Conceptual Coordinates of "Mother Life Threat and Risk" in Therapeutic Abortion Laws

The legislature, by enacting the abortion clause in Article 1384 as well as the enactment of clause 718 in 1392, greatly altered the disagreement over the abortion license. However, the literature of the two articles and their correspondence with each other has led to a vague reading for medical and judicial experts as far as the notion of Article 84 is strengthened by Article 718. The first ambiguity goes back to the words "threat" and "danger" in the legal material. Article 84 states that it is permissible to abort the fetus if the mother becomes a "life threat". Note Article 718 BC issues the same license with the term "mother's life threat". Why do legislators have two different interpretations? Do each of the words 'threat' and 'danger' represent a particular issue that the legislator has deliberately referred to? The second ambiguity surrounding the possibility of extending the concept of conditional threat or life-threatening; does the legislature's intent of the term "life-threatening or threatening" exclusively involve the death, or does it include the disabling and destruction of organs? The present article uses a descriptive-analytical method based on medical and jurisprudential data and concludes that there is a substantial difference between the words "threat" and "danger" in the legislature's language, which precludes the issue of Article 84 of the Constitution. It is also concluded that the possibility of developing the concept of life-threatening organ failure and benefits must be differentiated between pre- and post-cure of the soul.