Fetal Rights and Responsible Abortion Practices
Content Updated on May 28, 2009
Note: This is not an article about pro-life/anti-abortion or pro-choice agendas. This is a personal essay about my opinion on abortion and the delicate balance between the rights of women and the rights of unborn children. I must admit that I have never and would never have an elective abortion, even if I became pregnant through an act of rape or incest, unless my own life was endangered by the pregnancy. However, I do not expect that everyone else should choose never to have an elective abortion.
Bad Terminology
Let's get the terminology problems over with.
Aren't most people pro-life? I'm sure there are a few people in the world who may want to see every living organism in the universe destroyed so that rocks can go back to being rocks instead of bricks and water can slosh about without being consumed by thirsty creatures, but other than that, aren't we all pro-life? Don't we all just want to live happily?
I've never met anyone who was pro-abortion, anyone who said, "Hey, we need more abortions in the world. Let's go on a mission to get more females pregnant, so we can abort the babies." People who are pro-choice aren't promoting abortion, they're promoting choice, as in "I would like the opportunity to choose to have an abortion is I absolutely needed one."
So let's change the terminology, pro-choice vs. anti-abortion.
How to Have Fewer Abortions, Birth Control
If you want to reduce the number of abortions in the world, then you need to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.
Birth control. Birth control. Birth control.
As soon as a child grows into an adolescent (i.e. reaches ten years old), we should teach them about sex, abstinence, male condoms, female condoms, spermicides, birth control pills, birth control injections, and so forth. Then we need to make birth control products available to them for free.
When Does Personhood Begin?
Technically, every cell in your body is alive, even a plant or a fungus is alive, so the question isn't when does life begin, but when does personhood begin? To determine the beginning of personhood, we must first define what it means to be a person. What makes us different than a clump of cells? Essentially, we are aware. We may not comprehend the meaning of our own existence. We may not even recognize ourselves as individuals. At some level, though, we know that we exist. We are aware of stimuli. We know when something feels good and when something feels bad. The problem is that we don't exactly know how or when this level of awareness is achieved. Figuring this out is vital to determining the beginning of personhood.
Does Personhood Start at Birth?
Many pro-choice advocates say that "the fetus is a person when the it is born." True, a baby is indeed a person when it is born. But, I must say I dislike this argument because it suggests that the baby was not a person just five minutes before its birth. A fetus five minutes away from being born is just as much a person as a baby born five minutes ago. So my definition of personhood starts before birth.
Does Personhood Start at Viability?
Some definitions of personhood include the idea that the baby must be able to survive outside of the mother's body. However, it wasn't long ago that a child born four weeks early was likely to die. Now that pre-mature child has a very good chance of survival because our medical technology has advanced so much. We've even been able to save the lives of babies born twenty weeks early! Since the baby at twenty weeks gestation has a chance to survive even if not within the womb, I believe that by twenty weeks of pregnancy, the baby is a person and deserves all the rights of any born human being, including the right to live, and anyone having an elective abortion after the twentieth week is committing a homicide.
But not all homicides are bad. Death can be welcomed by somebody who is continually suffering without hope of getting better. (This, of course, stretches into the death with dignity acts, which is another debate.) So it may be morally right to have an elective abortion after twenty weeks of gestation if the baby would have been born with a serious defect that would keep the child in persistent agony (please note that poverty is not a biological congenital defect). It may also be morally right if the baby is expected to remain in a vegetative state after birth with no hope of improvement.
If the pregnancy would likely result in the harm of the mother, then every opportunity should be exhausted to give the baby an early birth and help it survive and thrive. Killing the baby is not typically necessary to remove it from the mother.
I would support legislation to uphold the rights of the fetus after the twentieth week of pregnancy, if they included provisions that allowed for abortions in circumstances that involved extreme birth defects.
Does Personhood Start with Brain Waves?
