fetus can't feel pain before 24 weeks

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Responding to stimuli is one thing - having the nerve development necessary to feel pain is another.

There is no reason to suppose that the one contradicts the other.

[Fandango 1,440]

Are you sure?

We can make relativistic arguments about the science, but all that does is give ignorant (as in ignorant of the facts of a particular issue) people the conceit that their opinions are as valid as those of people with specialised or in-depth knowledge about the subject.

I have no reason to suppose that the science was dishonest or that the conclusions are flawed - and I certainly wouldn't cite personal experience as a reason why it is incorrect. You can say it is BS if you want, but you have no more of an authoritative opinion on it than anyone else who read the OP article.

Fair enough, I'm wrong as far as abortion time limits, but again, that doesn't change my stance concerning this argument. And why can't one cite personal experience? I can say 'I saw this' which makes it *my*perspective. Scientific studies are flawed all the time. At one point, science told us the Earth was flat.

I'm not saying that I am a scientist, or that this particular study was rigged for some political gain. What I'm saying is, I have personally witnessed a fetus responding to stimuli at 22 weeks. Which contradicts this study.

Well this is probably going to go down like a lead balloon - which is another reason why it was not a good idea to personalise this by using photos of your own unborn child - but from what you described it sounds as though you made that decision by sidestepping it. You have denied yourself the information about the health of the child in order to not have to face the decision on whether or not to abort.

Please understand, I do not mean this to sound derogatory - I'm not saying that you were wrong or negligent to not do this, but you can hardly claim to have agonised about the decision when you have essentially avoided the situation.

It's funny, you claim to know my past feelings better than I do. I can't see how you can even type that with a straight face.

We chose not to do it, because in the end, test results wouldn't matter. Yes, we agonized the 'what ifs' to the nth degree, but in the end, we decided the results didnt matter, so what point is an invasive test?

Can you not see what I'm saying here?

[GabiandVi 34]

I *knew* someone would use that argument

Well all you can really say to that is why would you be skeptical of it when you have no evidence to subject this specific research to skepticism - perhaps it is accurate, perhaps it isn't, neither of us knows - but clearly this research was necessary in order for the government to formulate whether or not to change existing policy.

Questioning the conclusions of this scientific study by citing the alleged dishonesty of other scientists is a relativistic argument. That more than anything else amounts to "shutting down" the conversation - because if you throw out the word of an "expert" out of hand then what is left except the subjective opinions of ignorant people (meaning again: people ignorant of the facts of the issue).

You've ignored the research cited that shows that a fetus will respond to stimuli at 7.5 weeks. Which is right? I don't think it can be both. Maybe no one is being dishonest. Maybe one is wrong.

[Fandango 1,440]

Responding to stimuli is one thing - having the nerve development necessary to feel pain is another.

There is no reason to suppose that the one contradicts the other.

If one can feel stimuli, how can one not feel pain? I find that a very curious distinction.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If one can feel stimuli, how can one not feel pain? I find that a very curious distinction.

To answer that question with any authority we'd need a detailed understanding of how the fetal nervous system develops.

[Ban Hammer 13,491]

just seems like a basis some can use to rubber stamp abortion

[GabiandVi 34]

Responding to stimuli is one thing - having the nerve development necessary to feel pain is another.

There is no reason to suppose that the one contradicts the other.

Well, you've admitted you are no scientist, but maybe you are right. However, I can't see how responding to non-painful prodding and responding to painful prodding can be any different.

[Peikko 1,575]

Have you ever had an ultrasound during pregnancy?

Any ultrasound technician or doctor who regularly performs ultrasounds will tell you that nearly all fetuses respond to the ultrasound. Starting from much earlier than 24 weeks, which is only 22 weeks post conception. At between 13 and 14 weeks (11 and 12 weeks post conception) nuchal translucencies are measured via ultrasound. These are often done with vaginal ultrasound wands. If the fetus is not positioned so that the nuchal translucency can be accurately measured, they can be nudged so that they might move into a better position.

Oh good grief. What has my personal experience of ultrasound got to do with anything at all? It is not relevant.

The facts are that a fetus movement in the womb can not be translated into an adult experience of the same stimulation/response mechanism. A fetus obviously is able to move and can at some level respond to some forms of stimulus, but it's consciousness of that movement, and self awareness are completely undeveloped as is the mechanism to feel pain - which are most probably interconnected if you understand what they say about the experience of the fetus during this period of development at all.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Fair enough, I'm wrong as far as abortion time limits, but again, that doesn't change my stance concerning this argument. And why can't one cite personal experience? I can say 'I saw this' which makes it *my*perspective. Scientific studies are flawed all the time. At one point, science told us the Earth was flat.

