Is Freedom Of Choice A Right Or A Responsibility That Is That The Que

Is freedom of choice a right or a responsibility? That is that the question which will determine the outcome in ?woman vs. doctors?. The problem is this: a woman wishes to have her child born naturally. If this happens her baby will most likely be born retarded. The way her baby is positioned inside her, within a few months, the baby would not receive enough oxygen and the birth process would be drastically altered. If it is a choice, then the baby will be born naturally. If it is not a choice, the baby will be born via cesarean section. The main argument in the mothers case is that it is her child and therefore her decision. The main argument for the doctors is that the baby will be born retarded or possibly dead. The baby is hers; It is that simple. Should the doctors have any right to reject her religious beliefs for beliefs of there own. Now you can argue logic and probability versus religion, but that again is a one sided battle. For decades Scientists and Christians have argued fact and logic versus miracles and God. The only conclusion that has ever been reached is this: according to Christians Jesus walked on water. According to Scientists that is physically not possible. Who is right? We as a society are willing to accept both however, so how can we not accept her beliefs now? Is it because certain beliefs mean more than others, or that is it that we feel we can intervene when it is convenient for us. Does she not have a right to control what happens to her body? In a country founded on principles of religious freedom, if this woman believes that her god will take care of the baby, who is the government to tell her she has to have an operation? In the case of the doctor telling her patient that she needs to have a c-section to save the life of her child, we need to realize that the doctor is just doing his/hers job. If the doctor's opinion counts for so much, the lady needs to listen. If she did not want the opinion of a doctor, she should not have gone to the doctor. Also in the case of the doctor, lets just say that if the female goes against the wishes of the doctor and the lady went with her instincts and the baby died, the doctor and the hospital will be facing a law suit of some sort. The real issue is about murder, the case is not about anything else. Especially since this is the nineties, and every person is looking for a quick buck. There is not an issue about the women's rights, it is about the right of the child, the human being, which is also a life. Event though the fetus is not standing on it's own two feet, it still matters. In this case I feel the doctor has the right to suggest and try to persuade the lady to have a cesarean section. Now, it is the lady's decision to believe in the doctor or go on with her very strong belief of God. I do not believe that this should be considered a murder trial, because then the issues of abortion will arise and this will go into a whole other issue. The lady should have her own decision and everyone else should just sit back and see what happens.