barry@ames-lm.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (06/25/84)
[No...get back...AAA{ (burp)]
Perhaps because the abortion debate tends to climb the
ladder of abstraction from "legal abortion = good / legal
abortion != good", to "fetus = human / fetus != human", a
concrete development which may render the latter question
academic, has gone unnoticed, here.
I refer to a recent news story about a couple who were
killed in a plane crash; it seems there is an embryo (well,
fertilized ovum) of the couple alive and well in some lab.
I guess the couple were attempting to get around some kind of
infertility problem, with eventual reimplantation of the ovum
planned.
Whatever the reason, there is currently a controversy over
what should be done with the fertilized egg (eggs? Not sure).
What interests me about the story is the fact that we are now
able to preserve such fertilized ova ex uterus for extended
periods, and the implications of this in re abortion. It sounds
to me as though we are very close to being able to preserve
"aborted" fetuses indefinitely, with the possibility of eventually
reimplanting them in the womb of some other woman who desires a
child, but is unable to conceive, or prefers to "adopt".
I understand that we may not be able to do this quite yet.
I do not recall hearing how long they can keep the ova in stasis,
and I am aware that putting a fetus in stasis when it's a few
weeks to a few months along is more difficult than maintaining a
single fertilized egg. But I get the impression that we must be
getting close to where fetuses destined for destruction could be
preserved instead of destroyed.
Would this be a good idea? I have some opinions, but I'm more
interested in yours. If nothing else, the possibility of such an
alternative would decouple the "either the mother's welfare
or the fetus's" argument. We'd still not know if the fetus was
"human", but, having hedged our bets, we'd no longer *need*
to know; the question would be academic.
Comments?
"I am only an egg." Kenn Barry
NASA-Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric Avenue: {dual,hao,menlo70,hplabs}!ames-lm!barryowens@gatech.UUCP (Gerald R. Owens) (06/26/84)
(burp)
Oh I hope so. In fact, one can think of a group of people
who would jump at the chance, and that would be those parents unable
to have kids of their own. I hear that the demand for babies has
shot sky high now that abortion is legal and that there are few
pregnant women not wanting the child who will nevertheless go through
with the pregnancy.
By the way, I read a while back that the vast majority of
unwanted pregnancies arise from either the lack of birth control, or
just miseducation in it's use. Does anyone know whether the success
rates given for various birth control methods includes the "natural"
mistake rate (i.e. they factor in missing a day in taking the pill.)
I hear that the most popular birth control method in Japan is the
condom, and that the success rate exceeds 99%. Apparently, they've
taken the time to learn the risks, but I heard from the same source that
they've created a ritual around it's, ah, application, that seems to
insure that it is used properly.
A final peeved note. How many pro-life people who allow the
use of birth control methods REALLY believe that abortion is murder??
Let me draw a picture. If somebody uses birth control methods, the
possibility of a pregnancy is reduced. Less need for abortion. Sure, there
may be a few "misses". Nobody's perfect. But one MUST face the fact
that reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies will reduce the
number of abortions desired. If we can't stop the slaughter right now,
let's start cutting it back, at least. Now, why are we opposing the
public dispensing of birth control devices and information? people
are gonna indulge themselves, like it or not, so why not make it
cheaper for them to prevent a pregnancy than to abort it? Using the
fear of pregnancy to control the behavior of people is not as effective
as appealing to their pocketbooks. After all, that's called
free enterprise.
Gerald Owens
Owens@gatechlmf@drutx.UUCP (06/27/84)
<> Interesting thought about reimplanting fetuses. What would one do with unwanted fetuses? My thought is that the procedure for removing the fetus would be incredibly expensive and perhaps more dangerous to the woman's health. Abortion will likely be around for many more years, let's keep it legal. When replanted fetuses are born and grow up will they then go searching for their biological parents. Sounds complicated. Lori Fuller
brianp@shark.UUCP (Brian Peterson) (06/27/84)
Given: 1) we can preserve any fertilized ova that we get early enough; 2) many more fertilized ova die through natural causes (spontaneous abortion, etc) than end up turning into babies; 3) there are more than enough people on the earth now; should we preserve all the fertilized ova that we can? Brian Peterson ...!ucbvax!tektronix!shark!brianp