babelfish

If anyone's interested, I've been having a very interesting (yet disturbing) discussion on Christianforums.com with "Knight" about this very same issue.

If you want to get the basic Pro-Life party line as mouthed by an ardent pro-lifer (not a moderate like our Sabine Grant), <a href="http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=488911#post488911" target="_blank">click here</a>.

(BTW, I'm "judy")

[ December 04, 2002: Message edited by: babelfish ]</p>

Sabine Grant

Good morning Babelfish!
Dehydration and starvation are not uncommon as a method of euthanasia. I am not sure what methods of pain reducing factors are used in that situation.
Here is the problem in my opinion: if we focus at all on the stages of development of the human fetus, we open up " a can of worms" by approaching the forbidden subject of its humanity. But the reality remains that at some point of time, a fetus has the "ability" to feel pain. Can we guarantee that a curretage performed at 12 weeks induces no pain whatsoever to the embryo?I have yet to find accurate data which guarantees that measure of "mercy". Maybe some of you have.
In your opinion should we ignore the pain factor after we evaluate when an embryo or fetus can develop the sense of physical pain? At what stages has medical and scientific data evaluated that sense to be developed?
The way the Supreme Court validated Roe v Wade was by eliminating constitutional identity from the "persona" of the unborn at any stages. Same constitutional identity which guarantees the right to die peacefuly and without any pain. In other words, the human fetus has no protection from pain because it is not recognized as a human being until it is actualy born ( I believe that it means that the head of the fetus is totaly disengaged from the birth canal).
The Supreme Court would have to revise then the status of the unborn to promote legislation that would guarantee merciful procedures during an abortion. Do you see the dilemna?

brighid

Sabine,

I think you bring up some very interesting points and all can be answered with the use of anesthesia. I will have to look up the literature, but from what I remember pain receptors aren't developed prior to ... oh, my coffee has not yet kicked in so I will double check this later - around 20 weeks. Certainly in the earliest stages of development, such as during the blastocyst or zygote stage nothing resembling a human nervous system (or even a human being for that matter) exists to presume that it can feel pain. It would be like asking if a cancerous tumour felt pain when irradiated or if it was surgically removed.

Roe v. Wade allows for the advancement of science and knowledge and rulings since then reflect the developing "persona" of human development from conception onward. The humanity of this growing organism is not negated through the right or the action to abort, most specifically in the earliest stages where the VAST majority of abortions are preformed.

The focus on late-term abortions is a very manipulative tactic for much of the Pro-Life movement in an attempt to break down the barriers preventing them from completely outlawing abortion at ALL stages of the pregnancy, as well as attacking birth control methods. THIS is far more dangerous and inhumane then they .01% of fetuses that will be aborted via late-term abortion methods that are not of the D&X nature (even those done via hysterectomy, D&E and labor induction.)

Where is the humanity in forcing a woman to give birth to a child she either does not want, is incapable of caring for because of financial, emotional or physical reasons (either poor health, poverty or reoccuring domestic violence?) Especially when it can be prevented through adequate sexual education, ubiquitous access to birth control and the choice to abort if necessary?

I am for regulate late-term abortion. I am for anesthetizing a fetus who has developed any pain receptors. Unfortunately the "merciful" right to die isn't even available to the born who through their own fruition desire to end their lives without terrible pain. The same people who oppose abortion, often times oppose any measures to help terminally ill people die with dignity and without pain.

I see the Pro-Choice movement as being far more for the human dignity of women, children and others then what I see of the majority of the Pro-Life movement. The motive behind much of the Pro-Life movement seems to be about punishing women for the sins of Eve and the legacy we allegedly inhereted through her seductive deception of Adam and the punishment dolled out by this God of theirs (who IMHO is a cruel bastard.)

The problem is not abortion and it is certainly not late-term abortions that are done to save the life or health of the mother, or the terminate a severly deformed fetus. Make no mistake, the Pro-Life movement in this country desires to remove the ability for women to control their destinies through denying any sort of reproductive freedom. We all know abortion won't end if it becomes illegal once more, so if the Pro-Life movement is really that - PRO-LIFE then it needs to address all the reasons why women will risks their lives to terminate a pregnancy. The Pro-Life movement needs to understand that women are valuable and deserve the dignity the so desire for the unborn, but that they so often deny and repress in those who actually make it into this life.

