Yes, unborn babies can feel pain at 20 weeks, doctors testify

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
_Abyssinia said:
I truncated your post. Check this excerpt:doctorsonfetalpain.com/answering-the-pain-deniers/
Click to expand...
Weak sauce for several key reasons. In response to what they claim to be “facts.”

“Fact” 1: JAMA was/is aware that there was/is some disagreement as to which portions of the brain are responsible for pain perception. That is one of the reasons why they did the analysis. They examined the full body of peer-reviewed scientific research to determine what the preponderance of the evidence supports and it turned out that the majority of research supports the position that a functioning cerebral cortex **is **required. The author of that article plucked out the onesie/twosie studies dissenting from the majority of the research to assert that the minority opinion should be the standard by which scientific truth is realized. Sorry, just doesn’t work that way.

“Fact” 2: This is a classic mistake people make on this issue; they mistake autonomic response to stimuli for willful reaction to stimuli resulting from pain perception.

“Fact” 3: This was probably the most amusing. The author states “Of course, that a factual scientific or medical claim is made by either a proponent or an opponent of abortion does not of itself make that claim either true or false”, then goes on to assert exactly the opposite in the rebuttal.
 
Libtam said:
That means we can abort them before that time, it won’t be up for any debate.
Click to expand...
Your logic only requires a good anaesthetic be administered first. Then you can abort at anytime! Beyond debate, eh? :rolleyes:
 
Monkey1976 said:
There are several methods for killing someone painlessly - does that make it okay to kill them because they’re an inconvenience?
Click to expand...
Great point!

Date rape isn’t justifiable on the basis that they don’t feel anything.

It’s not OK to steal if the person you’re robbing doesn’t notice their money is missing.
 
Interesting fact #1 - and by ‘interesting’ I mean disgusting!

Many abortion clinics offer fetal anaesthetics.

Interesting fact #2

Many women decline the option. Why?
Yep - you guessed it! $$$$$$
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
Weak sauce for several key reasons. In response to what they claim to be “facts.”

“Fact” 1: JAMA was/is aware that there was/is some disagreement as to which portions of the brain are responsible for pain perception. That is one of the reasons why they did the analysis. They examined the full body of peer-reviewed scientific research to determine what the preponderance of the evidence supports and it turned out that the majority of research supports the position that a functioning cerebral cortex **is **required. The author of that article plucked out the onesie/twosie studies dissenting from the majority of the research to assert that the minority opinion should be the standard by which scientific truth is realized. Sorry, just doesn’t work that way.
Click to expand...
“fully functioning cerebral cortex”

Children with hydranencephaly don’t have a functioning cerebral cortex, do they?

Children with hydranencephaly, according to this are, “missing much or most of their cerebral hemispheres, that is, the two masses of folded brain tissue (cortex) that surround the brain stem.”

One of the myths the Hydranencephaly Information Network says is that ‘children with hydranencephaly don’t feel pain’ and they say, “In our recent survey 88% of the children are re- ported to feel pain”

If the majority of research that JAMA is citing, claims that you need a functioning cerebral cortex to experience pain, how would they explain why people who do not have a functioning cerebral cortex are reported to feel pain?

The source I quoted before says:
IN FACT, there is substantial medical evidence that in the brain it is the thalamus, rather than the cerebral cortex, that is principally responsible for pain perception [see endnote 6:b]. While the cerebral cortex may affect reaction to and modulation of perceived pain, children born missing most of the cerebral cortex, those with hydranancephaly, nevertheless experience pain [see endnote 6:b] – and in adults, stimulation or ablation of the cerebral cortex does not alter pain perception, while stimulation or ablation of the thalamus does [see endnote 8]. Nerves link pain receptors (nociceptors) to the thalamus by 20 weeks after fertilization [see endnote 1].
Click to expand...
doctorsonfetalpain.com/answering-the-pain-deniers/
“Fact” 2: This is a classic mistake people make on this issue; they mistake autonomic response to stimuli for willful reaction to stimuli resulting from pain perception.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t have be either or though necessarily, does it?
“Fact” 3: This was probably the most amusing. The author states “Of course, that a factual scientific or medical claim is made by either a proponent or an opponent of abortion does not of itself make that claim either true or false”, then goes on to assert exactly the opposite in the rebuttal.
Click to expand...
 
