Subscribe: Comments on Pyjamas in Bananas: Dispatches on abortion
http://pyjamasinbananas.blogspot.com/feeds/6182219814577561823/comments/default
Preview: Comments on Pyjamas in Bananas: Dispatches on abortion

Comments on Pyjamas in Bananas: Dispatches on abortion





Updated: 2016-07-18T08:11:24.882+01:00

 



"True, but I think we are just lying to ourselves ...

2007-10-18T21:20:00.000+01:00

"True, but I think we are just lying to ourselves when we try to turn this into a scientific matter.

If a 9-month-old baby in a mothers womb could not feel pain, would it be OK to kill it? What about an 8-month-old baby?

Of course not.

It seems some are debating this idea of feotal pain, when clearly the issue of pain has little, if anything, to do with the abortion issue."


I agree that for many, particularly the anti-abortion movement, but also some of the pro-choice movement this is not a scientific question. Unfortunately these same people are trying to fight this ideological debate using science as a cover.

"It was astonishingly un-journalistic. Is that what passes as a documentary in the UK??!!"

I haven't seen that one, but I commented before the current broadcast that the same journalist made a bad documentary for the same programme ('Dispatches') on liver disease.

Generally speaking all documentaries on scientific issues are bad. I think it is a universal law. Maybe I just don't know enough about other issues to see how bad the ones on other topics are.



"But as it happens I think they ought to because t...

2007-10-18T20:53:00.000+01:00

"But as it happens I think they ought to because they are being called as semi-experts on a scientific matter, but they often seem to be affiliated with religious groups which take a non-scientific position on this issue. The concern is that they are giving flawed scientific evidence motivated by religious concerns to reduce the number of abortions.

True, but I think we are just lying to ourselves when we try to turn this into a scientific matter.

If a 9-month-old baby in a mothers womb could not feel pain, would it be OK to kill it? What about an 8-month-old baby?

Of course not.

It seems some are debating this idea of feotal pain, when clearly the issue of pain has little, if anything, to do with the abortion issue.

This has always been an issue of morality, and I am wondering why the concerted effort to treat it as some scientific matter instead of just making the very unprecedented decision to base our actions regarding abortion on morality and responsibility.

I'm not sure how things go in the UK, but here in the States we do not have some tangible reason to treat people we know cannot pay their bill, but we do, because it is the right thing to do. I would assume that is also the case in the UK.

I also wonder out loud, if there was evidence to suggest that the foetus could feel pain at say, 1 week, would we then limit abortions to 1 week?

"No, my intention is to point out the poor quality of life of those very preterm infants that do survive."

OK.

"Who are you?"

USA.
Thinking about career in medicine.


Also, I saw a "documentary" titled "Torture: America's Brutal Prisons," by the same person who made the abortion one. It was astonishingly un-journalistic. Is that what passes as a documentary in the UK??!!



"Demanding one divulge their personal affiliations...

2007-10-18T13:11:00.000+01:00

"Demanding one divulge their personal affiliations serves no purpose in the debate"

I don't think I made any claim that they should declare these affiliations. But as it happens I think they ought to because they are being called as semi-experts on a scientific matter, but they often seem to be affiliated with religious groups which take a non-scientific position on this issue. The concern is that they are giving flawed scientific evidence motivated by religious concerns to reduce the number of abortions.

In fact the article mentioned with absolute certainty that the feotus could feel pain. So your question of physiological response to noxious stimuli or pain is not only irrelevant, since the simple fact that because a feotus does or does not feel pain bears no weight, at least from the "pro-choice" stand point, but moot.

I'm afraid I'm not sure what you're saying here. The article I quote says:

"...the foetus is not aware and can't feel anything.

But we found disturbing research in America that directly contradicts this established view.

...he's been comparing how newborn babies and unborn foetuses react to any kind of stress, including pain.

He's found similar changes in their hormones and their blood flow, suggesting that foetuses can indeed respond to pain."

Which claims that physiological responses to noxious stimuli imply that foetuses can feel pain. In my post I point out that there is a distinction between a physiological response and the perception of pain (e.g. if you have surgery under an anaesthetic you'll still respond to being cut upon physiologically even if you can't feel pain), and this is a distinction the article avoids making.

Am I correct in thinking your solution is to extinguish those who are not 'intact.'

No, my intention is to point out the poor quality of life of those very preterm infants that do survive.

My last question, who are you? (education, career, locale, etc.)

Well I'm in the UK, and am trained in medicine and medical research. Who are you?



"Yesterday's news contained the revelation that me...

2007-10-18T08:11:00.000+01:00

"Yesterday's news contained the revelation that members of anti-abortion campaign groups have been asked to declare their affiliation when they give evidence to the Commons committee"

Why do you feel it is necessary for one to reveal his personal affiliations before he gives his opinion? It seem as though you are searching for an easy way to discredit someone whose views do not match yours. Demanding one divulge their personal affiliations serves no purpose in the debate; that is unless for some reason you have come to the erroneous conclusion that ones affiliations can determine credibility of their opinion, which is, by definition, an impossible task.

I suppose there is no emotive intent in doing so. Just, curious? And just disingenuous, more accurately.

In your previous post, The abortion debate II, you write:

"Note the distinction between a physiological response to noxious stimuli and feeling pain is elided here."

The part you quoted did not say there was a difference. You did. In fact the article mentioned with absolute certainty that the feotus could feel pain. So your question of physiological response to noxious stimuli or pain is not only irrelevant, since the simple fact that because a feotus does or does not feel pain bears no weight, at least from the "pro-choice" stand point, but moot.

"I wonder how many of the surviving infants could be considered 'intact'?"

Am I correct in thinking your solution is to extinguish those who are not 'intact.' Because my intact does not include disabled children, at whatever stage of life. Are they too expendable?



My last question, who are you? (education, career, locale, etc.)