[AnnieK]

The survival rates for premature babies are actually quite amazing

Chances of survival following preterm birth
Less than 22 weeks is close to zero chance of survival.
22 weeks is around 10%
24 weeks is around 60%
27 weeks is around 89%
31 weeks is around 95%
34 weeks is equivalent to a baby born at full term.

Granted some medical intervention will probably be required.....just as it is for anyone with medical conditions and they wouldn't be classed as not alive

I'm pro-choice but do believe the time limits need changing as medical advances happen. The thought that you can still abort a baby that has around a 60% survival rate is quite shocking.

My child was alive to me the moment I knew I was pregnant, by the time he was born I "knew" him and I would imagine most parents feel that way so maybe my opinion is biased but to say a child under 30 weeks is not alive is a tough one to get my head around.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Rawdogging doesn't make you a medical expert either, TS.



Whether I have kids or not shouldn't make my opinions any less valid. Also I never said that a fetus is a bundle of cells until full term. Getting quite tired of people suddenly forgetting how to read competently so they can get a dig in instead of arguing against what I'm saying.

It doesn't make your opinions invalid but it does make them less valid; ignoring lived experience entirely is foolish and arrogant. It's true of BLM, its true of feminist issues, and it's true here.

Your opinions on racial issues are less valid than a black person's, I assume you can concede that, so yes... Your opinions on gestation are less valid than those of a woman who has been pregnant.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

It doesn't make your opinions invalid but it does make them less valid; ignoring lived experience entirely is foolish and arrogant. It's true of BLM, its true of feminist issues, and it's true here.

Your opinions on racial issues are less valid than a black person's, I assume you can concede that, so yes... Your opinions on gestation are less valid than those of a woman who has been pregnant.

Are you comparing medical knowledge, the kind of things you have to have years of training and education to practice, is the same as recognising social inequality? Really? I've had plenty of operations and medical procedures but it doesn't make me knowledgeable about the ins and outs of those procedures.

When have I ever said that my opinions on racial inequality as as valid as someone who has suffered it? You're just trying to stuff words down my throat now.

At the end of the day, my point is simple, my definition of a fetus being truly alive is 30+ weeks, when fetuses can survive as consistently as full term babies, then I'll change my mind but we're not at that point yet.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Are you comparing medical knowledge, the kind of things you have to have years of training and education to practice, is the same as recognising social inequality? Really? I've had plenty of operations and medical procedures but it doesn't make me knowledgeable about the ins and outs of those procedures.

When have I ever said that my opinions on racial inequality as as valid as someone who has suffered it? You're just trying to stuff words down my throat now.

At the end of the day, my point is simple, my definition of a fetus being truly alive is 30+ weeks, when fetuses can survive as consistently as full term babies, then I'll change my mind but we're not at that point yet.

I didn't say that the opinion of a woman who has been pregnant is more valid than that of a doctor or a biologist... But you're not either of those? You're a male layperson, your opinion is less valid than that of someone who has experienced a pregnancy, whose opinion is not medical or scientific.

... But to be fair, I doubt you'll find a biologist who would attempt to argue that a fetus of ANY gestation is not alive. I've literally never heard the claim that life that isn't self sustaining "isn't life" in any form, and you don't have to be a biologist for that one, basic high school biology will do, or even reading a dictionary.

Life

the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.

A fetus is a distinct cellular entity that consumes in order to grow and is in a state of continuous cell division. That's literally the only qualification for "being alive". It's made up entirely of human DNA, thus it is human life.

Again, that doesn't mean it is "a meaningful person" in the philosophical sense and that's the part that's open to debate and interpretation. That a fetus is a form of life is simple biological fact.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I didn't say that the opinion of a woman who has been pregnant is more valid than that of a doctor or a biologist... But you're not either of those? You're a male layperson, your opinion is less valid than that of someone who has experienced a pregnancy, whose opinion is not medical or scientific.

... But to be fair, I doubt you'll find a biologist who would attempt to argue that a fetus of ANY gestation is not alive. I've literally never heard the claim that life that isn't self sustaining "isn't life" in any form, and you don't have to be a biologist for that one, basic high school biology will do, or even reading a dictionary.



A fetus is a distinct cellular entity that consumes in order to grow and is in a state of continuous cell division. That's literally the only qualification for "being alive". It's made up entirely of human DNA, thus it is human life.

Again, that doesn't mean it is "a meaningful person" in the philosophical sense and that's the part that's open to debate and interpretation. That a fetus is a form of life is simple biological fact.

