• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Foetus 'cannot feel pain before 24 weeks'

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
25,302
Reaction score
12,100
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The human foetus cannot feel pain before 24 weeks, according to an official review of scientific evidence, contradicting one argument that anti-abortion campaigners have used for reducing the termination limit.

Nerve endings in the brain are not sufficiently formed to enable pain to be felt before 24 weeks, according to the report by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, which had been commissioned by the Department of Health.

The report said: "It can be concluded that the foetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation."

Foetus 'cannot feel pain before 24 weeks' - Telegraph

Every can read the rest of the story at the link above.


Now it may be true that a fetus cannot feel pain until week 24, this does not mean that the 20 week limit should be let go. I would personally even like to see it at week 16 at the latest but that is just my personal opinion.
 

ksu_aviator

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
6,969
Reaction score
2,592
Location
Fort Worth Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The human foetus cannot feel pain before 24 weeks, according to an official review of scientific evidence, contradicting one argument that anti-abortion campaigners have used for reducing the termination limit.

Nerve endings in the brain are not sufficiently formed to enable pain to be felt before 24 weeks, according to the report by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, which had been commissioned by the Department of Health.

The report said: "It can be concluded that the foetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation."

Foetus 'cannot feel pain before 24 weeks' - Telegraph

Every can read the rest of the story at the link above.


Now it may be true that a fetus cannot feel pain until week 24, this does not mean that the 20 week limit should be let go. I would personally even like to see it at week 16 at the latest but that is just my personal opinion.
Red Herring. From day 1, it is human. That's what matters.
 

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
25,302
Reaction score
12,100
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Red Herring. From day 1, it is human. That's what matters.
No, that is what matters to pro-lifers, for pro-choicers it is the right of the woman to decide what happens inside her body that counts (up to a point in time that is)
 

Sykes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,295
Reaction score
1,066
Location
Mmm. Bacon.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The human foetus cannot feel pain before 24 weeks, according to an official review of scientific evidence, contradicting one argument that anti-abortion campaigners have used for reducing the termination limit.

Nerve endings in the brain are not sufficiently formed to enable pain to be felt before 24 weeks, according to the report by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, which had been commissioned by the Department of Health.

The report said: "It can be concluded that the foetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation."

Foetus 'cannot feel pain before 24 weeks' - Telegraph

Every can read the rest of the story at the link above.


Now it may be true that a fetus cannot feel pain until week 24, this does not mean that the 20 week limit should be let go. I would personally even like to see it at week 16 at the latest but that is just my personal opinion.
Thank you. And from a personal perspective, I can't see abortion past four months (sixteen weeks).

Fortunately, I'll never get pregnant, and so what I think doesn't matter.
 

Serenity

Stay Human
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
28,977
Reaction score
25,968
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Not sure of others thoughts here, but i know for one I've never used the reason of "pain" as a primary reason against abortion. The argument is simply that killing children in the womb is morally wrong.

Whether or not unborn children feel pain is completely irrelevant as to whether or not they should be killed. At the moment of conception a new human life is created and it is this life that those opposed to abortion wish to preserve and nurture.

There are ways to kill anyone painlessly. Doesn't make it any less wrong.
 

ksu_aviator

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
6,969
Reaction score
2,592
Location
Fort Worth Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
No, that is what matters to pro-lifers, for pro-choicers it is the right of the woman to decide what happens inside her body that counts (up to a point in time that is)
Well if the pro-choicers are conceeding that the woman doesn't have the right to determine what goes on inside her after a certain point, then why 16, 20 or 24 weeks? What's the difference? From the moment the egg was fertilized it is human. Why confer rights at any point in time after that?
 

JayDubya

Struggler
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
17,181
Reaction score
4,037
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Well if the pro-choicers are conceeding that the woman doesn't have the right to determine what goes on inside her after a certain point, then why 16, 20 or 24 weeks? What's the difference? From the moment the egg was fertilized it is human. Why confer rights at any point in time after that?
Indeed.

If the primary conceit is "choice" and "ownership of the contents of one's uterus" (which mean, respectively, "the choice to kill another human being in cold blood," and "the ability to own another human being as property"), then the age of the human in the womb should be irrelevant.

That is often their conceit, or so they claim. IF their primary argument lies in saying that non-sapient life should not or do not have rights, as they often argue, then they wouldn't even stop at birth as the cut-off for killing a kid; there's nothing magically different about a human pre-birth and post-birth, just a minor shift in relative geography.

It doesn't make any logical sense; strong contradictions...
 

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,718
Reaction score
25,089
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
The human foetus cannot feel pain before 24 weeks, according to an official review of scientific evidence, contradicting one argument that anti-abortion campaigners have used for reducing the termination limit.

