After Birth Abortion

[PanzerJaeger]

In an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics, a pair of medical ethicists have sought to resurrect the movement for after birth abortion. Essentially, the argument is a logical extension of the modern conception of government's role in health care and the social acceptance of abortion. Essentially, they argue that new born children are no more sentient than they were as fetuses in the womb, and thus are not entitled to life. They go beyond more traditional arguments for infanticide by suggesting that such after birth abortions should not be conditional on grave or terminal medical conditions. For example, if raising a child will be a severe burden for a family and require state assistance, even a perfectly healthy newborn should be eligible for the procedure. The ethicists have received hate mail and death threats for their proposal.

ABSTRACT
Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not
have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing
that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the
same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that
both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3)
adoption is not always in the best interest of actual
people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth
abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all
the cases where abortion is, including cases where the
newborn is not disabled.

[Fragony]

They are right imho, call it a lumb of cells all you want. Good way to start a debate on what I see as deeply wrong

[Sasaki Kojiro]

For example, if raising a child will be a severe burden for a family and require state assistance, even a perfectly healthy newborn should be eligible for the procedure.

The cultures in history that have practiced infanticide did it because the kids would have starved to death (generally). Not because of this or:

Birthmothers are often reported to experience serious psychological problems due to the inability to elaborate their loss and
to cope with their grief. It is true that grief and sense of loss may accompany both abortion and after-birth abortion as well
as adoption, but we cannot assume that for the birthmother the latter is the least traumatic. For example, ‘those who grieve
a death must accept the irreversibility of the loss, but natural mothers often dream that their child will return to them. This
makes it difficult to accept the reality of the loss because they can never be quite sure whether or not it is irreversible’.

I don't know much about the grave or terminal medical conditions though.

[lars573]

In an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics, a pair of medical ethicists have sought to resurrect the movement for after birth abortion. Essentially, the argument is a logical extension of the modern conception of government's role in health care and the social acceptance of abortion. Essentially, they argue that new born children are no more sentient than they were as fetuses in the womb, and thus are not entitled to life. They go beyond more traditional arguments for infanticide by suggesting that such after birth abortions should not be conditional on grave or terminal medical conditions. For example, if raising a child will be a severe burden for a family and require state assistance, even a perfectly healthy newborn should be eligible for the procedure. The ethicists have received hate mail and death threats for their proposal.

Pure logic guided only by function and practicality. Enough to give a borg a boner, if it still had a wing-dang-doodle.

[Rhyfelwyr]

rofl at the term "after birth abortion". What are they being 'aborted' from, the face of the planet?

But hey at least these types aren't pretending anymore, we have it from the horses mouth that there's no real reason for a substantial change in a babies right to life upon exiting a vagina.

As I've always said infanticide is the natural conclusion of the arguments used to support abortion, and this is why the slippery slope argument is perfectly valid in an abortion debate.

[ICantSpellDawg]

This is the same thing I've been arguing for years. It's only a matter of time before 50% of board members are for this and 50% are against.

[Strike For The South]

Disgusting

[Lemur]

Oh look, a couple of Australian philosophy professors published a controversial paper about killing babies. Let's click on their links and give them lots of attention! THIS ARE IMPORTANT!

[ICantSpellDawg]

So are alot of things. Where is your personhood argument now? Why is this so wrong, because you can see their faces?

[a completely inoffensive name]

So are alot of things. Where is your personhood argument now? Why is this so wrong, because you can see their faces?

[ICantSpellDawg]

stuff

Why is it wrong to kill these children? What makes them different? Do you always resort to meme's when you have nothing to say but conventional moral rhetoric? What about the mother who can't afford to take care of them and believes that adoption would be cruel? They are not "persons" are they? How can you be so heartless?

[a completely inoffensive name]

Why is it wrong to kill these children? What makes them different? Do you always resort to meme's when you have nothing to say but conventional moral rhetoric? What about the mother who can't afford to take care of them and believes that adoption would be cruel? They are not "persons" are they? How can you be so heartless?

[Strike For The South]

So are alot of things. Where is your personhood argument now? Why is this so wrong, because you can see their faces?

If one can not understand the difference between the first trimester and out of the womb there will be no explaning this to you

[ICantSpellDawg]

more stuff

Excellent and thoughtful post. Mark it on your list of the posts that I approve of. Strongly.

[Strike For The South]

Excellent and thoughtful post. Mark it on your list of the posts that I approve of. Strongly.

Do you deal in absolutes b/c it keeps you warm at night

[ICantSpellDawg]

I get it. Graded laws based on graded levels of human life. We've decided what stages of human life can be protected, to what extent, and which ones should only have financial value to the mother in the event of someone else's legal liability. I'm sure that you can't tell me at what point the baby deserves equal protection, beyond "when it's head comes out of the Vagina". That is an arbitrary and old fashioned point in the development of human young, by modern standards.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Do you deal in absolutes b/c it keeps you warm at night

I deal in absolutes on this. The rest I'm open to what works. My initial response wasn't to your post.

[Whacker]

This sounds dangerous at best. My sister and I would have actively lobbied for this on each other until we hit late high school/college, and started to actually get along like actual siblings.

[Fragony]

Owww, congratulation it's a sarcasm. But why not kill baby's what makes the difference. Or when, when does it becomes murder. Not that stupid a question for the omgwtflolrofl'ers among us. Abortion is just a feminist thingie, you must be the first male lesbian I guess

[rory_20_uk]

Simply:no.

