| When Does Life Begin? Medical Experts Debate Abortion Issue |
 … Right? Wrong. In every political season, abortion emerges as one of the most hotly debated topics. It draws in everybody—from the religious to the political. But what about the scientists? In 2006, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Ethics published their opinion on “Using Preimplantation Embryos for Research.” In it, they say, “If the preimplantation embryo is left or maintained outside the uterus, it cannot develop into a human being.” Did you catch that: “… into a human being”? The question for many doctors and scientists is not, “When does life begin?” but, “When does that life become a human being?” Pro-lifers say it’s a human from the start. How could it be anything else? “Scientific and medical discoveries over the past three decades have only verified and solidified this age-old truth,” says the conservative-leaning American College of Pediatricians on its website. “The difference between the individual in its adult stage and in its zygotic stage is not one of personhood but of development.” “Pro-choice docs would say that it is not their business to determine for a patient when life begins,” says Diana Philip, interim executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers and its sister organization, the Abortion Conversation Project. “Ultimately each patient determines the value and definition of life and that definition lies within her own mind and heart.” So the question to our debaters was simply—and yet not so simply—"Do we know when human life begins?" Now, let the debate begin.
Since the mechanism by which mammals reproduce has been known for at least the last 150 years, any biologist in the world can tell you that a mammal’s life begins when the sperm from the father unites with the egg from the mother. This process is called fertilization, and when the DNA from the father and mother have combined, the egg is called a fertilized egg, or zygote. When the zygote splits into two cells, it is called a two-celled embryo. When it splits into four cells, it is called a four-celled embryo, etc. The definition of “embryo” is “the youngest form of a being.” If this being is nourished and protected, it will proceed uninterrupted through the developmental stages of embryo, fetus, newborn, toddler, child, teen, adult and aged adult: one continuous existence. This being never develops into a pig, a frog or a tree, but only into a human. This being is therefore, by definition, a living human being. This fact is very inconvenient for those who want to treat embryonic and fetal human beings as property. The real argument in the abortion debate is whether or not this human being is a “person,” with all the legal rights and protections of “personhood.”
As long as “personhood” is denied to human beings in their embryonic and fetal stages, the holocaust of abortion will continue. Get expert-written articles like this every month in our free health newsletter.
What makes us so sure we know when human life begins? Despite our best efforts, we do not even really know when human life ends, as the Terry Schiavo case reminded us. If it is so achingly difficult to know whether someone is dead or alive when she is in front of people who love her, how much harder it is to be certain when life begins, especially when we cannot see it with our own eyes. Biologist Scott Gilbert, an expert in human development, tells us that there are at least four distinct moments that can be thought of as the beginning of human life. Each can be said to be biologically accurate. The genetic view (the position held by the Roman Catholic Church and many religious conservatives) holds that life begins with the acquisition of a novel genome; it is a kind of genetic determinism. Those who hold the embryologic view think life begins when the embryo undergoes gastrulation, and twinning is no longer possible; this occurs about 14 days into development. (Some mainline Protestant religions espouse a similar view.) Proponents of the neurological view adhere to brainwave criteria; life begins when a distinct EEG pattern can be detected, about 24 to 27 weeks. (Some Protestant churches affirm this.) Interestingly, life is also thought to end when the EEG pattern is no longer present. Finally, one can say that life begins at or near birth, measured by fetal viability outside the mother’s body. (Judaism affirms something close to this position.) After all, somewhere between 50 and 60 percent of all embryos conceived miscarry. So, when does life begin? I do not think we can know this with any more certainty than we know when life ends. People of faith, and people of good conscience, are going to have to agree to disagree—with a good dose of humility—on matters of life and death.
