Concepts have consequences
Jun. 25th, 2022 06:04 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kengrThere seem to be four arguments as to when "life begins". Or, rather, when "being a human" starts.
Let's take these in reverse order.
"At birth" pretty much ends the abortion issue. Won't make a lot of people happy, but it ends it.
"Viability" Is relatively clearcut, and few abortions are performed at/after that point anyway. (The "late term" abortions you hear so much talk about are usually because the fetus is already dead, or wouldn't survive for various reasons)
"Heartbeat" has several problems. One is that the time frame (~six weeks) means that the mother may not even realize that she's pregnant yet. Her period would only be 2 weeks late.
Also "heartbeat" or "brain waves" aren't much of an indication of anything except that the clump of cells is growing, *probably* normally. We don't use a heartbeat as an indicator of life for *adults* any more. Braindead people can still have heartbeats.
Brain wave activity? Well we often use that in cases where we are trying to decide whether or not to turn off life support. I'd *really* interested in what sort of brain waves they are talking about at six weeks.
In any case, this has most of the bad features of our final choice.
Finally, "life begins at conception". Not only , "non", but HELL no!!!
This idea has utterly *horrible* consequences. That's because it that is a *legal* rule, then there are legal consequences.
Consider the realities of what happens after a sperm fertilizes an egg. It's actually *common* for the egg to not attach to the uterine wall. In which case it gets flushed when the person has their period.
If life begins at conception, that'd be the death of a "human being". and thus have to be investigated as to cause of death, and who is responsible.
Think *hard* about what it would take to even *detect* this, much less investigate it.
Also think of the consequences of the investigation. If it is ruled due to some action on the part of the person, then it's either homicide, or manslaughter. I don't need to tell you what that means.
If it's ruled accidental, there are *still* legal consequences.
Later on the eggs that do attach can have problems resulting in miscarriage. When I originally wrote on these issues, I pointed out that the laws could treat that, to as a death to be investigated. to be legally consistent.
Alas, in the decades since a number of states have indeed passed laws that require investigating miscarriages as potential murders. And they have *done so* on a number of occasions.
That is a *horrible* thing to do to someone who wanted the baby. And it's far from a picnic for anyone else either.
Again, this "justifies" incredible invasions of privacy. the same social media algorithms that get people deluged with ads for pregnancy care and baby stuff, can also be used to folag someone who was pregnant but isn't anymore. Or who is looking for ways to terminate their pregnancy.
Big Brother is here and he *is* watching.
I'll leave you to imagine other measures yourself.
But basically, it amounts to making women, *all* women* third class citizens, subject to huge invasions of privacy, and limitations on their activities.
Anyone who thinks *this* is a proper solution to *anything* is both ignorant *and* evil
- Life begins at conception
- life begins when a heartbeat is detected (about 6 weeks, brain waves start around the same time)
- When the fetus is viable
- At birth
Let's take these in reverse order.
"At birth" pretty much ends the abortion issue. Won't make a lot of people happy, but it ends it.
"Viability" Is relatively clearcut, and few abortions are performed at/after that point anyway. (The "late term" abortions you hear so much talk about are usually because the fetus is already dead, or wouldn't survive for various reasons)
"Heartbeat" has several problems. One is that the time frame (~six weeks) means that the mother may not even realize that she's pregnant yet. Her period would only be 2 weeks late.
Also "heartbeat" or "brain waves" aren't much of an indication of anything except that the clump of cells is growing, *probably* normally. We don't use a heartbeat as an indicator of life for *adults* any more. Braindead people can still have heartbeats.
Brain wave activity? Well we often use that in cases where we are trying to decide whether or not to turn off life support. I'd *really* interested in what sort of brain waves they are talking about at six weeks.
In any case, this has most of the bad features of our final choice.
Finally, "life begins at conception". Not only , "non", but HELL no!!!
This idea has utterly *horrible* consequences. That's because it that is a *legal* rule, then there are legal consequences.
Consider the realities of what happens after a sperm fertilizes an egg. It's actually *common* for the egg to not attach to the uterine wall. In which case it gets flushed when the person has their period.