Nerve endings in the brain are not sufficiently formed to enable pain to be felt before 24 weeks, according to the report by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, which had been commissioned by the Department of Health.

The report said: "It can be concluded that the foetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation."

Foetus 'cannot feel pain before 24 weeks' - Telegraph

Every can read the rest of the story at the link above.


Now it may be true that a fetus cannot feel pain until week 24, this does not mean that the 20 week limit should be let go. I would personally even like to see it at week 16 at the latest but that is just my personal opinion.
I have researched this issue a lot and everything I have read also supports the fact before 24 weeks gestation a fetus has not developed enough to feel pain.
There are also natural chemicals in the amino fluid which limit feeling of pain even after the nervous system is more developed.
Perhaps that helps during childbirth ...not sure.

Anyway this subject is of special interest to me since I had a miscarriage between ny 2 ed and 3 rd child at 20 weeks gestation over 30 years ago.

I was about 20 weeks gestation when I went into early labor.
I went to the ER hoping they could stop the labor so I could continue my pregnancy.
They took a pregnancy test and informed me I was no longer pregnant.
They gave me meds hoping to stop the labor because the doctor covering for my doctor who was out of town did not want to come that day.

When they took me to my room and I was transferring from the gurney to the bed the fetus was expelled and I accidentally saw it and how deformed it was.

Later my doctor told me even if I had carried longer it never would have survived. It was so deformed they could not even tell the sex.

I am at peace of mind knowing that poor little deformed fetus felt no pain.
 

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
25,302
Reaction score
12,100
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Well if the pro-choicers are conceeding that the woman doesn't have the right to determine what goes on inside her after a certain point, then why 16, 20 or 24 weeks? What's the difference? From the moment the egg was fertilized it is human. Why confer rights at any point in time after that?
Because it is their right to have an abortion. We will never concede that a woman does not have the right to determine what is inside her and the constitution protects her right to privacy.

From the moment the egg is fertilized it is a clump of cells, with no substance with no qualities that make it a human being, just human material. A tumor is also human material and we have no problem removing that. As long as the clump of cells is early enough in the pregnancy it is not a human being and thus the only human being in the issue has the right to decide.
 

ksu_aviator

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
6,969
Reaction score
2,592
Location
Fort Worth Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Because it is their right to have an abortion. We will never concede that a woman does not have the right to determine what is inside her and the constitution protects her right to privacy.
She had every right to make that determination prior to sex. The commission of sex is the choice. The possibility of pregnancy is always there, no matter what protections you use. After that, I don't see any rights bestowed upon the woman or state to sentence the child to death.

From the moment the egg is fertilized it is a clump of cells, with no substance with no qualities that make it a human being, just human material. A tumor is also human material and we have no problem removing that. As long as the clump of cells is early enough in the pregnancy it is not a human being and thus the only human being in the issue has the right to decide.
I'm 36 years old and you can describe me as nothing more than a clump of cells. A much larger clump, but a clump none the less. Same goes for you, Obama, Boehner, and every other adult. In the literal sense, we are all a clump of cells. We have every quality of a human being as does the clump of cells inside a woman. Developmental stages do not determine species. Not in this case. Unless you can tell me that that clump of cells is even remotely likely to be another species (dog, cat, snake, or anything else), it is disingenuous to label it anything other than human.

Going back to the Constitution for a moment, do you recognize this: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." That of course, does not come from the Constitution, but the Declaration of Independence. I bring up the DOI because it is the basis for the separation from Great Britain and the formation of a new set of states. It is the principle behind our Constitution. It states we are created equal. Not born equal. Those are two different times. We are created equal and we have rights, natural rights, of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That is where the 5th Amendment comes in: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury..." The death penalty cannot be assigned without a proper trial. These "clumps of cells" are not given trials, therefore their death is not constitutional.
 

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,718
Reaction score
25,089
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
The fetal right to life argument was rejected by the Supreme Court in the Roe vs Wade decision.
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,510
Reaction score
50,093
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Ah.

So if an accident leaves me unable to feel pain in my right foot for a period of 24 weeks, during that period it would be perfectly fine for you to cut off my foot without my leave, right?


Right. No pain makes it moral. :doh
 

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,718
Reaction score
25,089
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Ah.

So if an accident leaves me unable to feel pain in my right foot for a period of 24 weeks, during that period it would be perfectly fine for you to cut off my foot without my leave, right?


Right. No pain makes it moral. :doh
Who on this thread said no pain makes anything moral ?
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,510
Reaction score
50,093
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,718
Reaction score
25,089
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Didn't say they did. However, it did seem to be implied.
I thought it referred to states that passed 20 week gestation abortion limits on the unfounded fetal pain theory .
By the way most of those 20 week gestation limits have been struck down the federal courts as unconstitutional.
Arizona and seven other states that had 20 week gestation laws were struck down in May.
Idaho's law was struck down earlier this year.
 

