Kevin McMahon

Phil 342

Prof. Wachbroit

May 14, 1998

Partial birth abortion is a topic that has been debated heatedly for the last few years. Several laws have been written trying to limit the practice and unfortunately they were vetoed. This is tragic because partial birth abortion, especially those performed after the 20th gestational week is a moral outrage, and should be outlawed except when the mother must defend her own life. This procedure is morally wrong for several different reasons, ranging from pain to the simple right to life after viability. Viability is the point at which a fetus is able to survive outside the woman.

Abortion happens frequently in this country; roughly 1.5 million abortions are performed every year. It is the process of ending an unwanted pregnancy. Most abortions, roughly 98 percent, are performed prior to the 20th gestational week. Most of these abortions are performed using a technique known as “suction”. This is where a small, usually undecipherable fetus is extracted from the body by use of a vacuum tube; it has no chance of survival outside the mother at this early stage (prior to the 16th week). The other main technique used on early abortions is dilation and curettage or D&C. This is where the cervix is dilated and the contents of the uterus are scraped clean; again the fetus, if delivered, had no chance of survival. After the 16th week another method known as saline-injection is used; the amniotic fluid is extracted and replaced by a saline solution thereby causing a miscarriage. Basically abortion is the process of taking the life of an unborn and usually not yet viable fetus.

Partial birth abortion is a very disturbing procedure. This procedure is also known as Dilation and Extraction (or D&E), but for the lay individual partial birth is much more descriptive. This is a procedure that is not even a medically defined procedure in some areas. The mother is first given drugs to dilate her cervix. Then the doctor, using a procedure much like a breech birth, guides the fetus out feet first. Almost all of the fetus is then exposed except for the head. A pair of surgical scissors is then inserted into the back of the fetuses’ skull and opened to make a larger entrance hole. Next the doctor uses a suction catheter to extract the brain from the fetus causing the head to collapse and ending the life of the fetus. The dead fetus is then completely removed and the abortion is complete. According to Dr. C. Everett Koop, former U.S. Surgeon General, most partial birth abortions are performed on fetuses that are about 26 weeks old. It is interesting to note that no matter how young the fetus, if the doctor pulls the fetus out to far and it is allowed to take only one breath, it is considered a live birth and therefore human under the eyes of the law.

In the past an fetus was not considered viable until very late in it’s gestational life, usually around seven months. In recent years, medical science has made many advances in neo-natal care and surgery. Nowadays that time has been significantly shortened. According to Dr. Robert Pancratz, a fetus may survive as early as 21 weeks. It has a 50/50 shot of surviving at 24 weeks and should be “home-free” at 26 weeks. Therefore anytime after 21 weeks a fetus has a chance at surviving and living a long-life.

Murder is anytime that a person’s life is taken against their will. In almost all civilizations, murder is one crime that is universally considered evil and morally suspect. Certainly if one individual decides to take the life of another, say a 50 year old woman, it is considered murder and then is wrong. If that same individual decides to take the life of a 20 year old it is considered at least equally wrong, if not more so because the younger person had more of its life let to look forward too. In the same respect killing a six year old child may be even more wrong. Following this chain it is easy to argue then that killing the life of an infant is a horrid crime and definetly morally suspect. It would seem then that all of these ‘people’ no matter how old they are, have some rights.

This brings us to the ontological debate. Ontology is a philosophical study of being. What makes a person a person; what makes one thing have rights and another not. It is easy to argue that an ant or a termite does not have a right to life, but it is not easy to argue that an adult person does not have a right to life. What gives the adult people their right to life; what is in the human nature to make its life more valuable than an ant’s. It is by mutual agreement among humans to respect the life of each other. If we all felt it was okay to kill any human than we would all be under great fear for our own lives. It is by this social contract that we can get our own right to life as compared to other creatures on earth.

At what point does a fetus have the right that seems universally applied to all adult humans. What makes it a person. Some argue that it is a having an interest in one’s own ‘continued existence’. This is not truly fair for this makes infanticide okay and very few people see this practice as morally acceptable. Perhaps the difference is the ability to survive on its own. A newborn infant, though requiring the help of some individual care does not require the womb of its mother anymore. This ability to survive means that the infant has done all the physical development needed to be considered fully human. At the point of viability then, we can argue that a fetus has a right to continue its own existence as long as it is not endangering the life of another.

Normally abortions are justified by saying that we are protecting the right of the woman not to be burdened by carrying a baby to term. Pregnancy is a nine month process that can cause much disruption to her life. It is generally argued that the fetus is not a human, and that is one of the main justifications of abortion in general. The Supreme Court in the decision of Roe V Wade, agreed with the assumption that the fetus can be protected as having its own right to life at the point of viability. Anytime after viability the state has the authority to limit abortions with respect to protecting fetal life. It is at this point where the fetus has the capability of a meaningful life, even if the mother does not want to carry to term.