If life begins at conception, that'd be the death of a "human being". and thus have to be investigated as to cause of death, and who is responsible.
Think *hard* about what it would take to even *detect* this, much less investigate it.
Also think of the consequences of the investigation. If it is ruled due to some action on the part of the person, then it's either homicide, or manslaughter. I don't need to tell you what that means.
If it's ruled accidental, there are *still* legal consequences.
Later on the eggs that do attach can have problems resulting in miscarriage. When I originally wrote on these issues, I pointed out that the laws could treat that, to as a death to be investigated. to be legally consistent.
Alas, in the decades since a number of states have indeed passed laws that require investigating miscarriages as potential murders. And they have *done so* on a number of occasions.
That is a *horrible* thing to do to someone who wanted the baby. And it's far from a picnic for anyone else either.
Again, this "justifies" incredible invasions of privacy. the same social media algorithms that get people deluged with ads for pregnancy care and baby stuff, can also be used to folag someone who was pregnant but isn't anymore. Or who is looking for ways to terminate their pregnancy.
Big Brother is here and he *is* watching.
I'll leave you to imagine other measures yourself.
But basically, it amounts to making women, *all* women* third class citizens, subject to huge invasions of privacy, and limitations on their activities.
Anyone who thinks *this* is a proper solution to *anything* is both ignorant *and* evil
no subject
Date: 2022-06-26 01:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2022-06-26 02:35 am (UTC)The problem is this.. the logical point to decide when life begins, is when the fetus is independently viable. But, this is a problem because that point keeps changing, being revised downwards as medical technology improves.
The heartbeat and brainwave arguments were advanced in an attempt to perform an end run around this problem by defining it based on developmental stages which would be fixed and could be reasonably argued without which there is no personhood. Sort of an improved version of defining life beginning at the 'quickening' stage.
But that fell flat because it was based on flawed medical assumptions, as you point out. Not to mention we can't even measure brainwaves in utero, and have no understanding of how they relate to whether or not the fetus is a person...
As for the problems surrounding regarding life beginning at conception... well that's less a bug and more of feature, as it was put forward by those who wanted that specific licence to prosecute women, and use it as an excuse to ban abortion outright.
I would personally argue that potentially life begins shortly after implantation, around about the time or just after, we can be reasonable sure that the fetus isn't going to be rejected. But that argument is irrelevant.
Because I would also argue that unless it can be definitely proved that the mother engaged in behaviour known to put the developing fetus at risk (smoking, drinking etc) then any miscarriage should not be investigated as or treated as deliberate homicide. Babies are fragile, and natural deaths occur at any stage up to and including birth.
But... that's probably far too sensible for this reality.
no subject
Date: 2022-06-26 02:04 pm (UTC)The biblical tradition is that life begins with the first intake of breath.
no subject
Date: 2022-06-27 01:26 pm (UTC)Because of my underlying health conditions, the doctors did not want to give me the medications that now are summed up under "medication abortion". If I hadn't gotten appropriate abortion care in 2002-2003, I wouldn't have lived long enough to give birth to my only child in 2004.
That "fetal heartbeat" that keeps getting cited is inaccurate medical terminology use, lying for propaganda. At that early stage, it's a cardiac PULSE, and stem cells will do that in a petri dish, if given an electrical current to start. You can't have a heartbeat until you have heart structures! I have *both* types of intrauterine congenital heart disease, arrhythmia and a now repaired sub-aortic stenosis ribbon membrane type. Arrhythmia of the nervous system might be detectable at 6 to 8 weeks. The sub-aortic stenosis was not differentiated from a bicuspid aortic valve until I was almost 34 years old! That's when I had my first trans esophageal echocardiogram, instead of the echocardiogram ultrasound from outside. I've been telling my pro birth friends for 15 YEARS now, that you can't stop voluntary abortions unless you're also backing complete socialized healthcare, because letting me be born with disabilities and not supporting my necessary open heart surgery is just abortion of a fully cognizant human being, calling it murder to their faces.
I've seen "habitual aborter" on my medical records. (/Agonized tone of voice) It's NOT a habit I wanted! Code now is recurrent pregnancy loss - https://www.icd10data.com/search?s=Habitual%20aborter