Dear Editor,
What do you know about fetal development? Is abortion just about women’s rights? I recently read two similar letters to the editor (Ms. Kopf’s in the October 16, 2012 edition Barrhead Leader; Ms. Gale’s in the, October 22, 2012 Town &Country) and was distressed by much of what was written, including the disregard shown in these editorials for the medically established facts of fetal development. I would like to provide a few facts (all taken from Maternal Child Nursing Care, by D. Wong, S. Perry, and M. Hockenberry (2002), a textbook used in the nursing program at the University of Alberta) that were missing in these editorials.
Between four and six weeks after a woman’s last menstrual period and only 2-4 weeks after conception, the external appearance of the developing human is a flexed, C-shaped body, with arm and leg buds present and the head at right angle to the body. The measurement from head to bottom is 0.4 to 0.5 cm. The stomach, liver, esophagus and intestinal beginnings are able to be recognized. The heart is developing, double chambers are visible, it begins to beat and the aortic arch and major veins are completed. Primary lung buds appear and the beginnings of eye, the ear and even the urinary system are present. In these early weeks of pregnancy the mother will often find out that she is pregnant, as she will miss her monthly period and at 2 weeks past conception a home pregnancy test will turn positive.
By the time a month has passed (at 8-10 weeks of pregnancy, or 6-8 weeks after conception) the developing baby’s body is fairly well formed, the fingers are well formed, the head is elevating and the eyes, ears, nose and mouth are recognizable. Baby measures about 2.5 to 3 cm from head to bottom, and weighs about 2 grams. Different bones are becoming distinguishable and even at this early stage the fetus becomes capable of some movement. The main blood vessels of the heart are assuming their final plan and there is more differentiation in the parts of the brain. Also at this time testes, if baby is a boy, and ovaries, if baby is a girl, are distinguishable internally and the external genitalia are beginning to differentiate.
By 12 weeks of pregnancy (10 weeks after conception), this baby does indeed resemble a human, with its head erect but disproportionately large and his/her skin pink and delicate. In her editorial Ms. Kopf states that “the term “unborn baby” is an inaccurate, emotional based portrayal that conjures up images of a plump, pink child, playing pat-a-cake in the womb.” Though a baby in the early stages of development may not be plump, or playing pat-a-cake (though by the seventh week muscles are contracting spontaneously), medical science certainly shows us that it is a human. When one is referring to a zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus as an unborn baby, it is simply because IT IS. These terms are used to describe and differentiate between various stages of fetal development but do not take away from the baby’s humanity.
The pro-abortion community may point to an unborn baby’s tiny size, immature levels of development, environment (existing in the womb, rather than outside of it) and level of dependency upon someone else for survival as things that diminish his or hers humanity. But if we extrapolate those arguments, say to my toddler-aged daughter and me, they are shown to be completely unfounded and ridiculous. One would never say that my daughter is less a person simply because she is much smaller than I, nor that being a little girl she is less human than myself as a woman. Her living environment has no bearing on her personhood, in addition, one would never say that since she is dependent upon her parents to provide for her basic needs each day she is somehow less of a human.
As to Ms. Gale’s concern over the control of a woman’s body, and Ms. Kopf’s belief that a pregnant woman’s rights trump those of her unborn child - I will state this: I am utterly appalled that being as I am 6 months pregnant, I could go to an abortion clinic tomorrow and end my child’s life. This little boy or girl inside of me is every bit as much a person as I am. If born today, my baby would have a chance of survival with the help of trained staff in a neonatal intensive care unit. However as in Canada we have no laws pertaining to abortion, if I decided (or was coerced, as there is no law against this either) to have an abortion tomorrow, this child’s life would be over.
Clearly a baby is a person, and therefore has a right to life that should be protected. A child’s right to life should trump a pregnant woman’s desire to end her pregnancy and is not at all about controlling women. Rather, the pro-life message is about protecting as yet unborn women and men. No matter how much of a social, financial, or physical burden they may be perceived to be, doesn’t each child deserve to live?
Respectfully,
Jennifer Otten