Legal in the first trimester for whatever reason, increasing difficulty as one approaches the end of the second. In the third we are left with previously unseen fatal congenital conditions such as ancephaly

To use some nutters are arguing for post natal "abortion" adds weight to a slippery slope argument is equally as valid as saying that since everyone dies, there is no such thing as murder.

[Fragony]

Simply:no.

Legal in the first trimester for whatever reason, increasing difficulty as one approaches the end of the second. In the third we are left with previously unseen fatal congenital conditions such as ancephaly

To use some nutters are arguing for post natal "abortion" adds weight to a slippery slope argument is equally as valid as saying that since everyone dies, there is no such thing as murder.

What is legal isn't necesarily the right thing to do, a lump of cells is still a person if you allow it to live, no matter how far it has developed. Abortion as a right that's not even to be questioned on the risk of teh facepalm of facepalmness just doesn't resonate very well with me, it are valid ethical considerations

[Tuuvi]

So if a newborn isn't a person, then what is a person?

Also I find it interesting that they're basically using the same arguments used by pro-lifers, that abortion is the same thing as killing a newborn, and combining them with the arguments used by pro-abortionists to come to the conclusion that after birth "abortion" should be accepted by society.

[gaelic cowboy]

I have read arguements on this before from Peter Singer about premature babies and how we should let them die.

The fact they have greatly increased chance of disability and neurological impairment was he argued really being imposed by us because of our own selfisness.

Reading the article it's pretty much the same idea for babies who are not premature but have increased potential for disability.

It's a difficult call too be honest I dont think I could argue against it if I knew the kid would suffer for the rest of there lives, I mean I would be choosing a life of disability for someone.

[Fragony]

I have read arguements on this before from Peter Singer about premature babies and how we should let them die.

The fact they have greatly increased chance of disability and neurological impairment was he argued really being imposed by us because of our own selfisness.

Reading the article it's pretty much the same idea for babies who are not premature but have increased potential for disability.

It's a difficult call too be honest I dont think I could argue against it if I knew the kid would suffer for the rest of there lives, I mean I would be choosing a life of disability for someone.

If you are asking the question you already answered it I think. Abortion should be a last resort, a very last resort when everything else has failed. Why is it seen as a women's right, we must be raised by quite unpleasant feminists who don't really want a job in the first place, they just claw your eyes if they can't have it

[gaelic cowboy]

If you are asking the question you already answered it I think. Abortion should be a last resort, a very last resort when everything else has failed.

Indeed


Were all fine with our hypocracy stating firm opinion until we need to choose a side, me I will be fine with hoping I never have to choose and leave it there.

Such thinking is how we really get through the day if were really honest.

[Tuuvi]

I have read arguements on this before from Peter Singer about premature babies and how we should let them die.

The fact they have greatly increased chance of disability and neurological impairment was he argued really being imposed by us because of our own selfisness.

Reading the article it's pretty much the same idea for babies who are not premature but have increased potential for disability.

It's a difficult call too be honest I dont think I could argue against it if I knew the kid would suffer for the rest of there lives, I mean I would be choosing a life of disability for someone.

I've met people who were born pre-maturely and they turned out just fine. When I was born I got stuck in my mother's birth canal and the umbilical cord was wrapped around my neck so I lost oxygen at birth. Then to top it all off when I was still a newborn I got meningitis. The odds were against me and despite all that I don't have any disabilities or impairments. IMO we shouldn't end someone's life when there's a chance that nothing will be wrong.

And even then, a life of disability doesn't mean a life of unhappiness. We all suffer to some extent, whether we have a disability or not.

[gaelic cowboy]

I've met people who were born pre-maturely and they turned out just fine. When I was born I got stuck in my mother's birth canal and the umbilical cord was wrapped around my neck so I lost oxygen at birth. Then to top it all off when I was still a newborn I got meningitis. The odds were against me and despite all that I don't have any disabilities or impairments. IMO we shouldn't end someone's life when there's a chance that nothing will be wrong.

And even then, a life of disability doesn't mean a life of unhappiness. We all suffer to some extent, whether we have a disability or not.

Each situation is differant the doctors will advise the parents of the risks and they make there choice.

The choice is there's to make because they and the baby will live with the consequences.

You miss the point people like Singer and the ones in the OP's link are making though, these babies have not fully developed cognitively as people yet. An adult disabled person has a personality and cognitive ability however impaired and naturally deserves life.

Babies on the other hand are basically hairless chimpanzees who develop there faculties later, it does not mean we love em any less but we might have to acknowledge it. (it's a terribly utilitarian view but then these are extreme situations)


Sometimes we really do have to ask if the choice to have a child was really as selfless a choice as we might like to pretend.



It's too easy to just dismiss these ideas as crackpot or fascist but the reality is we make choices like these everyday we just pretend there not the same.

Me as I said already I am quite fine with hypocracy and just pretending it wont happen to me I am Irish after all it's our nature.

[Ronin]

am I the only one that reads this as an anti-abortion piece that is simply using a reductio ad absurdum stance in regards to liberalized abortion?

I mean the buttons it's design to push are pretty obvious.

[Populus Romanus]

As a teeneager I not fully developed cognitively either. So should someone have the right to after birth abort me? This goes far beyond just newborns.

[gaelic cowboy]

As a teeneager I not fully developed cognitively either. So should someone have the right to after birth abort me? This goes far beyond just newborns.

Absurd arguement as pointed out by Ronin already, you have a personality and a host of other things like a theory of mind that mark you out from an tiny infant.


now swiftly moving on