Get Premium
Dark mode theme is available exclusively for premium users. Learn more about the benefits of subscribing.
No fees, cancel anytime.
Dark Mode 
No fees, cancel anytime 
39
Pregnant Woman With No Brain Activity Kept On Life Support To Save Baby Sparks Controversy
The ordeal of a Brazilian family has the country immersed in a heated debate as a brain-dead 21-year-old mother is being kept alive by machines so that her unborn 6-month-old child has a chance to survive.
“This is disgusting,” a local netizen said. “She’s being forced to have her body violated just so that she can give birth to someone who will never remember her.”
Highlights
- 21-year-old Joyce Araújo is being kept alive to save her unborn 6-month baby.
- Joyce collapsed from a severe headache due to a brain aneurysm.
- Brazil's law prohibits abortion after three months.
- The cause sparked heated debate among locals online.
Joyce Sousa Araújo, collapsed after suffering “very strong headaches,” being hospitalized at a Rondonópolis hospital for surgery. Doctors were able to detect an aneurysm but it was already too late, as her brain had swollen to the point she couldn’t be saved.
“I’m sure that, if the mother was alive, this is exactly what she would’ve wanted!” another replied.
RELATED:
A brain-dead 21-year-old mother is being kept alive by machines to give her unborn 6-month-old child a chance to survive
Image credits: g1
Her husband, 23-year-old João Matheus Silva, recounted the suddenness of the tragedy, which left their two daughters, aged 3 and 7, without a mother and with their brother’s life at risk.
“She started feeling very strong headaches after getting pregnant, but nothing that indicated an aneurysm. We never imagined this would happen,” he said, remembering how his wife’s condition suddenly worsened on December 20 while at their home in Jaciara.
Image credits: sousa_joy9890
As her brain expanded, doctors desperately tried to remove part of her skull to alleviate the swelling, but their efforts failed. Joyce was declared brain dead a few days later.
Despite the mother’s condition, doctors decided to continue artificial life support due to her advanced pregnancy.
The hospital has been monitoring both Joyce and her unborn child closely, aiming to deliver the baby boy as soon as it reaches 7 months of gestational age.
Experts have long debated the ethical considerations of cases such as Joyce’s, as well as the legal ramifications of the procedure
Image credits: sousa_joy9890
The story of Joyce has parallels to other cases around the world where pregnant women declared brain dead have been kept alive to support their unborn children.
A notable example is the case of Catarina Sequeira, a Portuguese woman who was maintained on life support until her baby could be delivered at 31 weeks.
Her case was thoroughly examined by a 2020 University of Cambridge study which delved into the complex legal and ethical implications of keeping a mother alive to save an unborn child’s life.
Image credits: estreitonline
For Alex Warren, one of the paper’s authors, one that one of the most contentious aspects of delicate situations like this is hospitals acting against the express wishes of the mother’s family.
Image credits: matheus__.borges
“In a number of highly publicised cases, continuation of maternal physiological support after brain death has been attempted against the express wishes of the patient’s family,” he wrote.
The study also put forward a concerning figure, citing a German study of 30 cases of brain-dead mothers, of which only 63% were able to successfully deliver their babies.
Brazil’s legal system forbids abortions beyond the third month, which means doctors must do all they can to keep Joyce’s baby alive
Image credits: viralagora
Aside from the complex ethical considerations of surrounding the subject matter, legal concerns also need to be taken into account.
Brazil is a signatory of the American Human Rights Convention, which grants the right to life to human embryos, including intrauterine ones. In 2016, the Supreme Court in Brazil ruled that abortion was not considered a crime in the first three months of pregnancy.
Image credits: estreitonline
Beyond that specific timeframe, the procedure is only allowed if the mother was raped, to save the mother’s life, and in the case of an anencephalic fetus.
Joyce’s baby being a 6-month-old, means that doctors are under the obligation to preserve its life to the best of their ability. The mother’s family have also expressed willingness to receive the baby.
Image credits: sousa_joy9890
View this post on Instagram
“The worst part is knowing that the children will grow up without a mother,” the father explained.
The family is now looking for a way to raise money to send Joyce’s body to the state of Tocantins, in the center of Brazil, after the baby is born, with the father putting up a video on Instagram explaining their situation.