I'm not saying that I am a scientist, or that this particular study was rigged for some political gain. What I'm saying is, I have personally witnessed a fetus responding to stimuli at 22 weeks. Which contradicts this study.

It contradicts it because you don't have a detailed understanding of how the fetal nervous system develops. Neither do I for that matter - what that means is that this stimuli Vs. pain debate is characterised by ignorance because he only thing offered which suggests an expert opinion is being discounted out of hand.

It's funny, you claim to know my past feelings better than I do. I can't see how you can even type that with a straight face.

We chose not to do it, because in the end, test results wouldn't matter. Yes, we agonized the 'what ifs' to the nth degree, but in the end, we decided the results didnt matter, so what point is an invasive test?

Can you not see what I'm saying here?

I'm not talking about "feelings", it's a question of logic.

You *could* have had the ultrasound secure in your commitment that you would never have aborted, but you didn't because but that would have presented you and your partner with a difficult situation had the exam shown up any serious problems.

I'm not judging you for it, I'm just skeptical that anyone could say outright that they would never abort. It's a very big issue - I don't see how anyone can say with certainty what they'd do.

[Fandango 1,440]

Well, you've admitted you are no scientist, but maybe you are right. However, I can't see how responding to non-painful prodding and responding to painful prodding can be any different.

Exactly!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well, you've admitted you are no scientist, but maybe you are right. However, I can't see how responding to non-painful prodding and responding to painful prodding can be any different.

I found it interested that the article you posted offers this conclusion:

The response of fetuses and neonates to invasive practice is a valuable research area that should provide better clinical practice in the future. Basing this research on the assumption there is pain experience, however, could lead to unnecessary anesthetic procedures and increased distress for pregnant women seeking abortion or facing fetal surgery. In addition, the focus on fetal pain challenges the current understanding of pain, but without providing theoretical progress. There is a tendency to roll back understanding toward ideas already largely rejected. Hasty acceptance of fetal pain may be detrimental to the pain field in general and the treatment and understanding of nociceptive responses in the fetus and newborn baby.

[Amby 490]

If one can feel stimuli, how can one not feel pain? I find that a very curious distinction.

I think we need HAL to explain this one. Where is he?

[Fandango 1,440]

It contradicts it because you don't have a detailed understanding of how the fetal nervous system develops. Neither do I for that matter - what that means is that this stimuli Vs. pain debate is characterised by ignorance because he only thing offered which suggests an expert opinion is being discounted out of hand.

I'm not talking about "feelings", it's a question of logic.

You *could* have had the ultrasound secure in your commitment that you would never have aborted, but you didn't because but that would have presented you and your partner with a difficult situation had the exam shown up any serious problems.

I'm not judging you for it, I'm just skeptical that anyone could say outright that they would never abort. It's a very big issue - I don't see how anyone can say with certainty what they'd do.

It wasn't an ultrasound...obviously as proven above, I went for that It was an amniocentesis, which carried risk for fetal death. Which is why I didn't have it done. I don't know why you keep saying what's in red, because that's exactly what I'm saying, and have proven with actions. *shakes head* I suppose having this argument with you is my own for telling you my story, but your presumption here is astoundingly offensive.

[Amby 490]

Lisa - the only way I can think to explain it is like this. there's different types of nerves. each type of nerve has a different purpose. some send messages to the brain, others send messages back to the stimulated area. so if the nerves for stimulus are responding it doesn't mean the nerve pathways for pain are formed as well. they very well could be, but the article says they aren't. I don't know a ton about nerves, but that's the only way I can think to explain it without getting into lots of medical terminology.

[Peikko 1,575]

fetus responded with 'outrage'? oh my word!

This is what you posted "When they were pushing on my belly to get him to move around, he put his hand in front of his face as if to say 'leave me alone, I'm sleeping' lol"

You have given an entirely adult interpretation to whatever it was that happened at the point the fetal picture was taken - hence why 'outrage' was in quotation marks. You clearly believe that the response to the stimulation was based on the fetus having self awareness and the ability to respond, in a mature (as in mature nervous system) manner to stimulation. The study that you describe as complete bullshit no doubt explains why this point of view is so fatally flawed, understandable as it is, after all you are a would be mother and necessarily protective of the unborn, which is natural, understandable and utterly normal but in no way contributes to any debate on this matter in a way that can be seen as meaningful.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Madame Cleo