Foetus' right to life vs women's bodily autonomy

[AmberTheCat]

I've just been reading a paper written by a friend of a friend, arguing that a foetus should be seen as having the same right to life as a postpartum human, because there are no lines that can be drawn between a foetus and someone post-birth that couldn't also be drawn between two postpartum humans. He added a note to say that clearly there is a question of how this right to life relates to women's autonomy, but that this wasn't something he was addressing in this paper.

Given that this is surely THE question, can you help me refine my arguments for the primacy of bodily autonomy? My instinctive view is that I can't see any way of denying that a foetus is a human being, or at least has the potential to become a human being, depending on how developed it is, but that the decision of whether or not to allow that (potential) human to grow inside her must still always remain the woman's. I'm quite out of touch with the thinking around this, though, so would welcome pointers.

Thanks!

Buffy,

Ok, thought experiment. Is a 24 week born foetus a person? Is a 35 week foetus in utero a person? Can you really claim killing one is murder but there is nothing wrong with latter?

If it's a choice between terminating up to term or being forced to carry a baby you don't want then give it away to be raised by someone else when you didn't want to give birth then I choose the terminating up to term option though of course as early as possible as late as necessary is better.

once it is separate from the mother and breathing it is a person. Your question is like asking

"is a healthy 24 year old adult "alive"? But a 35 year old person who is legally brain dead and on life support is not? Can you really claim killing one is murder but there is nothing wrong with pulling the plug on the latter?

Individuals may have different answers to this based on their beliefs and make decisions accordingly for their next of kin, but legally, and morally yes you can claim that one is murder but the other is not.

I remember seeing a documentary about women, sex and the clitoris which showed that although PIV sex can and does result in orgasm, clitoral stimulation resulted in better longer lasting orgasms.

And don't get me started on abstinence instead of contraception, a proper female hating agenda.

Buffy,

Why would you give yourself the right to terminate a 35 week old foetus but not prefer to also keep that right for the baby that has been born. I have heard people make the argument that 'post birth abortion' should be legal.

It is funny how many people resort to the law as an argument for why a foetus is not a person yet are perfectly prepared to challenge the law on the 24 week limit.

We all know what the law states. The debate is about ethics and morality.

Fuzerelli,

Medicine has made strides since we believed that breathing independently was a qualification of a person.

I think the "separate from the mother" part is the essential part, not the breathing. Not suggesting that a paralyzed person in an iron lung, for example is not a person.

It might be less emotive to debate instead when does a fertilized chicken's egg become a chick? I would say after it's hatched, even if the embryo looks more and more like a chick every day of its development. If it's connected to the yolk sac or however it works inside a chicken egg, it's still an embryo, once it's free of the egg, standing, breathing, eating, drinking, etc. it's a chick. It's about being a separate entity.

I think you mean a potential sentient being with human rights.

Fuze,

You can make that distinction. Most people do not see independence from the mother as the start of personhood. It is arbitrary and convenient, really, and not based on any real logical premise. It is also not really believed by society or they would not spend the amount of money they do on treating and preserving foetuses in utero.

Forgive me for being late to the thread and for skimming mansplaining and/or graphically unpleasant posts - it's not personal, it's just I consider myself pre-pregnant at all times and care about my blood pressure going stratospheric.

I did want to say, seriously, that I think it is unbelievably cruel to submit a foetus that can feel pain, to the pain of a labour you know it will not survive. If you hold that an eight-month foetus is a person, then there will be cases in which what you are saying is you prefer to torture a person, possibly for hours, until it dies.

Personally, women's rights over their own bodies are the main issue here, and so I've already got my mind made up, but if you think about a foetus as a 'person,' you might consider that argument.

Of course, sorry! but still that is besides the point of this thread which is does the fetus have rights to then weigh against those of the pregnant woman / sentient human being / egg shell, and my answer is no, so the question of one's rights vs. the others is a non-starter.

Larry in terms of surgery on fetuses in utero I don't think they go to any more trouble than they would operating on any other organ in the woman's body. Or all of the horrors that women undergo with IVF or repeated miscarriages. It is still happening within the woman's body, assisting her with ttc or pregnancy. She is still the one having the surgery.

Medically and legally, a foetus doesn't become a separate person with rights and responsibilities until it is separated from it's mother. Which is how abortion up until birth is legally and medically possible without the people involved in the actual operation escape charges of murder.

OMG!.... Which is how abortion up until birth is legally and medically possible without the people involved in the actual operation being charged with murder.... sorry!

"Most people do not see independence from the mother as the start of personhood"

Do you have any evidence for that?

If that were true, our laws would reflect that view.

I have just been looking at the statistics for aabortions in England and Wales for 2013.

Currently over 90% of abortions ate carried out by 12 wks. So less than than 10% are after the first trimester and when they are its often because something has shown up at the 12 wks scan so an issue with the foetus.

Yet abortion is allowed up to 24wks (and after for foetal abnormalities). Yer there are not masses if women having them even after the first trimester.

So why in discussion about late terminations do we get the idea that if abortion was legal till term that there would suddenly be masses of requests for them?

Even the late terminations ie after 12 wks but before 24 that are not due to fetal abnormalities are generally because the woman didn't know she was pregnant or was in denial or there was a delay in providing her with an abortion.

Does anyone really think there would be a sudden increase in late term abortions?! Really?!!

Looking at the statistics it seems most women get one as soon ad possible. Over 70% before 10 wks. It is allowed up to 24wks yet not many women choose to abort even that late.

Those having later terminations (past 12wks) tend to be young or have health issues.

So given so few woman take advantage of the law as it currently stands to avail themselves of abortion even past 12wks I highly doubt there would be many if any at all that would turn up at 38wks or whatever and demand an abortion.

Some people think we need the law to stop women from doing so, I don't think we do. I think we could change the law, giving women co plate bodily autonomy as they should have and I don't think the figures would change that much if at all.

As it is we have a law that refuses women bodily autonomy and is actually discriminatory towards disabled fetuses.

're the giving birth to a baby that will die shortly after birth and whether that is right, in many if these situations (that I have read) it tends to be cases of ancepholiy (sp) or similar and if there is any sign of suffering then appropriate pain relief is administered, the baby then passes away often in its parents arms so feeling some cofort if it even has the ability to feel anything. And the parents have some comfort/closure. They are also able to get a birth and death certificate. This can be important fir maternity leave and pay, horrid though that thought is it means a woman can have time off work etc to recover and she is protected legally. As sadly some employers are rather crap with their treatment of women who suffer late tern losses etc. Thankfully I haven't ever had to deal with such situation myself so cannot say what I would do.

Cote I'm not sure where you live but yes, here and everywhere else I've ever heard of, if a viable fetus is aborted, it is killed by an injection to its heart.

A live baby does occasionally happen,I believe, but it is an accident.

No, my feelings were certainly not hurt but I agree with Thumb in that you could have just googled him.