So, let's not obfuscate the important issues facing women and children by focusing on emotional responses of "what about the children?" or exaggerated and mythical notions of women who seek late-term abortions and the erroneous "fact" that there are NO limitations on late-term abortions. Instead let us focus our time, energy and attention on the issues that will drastically reduce a woman's need to chose an abortion as the best option. Why is it that no one sees that senseless tragedy in the fact that MILLIONS of women every single year, through out the whole of human history feel the best choice is to terminate a pregnancy? THIS is the real tragedy, not the babies lost but that conditions are consistently so deplorable for women all over this world that they would rather terminate a pregnancy then continue one.

Brighid

babelfish

Here are a few quotes from pro-lifers from
<a href="http://www.christianforums.com/forums/13.html" target="_blank">christianforums, </a> where I enjoy slumming once in a while:


After I asked one poster this:

This was the answer I got:

It's very sobering to know that there are people who want to run the country, who want to tell women what they can and can't do with their uteruses, who feel this way.

brighid

They feel this way because they live in shallow, constrained worlds and lack the ability to empathize. How Christian of them to be UNABLE to walk a mile in another persons shoes? How hypocritical of them to condemn the woman who gets an abortion, but to show compassion to Susan Smith who KNEW it was wrong and ILLEGAL. Perhaps that point could be illuminated by the fact that she LIED and she killed her LIVING children, not some blastocyst or zygote but children that were actually living, breathing, VIABLE human beings. Oh, pity the poor woman. She murdered her children, then lied on national TV and blamed a BLACK man for her actions all because a man didn't want to be involved with a woman who had children. Sure she couldn't have easily chosen the compassionate thing and simply asked her husband to take custody of them. That would be too much to ask of the feable minded, subservient female incapable of making decisions for herself when the rightful head of her household has now left her.

Women are only unedcuated about abortion because of the Pro-life movement and the restrictions and lack of availablity and services available to women because of the social STIGMA. Guess who creates that social stigma? Yes, you guessed it the PRO-LIFE movement.

There are also millions of women (and men) who suffer the same ill emotional affects after having a baby against their will. Difficult decisions often have painful consequences. Those painful regrets don't mitigate the removal of the action. Blastocysts, zygotes and fetuses that have no brain or functioning central nervous systems are no more human then any other mutli-celled organism.

This is what happens when a nation subjects it children to incredibly poor science and critical thinking education standards - blind ignorance which leads to an unconscionably easy ability to manipulate the minds of the masses with half-truths and fallacious appeals to emtion. Facts are simply irrelevant to the emotionally confused ignorant.

Brighid

Sabine Grant

Bonsoir Brighid...I had suggested earlier that including in the sex Ed curriculum the various stages of development of the human fetus would then enlight the next generation. IMO often medical and scientific data on that topic remains absent from public school education.
Maybe such data would determine when does the embryo or fetus can sense pain and at what point we face the moral issue of inflicting pain thru any abortion procedure. But do we want to determine it ?
Such data would promote better contraception and keep the abortion rate at the first ten weeks or so.( unless it is an abortion for medical reasons). With proper education, there would be no need for later term abortions where we may face the moral issue of the humanity of the fetus.
I do not believe that solutions are to be political ones. They need to be definitly a matter of education at all levels.
The right to choose remains but with proper data. Prevention is what we all need to focus on.
Brighid, it is only on my 3d abortion that I realized that I could not use anylonger abortion as a way out of my irresponsibility. I was faced with the details of the humanity of the unborn thru the boldness of my physician.My concern for the unborn stemmed from that experience.
Since then my level of concern for the physical pain of a fetus has been what connects me to the pro life movement. I believe women need to be able to choose. But I also believe that the fetus should have the right to not suffer.
How do we achieve that ? do we continue to deny any sensitivity to pain for a 16 weeks old fetus or do we invest in the necessary research to determine when exactly an embryo or later fetus can feel pain?
Do we continue to dwell on the absence of persona or do we deal with scientific data?
It is difficult for me to comprehend that we will show compassion to a beloved pet and alleviate its pain with peaceful euthanasia but we will hesitate to determine the level of pain a fetus will feel because it has no constitutional protection and it is not wanted.
Should the criteria of ending any life be based on whether it is wanted or not wanted or based on ending it without any sufferings?
I have not met so many christians who said " poor woman" as they commented on Susan Smith's horrendous crime. But I have met christians who rejoiced when Ted Bundy was executed. I cannot imagine rejoicing on anyone's death. I can see how the death of a serial killer brings closure to the grief of the families and friends of the victims, but to rejoice as christians.... hmmmm.
Compassion, Brighid, needs not to be deserved.
Whether a woman killed her own child or chose to end the life inside herself, compassion should always be available.

