fetus can't feel pain before 24 weeks

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

A more in-depth article on the topic than the Fox News piece in the OP.

Yes, scientists are not unanimously agreed on the question of whether a fetus feels pain at 24 weeks, but given that the study in question was commissioned by the government with a view to changing existing law - that study is the basis under which such a change would be made.

UK report: fetus can't feel pain before 24 weeks

By SYLVIA HUI (AP) – 18 hours ago

LONDON — Human fetuses cannot feel pain before the age of 24 weeks, a British medical association said Friday — delivering a setback for anti-abortion activists campaigning to lower the country's 24-week time limit.

Lawmakers who were considering lowering the limit to 20-22 weeks had commissioned the study by the Royal College of Obstetricians and

Gynecologists.

Citing evidence from medical research and post-mortem reports, the group said nerve connections in the brain were not sufficiently formed to allow pain perception until after 24 weeks, and that even after 24 weeks, the fetus was in a state of sleep-like unconsciousness or sedation.

"There was fairly good evidence that the pathways necessary to feel pain really just aren't there before 24 weeks — although they very clearly are there after," said Richard Anderson, a professor in human reproductive sciences with the University of Edinburgh, who was part of the study.

Some doctors disagree with the findings, arguing that fetuses can experience distress by the age of 20 weeks. The U.S. state of Nebraska recently passed a bill banning abortion at and after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

But the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has said it knows of no legitimate evidence that shows a fetus can experience pain. It said a fetus' brain begins its final stage of development between the 20th and 40th weeks of pregnancy, and that certain hormones that develop in the final trimester also must be present for it to feel pain. It's not known exactly when those hormones appear.

In Britain, the Abortion Act of 1967 allows surgical abortions up to 24 weeks. A woman can still abort her baby after 24 weeks if doctors agree the mother's life is in danger or there is strong evidence that the fetus would be born with a severe disability.

The law, however, does not extend to religiously conservative Northern Ireland, where abortions are still banned unless a woman's life is in danger or at mental or physical risk. As a result an estimated 1,400-2,000 women from the British territory travel annually to England or other European Union nations to end their pregnancies.

"We have no real evidence because the unborn baby can't speak," said Bernie Smyth, director of Precious Life, an anti-abortion group active in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. "The fact is babies have been born at 24 weeks, they have survived, and they do feel pain."

Prime Minister David Cameron had backed reducing the limit to between 20 and 22 weeks before he came to power in May. The House of Commons voted in 2008 to keep the existing limit, and Cameron's office issued a statement Friday saying no changes were planned in the policy. It said the prime minister would be led in his decision by science.

Campaigners against abortions said the report's conclusions were not definitive and did not change their view that terminating pregnancies is wrong.

"Performing abortion humanely does not justify the fact that you are terminating a human life," said Josephine Quintavalle of the London-based Comment on Reproductive Ethics.

But supporters of the current abortion laws said the findings would reassure women considering a late-term termination.

"It is vitally important to protect a woman's right to access abortion services, and British law rightly recognizes this principle," said Tony Kerridge of the sexual health charity Marie Stopes International. "The findings should give comfort and reassurance to any woman who finds herself in the extremely distressing position of having to make the decision to terminate a pregnancy at a later gestation."

The charity said late abortions were extremely rare in Britain. Last year there were fewer than 3,000 abortions above 20 weeks gestation, Kerridge said.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Let me make something clear: I'm not here to sway anyone to or from their opinions on abortion. What you do is your biz, and that's between you, your partner, and perhaps your God (if you have one).

My point was: 22 week old fetus responds to stimuli. There's the proof. So this study, imo, is BS.

If what we do is our business, then it's no one else's business to restrict it.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

OF COURSE I challenged my preconceptions!

I won't repeat myself again here. Scroll up to my past posts to you and reread and maybe you will understand what I'm saying. Maybe you won't, until if/when you ever find yourself expecting. It's not even for you to question, tbh. And it's not even relevant to the conversation either, because my stance is not about what others should do in specific circumstances. Why you're banging this drum is beyond me, but I'm a bit disappointed you can't see where your presumption is completely offensive.

Telling me, or assuming any parent in my shoes who made the choice I did based on similar reasons is 'sidestepping making the difficult choices' is probably the most offensive thing I've heard in quite some time. It's just as wrong as saying i cannot claim with authority what I would do, because I already made my choice based upon those factors.

And again, yes, I admit I'm sure you're not meaning to offend. End result is still the same though.

The point being you were able to make your own choice.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The issue of choice is irrelevant to this particular thread imo. It isn't about whether or not abortion is morally justifiable - it's that the UK government commissioned a scientific study to inform their thinking about lowering the abortion limit from 24 weeks.

We can argue that the study is BS, that it's politically motivated or what have you (although we can't - since we don't have the knowledge to do that) - but that is missing the point. Specifically - if people prefer that the government made decisions on these issues based on nothing more than preconceived ideology or is it perhaps better that they attempt to support their decision-making by bringing in experts?

Someone will probably relativise what I've said above - some BS about Iraq, global warming and putting blind faith in the government etc. etc. - but all that does is give individuals the conceit that their opinions have as much weight as that of experts (expert opinion that has been tossed aside in favour of personal stories and subjective intuitions - which while nice, are entirely worthless to the point about whether or not a 24 week fetus feels pain).

