Pro-life vid of day: Prayer sustained pregnant woman with cancer
by Hans Johnson
Stacy Roorda was stunned to get a diagnosis of Stage Four breast cancer – and then in a follow-up test came the news that she was pregnant. With the aggressive cancer feeding on the hormone essential to the baby, she was urged to abort the child so they could start intensive chemotherapy immediately.
A devout Christian, she was sustained by a prayer chain in her church, and boldly told the doctors: “I wouldn’t give up my other two children, I’m not giving up this one. So you need to figure out a plan B.” When the doctors left them alone:
Matt and I just sat there. We were newly pregnant, fighting cancer, and in total shock. Just as I was beginning to wonder if this was the right choice, one of the resident radiologists snuck back in to the room. She quietly said, ‘I’m a Christian too, and I want you to know that it’s a baby, not a fetus, and you’re making the right choice. I’ll be praying for you.’ Both Matt and I burst out sobbing. It was exactly what we needed to hear at that moment.
A milder treatment was used to slow the disease, but then it reached the bone, and Jazmine Stacy had to be delivered (in good health) at 32 weeks. As prayer support spread worldwide, doctors were surprised that the cancer was stopped right in its tracks, and remains there, unchanged, eight years later.
Roorda relates her brave ordeal in a compilation of inspirational stories called The Missing Piece.
[vimeo]https://vimeo.com/82251139[/vimeo]
Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions.
[Photo via The Blaze]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
One comment regarding the radiologist’s remark “it’s a baby, not a fetus.” It does not have to be an either / or situation. Both terms can apply equally. I am glad that the resident offered encouragement and hope. May God continue to bless them.
Agreed, MoJoanne – no point in arguing over the terms, there.
The point is that *fetus* is used as a dehumanizing term when people are thinking of killing the child. While technically this is true, that it *is* an accurate term, I prefer *the child in the womb* term because it restores the humanity. It is a philosophical point, but using the words *baby* and *child* encourage parents to recognize that the little person in the womb is, indeed, a child.
*Fetus* has a cold sound, and has developed an awful connotation due to the pro-death movement’s widespread use of it, with the sole purpose of denying the child’s humanity.
You do not buy *fetal* clothes, but you *do* buy *baby* clothes. You do not send out *fetal* announcements, but you do send out *baby* announcements. You do not make a *fetus* announcement, but you do make a *baby* announcement. You do not buy a crib for the *fetus* or buy bottles for the *fetus*. You do buy these things for the *baby*. Even though there are items in the store for unborn babes, this is termed the “baby” section. You do not say, “We got to listen to the fetus’ heartbeat today!” or “We saw an ultrasound of our fetus”.
The abortion industry knows this well, and thus, uses the negative, although technically accurate term of *fetus*, and is highly successful in causing mothers to not think of their child as a *baby*.
Just as people of color do not like to be referred to in certain terms, so we should not refer to children in the womb with a term which carries a certain connotation to it, unless we are a doctor or in the medical or scientific professions, and need to discuss things clinically and scientifically, for ease of understanding and in order to be technically accurate.
In ordinary conversation, and in discussing children in the womb with others, however, we should always strive to give these children the respect which is their due.