“Any strong woman would do this,” one reader wrote, believing Joyce would’ve been happy with the decision the doctors made
Image credits: dan2006y
Image credits: poraodocaos
Image credits: naoironicamentw
Image credits: caracavic
Image credits: sunshineMiny
Image credits: Maxnogueirat
Image credits: sandroewillian
Image credits: 2d_ryuzuuki
Image credits: akutagawazinho
Image credits: bebelaleao
Image credits: IzzieDash
Image credits: vct_fl
Image credits: bibi_pitica
Poll Question
Thanks! Check out the results:
Newsletter
Subscribe to Access
Exclusive Polls
By entering your email and clicking Subscribe, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Privacy Policy.
Thank you! You've successfully subscribed to newsletters!
What do you think ?
JB 1 day ago (edited)
Hold up. Where’s the comments that at 21 she already had a 7-year old? This woman was pregnant at 13 /14 but that fact is lost underneath the facts she is pregnant now. She was a child the first time she got pregnant. She was still a child with her second pregnancy. She was barely an adult with her third yet she’s still being treated as an incubator. Maybe she would have wanted her child to survive no matter what, but I have to question would she make that choice if she wasn’t already convinced that her sole purpose in life is to produce babies.
MaryHadaLittleLamb 1 day ago
I had the same thoughts after doing the math.
Load More Replies...
Libstak 1 day ago
There doesnt seem to be any disparity between what her family wants and what the doctors are doing...where is the issue? 6 months is an undeveloped but functioning heart, lungs, kidneys, brain etc its on the cusp of survivability with medical assistance. In 4 more weeks the baby can be born and incubated safely.
st4x2gt974 19 hours ago
Thank you. I kept looking for the controversy. There isn’t one. Such a pointless article. It’s not our business, so why is it something I should opine on???
Load More Replies...
Reginald 1 day ago (edited)
I’m pro-choice and this a tough one. You wonder what the mother would want in this situation. But ultimately it should be up to the husband, not the government.
Belamy 1 day ago
I agree. It is a tough one. I am pro choice, and have a DNR in place. But, as a mother and grandmother, I'm sure I would opt for life support to save my baby.
Load More Replies...
TruthoftheHeart 22 hours ago
This is not the same as using a already brain dead person to host a pregnancy she was already pregnant and they're just keeping her alive for the sake of her child.
Lee Gilliland 1 day ago
I'm pro-choice, despite the fact I could never personally have an abortion, and I would be happy if my child lived.
Jenna Kay 1 day ago
As a mom, I would want my child to live if at all possible. She seems to have wanted to have the child, I can't imagine she would have wished for his death. Yes, she was young, as other posters here have said, but that has nothing to do with the current situation, now does it.
Earonn - 16 hours ago
The fetus is 6 months old, it wouldn't automatically die.
Load More Replies...
Tonyah Mcanelly 1 day ago
I think If the baby has a chance they should do what they can. At this point they are still sustaining a life. I am pro choice but this seems like a special case .
StarCrossedFriday 1 day ago
I get the moral conundrum, but surely ‘performing an abortion’ isn’t the same as ‘unborn child dies when mother does too’? Also, why are the doctors making this decision? Shouldn’t her family have some say, assuming they know best what she presumably would have wanted?
StarCrossedFriday 13 hours ago
100% might be a bit much, but I’m sure many would, yes…
Load More Replies...
Lou Cam 16 hours ago (edited)
Ask any mother who carries a planned and much wanted pregnancy the question. Yes absolutely they would want the baby to live even if it meant keeping their body alive. I say this as a mother of two. I would have no hesitation in making this my wish. This is not a case of a SA situation and the mother was not sacrificed for the baby. The family wants and will love the baby. Not an issue.
Ima Blogman 17 hours ago
This is not a "woman's choice" debate, so cut it out. She is brain dead. She is simply an incubator. Hard fact.
Mjskywalk 9 hours ago
Did anyone notice the line “The study also put forward a concerning figure, citing a German study of 30 cases of brain-dead mothers, of which only 63% were able to successfully deliver their babies.” 63% is a pretty decent chance-there are a lot of treatments that have worse odds that we use regularly, but the way this article is written apparently we shouldn’t bother with any of those treatments. If she was an organ donor this would not be a “controversy,” even though it amounts to the same thing (giving up your dead body to give someone else life).
Nelson Álvarez Sáez 1 day ago
"which means doctors must do all they can to keep Joyce’s baby alive." Well said, BP. There's a baby involved.
Heather Menard 1 day ago
So she was 14 when she had her first kid. Um why is that not a red flag
Sally Horrocks 12 hours ago
Not an easy choice, but I can't see how taking the mother off of life support would be considered abortion.
Karina 13 hours ago
A braindead body cant regulate bodytemperature, hormone production, stresslevels from hormone accumulation and provides non of the rythm and movements a child needs for developing healthily inside the womb. And poor shild, she was 12 or 13 when she got pregnant the first time.
