Reprinted
from Eternity, June 1985
Stephen C. Meyer
The
right-to-life movement has mastered a powerful new tool of persuasion: medical
technology. A recently developed science called fetology has greatly enhanced
knowledge of the human unborn, and harbors an implied challenge to the legal
practice of abortion.
"Now
for the first time, we have the technology to see the abortion from the
victim's vantage point," says Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a former abortionist
and cofounder of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) who is now
an antiabortion activist.
Fetology
did not exist in 1973, the year the Roe v. Wade decision was made. At that
time, says Nathanson, the belief "that the fetus was a human being with unique
personal qualities" could be only an "article of faith."
Medical
science has changed that. Studies of the prenatal immune system discredited the
proabortion claim that, until birth, the fetus exists merely as an extention of
the mother's body. Researchers now know that the fetus must excrete precise
hormone mixes through the placenta to protect itself from the hostile immune
system of the mother. Without these protective secretions the uterus would
reject the fetus as a foreign substance.
Further,
new technologies such as ultrasound imaging and electronic fetal heart
monitoring have given physicians a bird's eye view of the earliest stages of
fetal development. By correlating the echoes of high-frequency sound waves, it
Is now possible to view on an office television monitor an image, or a
sonogram, of an unborn child still in the womb.
Using
microcomputer and transducer technology, monograms enable physicians to track
the fetal heartbeat from as early as five weeks into pregnancy. With other
techniques doctors may monitor the unborn s brainwaves after only six weeks.
Well before 12 weeks, "the fetus," asserts Nathanson, "is a
fully formed, absolutely identifiable human person ... indistinguishable from
any of us ... in form or substance."
While
ultrasound imaging has allowed parents to observe the marvels of life within
the sanctuary of the womb. Nathanson and an organization called American
Portrait Films have used it in a controversial abortion documentary called
"The Silent Scream" to expose a grisly reality of clinical abortion:
The aborted child experiences pain.
Nathanson's
film reaches its climax as he narrates a stop-action sonogram depicting an
actual first-trimester abortion. The fetus is first observed resting serenely
within the amniotic fluid. After the introduction of the abortionist's suction
tip, the fetus rears, wildly in an attempt to escape the invading instrument.
The child's heart rate rises from 140 beats per minute to 210.
"There
is no question," intones Nathanson in the film, "this child senses
aggression." Nathanson then freezes the stop-action image, revealing the
child's tiny mouth opened wide in what Nathanson's calls "the silent
scream."
Modern
neurology confirms that the fetus can experience pain, not just reflex. Reflexive
reactions, such as the involuntary and painless knee jerk produced by a tap of
a physician's mallet, electronically stimulate only the spinal column. More
complex "aversive," or pain, responses require stimulating a tiny
brain sensor called the thalmus. Neurologists can now detect thalmus and
central nervous system functions between the 8th and 13th weeks of gestation.
The coordinated motor responses manifested by the baby in Nathanson's sonogram
clearly indicate aversive, not reflexive, response to the abortion procedure.
While
advancing methods of monitoring fetal brain waves may soon allow a more
quantitative verification of pain, currently available knowledge certainly
shatters the popular conception of abortion as a humane and an antiseptic practice.
The most common of first-term abortion, suction, systematically dismembers the
child's body. The head, referred to euphemistically by the abortionist as
"number one," must be crushed with forceps before it can squeeze
through the suction tube.
Nathanson,
who formerly directed what was at the time the largest abortion clinic in the
Western world, has challenged proabortion groups such as NARAL and Planned
Parenthood to give material exposing the true nature of the abortion procedure
to women considering abortion. Many feminists have objected. However, to the
suggestion that women use such material at a time "when they feel most
vulnerable."
Yet
one doubts that an increasingly wary public will continue to support a woman's
right to choose, even while the prochoice movement would deny her the right to
know. Our increased knowledge of fetal life provided by fetology may explain,
at least in part, the increased public opposition to abortion reported recently
in Gallup polls.
The
facts available through fetology have forced the hand of the proabortion camp.
A Dallas columnist belittles "The Silent Scream" as "rehashed
propaganda," showing only that the fetus dies. "We've known that all
along," she added. Yet the life of the fetus--as a separate human being--is
precisely what the prochoice movement has never wanted to concede. As one
prochoice advocate told Nathanson on a recent edition of NBC's "Hour
Magazine," "You have your idea of when life begins, and we have
ours."
Such
subjective reveries reveal a movement motivated not by the intricacies of
individual moral calculations, but instead by the demands of personal
convenience. Those who have heard the silent scream may no longer justify
convenience with ignorance.
Copyright © 1985 Stephen C. Meyer. All rights
reserved. International copyright secured.
File Date: 12.29.98