They say a picture paints a thousand words, but sometimes words do a pretty good job on their own. Take, for example, the understandable devastation of the couple involved in the IVF mix-up in December 2007.
It is often suggested that to believe that human embryos have the same right to life as an adult human is not intellectually respectable – one Anglican bishop described this view as "absurd". A vast majority of MPs also believe the same, it seems, since our Parliament has passed some of the most liberal laws in the world regarding embryonic stem cell research.
However, the couple involved in this situation certainly don’t think it’s absurd. Here’s what they had to say (emphasis added):
“We felt absolutely devastated. Both of us got very tearful…….The actual mention of the termination part of it really upsets us because we tend to think of the embryo as the little boy that we have got because he was from the first batch of embryos. It was killing my baby."
The Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust certainly seems to sympathise with them. – they awarder the couple damages of GBP25,000.
Surely, if embryos were just clumps of cells, then the couple would not have felt like they lost a baby, and there would have been no need to compensate them for their loss.
Myself, i feel that the
Myself, i feel that the viewpoint is subjective. Some people may feel that an embryo is indeed a life that deserves respect, and should be protected. Others may see it as being a clump of cells that grows, and in certain circumstances could be perhaps like a tumor, unwanted and just a problem that needs to be removed. Myself, i feel that most certainly at the start of pregnancy, it is a mere clump of cells. IN this circumstance, there are several possibilities for the sense of loss. In this case, I would argue that it could have been due to the fact that they were owed a baby, and that they were denied as such. THeir point of view is easily explainable that what should have been their baby did not come to be their baby, and was as such terminated before it reached that stage.
In regards to the bishop, I would be inclined to agree. We are comparing a clump of cells that has no sentinence and only exists by gaining nutrients and other such requirements from a living, sentinent being to a being who is able to think, act and has control over it's actions.
To refer to the embryo as
To refer to the embryo as just a clump of cells, is to ignore the fact that it is a human life growing. Remember we are all made of cells, just many, many more than a foetus. So what is the criteria for the number of cells making up a human that determines when a human life can be regarded as a human and not just a 'clump of cells'?
the fact is the 'clump of cells' are constantly growing and developing, therefore if it is growing it is alive because we know that the embryo will eventually develop into a baby with organs etc.
If the embryo is not human life growing and developing, then what is it? And if you come to the conclusion it is Human Life, then surely ending Human Life is wrong?
Throughout the pregnancy the unborn baby needs the mother to provide nutrients, I don't deny that but to use that as argurment to devalue the life is not a good arguement. If you look at what happens to embryo as it develops you see that the embryo develops a Central Nervous System, limbs, eyes (a tumour does not). This all starts to occur within the 7 week stage.
Respect to the couple who had the courage to express their true feelings about the matter. My thoughts are with them.