It’s always been my view to mind my own business and not get involved in the personal decisions of others. This view applies very strongly to my pro-choice identity. With the 43rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade recently, I just have to collect my thoughts and explain why I identify as pro-choice.
-
I’m a man. Because I am a man and am not biologically programmed to have a uterus, I will never experience pregnancy. Because of this, it is not my place to dictate what a woman should and should not do in regards to her reproductive health.
-
To put it crudely, coat hanger abortions are not a myth. A former gynecologist wrote an essay for the New York Times explaining the oftentimes graphic cases he encountered. He recalls pretty much any instrument (broken glass bottles, sharp objects, etc.) being used to elicit an abortion, with dire consequences for the woman (oftentimes, death). History tells us that during the 1930s, 18% of maternal deaths could be attributed to illegal abortion. Poor women were the most adversely affected by illegal abortion. Approximately 77% of women (who participated in a gynecological study) attempted a self-induced abortion, while only 2% had the guidance of a doctor. After the landmark decision of Roe v. Wade, the mortality rates for self-induced abortions dropped substantially (more than four-fold, to be precise). Roe v. Wade did not mean that abortion could be performed (they’ve always been performed since ancient times). What it did mean was that abortions could be performed in a medically sanctioned setting that significantly reduces the risk of complications and adverse events.
-
Science and History. I’m a devout Roman Catholic. I, however, am in direct opposition to the Church’s stance on abortion because history and my background in biology inform me. Contrary to the claims of gung ho “pro-lifers” (notice my sarcastic quotations), the Church has not been consistent on its teaching of abortion. The Church has constantly flip-flopped and shown much internal debate as to the nature of abortion. Some theologians have considered abortion a sin of murder, while others have condemned it as a sexual sin. One theologian I would like to mention is Thomas Aquinas, who is revered as a “Doctor of the Church.” This esteemed theologian espoused a doctrine called “delayed hominization.” This doctrine (derived very strongly from Aristotle) discusses the evolution of the soul infused in the developing embryo. At the moment of conception, Aquinas believes the developing embryo has a vegetative, inanimated soul. This then progresses to an animal soul and finally a rational or human soul. Delayed hominization implies that a “human form” is necessary to deem an embryo with possessing a human soul. Here’s where my understanding of biology comes into play.
Human form may imply looking like a human being. We, as scientists, also believe in a concept called structure-function relationship, which dictates that our body’s anatomy directly contributes to the functioning. The Church believes that life starts from the moment of conception and they use the rationale that the zygote has its own signature DNA to defend this dogma. That, however, is faulty reasoning. If you’re going to use the whole “signature DNA” concept as defense for not aborting a fertilized egg, you may as well defend a sperm as sacred and worthy of protection. Spermatogenesis (the process of making sperm) is done via meiosis (in layman’s terms, cell division that produces sperm and eggs). During this process, genetic recombination occurs, producing sperm that are genetically distinct from one another. No two sperm are exactly alike. Yet pro-birthers do not complain about a sperm. Why is it so hard to understand that a zygote (a newly fertilized egg that bears no resemblance to a human being) is not a human being? A seed is not a tree. An egg is not a chicken. The silk from a caterpillar is not a dress. A seed may have the potential to be a tree, but it is not a tree. The same principle applies to the egg, the caterpillar silk, and the newly fertilized zygote.
As I’m writing this, I’m looking at my notes from my developmental biology class in my undergraduate years. I’ll try to explain each development milestone in layman’s terms. There are 4 distinct phases to pregnancy: the fertilization and cleavage stage (i.e. when the zygote starts dividing to become multiple cells), the formation of the essential components of the placenta and implantation in the uterus, the embryonic phase (typically weeks 3-8), and the fetal phase (typically weeks 9-birth). During the embryonic phase we have a number of key events. We start seeing the foundation of the nervous system and the cardiovascular system being formed. Typically around week 4, the organs and parts of the body start forming (i.e. the primitive head structures, the windpipe, a primitive heart with a heartbeat and simple blood vessel network, foundations of the kidney, etc.). The embryo is still extremely tiny at this stage. Week 5 is typically marked with growth of the parts from week 4, more kidney development, and sex organ development. By week 8, we see a mature four-chambered heart and lung development. During the fetal period, we mostly see growth of all the major organ systems and fetuses are usually viable around 26-28 weeks.
