I agree Pan. Not all circumstances that would drive a woman or couple to consider abortion are cut and dried, and there should be room for grace for those who find themselves in dire medical situations and dealing with pregnancy that threatens their life or yes, health. My beef is not that there is no such thing as a woman's health being threatened by pregnancy (after all, both by sons were born preemie because of severe pregnancy-induced hypertension, and the first almost died and killed my wife). My point is only that when that is the language, liberals will make it mean whatever they want it to mean. It's code language for "this is a hat-tip towards life, but the value of it is still arbitrary."
I'll share an anecdote relating such a consequential situation with an overall positive outcome. The wife of a couple that are very close friends of ours for years is afflicted with Lupus that primarily attacked her kidneys, rejecting them as if they were a foreign body. She had to take anti-rejection meds, and she was told in her mid 20s that pregnancy would ruin her kidney function, and hasten the day when she would need a very risky kidney transplant. They agonizingly resigned themselves to a life without children, and an uncertain future regarding her health. A few weeks after she was ordered by her doctor to never have children, they discovered she was pregnant.
Her kidney function was already at a bare 50%, and they told her if she carried the baby to full term, her function would be reduced to about 30% immediately, a degradation that would otherwise take several years. She was further told that once her kidney function was reduced to that level, the decline if her kidney health would become more acute and accelerate. She was advised to abort.
We didn't know our friends then, as they made their decision to carry the pregnancy to term. We met them because our sons are the same age, and our back yards were connected.
The doctors were right. The pregnancy destroyed her kidneys. Her health steadily declined for about 8 more years until her brother sacrificed one of his kidneys so that she could live. She is now in her early 40s, very cautious with her health, and relatively healthy. Her son is 16, athletic, smart - and an only child.
I can't imagine many medical situations that are not imminent emergencies that would require killing a baby in the womb. I'm sure they exist, and I plead ignorance as to the nature of them. But I know at least one woman who went through the fire, and chose life at the cost of her own health. For her choice, she was blessed with a son and a new kidney. That speaks to me.