From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: ABORTION: WHEN Does Human Life BEGIN?!
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 03:05:02 GMT

In article <nyikos.725160597@milo.math.scarolina.edu> 
nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:

>> The debate about the abortion issue really boils down to 
>> a question of when human life begins.  
>> [...]
>> "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the 
>> ground, and breathed into his nostrils the BREATH OF LIFE, 
>> and man became a living Soul.". 

> [...]
> Backing up :-) a bit: what portion of the baby must be outside the
> birth canal before killing it is considered murder in present-day
> America?  Does the answer change if it is a breech delivery?

The courts of some states have held that a child becomes
a person once it shows signs of "independent life".  This
means that the child has to breathe on its own and have 
independent blood circulation.  Physical expulsion from the
mother's womb is not sufficient to acquire personhood status.  

This suggests, although I haven't seen it stated explicitly,
that an abortionist can legally kill a child who is outside
the mother's womb and still attached via the umbilical cord.

Here's a quote from the text which I am relying upon:


  "Cases involving fetuses born after a full gestation period,
   but who died before they were completely separated from their
   mothers, offer other clues. In State v. Winthrop, the issue
   was whether the killing of such a fetus was homicide--the killing
   of a person. The trial court instructed the jury as follows:

     If the child is fully delivered from the body of the mother,
     while the after birth is not, and the two are connected by
     the umbilical cord, and the child had independent life, no
     matter whether it has breathed or not, it is a human being...

   Because that instruction looked solely to the fact of physical
   expulsion in defining personhood, the Supreme Court of Iowa
   reversed [the decision]. According to the court, the instruction
   ``would tell the jury ... that they might find independence of
   life in utter disregard of the conditions in which, alone it
   could exist.'' The high court held that potential independence
   was not enough; the state needed to show actual independence
   in order to sustain a conviction for homicide. Thus, the state
   had to prove that the victim had an independent circulation,
   that the umbilical cord had been severed, and that the newborn
   had breathed on its own before the killing. To be a ``person,''
   the infant needed to be capable of survival; mere physical
   separateness was not determinative.

   Other cases agree with Winthrop's view of when a fetus becomes
   a person and reject mere physical separation in favor of other
   factors, factors suggesting a capacity for continued independent
   life. The indices of live birth that courts have used include
   independent circulation, severance of the umbilical cord, and
   physical expulsion from the uterus. Secondary signs have also
   been offered, such as vocal cries and heartbeat. The most widely
   used criterion, however, has been independent respiration."
 
   Abortion, Moral And Legal Perspectives, 1984, pg. 63 
   Patricia A. King


Doug Holtsinger

Xref: sparky talk.abortion:52708 alt.rush-limbaugh:12161