 |
 |
This example, Dr Finks, is one that has to be disturbing. Regardless of the status of the fetus as a human being the doctors on that team were faced with a life and death decision. To do nothing, both would die. To do something, would result in the death of one. Today that person might have been able to be saved. I don't know if that makes it human or human life? In doctor Finks case today there would have been hope for both perhaps even at that time all efforts should have been taken to save the child. If they were, then the decision might have been less disturbing. There would have been an attempt to save both, one just had poor odds. In the end did the woman survive? Now, not knowing "when human life begins", perhaps all efforts should be taken to not actively destroy it. Just because we are or can be the instruments of unconventional conception, or if we kicked off the life process in some other way, would not make the product of our actions any less human in the end. Not knowing when that transformation takes place is what makes it difficult for many people. Now Maryse also brings up a good point. For me also it is hard to see where an embryo (5 days old), where the cells have not yet differentiated, could be human. Many women do loose them without even knowing it. Nature however controlled that example not the mother. Even Maryse example does not define when it is human life. The embryo's in fertility clinics have already started on the journey to birth. We can all agree that somewhere "in between" human life exists. Defining that point is what is hard. After that definition is made measuring that point in each case would be another issue. This is where using embryo's from fertility clinics can become an issue. This is not the same as SCNT. Admittedly we are dealing with quite different issues there, at least as far as we know today. Even though we are dealing with different issues, are we still dealing with the start of human life for which science has been able to define an end but not a beginning? If in the end a human life could exist, even though the start was unconventional, then we are still dealing with the same issues? If we knew for sure that under no circumstances a base stem cell created under today's SCNT processes could ever become a human in the end the answer might be "this is ok." If under some future conditions they could become humans then you may be dealing with some of the same issues. When and how do you define the start of life, we know when it ends? Unfortunately mankind is very good at accelerating death and not quite as good at preserving life. Thank you both for your respectful and thoughtful input on this subject. Still searching Frank cg. Teri 52/47/40 15024 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert A. Fink, M. D." <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 1:15 PM Subject: Re: Full Human at fourth month... > On 19 Mar 2004 at 10:09, FrankandTeri wrote: > > > I for one don't know the answer and I am still searching. Now just > > for me and no one else, I would try to error on the side of my > > conscious. I would also not impose my conscious on anyone else. This > > is a difficult subject and should be treated with respect for all > > peoples opinions. They should all be valued and then perhaps we will > > find the answer in the collective consciousness of man. As influenced > > by God of course or whomever or whatever you believe guides mans quest > > for truth. > > > > Frank > > I think that the major problem with the stem-cell issue (and abortion issues as > well) lies with the fact that, thusfar, modern medicine has yet to determine the > time that a living embryo/fetus "becomes a human being". For whatever it is > worth, we have decided that killing a non-human being is licit, while killing a > human (except under very stringent circumstances) is not. > > My general philosophy (that a human embryo/fetus is fully a human being) > dates back to an incident when I was an intern and we had a young woman, 5 > months pregnant with her first child, who was found to have uterine cancer. > The treatment at that time was insertion of radium implants (and this was > generally quite effective in cure of the cancer), but such insertion would kill > the fetus. The fetus would then be aborted spontaneously (miscarriage) > several weeks after the radium treatment. > > It was considered that passage of this dead fetus through the cancerous cervix > might be detrimental to the treatment of the cancer; and so, the accepted > treatment (then) was to perform a "mini-C-section" (the fetus was too large to > be evacuated by D & C), remove the fetus, and then proceed with the radium > implant. I "scrubbed in" on that procedure as an assistant, and when the fetus > was removed (it was about 6 inches long and was clearly a human baby in > form), it was placed in a tray next to the operating table. It "kicked" for about > 15 minutes before it finally died. > > After that experience, there was no question in my mind that a fetus was a > human being and that it wanted to live just as much as a full-term baby (or > already born child). Nowadays, that fetus could possibly have been saved, > using modern neonatology techniques. > > Physicians, using electroencephalograms and other modern techniques, have > arrived at a consensus as to when "death" occurs. So-called "brain death is > whan you have irreversible cessation of all brain function. Once this is > declared, the human being is dead and organs, tissues, etc. can be > "harvested". A 2-month fetus, if attached to an electroencephalograph, has a > documentable EEG tracing, thus not "brain dead". > > Thus, what is needed, is a consensus as to when one is "alive" (as a human > being), and once this state is reached, it is my opinion that such a human > being has all of the rights that any other human being has. This consensus > needs to be reached in discussions between scientific, religious, ethical, and > legal scholars. > > > Best, > > Bob > > ********************************************** > Robert A. Fink, M. D., F.A.C.S., P. C. > 2500 Milvia Street Suite 222 > Berkeley, California 94704-2636 > Telephone: 510-849-2555 FAX: 510-849-2557 > WWW: http://www.rafink.com/ > > mailto:[log in to unmask] > > "Ex Tristitia Virtus" > > ********************************************* > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn