn child.
Anya Cook in Texas and Andrea Prudente in Malta faced analogous challenges, with the media suggesting that abortion was the only viable solution.
However, the term “abortion” itself has been manipulated, creating confusion.
Pro-life laws in various states emphasize protecting children from intentional killing during induced abortions, safeguarding their right to life.
Delivering a child early due to a mother’s medical emergency is a far cry from deliberately ending a preborn child’s life.
It is essential to recognize that induced abortion is not the standard of care for complications like PPROM or umbilical cord prolapse, even when these issues arise earlier in pregnancy.
Professor Yves Muscat Baron, an OB/GYN who chairs the Maternity and Gynecology Department at Mater Dei Hospital in Malta, provided crucial testimony in Prudente’s case.
He explained that a preborn child can survive with as little as two centimeters of amniotic fluid, and membranes have the capacity to reseal themselves.
“As soon as the waters break, we give intravenous antibiotics. When they rupture, the membranes overlap and close the tear,” he emphasized.
He cited instances where rest and antibiotic treatment led to the resolution of complications, allowing women to safely carry their babies to term.
Dr. Christina Francis, CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), underscored the medical standard for cases like PPROM – careful observation.
She explained that well-trained obstetricians closely monitor patients, identifying signs of developing intrauterine infection long before severe complications arise.
The message is clear: women facing pregnancy complications do not need induced abortion as the default solution.
While it may not always be possible to save the preborn child’s life, intentionally ending their life before its natural conclusion is an unacceptable proposition.
The medical community’s commitment to preserving life, as demonstrated in the case of Rita Dharaviya, is a testament to the triumph of hope and intervention over adversity.
Pro-Life Press will keep you up-to-date on any developments to this ongoing story.