Yes, and it shouldn't be considered a baby until birth, as there is always the possibility of the pregnancy bringing complications, potentially killing both individuals.
After the first trimester, chances of complications plummet. This also marks the end of the embryonic stage and the beginning of the fetal stage. At this point the baby has arms, legs, a brain, eyes, a heart that beats and so on. It is essentially a mostly complete little human baby. Halfway through the pregnancy, the baby can survive outside the womb, and most of the rest of the pregnancy is spent strengthening the lungs, practicing facial movements, sucking, gripping and so on.
I know, but just because the risk of complications plummets, it does not mean they don't exist. If there are complications there should not be a legal reason impairing the doctors to perform an abortion to safe a person's life, which is a part of society, has friends and family. If you choose to save the baby here, you have an orphan.
The fetus' survivability outside the womb, with a bunch of medical care and attention, is no argument for me. I don't want more orphans, if people do choose to not have a baby, they should have the choice to abort. You seem to forget the rest of life, what about the parents and what about the kid who has to grow up in an orphanage?
I think you're putting some words in my mouth that aren't there. I'm saying that the fetus definitely is a baby, long before it's actually born.
I'm not saying you should prioritize child over mother during birth. I'm not saying there should be legal restrictions on medical abortions in emergencies. I'm not saying there should be any legal restrictions on abortions in the embryonic stage (first trimester).
I'm just saying that after the first trimester, most complications are ruled out and the fetus is a baby. That's all.
As for "what about the kid who has to grow up in an orphanage":
This is a societal problem, not a medical problem. It's solved by having good foster families in a welfare system/state.
Do you have kids of your own? I'm guessing no, but if you do, would you really prefer to kill them prenatally than having them be raised by loving foster parents?
Then I guess you have a mental problem, because where are all those perfect foster families? Oh they don't exist, because they are literally just some caregivers... it is better than an orphanage, but anything but a solution, you are just pushing the issue forward. I am aware that you aren't capable of making any points, so have a nice day.
I think I live in a better country than you do, because we have a well-functioning foster care system. We also take abortion rights for granted, so we don't have to have silly discussions about their legality.
Maybe that is also why we don't feel the need to resort to personal attacks when we're out of arguments?
Fair point, personal attacks have no place in a discussion. I doubt you live in a better country than I do, but funny assumption.
If you remember the case the post talks about, we are talking about the US. In Europe it is a right that has been reinforced in many countries since the US repealed Roe. Some countries in Europe seem to go the other way and, what in my opinion is worse, people are getting some dumb opinions on abortions.
Taking things for granted is another big issue, we should be aware of how well we are off and we should also want to protect those 'benefits'.
Thank you for coming around and being sensible. I see you're not American, so let's call it a draw for the countries (🇳🇴).
I don't know enough about CPS or foster care in the US to make a qualified judgment, but I do stand by the assertion that a 15 weeks old fetus is still a baby and shouldn't be killed unless it's absolutely necessary. A 5 weeks embryo is another matter entirely, and in general I think that issues between the parents should be identified and dealth with during the first trimester in order to ensure that a potential abortion is done as early as possible and not after week 12, except for medical reasons.
I used to share your view that it's not a baby until it comes out... until I became a dad myself. 15 weeks since conception, 15 weeks since birth, it makes no difference. She was as much my little baby girl then as she is now, and I'd do anything and everything in my power to protect her.
I kind of have double standards, though, because if the NIPT had been positive we would have aborted in week 14.
I also made it very clear to her mother, my now ex, that I would not honor's mom wish about prioritizing the baby in the event of a complication, I would prioritize mom.
So all in all, I don't think we are that much in disagreement? And I fully agree about protecting our benefits and rights and other things we take for granted.
Pulling up in my 🇱🇺, not to confuse with 🇳🇱 where I live currently. I got aware our stance was that different when I called you names, we might not agree on every little detail and that is fine. The cases will not always be the same, and that's why I would always prefer more lenient time frames in policies.
5
u/Nicolash99 6d ago
Yes, and it shouldn't be considered a baby until birth, as there is always the possibility of the pregnancy bringing complications, potentially killing both individuals.