_Abyssinia said:
So if the majority of research that JAMA or anyone else is citing, claims that you need a functioning cerebral cortex to experience pain, and yet there are people with a known condition who do not have this and yet feel pain, this raises questions about that research.
Click to expand...
It raises questions about the dissenting research, yes. The answer is a simple one and explained below.
_Abyssinia said:
If the majority of research that JAMA is citing, claims that you need a functioning cerebral cortex to experience pain, how would they explain why people who do not have a functioning cerebral cortex are reported to feel pain?
Click to expand...
See my correction of “fact” number 2. They approach this issue from the false premise that any physical reaction to stimuli constitutes sentient/conscious awareness, i.e. that awareness of the body is the same thing as awareness of the mind. We know this to be a false premise precisely because the body has all sorts of autonomic responses to stimuli. A fetus supposedly “thrashes” about in response to ordinarily painful stimuli? So does a corpse when the body is preserved artificially. It doesn’t mean that either have a sentient/conscious awareness or perception of pain. Further, the majority of research also found that the same responses can be induced even with stimuli that are not ordinarily painful.
_Abyssinia said:
It doesn’t have be either or though necessarily, does it?
Click to expand...
It hast to be substantiated.
 
Lion_IRC said:
Great point!

Date rape isn’t justifiable on the basis that they don’t feel anything.

It’s not OK to steal if the person you’re robbing doesn’t notice their money is missing.
Click to expand...
That is a good point in itself…if we are basing whats right and wrong on whether they can feel and sense pain, using that logic, if a female is knocked out, anything done to her or anyone else should be accepted and ok.lol
 
I really don’t understand why there was ever any doubt about this. Of course they can feel pain. They are human beings just like us. Once their nervous system is developed I see no reason to believe why they can’t feel pain like us.
 
Always good to have the scientific facts, but in this case, it is somewhat peripheral. The immorality of abortion (assuming that is accepted) does not turn on whether the unborn feels pain from the act. It hangs on the intentional ending of their life. Knowing they do feel pain (if that’s the case) and proceeding to abort painfully, adds cruelty to the evil perpetrated.

If the pain theory becomes widely accepted, we can anticipate laws will be passed to require the unborn to be anaesthetized in the process of killing. Some comfort in that.
 
Science finds out more and more and it often seems to arrive more and more at most of our’s Christian perspective. I think eventually, science will solve this whole thing.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
It raises questions about the dissenting research, yes. The answer is a simple one and explained below.

See my correction of “fact” number 2. They approach this issue from the false premise that any physical reaction to stimuli constitutes sentient/conscious awareness, i.e. that awareness of the body is the same thing as awareness of the mind. We know this to be a false premise precisely because the body has all sorts of autonomic responses to stimuli. A fetus supposedly “thrashes” about in response to ordinarily painful stimuli? So does a corpse when the body is preserved artificially. It doesn’t mean that either have a sentient/conscious awareness or perception of pain. Further, the majority of research also found that the same responses can be induced even with stimuli that are not ordinarily painful.

It hast to be substantiated.
Click to expand...
I have read before that sentience is not what makes us human so if I could not feel pain in my leg because it was paralyzed, I would still be harmed if somebody cut off my leg. Many people can not feel pain. Those who are in a coma, under general anesthetic, and those who have leprosy can not feel pain but they are still human beings. Ability to feel pain is not what makes us human. There is an article here that looks into the issue of sentience.

A corpse, whether preserved artificially or not is just that, a corpse. It’s not alive in the same way an unborn baby in the womb is. An unborn baby that is alive in the womb is not a corpse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top