Nils Skirnir 19 hours ago
Add to all this the recent comments by a scientific advisor to the UK’s Conservative Party agreeing with the Colombian scientist. She stated that we should consider impregnating all brain dead women so that we can use them as surrogates to increase the birth rate. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10491701/
painttheyellowsubgreen 7 hours ago
The state isn't the one who decided to leave the womans body on life support, her husband did. So "add to all this the recent comments by" whoever. She wasn't impregnated after she died, she was already pregnant with a baby that her and her husband wanted. She isn't a surrogate, it's her baby. This situation is not the same as what the advisor is suggesting. Using brain dead women as surrogates is an insane, illegal, immoral, abhorrent idea. And until every child in foster care and group homes in the UK have been adopted she needs to shut her mouth. She doesn't care about increasing the birth rate, she wants control and to get her greedy little hands on the money they can make selling babies, I mean adopting out the babies.
Load More Replies...
Bean Driller 1 hour ago
Not sure why this is even controversial. She won't even need to carry the baby long. The baby can be delivered long before 40 weeks with support. This mother wanted her baby, the dad wants his baby, how on Earth is there debate on this???
Vermonta 8 hours ago
This happened to my cousin's wife in her 3rd pregnancy. They found breast cancer after she was pregnant so no chemo. she died when almost 8 months pregnant. They kept her alive until it was safe to birth the baby. The baby is 22 years old now and doing fine. It was a sad time.
zims 15 hours ago
She was happily married with two kids already and was clearly planning on carrying the third. The only people upset at this are the ones who are already upset about a woman's role in the reproductive cycle, and they won't be happy until we outsource pregnancy to machines and human childbearing is 100% optional for everyone.
Chris the Bobcat 22 hours ago
No one is commenting on how a 21 year old mother has a 7 year old child? (I looked up this story and it appears to be real. Articles exist in Portuguese about this sad case.)
painttheyellowsubgreen 19 hours ago
The article doesn't because it has nothing to do with the situation.
Load More Replies...
Zero Costa 22 hours ago
uhh why is no one thinking about how this kid is going to feel when they learn what happened in the future. that's horrific. this kid is going to need years and years of therapy
Earonn - 16 hours ago
It's the Erlanger Baby ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlanger_baby ) all over again. If she agreed beforehand to it, okay. If not, it's a terrible dilemma. If the fetus were too young to survive outside the womb it would be one thing, but at 6 months - there's lots of preemies being born even earlier than that. Also, if a woman's body can be used without her consent to 'save a life", does it mean we can use the bodies of comatose men, too? We could harvest one of their kidneys, after all, if they are braindead they won't need them anymore.
painttheyellowsubgreen 7 hours ago
She couldn't agree to it beforehand, she died. Her husband has the legal responsibility for her body. He chose to keep the body on life support to hopefully gestate the baby to a safer delivery window. Her body parts aren't being stolen to give to other people. I'm exhausted just imagining the mental gymnastics. And by the way a the next of kin of the deceased has the legal right to make decisions like organ donations even if the person who died didn't sign up to be an organ donor. Your rights to your body end with death unless you did the legal paperwork to limit specific actions while you were still alive.
Load More Replies...
Atom Bohr 1 day ago
There are some troubling aspects to this reporting. 1. The "baby" is not 6 months old. Age begins at birth, not before. This is a 6 month pregnancy or a foetus at 6 month's development. 2. There's no mention here of the fact this woman was groomed and raped. She was 21 at her time of death and already had a 7 year old by a guy 2 years older. 2 years isn't much when all involved are adults, but when the youngest party is 13/14 at the time of becoming pregnant, that is concerning. 3. There was no mention here of what her family's wishes are.
Reginald 23 hours ago
You’re assuming a lot. I’m assuming that she was 13/14, and that she and her (now) husband have been together the entire time, and that they are the parents of all 3 children. Which isn’t ideal, but they were teen bf/gf, and he didn’t groom or rape her.
Load More Replies...
Big Bear Buchko 8 hours ago
Most women live with no noticeable brain activity. This really isn't any different.
painttheyellowsubgreen 22 hours ago
She died intact, just like you want. Tada🥳🤗 However, her husband, who has the legal right to make choices about the body she used to inhabit decided to keep the engine running even though there is no driver, because there is a passanger on board that he would like to have arrive at its destination.
Load More Replies...
Reginald 23 hours ago
You’re assuming that she wouldn’t have wanted this. What matters now is what the husband/family want. It is not rape by any stretch of the imagination.
