When is a Baby a Baby?

1.1 The statement "life begins at conception" is really a tautology. Of course life begins at conception; that is what "conception" means. Therefore, it would seem clear that the occupant of a pregnant woman's uterus is a human being, right from the meeting of egg and sperm. It is not a "clump of cells", despite what some abortion rights activists say. (By the way, I also believe that abortion should be kept legal, but more on this below.)

1.2 Since abortion was legalized, there have arisen smoky fires, worthy of the Biblical Hades, of argumentation on when life and/or "personhood" begins. I hope to shed light in this area, using simple reason based on scientific facts.

1.3 For the moment, let us get away from words like "baby" and "product of conception". Let us use the unbiased term Unborn Biological Entity (UBE). This UBE is the occupant of a pregnant woman's womb. But what should we call it, and how should we regard it? The following explication will be helpful:

1.4

1. The UBE is a living organism. This is determined by its biological activities, such as oxygen and nutrient use, and of course its rapid growth from blastocyst, to embryo, to fetus.
2. The UBE contains genetic material from the woman, but also contains material from a man. Its genotype is therefore unique. The UBE is an unique living organism, not part or property of the woman who carries it.
3. All living organisms have a Linnean, scientific name. For instance, the Maine lobster is Homarus americanus; the Jack-o-Lantern mushroom is Ompholatus olearius. But the UBE is not a crustacean or a fungus; it must have its own scientific name.
4. Since the UBE has only human DNA, it should be classified as Homo sapiens: a human being.

1.5 This conclusion is true, irrespective of the UBE's developmental stage, shape, or whether it has a heartbeat. Arguments over "personhood" are philosophical and can go on forever; they are irrelevant here. Scientifically, the UBE is a human being. And this means that abortion is technically homicide.

1.6 Whether abortion is justifiable homicide, is not pertinent here. Personally, I am in favor of abortion rights, especially because many women would otherwise seek dangerous illegal abortions, or even go the route of the clothes hanger. There is no need for women to suffer this way, if abortion is kept legal. (Incidentally, I also agree with embryonic stem-cell research).

1.7 However, the best way to avoid or reduce the use of abortion, is contraception. The widespread use of contraception in Europe has resulted in its abortion rates being on average lower than those in the US.

1.8 It is amazing that one of the most vociferous opponents of abortion, the Roman Catholic Church, also forbids the use of contraception. It favors "natural family planning", in which a couple will abstain from sex while the woman is most fertile.

1.9 However, a woman's fertile period often coincides naturally with her greatest desire for sex. Therefore the Church is in effect restricting women's enjoyment of the sex act. The Church needs to get its "family planning" regulations in line with human rights.

2.0 To those in the Church or elsewhere, who staunchly oppose abortion rights, I ask: will you go the whole way, and adopt unwanted children? The early Christians often rescued unwanted babies from garbage dumps; it would seem that modern Christians should imitate this laudable charity. No child should be unwanted, as the saying goes.

2.1 But this demands another question. Legally, when is the UBE actually an unborn child, possessed of the right to life? The answer is passing strange.

2.2 In the landmark decision which legalized abortion (Roe vs Wade, 1973), the Supreme Court decided that the viability of the fetus would be the criterion for legal abortion. This viability was defined as the fetus' ability to survive outside the uterus, albeit with medical support.

2.3 Here is where the strangeness really begins. For since medical science is constantly improving, it is pushing back the stage at which the fetus can survive ex-utero. Since premature fetuses are surviving birth at earlier stages, the definition of "baby" should also reach back to the same stage. This would lead to increasing restriction of abortions.

2.4 The answer to this problem for abortion rights advocates, has been to enact laws defending the right to abortion all the way through, in some cases, the full gestation of nine months. In other words, for some advocates, a woman may abort a fully-developed fetus.

2.5 Fortunately this hideous procedure, technically called "intact dilation and extraction", and commonly called partial-birth abortion, was prohibited by an act of Congress (Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, 2003). Now this raises the question: why do many of us cringe in horror at partial-birth abortion, but have little or no problem with earlier-stage abortions? How is the 9 month-old fetus absolutely different than it was at 3 months? Anyway, none of this changes the fact that the unborn biological entity is a human being.

2.6 Yet even here, we find more strangeness. In Dorchester, MA, April 2010, one woman assaulted another, and tragically the victim lost her UBE. Under Massachusetts law, said an official, "a homicide charge may be brought in the death of an unborn child if the fetus would have survived outside the mother’s womb". "Unborn child?" "Fetus?" The law is clearly unclear about this.

2.7 So, when is a baby really a baby? Given that a pregnant woman can choose to abort at almost any stage, from blastocyst to well-developed fetus, I must conclude that it is entirely the woman's decision.

2.8 I have never heard a pregnant woman, who intends to keep her baby, call it anything else but a baby. No one says, "I'm having a fetus". I suppose women could have tee-shirts made with "Fetus" and a downward-pointing arrow, but I have never seen this. Women have babies, not fetuses. However, there are other opinions as to when a fetus ends and a baby begins.

2.9 Some people maintain that birth is the best place to draw the line, that only a postnatal baby is really a baby. All right, what happens at birth that distinguishes a fetus from a baby? The fetus simply enters this (rather cold and noisy) world. It may not begin breathing for several minutes postnatal, and again consider the condition and medical needs of the premature baby.

3.0 Going further, when exactly is the fetus-baby born? When its head appears (crowning), or when its entire body comes out? No one seems to know. In general, the decision of what constitutes a baby is left with the woman.

3.1 Beyond the strangeness of allowing pregnant women to make life-or-death decisions, there is the legal position of men. To my knowledge, nowhere in the USA is a man allowed to prohibit a woman from having an abortion; neither may he force her to abort. He may not even be told the gender of the fetus-baby, until the mother agrees that it be known.

3.2 This means that the fetus-baby is solely under the legal power of the woman. Since the man has no legal power, he also should be held harmless, and have no responsibility for the results of the pregnancy.

3.3 The far-reaching implications of a man's apparent lack of reproductive rights and responsibilities, are the subject for another discussion. As far as reason and science are concerned, human life begins at conception. Yet as far as the law of the land is concerned, no matter how irrational it seems, a baby is a baby when its mother says so.