A few notes about this developmental cycle. A lot of pro-birth people like to mention the heart development at 8 weeks as an excuse to ban abortion at this stage. Quite frankly, that is rubbish logic. Just because it has a functioning heart, does not mean it is capable of living outside of the womb at this stage (it isn’t). You need the lungs to start secreting a chemical called surfactant in order to allow the fetus to breathe on its own outside of the womb. That typically does not occur around 25 weeks and even then, the chances of survival are extremely low. Another point of contention they like to bring up is that the fetus starts developing brain waves during the fetal phase. Again, it is an extremely primitive system that would make it non-viable outside of the womb at this stage. They also like saying is that fetuses can feel pain as early as 20 weeks. That is also complete and utter nonsense not grounded in scientific fact. I’ll let the Journal of the American Medical Association do the talking for me:
“Evidence regarding the capacity for fetal pain is limited but indicates that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester.” -JAMA, 2005
This paper was a review of the vast amounts of scientific literature on the subject of fetal development. The basic premise for the conclusion above was the fact that pain requires conscious recognition of unpleasant stimuli and this consciousness can only develop when the connections of the thalamus (a higher order region of the brain) and the cortex (associated with higher brain function such as thought and action). This development typically occurs between 23 and 30 weeks. The paper debunks the whole argument that fetuses feel pain because of hormonal response to noxious stimuli; the hormonal responses in question can be triggered with or without a noxious stimuli. EEG readings also demonstrate “wakefulness” of the fetus around 30 weeks. The EEG readings demonstrate that consciousness and aversion to pain does not occur before the third trimester (which ranges from 28-40 weeks into the pregnancy). Another review of the literature occurred in 2010 by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in the UK, finding nearly the same exact results from the JAMA paper. Funny thing about science: when done right, it generally meets at the same consensus. So next time a pro-birther comes to you with that “Doctors for Fetal Pain” website, just show them the scientific data. “Doctors for Fetal Pain” is a collection of quotes from doctors presenting their mere opinions, oftentimes not corroborated by scientific consensus. Then again, I don’t exactly know if the pro-birther would listen to fact or reason.
Why do I mention this scientific talk and the concept of fetal pain? Going back to Thomas Aquinas’s dogma of “delayed hominization” and the implied “human form” argument, one characteristic that makes us truly human (i.e. gives us a “human form”) is our ability to perceive and respond to pain. Animals can feel pain, but they do not have the rational thoughts to process and interpret pain. That is uniquely human.
-
Abortion is sometimes medically necessary to save the life of the mother. Ever hear of ectopic pregnancies? Ectopic pregnancies are when the embryo implants outside of the lining in the uterus. The most common site is in the Fallopian Tubes. The consequences can be dire if not treated. Consequences include abnormal bleeding (which can oftentimes be attributed falsely to appendicitis, further delaying care) and rupturing of the tube (which is fatal, due to an artery running in the vicinity of the tube). Ectopic pregnancies occur at a rate of 19.7 cases per 1,000 pregnancies and is a top cause of maternal mortality in first trimester pregnancies. That is not a number to dismiss as insignificant by epidemiological standards. Other reasons why abortion may be necessary (as established by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) are to combat severe infections, preeclampsia (a condition that can lead to elevated blood pressure and increase risk of stroke), and heart failure. Pregnancy does not come without its risks!
I’ll close off here by saying this: pro-choice does not equate to being pro-abortion. It means that while I may not agree with abortion after a certain point in the pregnancy (particularly in the later stages of the third trimester), it’s also none of my business what people do. I do not know the life circumstances of the woman, therefore I give her the autonomy (as it should be) to make her own choices. It is for this reason why I am a staunch advocate of Planned Parenthood and it all the good work it does. The organization provides essential healthcare to poor women. It provides contraception so the chances of an abortion due to unplanned pregnancy are significantly lowered. Being anti-abortion does not make one pro-life. The pro-life philosophy encompasses so much more. Things like ensuring no human being goes hungry in a nation of vast wealth and resources, recognizing that healthcare is a human right, striving for diplomacy to prevent unjustified war, fighting systemic racism, bigotry, and discrimination of all peoples, and working to address issues like climate change and pollution (which have direct adverse impact on the world’s most vulnerable) are all part of the pro-life philosophy.