brighid

I think we achieve that through continued scientific exploration and ubiquitous availability to medical data for ALL people.

What I have continuously found in my personal research into the medical aspects of fetal development, abortion and the ethical quandries of abortion is that the medical community does not seem to want a SET time frame as to when and individual fetus is viable, etc. The prevailing sentiment is that the individual case should be evaluated on the basis of the uniqueness of each situation. Some fetuses may feel pain prior to the established timeline for nerve and brain development, some may develop much later or NOT at all. Therefore, each case must be jugded on it's own merits.

General guidelines should be established, but the final judgment must be left between the woman and her chosen doctor. If SHE wishes to gain a second opinion then she should be able to, but no law should be established that mandates she receive multipe opinions.

I don't believe a "persona" exists until much later in the pregnancy. I am not sure if you are confining your comments only to abortions later in pregnancy, but I will restrict mine to late-term procedures.

I concur with the AMA in regard to the necessity to anesthetize fetuses that have been determined to be able to feel pain.

I share your concern that we have the ability to compassionately terminate the lives of terminally ill animals, but we cannot compassionately terminate the pain and life of terminally ill human beings, or potential human beings who have not yet achieved full personhood, and therefore the right to full protection.

The courts have recognized that with advances in technology and thereby knowledge that existing laws may have to be modified. I agree, but where you and I differ is that although we both share equal concern for the pain and life of the unborn and the mother, I will not side with the Pro-Life movement because of the agenda they push - namely an utter lack of concern for the mother, the desire to punish the sinning "whore" and their complete failure to work for the living.

I am "pro-life" in the sense that I desire to presever the CHOICE for all women while addressing the changing status of fetal personhood. However a woman's life, health and rights remain first and foremost until the point of independent viability. Until there is a better social system in place to care for unwanted children I do not support removing the fetus at the point of viability, at least in most cases.

I think you and I care about many of the same things and are probably closer together, than we are further apart on this issue.

I am sorry for your losses and any pain your actions, choices and consequences have caused you. I think you bring up some very valid points, points that do need to be addressed. Hopefully we can continue to find common ground, but I do not feel the broad reality women face that lead to the choice of abortion should be overshadowed by the scientifically "debatable" personhood of the fetus.

If only .01% of all abortions in the US are late-term then I think we are doing a fairly good job addressing that issue. For the percentage of those late-term abortions that are performed for reasons OTHER than the life and health of the mother, or severe fetal deformity incompatable with life we must address the REASONS why a woman/girl is so desperate (or even selfish) that she feels this is the ONLY or best choice to make. The reasons I have previously outlined come into play in the scenario and cause a much heavier moral loss then those performed for the same reasons at the earliest stages of development.

Why do a handful of women choose a D&X or D&E procedure other then to save their lives, health or to terminate a brain dead, or severely deformed fetus? Shouldn't our concern be here, with the woman as well as with the unborn? Eliminate the need and the entire moral argument, loss of life and pain goes away. This is where our energies should be focused and we should not allow the radicals on either side to distract us from improving the lives of men, women and children so that abortion becomes nothing more then a rare choice. Now that is a "pro-life" stance ALL morally upright, compassionate people should be able to fully support.

Brighid