In fact, whether or not anyone here believes actually that fetuses feel pain at the 24 week point is also irrelevant - because the key issue is whether the UK government believes it in order to reduce the limits. On the basis of this article - clearly they don't.

Edited June 26, 2010 by Its a MADHOUSE

[Gemmie 142]

There is only "controversy" if you choose to be ignorant as to why late term abortions are permitted. They are permitted under very limited circumstances.

I know of one girl who did it after 20 weeks because she didn't want it. So even though there might be a large percentage that do it due to medical reasons, they are permitted due to personal choice as well.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Abortion is legal, but, legal or not, it's also still murder. Denials don't change that, either.

[Amby 490]

Abortion is legal, but, legal or not, it's also still murder. Denials don't change that, either.

Not everyone sees it at murder.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Abortion is legal, but, legal or not, it's also still murder. Denials don't change that, either.

It is the law which defines what is or is not murder, not the personal opinions of individuals. You are wrong - but you are perfectly entitled to that opinion. The law disagrees.

I know of one girl who did it after 20 weeks because she didn't want it. So even though there might be a large percentage that do it due to medical reasons, they are permitted due to personal choice as well.

From what I understand "late term" in the UK is anything over 24 weeks - for that there has to be some sort of medical complication and it has to be approved by 2 doctors.

Edited June 26, 2010 by Its a MADHOUSE

[chri'stina 190]

Not everyone sees it at murder.

Of course not, but some people do as we are saying in this thread. The problem is the denial of what abortion is.

I know of one girl who did it after 20 weeks because she didn't want it. So even though there might be a large percentage that do it due to medical reasons, they are permitted due to personal choice as well.

I feel like many people just want us to believe that every abortion performed late is for a very important health reason, when that's not true.

Like you said, maybe the % is higher of those who get one after a certain amt of weeks for health reason. But overall, the % of women who have abortions due to incest or rape is extremely low, and medical health reasons are also low compared to other reasons like it will dramatically change my life or can't afford a baby right now that have a high %. Here is a study done with stats. I didn't read it all, but looked at the stats. I assume it's an unbaised source. A good amount of info there that just shows the facts, not opinions.

Oops forgot to attach link: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf

Edited June 26, 2010 by chri'stina

[Sofiyya 1,687]

It is the law which defines what is or is not murder, not the personal opinions of individuals. You are wrong - but you are perfectly entitled to that opinion. The law disagrees.

That's what you think if you are a moral relativist. You are a moral relativist, and I'm not. I don't depend on law to tell me what's right or wrong when it comes to human life That way, I'm not morally confused or in denial about it.

[chri'stina 190]

I am sure that those who are against the death penalty think it's murder even though it IS lawful in states. I am not a big death penalty supporter myself, but just bringing up the obvious. Whether something is lawful or not doesn't change whether it's murder IMO. It has been legal to do many horrible things in the past, how about slavery. Just because something is lawful doesn't mean it's not a negative thing.

Edited June 26, 2010 by chri'stina

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Aha. On your 7th pregnancy you find that your fetus stopped developing and is about to cause mis-carriage. If that happens, there is a good chance that you will bleed to death. Of course, you would not even consider abortion, despite the fact that there is no saving the fetus - it's fate determined, it will self-abort. But you would rather risk leaving your 6 children orphans.

I believe you that you would do as you promised (attempt to die just not to have an abortion). I just can't accept that it would be an intelligent decision.

I didn't have 7 pregnancies. I didn't have a miscarriage. I said nothing about choosing to die to avoid an abortion.

Did you read my post or just copy it and post what you're thinking that had nothing to do with what I actually said?

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

It is the law which defines what is or is not murder, not the personal opinions of individuals. You are wrong - but you are perfectly entitled to that opinion. The law disagrees.

Then why is it when a pregnant woman is murdered it is considered a double homicide.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That's what you think if you are a moral relativist. You are a moral relativist, and I'm not. I don't depend on law to tell me what's right or wrong when it comes to human life That way, I'm not morally confused or in denial about it.

It's a statement of fact - the law defines what is or is not murder, regardless of what you, I, or anyone else thinks about it.

Abortion is legal because it does not fall within the legally proscribed boundaries of what is considered murder. Murder is essentially unlawful killing.

Incidentally, this has zip to do with the OP article. Perhaps better to stick to that rather than turn this into yet another directionless thread.

[chri'stina 190]

It's a statement of fact - the law defines what is or is not murder, regardless of what you, I, or anyone else thinks about it.

So we aren't supposed to stand up for what we believe, when a law goes against it? Since the death penalty is lawful in some places, people against it should just keep quiet? I think it's very important what the people think about the laws in their land in democracies. Why else would there be outrage all the time about all different kinds of laws?? Well the legality of abortion is also considered outrageous by some of us. Like some people are outraged about Arizona's law, the law about capping how much an oil company would be responsible for - which is now affecting the BP leak problem, laws that don't allow gay marriage, I am trying to bring different views not just my own. Examples of laws that people speak out against because they don't agree with them. So why should people who don't agree that abortion isn't murder keep quiet?

Edited June 26, 2010 by chri'stina