 Comments (34)
  written by Deborah Cady , April 26, 2012 It does not matter when society believes life begins. It is just an idol question that effects no one in particular EXCEPT the one whose egg is fertilized and growing. That one has all the power of decision. I suggest that they pro-actively prepare for the possibility, and quietly do what is best for themselves. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -2
 written by FOR LIFE , April 26, 2012 I am not against abortion because of my religion nor because of my political belief. I am just simply against euthanasia of any shape or form. I am against abortion as well as the death penalty. As far as the death penalty goes, no one should commit a murder which includes murdering a person who commits murder. I lost someone to murder yet I would not want the death penalty used so that someone could commit another murder on the scum of the earth who murdered my loved one. I just want them locked up in prison for life which maybe worse. There is euthanasia of people who doctors say have no quality of life.Once the doctors says this they are free to take a persons life who is unconscious in the hospital. They have been known to do this to cover up mistakes. One mistake could be that a person was drugged severely and unconscious and may have suffered brain damage. So instead of waiting for the person to come out of the coma they euthanize instead. If the person is elderly the dr can say that they are in the last stages of dementia or make up some other excuse as they drug the person into an unconscious state and proceed to euthanize this person. There are also ways that doctors can find excuses to euthanize the disabled or whoever. A so called doctor who could possibly do this to another human being is absolutely disgusting and the lowest form of trash there is. Anyway my point being is euthanasia has become a horrible convenient way of life for this country which is so very wrong. Euthanasia is something I am very against it in any shape or form we are not a third world country and should not act like one.NO ONE SHOULD BE DONE AWAY WITH AS IF THEY ARE NOTHING, INCLUDING UNBORN CHILDREN OR OTHER HUMANBEINGS WHO ARE IN AN UNCONSIOUS STATE AND CAN NOT SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES, BECAUSE THESE HUMAN BEINGS FROM THE UNBORN CHILD ALL THE WAY UP TO THE VERY OLD HAVE JUST AS MUCH RIGHT TO LIVE THEIR LIFE AS ANYONE ELSE DOES AND SHOULD NOT HAVE IT TAKEN FROM THEM. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -2
 written by Dr.Edu , April 20, 2012 I am a Pediatrician with not just one but TWO Doctorates in Developmental Biology and Teratology. One from Europe and one from the US. Dr. Harrison is 100o;rrect. These are NOT the Middle Ages; we can demonstrate what Dr. Harrison states under laboratory conditions any time. You can't deny the fact that the Human Embryo is an individual of the human species. Not even Scott Gilbert can deny it. It would be like saying that the Earth is flat. As DR. Maureen L. Condic said, “The ethicist Peter Singer of Princeton University is famous, or notorious, for his advocacy of selective infanticide for babies who are born and then found to be defective in a way that makes them unwanted. Most people will find that argument morally abhorrent. But Singer is right about one thing. As he has said on many occasions, he and the Pope are in complete agreement on when human life begins.” This discussion is over, because Dr. Harrison’s conclusions were derived using the scientific method. THE REAL QUESTION IS THIS: Do you believe that ALL INDIVIDUALS ARE EQUAL? If the answer is yes, you have the moral obligation to stop induced abortions. If the answer is no, then you join a club of human who have gone down in history for doing what they did. The slave-owners, and the Nazi. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by deborah cady , March 04, 2012 A splitting celled zygote HAS life. It is not life. Mammals begin life at first breath. I agree with the Bible. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -5
 written by victoria , November 04, 2011 I, too, have a big problem with the prolife people calling prochoice advocates "pro abortion". No one (except really sick individuals) I repeat, no one is pro abortion. As a woman, who in 1969 at the age of 17 had an "illegal" abortion in truly horrific conditions (not to mention painful) with no family support, I can tell you it is not an experience anyone wants to have, legally or illegally. With the morning after pill being available these days, I would think that could alleviate a lot of abortions. There is an abortion clinic not far from my home and it is mostly a bunch of old men out there protesting. Where are all the fathers these days or even in the past? They certainly are not at home helping to raise their children yet they think they can tell women what they can and can't do with their bodies. And what about the so called prolifers who have murdered doctors who perform abortions? Hipocrites. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
 written by Michael , August 31, 2011 It seems to me that Religious People disagree on the issue and Doctors & Scientists disagree on the issue as well. Therefore, let me take a totally legalistic approach to the topic. Our modern, and supposedly just, legal system is based on the premise ei inc*mbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies). That is, we are innocent until proven guilty. The question regarding abortion seems to have boiled down to 'personhood' not life. Yet, there is still no definitive answer at this point with ssemingly sound arguements on both sides. Therefore, unless an abortionist, that is, an abortion supporter, can prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that that zygote or fetus is not truly a person, then, we are bound by the very ethics that our judicial system was founded on, to protect that human life...especially since it is unable to defend itself. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +7
 written by Greg Kells , June 26, 2011 Pro-choice advocates have been given the luxury of an easily debunked opponent in the religious right wing. When confronted with clear pragmatic science, it is not such an easy stance to defend. Human life obviously begins at conception. No reasonable person can argue that a zygote is not life. It consumes, grows, and responds to stimuli, so it is life. It is human, it has human dna. The only question is personhood. Is it a person? Of course it is, what else could it be? If a person is in a comatose state that is almost certainly temporary, does that person lose their rights as a person while they are unconscious? If you don't believe they do, how can you defend denying those rights to a fetal human being, knowing that the condition is temporary. Human life is not defined by sentience alone. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +15
 written by John Piermont Montilla , April 10, 2011 A tree seed is plant life, if you don't plant the seed did you killed the tree? A zygote and embryo is human life, if it fails to implant, did you murdered the person? report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
 written by Rothschild , April 08, 2011 I think the fact that you were such an a**, given such a sensitive and hard decision from your wife was treated as a condescending joke, puts you in the wrong. No, those jokes weren't funny. They were in poor taste. Maybe if you focused more on her emmotional state instead of bashing government, you'd still be with her  report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
 written by Chalres H. Swanson , March 27, 2011 I've always thought that Gensis 2:7 defined the beginning of life. "then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living bein." Only a very late term fetus can survive and breath without support. "It is a moral necessity that we are not forced to bring children into the world for whom we cannot be responsible and adoring and present. We must not inflict life on children who will be resented; we must not inflict unwanted children on society." (Ann Lamont: GRACE (EVENTUALLY). report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -2
Write comment
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed
