ex-xian

I know this has probably been done to death, but I usually hang out in philosophy and science forums. Besides, I have my own questions that I'd like to pose.

When I was a xian, I was opposed to abortion except when the mother's life was in danger...even if the pregnancy was the result of incest or rape. My reasoning was as follows:

Human life begins at conception; abortion, therefore, is the taking of human life. In the case of rape/incest, the criminal is the perpetrator. It would be wrong to kill the baby as it is as innocent as the mother. The mother's life expection was b/c the surgery was to save the life of the mother. The fact that the child was killed in the process was unfortunate, but unavoidable.

Since my deconversion, I've shed most of my religous-based ethical views, ie, beliefs about homosexuals, pre-marital sex, yadda, yadda.

But I still have questions about the morality of abortion. If the fetus is not a full human being, then when does it become a full human being? If it is a full human being, how is justifiable to kill it, except to save another life?

I realize that this can be an emotionally charged issue, so please don't flame me.

Toto

Most non-religious people think that a fetus attains human status when it is developed enough to survive outside the womb - roughly at 6 months. (Some fetuses have survived at 22 weeks, but most do not survive and the ones that do tend to have severe problems.) Others look to brain development - the earliest that brain structures develop so that the fetus can feel pain or possibly have consciousness is later, at about 8 months. But practically speaking, abortions get more complicated after 6 months, and are generally only done for medical reasons, to save the life or health of the woman, or because the fetus is severely abnormal.

What problems do you see in this answer?

ex-xian

Wouldn't this imply that the definition of humanity has changed throughout time? As medical technology progresses, the earliest possible survival time goes back. Also, if the definition of humanity is the ability to survive independantly (without direct infusion of oxygen, food, etc), do medical patients who need machines to breath and eat cease to be human?

There have been babies born with only a brain stem and no brain. Are they unhuman? I understand the pain criteria, but I don't think that something as obscure as the consciouness of a fetus or an infant should be a standard.

But how does being able to feel pain make one human?

Please understand, I'm honestly not being sarcastic or facetious--I really am discombobulated by this issue.

Daleth

These questions are hard for me, and personal. I'd have to say that I think a baby is a person the minute it's born and not before. I'd also say that a fetus with a functional brain is a sentient creature deserving of compassion, though not full human rights. That is, once it's capable of suffering, I don't care that it's not a person... like any animal it deserves protection from harm. Prior to sentience, I don't see anything more than a bunch of cells which may or may not have a deep sentimental value to the parents.

I say that it's not a person before it's born because of my own experiences... I've had 2 stillbirths. People I have met, whether they believe full human rights begin at conception or believe that full human rights should begin at age 25, do not look at me as the mother of 2 dead children. When these things happened, nobody acted like I'd just lost a child. I'd lost a pregnancy, a possible child, potential and sentiment about it. There was debate over whether I should have funerals. Some said I should so I could move on and others said I should because I'd be dwelling. None said I should have a funeral to honor the lost children. When you lose an 8-year-old, it's a person, and people understand that you miss that individual. Some ninny may say you can still have more kids, but none act like little Joey can just be replaced. People may say that they believe a fetus is a human being, but in my experience they don't mean it, not really. Since people are the only ones to decide what is a person, I'd say we've shown what our decision is by our actions. Our actions show something like this: it's not a person until it's been known by other people.

As for the rest of it, I believe that before there is sentience, abortion is morally neutral. After there is sentience, I'd consider it to be cruel in cases other than medical necessity (life or health of the mother) or euthanasia (fetus has some horrible defect that was not or could not be detected earlier).

Hope that makes some sort of sense.
Dal

Viti

I don't consider a brainless body a person. The cells are human, but so are cancer cells.

Daleth, my condolences on your stillborns. People often are seemingly cruel in such situations because they are plain stupid.

edited because the English language seems to have escaped me tonight

Pyrrho

The first thing to do is to remember that there is a difference between something being potentially something and it actually being that something. For example, some tubes of paint and a canvass are potentially a great work of art, but they are also potentially a hideous mess. They actually are just tubes of paint and a canvass. A sperm cell and an egg cell can potentially become a human (if we are talking about human cells), but they are just a sperm cell and an egg cell.

Another thing to keep in mind is the fact that humans are not anything other than animals. You may still have the idea that people are something "more" than animals from your religious background, as humans are supposedly made in the image of God. But the plain fact is, humans are animals, and nothing more. Humans are just a specific species of animal, as dogs are a specific species, and every other animal is of a specific species.

