Just a Tissue Mass
By Mitch Berg
I say let the states decide about abortion.
But let them know the facts, too.
A premature baby that doctors say spent less time in the womb than any other surviving infant is to be released from a Florida hospital Tuesday.
Amillia Sonja Taylor was just 9 1/2 inches long and weighed less than 10 ounces when she was born Oct. 24. She was delivered 21 weeks and six days after conception. Full-term births come after 37 to 40 weeks.
“We werent too optimistic,” Dr. William Smalling said Monday. “But she proved us all wrong.”
The “What is Viable” threshold has always been a fuzzy, indistinct one; I always figure a “fetus” isn’t viable until it can get a job and rent an apartment.
But 22 weeks?
How anyone can support abortion based on “nonviability” after the fourth month just astounds me.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:44 am
Angryclown agrees completely. Women of America: when you find yourself with something 9-1/2 inches long in your womb, don’t kill it.
Whew, that was close!
February 20th, 2007 at 10:13 am
AC – it’s no wonder no one here takes you seriously. If you were forced to discuss an issue sans snark your head would explode!
Seriously now….viable at 22 weeks but at what cost. The hospitalization charges for that baby have got to be close to $1m.
This is one of those issues that middle ground needs to be found on. On one hand, you have couples who would literally kill to have any of these aborted babies. On the other, I could never ask a woman to carry a rapists child to term. However, middle ground will never be reached as long as “people” like AC continue with their prevailing attitude of no compromise.
LL
February 20th, 2007 at 10:18 am
I still think that the viability standard is a good one, assuming that it is used in the sense that child is sufficiently developed to survive on its own. Not that it /must/ survive on its own, simply that it has developed to the point where it is a possibility. Medical science will continue to force down to zero the amount of time a baby must spend in the womb, so that is not a good point for making legal distinctions.
There was a judge in South Carolina who ruled against allowing an abortion, using just this biological fact and applying contract law. The ruling stated that so long as abortion was legal in the early months of pregnancy, at the point the fetus became viable the mother entered into an implicit contract with this “person” to carry it to term. I think it is an elegant compromise, exactly in tune with Roe V. Wade, meaning that it will satisfy no one.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:04 am
Log Lady said: “This is one of those issues that middle ground needs to be found on.”
I think it should be legal to maim fetuses, but not kill them.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:10 am
One thing to keep in mind: abortion is big business. 1,200,000 performed in the US every year. I don’t know what the price per execution is, but even if it’s $100, well, you do the math.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:39 am
Why, that’s 9/11 times 10,000,000!
Maybe somebody else should do the math.
February 20th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Maybe that’s the Fortune 500 business Mitch is working for.
As for the math, Kerm, let’s see: 1,200,000 x 100.
Angryclown is stumped too. Gee Kerm, how are we gonna cope when they start making us do gazintas next year in Grade 5?
February 20th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
I had a grand-daughter that died at 6 months gestation. She was perfectly formed-a baby. I think it’s astounding that one as small as 21 weeks could live, but good for that little fighter.
Lady Logician, I have one small quibble in the case of rape: “…carry a rapists child…”. When you have a wanted baby, is it just your husband/partners? Or is it also “yours”? A child, an unwitting victim of a horrible crime, should not pay the ultimate price. 9 months and give it up without adding another layer of tragedy.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
In the first few days after fertilization, one pretty much has a clump of cells. Its probable that technology will someday be able to bring that clump of cells through gestation without a womb but in my mind, its a pretty extreme definition of “human being”. A notable percent of the time, a woman’s body terminates pregnancies in this stage due to various factors – this is by design (evolutionary or intelligent – your choice) and is how it is.
Of course, as Mitch’s story illustrates, you do have a human being long before its ready to start gulping air. There are thoughts, dreams, etc.
I really see the abortion question as a two stage question.
The first is, when does a fetus become a human being – protected by the Constitution and laws of America?
That’s a line that will always be somewhat arbitrary and needs to be more or less determined by congress.
Any fetus that is older than that (or, a better definition would be past some specific development stages) should be afforded the rights and protections of any child. The only reason to kill them would be a triage situation where the mother’s life was at risk.
Any fetus younger than that is not protected by the Constitution. What is allowable before that is not a federal matter which leads us to the second stage of the question.
What can the state choose to do? Beyond the confines of the constitution, bill of rights, and other amendments, the state should be permitted to do as the people of that state wish. If a state chooses to add additional rights or restrictions, it should be allowed to do so – with the understanding that those additions/restrictions may be reviewed against both the state and federal constitutions.
I really believe this to be a reasonable and responsible approach to the question. Of course, it’ll never pass litmus tests on either side so we’ll never see it happen with the current groups in power.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
As an aside, the basic traits I’d tend to look for as to when that line between “mass of cells” and “human being” is crossed is functioning brain wave activity in the non-basic portions of the brain. However, demonstrable viability seems reasonable to me.
Well, at least as long as technology hasn’t brought viability to the point of “I’ve got an egg over here and a sperm over here and I can make a baby so every sperm is sacred you onanistic cretin!”. (Realistically, I’d personally draw the line at the point before there is any brain activity whatsoever. I realize of course that others will disagree.)
February 20th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Donkeyman, it is always a delight when someone agrees with anyone, especially with me. In this case, I may be able to help even further. You have a question about the nature of the implicit contract, and the answer is that neither party has the right to kill the other. At the extremes, a woman could conceivably be jailed to prevent her from injuring the child. At the other extreme, since the child cannot be restrained from killing the mother, it could reasonably be killed to prevent it from killing. It’s tragic either way, but at least it’s logically defensible and consistent. One of these days we’ll learn how to do “transplants” and the problem will become truly moot.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Hey, speaking of abortions, how ’bout “The 1/2 Hour News Hour” on Fox? Geez, how much did that suck?
February 20th, 2007 at 7:23 pm
Angryclown spurted: “As for the math, Kerm, let’s see: 1,200,000 x 100. Angryclown is stumped too.”
I leave the obvious to great intellects such as yourself. I’ll just sit back and watch with commensurable admiration.
February 20th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Yeah, Angryclown, you might say that show is to comedy news shows what Air America is to talk radio.
February 21st, 2007 at 6:51 am
bovious stated the obvious: “Yeah, Angryclown, you might say that show is to comedy news shows what Air America is to talk radio.”
I might indeed.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:48 pm
public radio, which actually TRIES to include BOTH sides and doesn’t attempt to interpret the facts
Three words for you. “On The Media”.
In fact, PB, I’m not sure where you get that “doesn’t attempt” stuff. They do it all the time.