GEIxBattleRifle

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
3,306
Reaction score
1,024
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
IF their primary argument lies in saying that non-sapient life should not or do not have rights, as they often argue, then they wouldn't even stop at birth as the cut-off for killing a kid; there's nothing magically different about a human pre-birth and post-birth, just a minor shift in relative geography.
I agree

Some pro choicers like myself see no relative difference that happens at birth besides now the human no longer interferes with the women's right to abort.
 

GEIxBattleRifle

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
3,306
Reaction score
1,024
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
1. The argument is simply that killing children in the womb is morally wrong.

2. Whether or not unborn children feel pain is completely irrelevant as to whether or not they should be killed.

3. At the moment of conception a new human life is created and it is this life that those opposed to abortion wish to preserve and nurture.

4. There are ways to kill anyone painlessly. Doesn't make it any less wrong.
1. Morals this and that and this and that. One of the most overused words in the abortion debate

2. It's completely irrelevant to you but probably not for someone else

3. Pro lifers are not the ones preserving or ''nurturing'' the unborn here. The women are being the containers for what you value so much and we can afford to allow a nice sum of the unborn ''children'' to die while we focus on the entities that actually have put some trace of value on their own existence

4. Yes you're correct but you need to look at why the deaths are treated differently. Once you answered that we can talk about personhood here
 

ksu_aviator

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
6,969
Reaction score
2,592
Location
Fort Worth Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
1. Morals this and that and this and that. One of the most overused words in the abortion debate
Morality is the central question to abortion. You can't dismiss it and it can't be over used.

2. It's completely irrelevant to you but probably not for someone else
It is not relevant. What is relevant is the debate about when the right to life begins. Pain is not relevant.

3. Pro lifers are not the ones preserving or ''nurturing'' the unborn here. The women are being the containers for what you value so much and we can afford to allow a nice sum of the unborn ''children'' to die while we focus on the entities that actually have put some trace of value on their own existence
What? Why do you feel the need to reduce human life to inanimate objects?

4. Yes you're correct but you need to look at why the deaths are treated differently. Once you answered that we can talk about personhood here
There is no difference between killing someone that is born and someone that isn't born. Death is death.
 

Sykes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,295
Reaction score
1,066
Location
Mmm. Bacon.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
She had every right to make that determination prior to sex. The commission of sex is the choice. The possibility of pregnancy is always there, no matter what protections you use. After that, I don't see any rights bestowed upon the woman or state to sentence the child to death.



I'm 36 years old and you can describe me as nothing more than a clump of cells. A much larger clump, but a clump none the less. Same goes for you, Obama, Boehner, and every other adult. In the literal sense, we are all a clump of cells. We have every quality of a human being as does the clump of cells inside a woman. Developmental stages do not determine species. Not in this case. Unless you can tell me that that clump of cells is even remotely likely to be another species (dog, cat, snake, or anything else), it is disingenuous to label it anything other than human.

Going back to the Constitution for a moment, do you recognize this: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." That of course, does not come from the Constitution, but the Declaration of Independence. I bring up the DOI because it is the basis for the separation from Great Britain and the formation of a new set of states. It is the principle behind our Constitution. It states we are created equal. Not born equal. Those are two different times. We are created equal and we have rights, natural rights, of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That is where the 5th Amendment comes in: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury..." The death penalty cannot be assigned without a proper trial. These "clumps of cells" are not given trials, therefore their death is not constitutional.
Again with the celibacy argument.


And you don't see brain function as the difference between yourself and just a bunch of cells?
 

Dr. Chuckles

King Conspiratard
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
12,895
Reaction score
2,909
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Again with the celibacy argument.
It's not an argument for celibacy, but pointing to the fact that sex has known risks ( a point we all likely agree on). How the potential consequences of that risk (in this case pregnancy) are dealt with depends on your views of the fetus, and if, when, and what rights it has

But clearly we are not talking about a state of being that magically pops into existence
 

sangha

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
67,218
Reaction score
28,523
Location
Lower Hudson Valley, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Morality is the central question to abortion. You can't dismiss it and it can't be over used.
No, morality is not the central issue for abortion.

There is no difference between killing someone that is born and someone that isn't born. Death is death.
No, death is not death, and there is a difference between killing a person and killing a ZEF.

What you've stated are just your opinions. Nothing more. Just as what I've stated is my opinions. The difference is, my opinions are supported by the constitution and thousands of years of civilization.
 
Top Bottom