I never said I was a medical professional, pay attention. My whole point was having experience of a medical procedure or progress is not the same as being an expert on it. You're still trying to push something onto me that I've never said.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Rawdogging doesn't make you a medical expert either, TS.

Whether I have kids or not shouldn't make my opinions any less valid. Also I never said that a fetus is a bundle of cells until full term. Getting quite tired of people suddenly forgetting how to read competently so they can get a dig in instead of arguing against what I'm saying.

I honestly don't think people are not getting what you are saying and are arguing against what you're saying. I personally don't agree that a fetus under 30 weeks is not alive. Under 20-24 weeks I agree they have little chance of survival but over that, as the stats show, a high percentage survive with little or no birth defects. Whether that is with medical intervention or not doesn't really matter in my opinion

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

I honestly don't think people are not getting what you are saying and are arguing against what you're saying. I personally don't agree that a fetus under 30 weeks is not alive. Under 20-24 weeks I agree they have little chance of survival but over that, as the stats show, a high percentage survive with little or no birth defects. Whether that is with medical intervention or not doesn't really matter in my opinion

But my opinion is my opinion and nothing that's been said really contradicts what I'm saying. Does a fetus below 30 weeks have as much chance as surviving as a baby does after that point? No.

Science develops at a rapid rate, go back a few decades and premature babies had a far higher rate of mortality then they do now. I've no doubt that my mind will change as things progress but at this current moment in time, for the sake of argument. I don't consider a fetus under 30 weeks to be classed as alive in the same way a full term baby is. I just don't.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

But my opinion is my opinion and nothing that's been said really contradicts what I'm saying. Does a fetus below 30 weeks have as much chance as surviving as a baby does after that point? No.

Science develops at a rapid rate, go back a few decades and premature babies had a far higher rate of mortality then they do now. I've no doubt that my mind will change as things progress but at this current moment in time, for the sake of argument. I don't consider a fetus under 30 weeks to be classed as alive in the same way a full term baby is. I just don't.

Fair enough...as you say it is your opinion. I can't agree and nothing you have said has convinced me that your point it right either so we are at an impasse. Its an emotive subject and as I said in an earlier post as a parent I may be biased by by the time I was that pregnant my child was very much alive to me. After 24 weeks a funeral and registering the death is a legal requirement and therefore to me that indicates the law and medical fields recognise a "life".

Anyway....its been interesting to read your thoughts, even if we cant agree.

[Tom4784]

I also want to say, since it seems like people are confusing me with my idea of 30 weeks = Truly alive with me defending late term abortions, judging from the likes of Kizzy's question earlier.

I've said very little on abortion limits other than the vast majority of abortions happen within the first 10 weeks which is true. My personal view is that abortion limits is dependant on the medical advances we've made and that it's ultimately not my right to decide when a woman should or should not have an abortion. If pushed for an answer, I'd say twenty weeks at most but then again, it's not something I have a right to dictate.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I also want to say, since it seems like people are confusing me with my idea of 30 weeks = Truly alive with me defending late term abortions, judging from the likes of Kizzy's question earlier.

I've said very little on abortion limits other than the vast majority of abortions happen within the first 10 weeks which is true. My personal view is that abortion limits is dependant on the medical advances we've made and that it's ultimately not my right to decide when a woman should or should not have an abortion. If pushed for an answer, I'd say twenty weeks at most but then again, it's not something I have a right to dictate.

As far as I'm aware later abortions are rare and can't be done in normal abortion clinics either

[Liam-]

I think anything after 24 weeks should be solely for medial complications

[Ninastar]

It depends how far along but yes, I think so.

There’s so many women (couples actually) who find out they are pregnant and when they lose the baby/bundle of cells/fetus/whatever you wanna call it and it is absolutely heartbreaking for them

If I’m ever lucky enough to get pregnant, it is one of my greatest fears. I wouldn’t care if I was 3/4 weeks or 30+... it would absolutely kill me

Obviously the further along, the more heartbreaking it would be... but god, I couldn’t imagine anything worse

[Tom4784]

And I don't respond well to people prodding me for a reaction and then making out that I'm paranoid.

[Tom4784]

Also views on anti-vaxxers have absolutely jack**** to do with this, you're just, once again, shoving words down my throat and you did it again by making out that this is because you disagree with me. Annie disagrees with me but she didn't feel the need to add little jobs to her posts to get a reaction. you're trying to make out that I can't accept your opinion when it's anything but. You just keep constantly misrepresenting what I say and then you make out that i'm some paranoid psycho when I point it out.