From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Viability Again (was Re: a little slavery is "harmless" (was Re: "Harmless Slavery"))
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 14:47:46 GMT

In article <1992Apr7.175242.1276@nas.nasa.gov> dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King) writes:
>
>I've heard many pro-choicers say they want to see 1st and possibly
>2nd tri-mester abortions not restricted.  However, they do wish to see
>a restriction on 3rd tri-mester abortions.  I don't understand the
>rational.  If you consider it none of your business during the first
>6 months, why does it suddenly become your business later on.

Because at that point a VIABLE "living individuated human organism" (LIHO) 
exists. I think viable LIHO's deserve respect and some degree of protection. 
You and I are viable LIHO's, for instance, different only in degrees from a 
viable fetus. Because of that status, we rightfully demand from our laws
respect and protection. So, to some of us, viability makes a difference not 
necessarily to the general question of WHETHER abortion should be allowed, 
but HOW and/or WHAT METHODS of abortion can be performed.

In all cases, respect for LIHO's dictates, IMO, that abortions should be 
performed in such a way as to consider BOTH the fetus's chances of survival 
and the risks/costs/inconveniences to the woman. I would identify three
statistical survivability thresholds and thus three different "domains" of 
survivability:

         	C          NCS          V           B
         	|==========>|==========>|==========>|
            	   Domain 1    Domain 2    Domain 3

"C" stands for "Conception", of course, and "NCS" stands for "Negligible 
Chance [of] [extra-uterine] Survival". Everything between the two, I call 
Domain #1. In that domain, I would say that a fetus can be killed in utero for 
ANY objective, articulable reason which benefits the woman, whether it be 
medical, or financial, or social, or whatever. The chance of making a 
"mistake" is very small.

"V" stands for "Viability". Between NCS and V is Domain #2, which is a gray 
area where the rights of the woman must be carefully balanced with those of 
the fetus. I haven't quite figured out my moral position on this yet.

"B" stands for "Birth", of course. Between V and B, I would say that the only
moral abortion method is complete and intact removal, presumably by C-section 
or something similar. 

>I also see restrictions on 3rd tri-mester abortions being a solution
>to a non-problem.  

It may be a "non-problem" to the woman, but it certainly is a "problem" to
the viable fetus to have its life forfeit, don't you agree? Would you be in 
favor of allowing doctors to decapitate fetuses seconds before labor begins? 
Minutes? Hours? I think the line has to be drawn somewhere. So did the Supreme 
Court, apparently. But, unlike the SC, I don't necessarily think that fixed 
trimester boundaries are particularly the best ways to organize this. The 
Viability and NCS thresholds should be allowed to move with advances in 
technology. If and when an artificial womb is developed, for instance, the 
abortion issue should become a primarily economic concern instead of a moral/
legal/religious issue. Fixed trimester boundaries seem counter-intuitive,
considering the differences in gestational duration from woman to woman, from 
pregnancy to pregnancy, and the continual upward spiral of medical technology.

								- Kevin
Newsgroups: talk.abortion