After the 21st gestational week the fetus has the ability to survive outside the mother’s womb and therefore cannot be aborted. Abortion after the 21st week is actually murder because the fetus is then a person with a right to life. This is even more apprehensible then, when we consider the assertion of Dr. Koop that most partial birth abortions are actually performed around 26 weeks; most of these fetuses have a very good chance to survive. The mother may have the right to not have her body used by said fetus, but she does not have the right to have the fetus killed. In a partial birth abortion, all but the last 3 inches of a frequently viable fetus is removed before the life is literally sucked out. This is morally apprehensible for the child may have survived by just removing it the last 3 inches, thereby ending the mothers physical burden, and at the sane saving the life of the second person.

The supposed reason President Clinton vetoed the bills banning partial birth abortion was because it might ban a procedure needed to save the life of a woman. Although murder is wrong, killing in self-defense is not always considered wrong. In his essay, “Capital Punishment and Social Defense” Hugo Bedau sets forth certain parameters for killing in self defense. If one individual is faced with an immediate threat to his or her life, they have every right to retaliate with whatever force is necessary to protect their own life. This is so, even if it means killing the attacker. Bedau does limit this by saying that the individual only has the right to use as little force as is necessary to prevent harm to himself. In an intense situation there might not be enough time to weigh all possible options so extra leeway is given there, but given time to ponder other alternatives we must not go beyond the minimum necessary to prevent harm. A fetus may represent a risk to the mother and she legitimately has rights to defend herself, but killing a viable fetus using partial birth abortion is not necessary to save the life of the mother. How can it be justified as self-defense to bring a fetus to the precipice of life, just three inches from its first breath only to suck its brain out. How could it be life threatening to the mother to deliver those last three inches when the first part of the baby was not life threatening. Clearly it would seem that there are less drastic measures that can save the life of the woman and therefore it is murder not killing in self-defense.

We as a society also grant certain rights to some animals that are not humans. For example there are laws against abusing dogs and cats. During most medical experiments involving animals, it is required to anesthetize the animal to minimize pain as much as is possible. This is regardless of the fact that these creatures are not human. It is disturbing to see an animal tortured or caused significant pain when it could otherwise be avoided. Even if we feel that the life of the animal is not worth anything and it needs to be killed, it must be done humanely. The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (or SPCA) does occasionally have to destroy animals that it cannot find a home for; they use a process commonly referred to as ‘putting the animal to sleep’. It is a painless procedure where the life of the animal is taken by use of lethal injection.

If we grant this right not to be tortured and also not to suffer needless and excess pain to animals why would we not offer it to fetuses of any age. Therefore any procedure that would cause much pain to a fetus is wrong and morally suspect. According to Dr. Robert J. White, a neurosurgeon and Professor of neurological surgery at Case Western Reserve University, says that there is some evidence to believe that fetus age 8-13 weeks old may have the ability to recognize noxious stimuli, like pain. He does concede though that most studies agree that at least by the 20th week of gestation the fetus has the neurocircuitry in place to feel pain. He also says, unfortunately, that the neurosystems used to modulate and suppress pain are not found in fetus that young. This leads him to the conclusion that fetuses starting at 20 weeks may actually feel more pain than an adult human under the same stimulus.

Dr. White is of the opinion that, when the abortionist uses scissors to puncture the back of the skull and presumably sever the upper cervical spinal cord where it connects to the brain, they are really attempting brain surgery. There is no specific procedure defined to tell abortion doctors where exactly they are supposed to cut. There is no evidence given by doctors who perform this type of procedure to show whether they are cutting the spinal cord or if they are cutting into the brain itself; they are not trained neurosurgeons to know either way. Dr. White says “Even though they are attempting to terminate the child’s life by removing its brain, the poor infant’s pain neurocircuitry could remain intact, allowing the fetus to experience severe discomfort for some time.”

Certainly then procedure of partial birth abortion, done after the 20th week, is in all likelihood an extremely painful process for a fetus to undergo. It is also very likely that even on fetuses as young as 8 weeks this procedure may also cause great pain. There is no reason to cause such great pain to any living thing whenever it can be avoided. Some people will still argue that the fetus is just a collection of cells that are simply nothing more than a part of the mothers body. After the fetus has reached the point of viability, though, the fetus is then an autonomous creature and not just a part of its mother. If not prior to viability, at least after viability the fetus has the right not to be subjected to the excess pain of partial birth abortion.

It is for these main reasons that partial birth abortion, especially after the 20th gestational week is morally wrong. We have seen how a viable fetus has a vested interest in and a fundamental right to life. We have seen how even as early as 8 gestational weeks it is wrong to perform such a painful procedure. Prior to the 16th week either ‘suction’ or D&C are the preferred methods; from the 16th to viability, saline injection are used. There is, then, no reason to perform a partial birth abortion. As Dr. C. Everett Koop who, in addition to being the former Surgeon General, was also one of the nations leading pediatric surgeons said “In no way can I twist my mind to see that partial-birth abortion is a medical necessity for the mother.” There is no way to justify a partial birth abortion.

Home Outdoors Various School Projects Rat Babies Wacky Test Results Contact Kevin McMahon