In a fetus, brainwaves can be detected in the eighth week after conception (the tenth week of pregnancy). Do brainwaves equal consciousness? Not necessarily. Somebody who is brain dead may have brainwaves that regulate pulse, breathing, digestion, etc., in the same way that nerves in the arms and legs can stimulate reflexes in the limbs in paraplegics. However, a person who is brain dead does not have an awareness that can be detected via brainwaves using our current understanding of the brain. A fetus without brainwaves certainly meets the criteria for being brain dead, even if that brain is developing.
It is possible that a fetus that has not achieved brainwaves indicative of thinking does not have an awareness. However, what makes us so sure that we know which brainwaves indicates awareness. I'm a huge fan of science, but science is full of "oops, I guess we were wrong about that" discoveries. We may one day find that awareness occurs before the development of frontal lobe brain wave activity or that awareness is possible in parts of the brain other than the frontal cortex. Then the question becomes, when do brainwaves indicate awareness?
I favor error on the side of caution. I would rather assume that awareness begins at the moment brainwave activity starts and be wrong than kill a person because I assumed it wasn't a person yet. I do not believe everyone should be forced to hold this same standard, though, so I wouldn't support legislation regarding this matter unless a study could prove that the brain waves detected indicated awareness.
Does Personhood Starts When the Spirit Enters the Body?
I'm not God, I don't know when the spirit enters the body. Some religious dogmas teach that the spirit enters the body at birth while other teach that it enters at conception. Some religions teach that there is no soul at all. There is too much disagreement among religions to even attempt to consolidate these teachings into a single idea about when the soul and body join together. I believe that since religion varies from person to person, we should not try to incorporate religion into legal or scientific policies about the state of personhood.
If your religion teaches that the spirit enters the body at conception and that it's wrong to abort a body with a spirit, then don't have an elective abortion, but you should not try to force other people to share your religious beliefs.
The Morning After Pill
The Morning After pill stops a pregnancy before brainwaves even exist. Therefore, I see this method of abortion as causing the expelling of tissue rather than "killing" a person, and I have no problem with it. I'm in favor of having the pill available over the counter without a prescription.
The controversy is that the tissue may potentially develop into a person and that potential should be protected as if it were an actual person. But here's the problem with that logic. Eggs and sperm could potentially turn into people given the right conditions as well, but I don't think we should protect reproductive cells just because they have potential. Likewise, with cloning progress, any cell with DNA can potentially produce life, but trying to protect every DNA filled cell is unrealistic. As far as I'm concerned, a clump of cells is just a clump of cells, no matter what potential it has.
Making Responsible Choices with Information
The most annoying thing I have heard from some women seeking an abortion is, "I don't want to know what the thing looks like. I don't want to know if it's alive. I just don't want to be pregnant, and I don't want to have a baby." If knowing the information makes you feel guilty, then you're probably doing something that violates your values. If you have all the information and you feel comfortable with your decision, then feel free to continue. How should women get that information?
If the mother elects to have an abortion procedure, she needs to make the decision with the best information possible. We should not allow women (or anyone for that matter) to blindly undergo any procedure without being fully informed of what the procedure is and what the consequences may be. (Even if you get your tonsils out, it's important to know what tonsils are, what they do, where they're located, what may happen if you don't have tonsils, and what risks are involved in having the procedure.)
An abortion should first be preceded by an ultrasound exam to determine the age of the fetus (dating by using the last-menstrual-period method is unreliable, something I've experienced personally). This is a quick procedure that can be done the same day of the procedure.
Prior to an elective abortion procedure, the mother should be given mandatory education about basic fetal development, alternatives to abortion (including contact information for adoption agencies), and resources available for safety and economic concerns (such as protection from abusive family members as well as assistance programs for childcare, medical care, income, food, education, job training, etc.). The mother should also talk to a counselor before the procedure to ensure that somebody trained in assisting with emotional decisions can help them understand the magnitude of the decision they're making. All of these services could be done the same day of the procedure if limited time is a concern. Yes, there's an additional cost for these things, too, but it's a small price to pay when compared to the possibility of living a life filled with regret.
Minors Having Abortions
Should minors be forced to get their parent's permission to have an abortion? No!
Sure, as a parent I would want to know if my daughter decided to get an abortion. I hope that she would feel comfortable enough to talk to me about it first. (If she didn't, I would have to blame myself for not making her feel comfortable.)
