China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Does Personhood Begin During Pregnancy?
Published in Christopher Kaczor, The Ethics of Abortion, 2023
The court's reasoning in Roe v. Wade for holding that viability is a compelling point for the state to take legal interest in the human fetus (presumably because the fetus then has some moral worth) is stated only once and very briefly: “With respect to the State's important and legitimate interest in potential life, the ‘compelling’ point is at viability. This is so because the fetus then presumably has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother's womb” (Roe v. Wade 1973). But this justification, aside from the word “meaningful,” is simply a restatement of the definition of viability. Viability is achieved when the fetus has the capacity to live outside the mother's womb, and this is important, we are told, because it is when the fetus has the capacity to survive outside the mother's womb. This circular reasoning does not justify granting viability any significance.
Antineoplastic Drugs during Pregnancy
Published in “Bert” Bertis Britt Little, Drugs and Pregnancy, 2022
Pregnancies with gestational ages close to viability (i.e., 24–28 weeks) may usually be continued with only mild to moderate adverse effects on the fetus. Various therapeutic modalities are available, but none are known to be safe for use during pregnancy because pregnancy is a time of rapid cell hyperplasia and hypertrophy, and the goal of cancer treatment is to inhibit both forms of cell growth. Gravidas with pregnancies less than 24 weeks gestational age may best be termination, depending upon the patient’s preference after discussion of the possible adverse outcomes. Pregnancy termination decisions between 24 and 28 weeks are more difficult because the discussion is then concerning termination of a viable fetus. Most frequently, terminations decisions depend upon the patient’s wishes, the type of neoplasm and stage of maternal cancer.
Day 1
Published in Bertha Alvarez Manninen, Dialogues on the Ethics of Abortion, 2022
Well, viability is irrelevant, as I think abortions should be illegal throughout all points in pregnancy unless it is necessary to save a woman’s life. So say that she experiences an ectopic pregnancy, or if she is suffering from dangerously high blood pressure and the only way to stop it is to end the pregnancy. In those cases, I would be ok with abortion. In these cases the baby is going to die either way, so we may as well save one life. Otherwise no.
Segmental myocardial viability by echocardiography at rest
Published in Scandinavian Cardiovascular Journal, 2023
Marlene Iversen Halvorsrød, Anders Thorstensen, Gabriel Kiss, Asbjørn Støylen
Myocardial viability has for decades been a cornerstone in the therapeutic decision-making of patients with ischemic heart disease [1]. For clinical purposes, viability refers to the ability of a segment to regain its contractile function. The gold standard imaging measurement for detecting myocardial viability is not established [2]. Positron Emission Tomography (PET) shows metabolic integrity while magnetic resonance (MR) displays scar that may restrict contraction, but both methods are time-consuming and expensive. Echocardiography is available, cheap, fast and with few contraindications. Several echocardiographic measurements, both at rest and during stress, are candidates for viability diagnostics. Most of them are established as global measurements [3–5], but in the present study, we focus on the measurements at a segmental level, as viable segments are more relevant in relation to revascularization.
People’s knowledge of and attitudes toward abortion laws before and after the Dobbs v. Jackson decision
Published in Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters, 2023
Kristen N. Jozkowski, Xiana Bueno, Ronna C. Turner, Brandon L. Crawford, Wen-Juo Lo
On 24th June 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) upheld a 2018 Mississippi law (i.e. Gestational Age Act) in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (hereafter Dobbs v. Jackson). A draft of the decision was leaked in May 2022 and received tremendous media coverage. The Mississippi law restricted abortion after 15 weeks “except in a medical emergency or in the case of a severe fetal abnormality”.1 This decision overturned the 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade and eliminated the constitutional protection for the right to abortion up to viability or approximately 22–24 weeks of pregnancy. Of note, scientific and medical organisations provide guidelines for fetal/neonatal care that suggest the potential for viability at 22–24 weeks,2 which is often the timeframe cited by politicians and in the media as “fetal viability”. As a result of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, state lawmakers are positioned to enact legislation that can further restrict abortion beyond the bounds they were able to previously because of the trimester framework established in Roe v. Wade. The ruling in Roe v. Wade indicated in the first trimester, the decision to have an abortion is solely between a pregnant person and their healthcare provider. In the second trimester, the state is permitted to regulate abortion for concerns related to maternal health. In the third trimester, or at the point of fetal viability, states are permitted to either regulate or prohibit abortion with exceptions for cases of life endangerment for the pregnant person.
Feminist Concerns About Artificial Womb Technology
Published in The American Journal of Bioethics, 2023
Tamara Kayali Browne, Evie Kendal, Tiia Sudenkaarne
A risk associated with AWT, however, is that it could be used to justify further restrictions on reproductive rights, such as abortion. In a world where AWT is available, it is possible that states attempting to impose legislative measures against abortion may argue that it is no longer justifiable at any gestational age, as those who do not wish to carry their fetus to term can transfer it to an artificial womb for continued development and subsequent adoption. This argument could be used particularly in states where fetal viability is already used to decide the stage of pregnancy at which abortion should be allowed. However, as Claire Horn (2020) has argued, this argument rests on an anachronistic understanding of how and why abortions are conducted. According to existing predictions, transferring a fetus to AWT would entail major abdominal surgery (Eindhoven University of Technology 2022), and thus is not an ethical substitute for the majority of abortions, which are achieved simply and safely using medication early in gestation. Moreover, the details of how exactly the fetus would be extracted from the womb are almost never described. Yet it is important to pay attention to such details, especially if there would be coercion in cases in which AWT is viewed as “saving” the fetus from a substance-abusive fetal environment (in much the same way that forced C sections are conducted for “fetal interests”). Ignoring this issue reproduces the discourse of women’s pain and suffering being made invisible around pregnancy and childbirth (cf. obstetric violence) and might produce an entirely new reproductive justice issue.