For me, there are a number of ways in which to save the mothers' life, while not ending that of the childs'.
 1. One of these would be the removal of that which endangers, be it a clot in the blood, healing the respiratory system to better breathing. Another could well be a procedure for the bone, in the case that its' infected, or falling/fallen apart. Finding any amount of physical problems like these quickly, dealing with them with attentiveness and care, could likely ensure the safety, the wellbeing of both people involved.
 A preferable alternative to either one dying, most definitely not both.
2. Another would be one I'd recommend, that being a caesearean section.
 This would of course involve the relatively early removal of the baby from the mothers' womb/uterus. Although, this might not actually be possible, depending on how early in the pregnancy actually is, with how little development the baby has got to experience - less likeliness of surviving, not received enough nutrients, organs might not be large enough etc.
Though, in the case that the mother doesn't want them, having an unexpected pregnancy, one forced on them, or one threatening their life, then it might be one of the best solutions.
Besides any of these, there remain a variety of other options, in the case that a baby isn't life threatening, rather than that of abortion.
 There remain a rather large number of people that'd like to have a child, or children, that can't actually have them. This could be for a number of reasons, like a gay, or lesbian couple, or an infertile woman, or man. They could well care for, protect and provide for the child, or children in question, more than happy to do so.
 Other than this, how it affects their mental health could be dealt with, aided, by counselling, medication, even a mixture of the two, which could help in their road to recovery, however the pregnancy came about.
With these methods of prevention and alternative options, there should be little to no cause for the use of abortion to save the mothers' life. Instead, the much preferred way, to save them both, maintaining both the physical and mental health of the woman.

With all this life, all less strife
Winter Wolf

A few people have said, concerning the matter of abortion, how much the life of the mothers' life matters, when a pregnancy, a baby, might actually endanger their life. Then, there's a fair number of people that highlight the importance of the babys' life.
 But of course, this doesn't tend to be to the detriment of the mother. Reading through these various articles, I don't really see them saying that the clinics, the centres, the hospitals, should let them die, in order to save the child. I'd bring up how that very person isn't guilty of any crime, amoral act, sin... whatever term you go for, making it so that people might at least want them to die. Much like others have done not that long ago.
 More or less the same can be said of the mother. At least, whatever harm they'd caused, pain they'd inflicted, or crime they'd committed, it wouldn't mean that they should face up to their own mortality, maybe even pretty early, regardless of whether the baby's born or not.
  So, as one writer by my reading, likely much more, have suggested, the most important matter to consider here is not simply the mothers' life, concentrated on most, or the babys', risking a lifes' forfeit either way... No. The matter at hand is, of course, saving a womans' life, when there exists no logical reason for them to die.
  That at the same time, the unborn child doesn't need to either, in which case both of them could live. But one of the biggest questions there remains: how?


More on this next time, for now, think long, live well and eat merrily.
  Always a breath, always a chance,
  Winter Wolf