Ultimately, it's the decision of the pregnant girl, not the pregnant girl's parents. She is the one who will have to carry the child, give birth to the child, and decide to raise or adopt out the child.
If the girl has abusive parents, this would certainly cause safety concerns for her. I personally know girls who grew up with abusive parents. For any of them, admitting that they got pregnant could be an invitation to a beating. For some of them, admitting that they were considering abortion could be a death sentence. No person (especially a child) should ever be forced to enter a dangerous situation.
I'm also not in favor of requiring a judges ruling. For one thing, by the time the pregnant girl gets to see the judge, it's quite possible that the "clump of cells" may have developed into a person. On top of that, there's the fact that a judge is not a medical doctor. A judge should not be making health or medical decisions.
Using Abortions to Fight Poverty and Child Abuse
True, some children who would have been aborted will be born into households that are abusive and/or poor. If those children had been aborted, they would have never been born, so they would have never suffered abuse or known the sadness of poverty. But using that logic, we should go ahead and euthanize all children who may potentially be victims of abuse or poverty. Likewise, we should euthanize anyone who may potentially be faced with extreme hardship from any condition.
The most famous of such modern mass euthanasia was ordered by Hitler in 1939. It also happened during the Crusades when children were killed, so they wouldn't be converted to Christianity. It happened in the Roman Empire when fathers had the power to reject a newborn infant and abandon it, leaving it to die of hypothermia or dehydration. Such practices also happened in early Judeo-Christian culture. The only difference between those horrible acts of baby killing and aborting a viable fetus is that we have the technology now to kill those babies without having to see them first, reducing our guilt.
If we really wanted to fight poverty and child abuse, we would do more to establish, run, and fund programs that help young mothers and babies. Every child needs fully covered healthcare regardless of whether their parents can afford health insurance. Working families need assistance with childcare. Parents need education and job training, so they can get better jobs. They also need free parenting classes and access to free counseling programs and support groups. It's our duty to help families help themselves.
A Woman's Right
"But the woman has the right to decide what to do with her body..."
The moment I learned that I was pregnant for the first time, I realized that everything I did to my body would affect the body of my unborn infant. Everything I ate or drank or breathed would enter the bloodstream of my child. Every reckless behavior I did endangered my baby. This is the price of pregnancy: you lose your ability to say "It's my body, and I can do what I want to it" because it's not just your body anymore.
True, she has the right to do whatever she wishes to her body, but does she have the right to do whatever she wishes to her unborn child?
I feel that a mother who chooses to take recreational drugs, use tobacco products, or drink excessive alcohol while pregnant is guilty of child endangerment, just as a mother who leaves filled heroine needles on the floor of her child's home or forces her child to breathe second-hand smoke is guilty. Likewise, I feel that it is homicide to abort a fetus after it has achieved personhood even if that fetus is within the mother's body.
Attacking the Mother, Harming the Fetus
Should it be illegal to injure a mother, causing the fetus to die? Yes. If I'm pregnant and you cause my baby to die, I certainly want you held responsible.
Is it murder? After the baby achieves personhood, killing the baby is murder if it is intentional. Otherwise, the crime should be manslaughter or some other equivalent. Likewise, if the fetus is injured, the offender is guilty of abusing a child.
If the baby has not achieved personhood, and the mother intended to keep the baby, then a serious crime still has been committed. The offender has taken away the mother's dream of having this child and caused emotional stress. We must define a new law to fit this crime.
The Bottom Line
If you really don't want to get pregnant, you should use multiple forms of birth control AT THE SAME TIME. (I'm a big fan of condoms used with spermicidal foams or gels and even birth control pills as backup. If you are certain you never want to have children again, consider getting surgically sterilized.)
If there is the potential of unwanted fertilization, take the morning after pill.
If you truly want to have an abortion, get informed before deciding to do the procedure and learn about your alternatives.
Sources: http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/tul/psychtoday9809.html
Related Items
Similar topics
See other Kristen's Guide topics in this category.