Load More Replies... JB 1 day ago (edited)
Hold up. Where’s the comments that at 21 she already had a 7-year old? This woman was pregnant at 13 /14 but that fact is lost underneath the facts she is pregnant now. She was a child the first time she got pregnant. She was still a child with her second pregnancy. She was barely an adult with her third yet she’s still being treated as an incubator. Maybe she would have wanted her child to survive no matter what, but I have to question would she make that choice if she wasn’t already convinced that her sole purpose in life is to produce babies.
MaryHadaLittleLamb 1 day ago
I had the same thoughts after doing the math.
Load More Replies... Libstak 1 day ago
There doesnt seem to be any disparity between what her family wants and what the doctors are doing...where is the issue? 6 months is an undeveloped but functioning heart, lungs, kidneys, brain etc its on the cusp of survivability with medical assistance. In 4 more weeks the baby can be born and incubated safely.
st4x2gt974 19 hours ago
Thank you. I kept looking for the controversy. There isn’t one. Such a pointless article. It’s not our business, so why is it something I should opine on???
Load More Replies... Reginald 1 day ago (edited)
I’m pro-choice and this a tough one. You wonder what the mother would want in this situation. But ultimately it should be up to the husband, not the government.
Belamy 1 day ago
I agree. It is a tough one. I am pro choice, and have a DNR in place. But, as a mother and grandmother, I'm sure I would opt for life support to save my baby.
Load More Replies... TruthoftheHeart 22 hours ago
This is not the same as using a already brain dead person to host a pregnancy she was already pregnant and they're just keeping her alive for the sake of her child.
Lee Gilliland 1 day ago
I'm pro-choice, despite the fact I could never personally have an abortion, and I would be happy if my child lived.
Jenna Kay 1 day ago
As a mom, I would want my child to live if at all possible. She seems to have wanted to have the child, I can't imagine she would have wished for his death. Yes, she was young, as other posters here have said, but that has nothing to do with the current situation, now does it.
Earonn - 16 hours ago
The fetus is 6 months old, it wouldn't automatically die.
Load More Replies... Tonyah Mcanelly 1 day ago
I think If the baby has a chance they should do what they can. At this point they are still sustaining a life. I am pro choice but this seems like a special case .
StarCrossedFriday 1 day ago
I get the moral conundrum, but surely ‘performing an abortion’ isn’t the same as ‘unborn child dies when mother does too’? Also, why are the doctors making this decision? Shouldn’t her family have some say, assuming they know best what she presumably would have wanted?
StarCrossedFriday 13 hours ago
100% might be a bit much, but I’m sure many would, yes…
Load More Replies... Lou Cam 16 hours ago (edited)
Ask any mother who carries a planned and much wanted pregnancy the question. Yes absolutely they would want the baby to live even if it meant keeping their body alive. I say this as a mother of two. I would have no hesitation in making this my wish. This is not a case of a SA situation and the mother was not sacrificed for the baby. The family wants and will love the baby. Not an issue.
Ima Blogman 17 hours ago
This is not a "woman's choice" debate, so cut it out. She is brain dead. She is simply an incubator. Hard fact.
Mjskywalk 9 hours ago
Did anyone notice the line “The study also put forward a concerning figure, citing a German study of 30 cases of brain-dead mothers, of which only 63% were able to successfully deliver their babies.” 63% is a pretty decent chance-there are a lot of treatments that have worse odds that we use regularly, but the way this article is written apparently we shouldn’t bother with any of those treatments. If she was an organ donor this would not be a “controversy,” even though it amounts to the same thing (giving up your dead body to give someone else life).
Nelson Álvarez Sáez 1 day ago
"which means doctors must do all they can to keep Joyce’s baby alive." Well said, BP. There's a baby involved.
Heather Menard 1 day ago
So she was 14 when she had her first kid. Um why is that not a red flag
Sally Horrocks 12 hours ago
Not an easy choice, but I can't see how taking the mother off of life support would be considered abortion.
Karina 13 hours ago
A braindead body cant regulate bodytemperature, hormone production, stresslevels from hormone accumulation and provides non of the rythm and movements a child needs for developing healthily inside the womb. And poor shild, she was 12 or 13 when she got pregnant the first time.