As for killing a fetus or not, I recommend considering what it is at each stage, and consider whether or not it would be okay to kill such a thing, as it is at that moment. Some have suggested that being able to feel pain is relevant. This may be, but are you unwilling to kill (or have killed by someone else) other things that feel pain (say, for food, even though you'd probably be more healthy if you were a vegetarian)? Whatever principle you apply, I recommend applying it consistently. If it is not okay to kill something with characteristics X, Y, and Z, then don't kill anything with those characteristics.


You might also want to consider the motivations behind killing fetuses, as it is not something that anyone does on a whim, or for sport. In fact, no one really wants an abortion. (Just in case someone imagines that that is a typographical error, I'll say it again: No one really wants an abortion.) No one goes out and gets pregnant for the purpose of having an abortion. What people want is to not be pregnant, or not pregnant at that time, or not pregnant with that malformed fetus. So if they are pregnant and don't want to be, then the only way to not be pregnant right away is to have an abortion. As things are, there are problems with every type of birth control (none are absolutely perfect, though sterilization, preferably a vasectomy for the man as it is less invasive, is almost perfect, unless a child is wanted in the future). So, no matter how "responsible" people are, if they have heterosexual sex, and they are both fertile, then there is a possibility of a pregnancy. Should a woman in such a situation be forced to give birth if she becomes pregnant?


Obviously, I have not said whether killing a fetus is okay or not. What I am suggesting that you do is to think very carefully about what it is to kill a fetus, and what a fetus is compared with other things, as well as the motivation behind doing so. Unless you are pregnant right now, you have time to think about it, so don't make any hasty decisions about it.

diana

Thank you, Daleth. I've never seen it from that angle, as I've never given birth, but you just made the single best point I've ever seen made in this debate, bar none.

d

livius drusus

This may well be one of the most extraodinary paragraphs I have ever read in my life. I certainly have never seen anything both so clear-headed and heartfelt on a severely polarized subject like abortion. Thank you, Daleth.

Opera Nut

Daleth, I am so sorry about your stillbirths. I have had a healthy baby but no still births or miscarriages.

I think when bad things happen and society does not have a ritual to deal with it, or that ritual is inadequate for your processing of the event, then you must make up your own meaningful ritual, with words and objects that mean something personal to you. People who are not allowed to grieve over losses, because society says it's not important, carry their grief around for decades and feel guilt over it, when they shouldn't.

A person should do whatever they think they need emotionally, whether it's a funeral, a memorial service, or what.

I do know that in Japan they have temples with little dolls in them where people can grieve for the death of a fetus or an abortion.

I think it's analagous to the suffering many people experience when their beloved dog dies (I cried while reading Dr. Rick's story of his beloved Forrest's death and his loss).

Nowadays we even have grassroots support groups for the death of a child, or the death of a pet, and possibly even for fetal deaths -- I don't know.

I went to Compassionate Friends for several years. It is for parents of a dead child, of any age or any reason. I went to the main group and the sibling group, because my big sister died of cancer at age 42 in 1990. The sibling group had people in age from 8 or 9 years old to 50 or so.

I had to go to CF to deal with her death.
Everybody got a turn to talk, and just talking about the person who died and saying the good and the bad as well, helped me process it. I don't think I would have gotten thru it without Compassionate Friends.

At CF they had a fridge magnet that said something very profound and fitting. One of those statements that blows your mind with its truth. The magnet said It is Better to Speak Ill of the Dead, than Not to Speak of them at All.

Amen.

I have a table in my house where I have framed pictures of my dead friends and relatives -- people who I was close to and had an impact on my life. I sometimes light a candle on days when one of them died, like a yahrzeit candle in the Jewish tradition, and walk by and think about the good experiences I had with my friends and relatives.

Since my parents, sister and grandparents are dead, and several very close friends, it's a pretty full altar. The only close relative I have is my daughter.

In fact, I'm gonna have to light a yahrzeit candle real soon, since my sister died July 12, 1990. Her funeral was the 16th, which was absolutely the worst day of my life -- so far.

When our dog died, we had an elaborate funeral in the backyard and we (BF & I) read our favorite poems and statements about death. I read Thanatopsis by William Cullen Bryant and Lord Byron's Epitaph for a Dog, among other things. Some people wouldn't understand that, but some people would.

Again, I'm sorry for your loss.

diana

Maybe I'm just a hardass or something (wouldn't be the first time I've been so accused), but I didn't get that she was grieving or even asking for sympathy.

I think the point of her post was over there somewhere in the other direction.

d