Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!seismo!brl-tgr!matt
From: matt@brl-tgr.ARPA (Matthew Rosenblatt )
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: The Status of the Fetus and Its Rights
Message-ID: <1473@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 13-Sep-85 10:00:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.1473
Posted: Fri Sep 13 10:00:20 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Sep-85 05:49:35 EDT
References: <436@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA> <1631@pyuxd.UUCP> <1260@brl-tgr.ARPA> <316@rruxo.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 66

For readers new to net.abortion, there are some who say a fetus is not
a human life because it could not live on its own.  Others, including
me, believe that it's not important whether it could live on its own,
it's human anyway.  Moreover, many of them CAN live outside the womb,
as evidenced by premature babies who survive.  

> >>If you really believe this to be true, then why force women to endure
> >>nine months of pregnancy?  Obviously you have scientific proof that the
> >>fetus can be removed at seven months and be a full fledged autonomous
> >>human being, so let's remove ALL the fetuses at seven months and save
> >>the women the problems of an additional two months with a fetus inside her.
> >>Ante up.  [R. ROSEN]
> 
> > Mr. Rosen seems to think it's better to risk the death of the seven-month
> > fetus (or to ensure its quick death with an abortion, if unwanted)
> > than to burden the pregnant woman with an additional two months
> > of pregnancy.  Mr. Newton does not, and neither do I. [M. ROSENBLATT]
> 
> First of all, I never said that I held this position, which you tar me with
> in a most malicious manner.  What I *did* say is that if YOU truly believe
> this position, then you should carry it through to its logical conclusion.
> [R. ROSEN]

Rather than rely on me to "tar" Mr. Rosen with holding any position, let him
state what his position is himself.  Suppose a woman is seven months pregnant
and does not want to continue being pregnant.  Does she have the right to
risk the death of the fetus by removing it from her body?  Does she have the
right to ensure its quick death with an abortion?

>>If Mr. Rosen is saying either that the seven-month fetus cannot be removed
>>at seven months and be an autonomous human being, he is wrong.  Before the
>>days of sophisticated neonatal life-support equipment and techniques, 
>>premature babies of seven months' gestation did survive -- one of them works
>>right here in my laboratory.  All the fancy equipment did was increase the 
>>proportion of such babies that survive, although not to 100%. [ROSENBLATT]

>When I studied such things as neonatal research (as a sub-topic in a course),
>"although not to 100%" was a hell of an understatement. When the doctors
>were able to get a 30% survival rate (at the end of the second trimester),
>they were overjoyed. (prevoiusly, the survival rate was less than 3%)
> 
>Any premature baby born before the start of the third trimester are not yet
>fully developed. (In the third trimester, the fetus is complete and simply
>gaining size and weight, no more development occurs) If a child is born
>before the third trimester, it's as good as dead. I belive that the survival
>rate of secord-trimester babies was less than 1%.  [VINCE HATEM]

OK.  The second trimester ends at the end of the sixth month of gestation,
which is the beginning of the seventh month.  "Although not to 100%" was
referring to a seven-month fetus, i.e., one at the end of the seventh month.
All I said was that most of these do survive.  If Mr. Hatem says the survival
rate of second-trimester babies is "less than 1%," is he referring to the
overall rate for everyone born between the end of the third month and the
end of the sixth month, or the rate for those born at the end of the sixth
month?  If he is including spontaneous abortions during the first half of
the second trimester, of course he will get a very low survival rate.
However, a 30% survival rate at the end of the second trimester (i.e., the
end of the sixth month) means that if the doctors try to save a six-month
fetus, there is a 30% chance it will live.  Abortion, legal through the
end of the sixth month, usually ensures that the fetus will die (although
sometimes the doctors botch it and the damned nuisance lives anyway).  So
in at least some cases, whether the fetus lives or dies is determined by
its mother's wishes.  That kind of life-and-death power is what is
unacceptable to me.

					-- Matt Rosenblatt


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com