2010-06-26

What the science says about fetal awareness and pain

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

by Neil Godfrey

It’s in the various news sites, but I like to get as close to the source as possible to see what it says: Here’s the link to The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists website and its own news release.

The following two tabs change content below.

Neil Godfrey

Neil is the author of this post. To read more about Neil, see our About page.

Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)

2 Comments

  • 2010-06-27 13:19:03 GMT+0000 - 13:19 | Permalink

    Thanks for the comment. It’s a tough topic that obliges us all to explore the issues — and our values — as honestly as possible from all perspectives.

  • Aggie
    2010-06-27 10:30:30 GMT+0000 - 10:30 | Permalink

    ….So I saw “RCOG” in big, bold letters, at the top of the page linked, and my hindbrain’s immediate reaction was “Dave Pack! Nononononono! BackbackbackbackbackbackbackBACK….”

    Once I got past that, though, it’s fairly balanced. Even though I disagree with it personally: I’m pro-life, in that I disagree with self-centred yuppie parents who don’t want to be “burdened” with a child who doesn’t fit their designer-baby/picture-perfect-magazine ready child….But on the other hand, if they’re that callously shallow in the first place? Maybe the child is better off dead.

    I’m conflicted on that, but I’m definitely of the mindset that “genetic counselling” continues to slow the progress of acceptance, and hinders the tolerance of, those of us who don’t fit neatly into some pre-defined mold of “standard human components – some assembly required”.

    This would also be the point where I should disclose that I have been, off and on (more off than on, in the last decade, unfortunately), supportive of the ADA/Not Dead Yet movement in the States, which does not have an equivalent north of the 49th parallel, but it should. Attitudes up here have generally improved a hundredfold, although the bad apples are still in frequent supply on an individual level, and the medical field seems to (generally) take a far less pathology-based approach than they used to.

    Here’s the link for Not Dead Yet’s blog:

    http://notdeadyetnewscommentary.blogspot.com/

    And their home page with links:

    http://web.archive.org/web/20120404144327/http://www.notdeadyet.org:80/docs/contact.html

    Which doesn’t seem like it bears much relevance to your post, but it actually does: For there have been medical professionals, early on in MY life, who would have, if given free reign and allowed to play deity, cheerfully allowed me to starve to death. Now, while I am rather biased, on the whole I think I make a very positive contribution to society as a whole (I am a working taxpayer, NOT a burden on the system), and generally have a worthwhile life.

    The Euthanasia people and “Mercy Killing” parents choose to disagree…and so their children die, needless, unnecessary deaths, for physical differences that were as beyond their control as having red hair, or brown eyes.

    Sorry for the soapboxing…. /steps down Thanks for the link!

  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.