Essentially I take the position that the question is a philosophical one, more than a biological one, because development of a living person is a gradual, complex process. And I pointed out some logical absurdities that result when one insists that life begins at conception, or at first heartbeat, and that the collection of embryonic cells (biologically, a "bloastocyst,") has all the rights of a "person."
In an opinion piece in a recent New York Times, writer Molly Jong-Fast added some more absurdities that I'd like to share with readers. She begins with this question: "When, exactly, do abortion opponents think life begins?"
Alabama State Representative Terri Collins, speaking in favor of Alabama's new anti-abortion law, told colleagues: "This bill addresses that one issue. Is that baby in the womb a person? I believe our law says it is. I believe our people say it is. And I believe technology shows it is."
Op-ed author Jong-Fast, however, differs -- and pokes some holes in this thinking, pointing out that the Alabama law does have one exception. She writes: "Fertilized eggs, blastocysts, five-day-old embryos -- people, according to some definitions -- are exempt and can be destroyed, [according to the Alabama law] so long as they are not contained in the body of a woman. The egg in the lab doesn't apply."
This comes up in the course of newer techniques of in vitro fertilization in the process of helping infertile couples have a baby. What often happens is that a man's sperm and a woman's ova (eggs) are brought together in a lab dish, resulting in multiple fertilized embryos. Some of these are then implanted in the woman's uterus and the remaining ones are frozen -- in case the initial implants to do thrive.
So then you have a bunch of fertilized embryos that may or may not later be used. What's their status? Are they persons? There is some case law on this. In one such couples' case, their frozen, fertilized embryos were spoiled in a fertility clinic storage tank malfunction. They sued. But an Ohio appellate court ruled that "frozen embryos are not people."
An Alabama State Senator and co-sponsor of their recent anti-abortion bill seems to agree. He said, "The egg in the lab does not apply. . . It's not in a woman. She's not pregnant."
He does not address the logical inconsistency: Let's say 10 eggs were fertilized in the lab; 2 were placed in the woman's uterus, the other 8 frozen and stored. So all 10 were alike in the way they became fertilized, but the ones in a woman are persons and the ones in frozen storage are not, according to the Alabama law. And yet, by these same people's own definition, "life begins at conception."
Now, however, what if the infertile woman becomes pregnant on the first in vitro attempt? What do you do with those other 8 you've frozen and stored, but now don't need? Can they be discarded -- or would that be murder?
Another test of the concept happened in our own government. A 24 year old woman from Honduras, being held in an ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) detention facility, went into labor at 27 weeks and delivered a stillborn baby. It was not induced but rather a spontaneous, premature labor and fetal death during birth. Yet ICE did not report it as an "in custody death" -- because "for investigative and reporting purposes" a stillbirth is not considered an "in custody death." So, in such a situation, ICE doesn't consider a 27 week old fetus a person? Jong-Fast asks: "Is an immigrant fetus less of a person than a citizen fetus?" And she concludes:
"The idea that fertility clinics should be allowed to end 'life' in the pursuit of resolving infertility is wholly illogical; the notion that an in-custody stillbirth at 27 weeks is not a death, but that an abortion at six or eight weeks is a murder punishable by up to 99 years in prison, requires wild feats of mental jujitsu.
"It's almost as if the Republican Party considers 'life' to be a completely arbitrary notion. It's almost as if this isn't actually about 'life at all."
* * * * *
One of life's difficult questions . . . to be continued.
Ralph
No comments:
Post a Comment