Nils Skirnir 19 hours ago
Add to all this the recent comments by a scientific advisor to the UK’s Conservative Party agreeing with the Colombian scientist. She stated that we should consider impregnating all brain dead women so that we can use them as surrogates to increase the birth rate. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10491701/
painttheyellowsubgreen 7 hours ago
The state isn't the one who decided to leave the womans body on life support, her husband did. So "add to all this the recent comments by" whoever. She wasn't impregnated after she died, she was already pregnant with a baby that her and her husband wanted. She isn't a surrogate, it's her baby. This situation is not the same as what the advisor is suggesting. Using brain dead women as surrogates is an insane, illegal, immoral, abhorrent idea. And until every child in foster care and group homes in the UK have been adopted she needs to shut her mouth. She doesn't care about increasing the birth rate, she wants control and to get her greedy little hands on the money they can make selling babies, I mean adopting out the babies.
Load More Replies... Bean Driller 1 hour ago
Not sure why this is even controversial. She won't even need to carry the baby long. The baby can be delivered long before 40 weeks with support. This mother wanted her baby, the dad wants his baby, how on Earth is there debate on this???
Vermonta 8 hours ago
This happened to my cousin's wife in her 3rd pregnancy. They found breast cancer after she was pregnant so no chemo. she died when almost 8 months pregnant. They kept her alive until it was safe to birth the baby. The baby is 22 years old now and doing fine. It was a sad time.
zims 15 hours ago
She was happily married with two kids already and was clearly planning on carrying the third. The only people upset at this are the ones who are already upset about a woman's role in the reproductive cycle, and they won't be happy until we outsource pregnancy to machines and human childbearing is 100% optional for everyone.
Chris the Bobcat 22 hours ago
No one is commenting on how a 21 year old mother has a 7 year old child? (I looked up this story and it appears to be real. Articles exist in Portuguese about this sad case.)
painttheyellowsubgreen 19 hours ago
The article doesn't because it has nothing to do with the situation.
Load More Replies... Zero Costa 22 hours ago
uhh why is no one thinking about how this kid is going to feel when they learn what happened in the future. that's horrific. this kid is going to need years and years of therapy
Earonn - 16 hours ago
It's the Erlanger Baby ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlanger_baby ) all over again. If she agreed beforehand to it, okay. If not, it's a terrible dilemma. If the fetus were too young to survive outside the womb it would be one thing, but at 6 months - there's lots of preemies being born even earlier than that. Also, if a woman's body can be used without her consent to 'save a life", does it mean we can use the bodies of comatose men, too? We could harvest one of their kidneys, after all, if they are braindead they won't need them anymore.
painttheyellowsubgreen 7 hours ago
She couldn't agree to it beforehand, she died. Her husband has the legal responsibility for her body. He chose to keep the body on life support to hopefully gestate the baby to a safer delivery window. Her body parts aren't being stolen to give to other people. I'm exhausted just imagining the mental gymnastics. And by the way a the next of kin of the deceased has the legal right to make decisions like organ donations even if the person who died didn't sign up to be an organ donor. Your rights to your body end with death unless you did the legal paperwork to limit specific actions while you were still alive.
Load More Replies... Atom Bohr 1 day ago
There are some troubling aspects to this reporting. 1. The "baby" is not 6 months old. Age begins at birth, not before. This is a 6 month pregnancy or a foetus at 6 month's development. 2. There's no mention here of the fact this woman was groomed and raped. She was 21 at her time of death and already had a 7 year old by a guy 2 years older. 2 years isn't much when all involved are adults, but when the youngest party is 13/14 at the time of becoming pregnant, that is concerning. 3. There was no mention here of what her family's wishes are.
Reginald 23 hours ago
You’re assuming a lot. I’m assuming that she was 13/14, and that she and her (now) husband have been together the entire time, and that they are the parents of all 3 children. Which isn’t ideal, but they were teen bf/gf, and he didn’t groom or rape her.
Load More Replies... Big Bear Buchko 8 hours ago
Most women live with no noticeable brain activity. This really isn't any different.
painttheyellowsubgreen 22 hours ago
She died intact, just like you want. Tada🥳🤗 However, her husband, who has the legal right to make choices about the body she used to inhabit decided to keep the engine running even though there is no driver, because there is a passanger on board that he would like to have arrive at its destination.
Load More Replies... Reginald 23 hours ago
You’re assuming that she wouldn’t have wanted this. What matters now is what the husband/family want. It is not rape by any stretch of the imagination.
Load More Replies... You May Like Twin Posed As Deceased Sister For Five Years To Spare Family From Further Heartbreak “Tell Him To Get Lost": Elon Musk’s Dad Humbles Him By Asking People To Dismiss What He Says People Sympathize With ‘Harry Potter’ Actor Warwick Davis As He Sues Hospital After Wife’s Passing
Renan Duarte
Karina Babenok
Donata Leskauskaite
Related on Bored Panda
22
105