Preborn

At what point can we validly say, "A living being is in the womb"? There are various views about

when an individual not yet born becomes a human being. I will review them here and although

some points will be left unresolved I will state a general conclusion.

AT CONCEPTION

A new genetic code is formed at conception (the time when the sperm and egg combine). Most of

the physical characteristics an individual will possess (such as gender, eye-color, and so forth) are

determined at this time. A unique individual, with a new genetic code that is distinct from the

mother's, comes into being at conception.

This forms a strong basis for the view that immediately after conception, a distinct human life has

begun. However, the phenomenon of twinning may post a problem for that view. Twinning can

occur up to 14 days after the initial point of conception. When that happens physically, what - if

anything - has happened spiritually? Has a new soul emerged from a body that was already there?

Or, prior to twinning, did two souls inhabit one body? Or, at this early stage, is there no soul

present at all? It is difficult to insist dogmatically that a soul is present in a body which has the

potential to twin (and thus be occupied by two souls). Also, at conception, the fertilized egg is

extremely small (less than a millimeter long).

However, even if it is granted that the potential for twinning implies that we do not know if the

number of souls in the womb is one or two, that does not mean that no human soul is present,

and that we are free to kill the new tiny human individual. One might compare the situation to

that of a hunter who sees something move in a forest and prepares to take aim. Through his

scope he sees that the movement was not caused by a deer or by some other animal. He sees

that the movement was either caused by one human being, or by more than one human being,

or by the wind. Does this degree of uncertainty provide a moral justification for him to fire?

AT IMPLANTATION

By about the tenth day after conception, the blastocyst attaches to the uterus. A hormonal change

occurs to the mother. About 60% of all fertilized eggs are never implanted. They pass out of the

body without the mother ever knowing that fertilization has occurred. It may be noted that Christian

churches do not have a tradition of treating the losses of fertilized eggs as the losses of people by

conducting funerals for them.

After implantation, the blastocyct is in a relatively stable biocontinuum, barring a fatal defect or

an ectopic pregnancy, the blastocyst is positioned to develop and live. If one were to posit 14 days

after the initial conception as the point at which personhood is present, the question about twinning

would be avoided. Also, this would be more consistent with the non-recognition of personhood

given to fertilized eggs which are not implanted. If implantation were adopted as the point at which

personhood is present, the use of forms of birth control which prevent implantation would be

permissible.

However, implantation is basically a change of location, accompanied by an increase in genetic

stability. Except in cases of late twinning, everything about the blastocyst is essentially the same

after implantation as before. So it seems to be a somewhat arbitrary point at which to

acknowledge personhood.

AT INITIAL BLOOD FORMATION

By the end of the first month after conception, the form of the pre-born individual has changed.

The individual is no longer a blastocyst; the individual is now called an embryo. Although the heart

is not fully developed, the embryo does have a pulse - and blood. Leviticus 17:11 is cited by some

as evidence that at this point, meaningful life ought to be attributed to the embryo: "The life of the

flesh is in the blood." The absence of blood in a body, after birth, is a clear manifestation of the

absence of life. Thus, it has been proposed, the presence of blood ought to be the defining criteria

for the presence of life before birth.

However, the context of Leviticus 17:11 is not focused upon the determination of personhood;

it is part of the instruction to the Israelites not to consume the blood of animals.

AT INITIAL BRAIN WAVES

The presence or absence of brain waves has been used as a medical criterion for the presence

or absence of life. At about 40 days into pregnancy, the embryo's brain waves can be detected.

By this time, the embryo - about half an inch long - is swimming in the amniotic fluid.

This is a good medical criterion. However, the question has been raised whether the presence of

brain waves is all it should take to acknowledge meaningful life, or whether brain waves of a certain

level of complexity ought to be present before meaningful life is acknowledged. Despite this blurring

of the issue, it is universally recognized that when an individual with a human genetic code has

naturally sustained brain waves and a naturally sustained pulse, the individual is alive. The embryo,

at this point, meets those criteria. If, before this point, the burden of proof was on the side of those

who wished to prove that the embryo is a living human being, it would seem that as a medical

question, the burden of proof shifts at this point to those who wish to show that the individual is

not a living human being.

AT INITIAL RESPIRATORY ANIMATION

At about the tenth week after implantation, the individual's lungs begin to perform "practice breathing." Oxygen is
supplied through the umbilical cord; the "practice breathing" action involves the inhaling and exhaling of amniotic
fluid. Also, at this point the individual simply looks more human than in the early embryonic stages.

The absence of breathing is a traditional measure for the absence of life. This may be alluded to in Scripture:
James 2:26 states, "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." (The word for
"spirit" in the Greek text is pneuma, which also means "breath.") In Genesis 2:7, which depicted the creation of
Adam, "man became a living soul" as "the LORD God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life."

Visually, creatures that have active respiratory systems - whether they are land-based animals or aquatic animals -
look alive, and are therefore considered alive. There have even been experiments in which land-animals breathed
a fluid - materials known as perfluorocarbons - and then breathed air later. Those animals did not thus die and
then come back to life. So if one were to ask, "Is this creature alive" by asking, "Does this creature possess
obvious signs of life?" then lung-animation seems to deliver a clear answer that is detectable without sophisticated
technology. At about the same time respiratory activity begins, the individual's liver and bone marrow begin to
produce blood cells. This seems to meet another proposed measurement of the presence of life: respiratory
animation, direct blood production, and increased bone development (possibly referenced in Ecclesiastes 11:5)
appear at about the same time.

AT "QUICKENING"

This refers to the point at which the mother feels the individual moving in the womb. (The term "quick" is used here
in its archaic sense of "moving, demonstrating life.") It is a clear indication that the pre-born individual is active.
This typically occurs at about the 19th week of pregnancy. The quickening-point is measurable without technology.
That is probably its most favorable feature. A major objection to the use of quickening as a criterion for life is that it
is a measure of the mother's ability to discern fetal activity as much as it is a measure of the fetal activity itself. It's
like saying that if a person is hiding, the person is not really there.

AT VIABILITY

This refers to the point at which the individual is capable of surviving outside the mother's womb - generally, at
about 24-26 weeks, although with intensive support and advanced technology some babies have survived earlier
premature births. A major objection to the use of viability as a criterion for personhood is that even babies after
birth are not viable in the sense that they cannot survive without assistance. The same could be said about many
children and adults.

Also, a statement about viability is a statement involving hypothetical circumstances. The typical pre-born
individual is viable in his or her current environment, provided that the individual's biocontinuum is not disturbed.
The use of viability as a criterion for personhood cannot be applied consistently: if the pre-born individual were
suddenly born, the individual could not survive, but if therefore the individual is not a person, why can't we also say,
"If an adult were suddenly held underwater, the adult could not survive; therefore the adult is not a person"?

AT BIRTH

Some people have proposed on theological grounds that the absence of breath implies the absence of meaningful
life, and therefore they claim that personhood should not be recognized until after birth. Stated another way, this
means that until an individual has taken a breath of air, the individual is not to be regard as a human being. At least
three objections against this position have been raised:

First, Luke 1:41-44 affirms the presence of a meaningful pre-born life: Elizabeth, speaking explicitly by divine
inspiration, states that her child "leaped in my womb for joy." This implies personhood. Similarly in Judges 13:7, a
woman is instructed to keep the Nazarite regulations (that is, she should avoid wine, etc.) because the child she
shall conceive is to be a Nazarite "from the womb." If personhood were only granted upon birth, there would seem
to be little reason to require the mother to keep those regulations during her pregnancy.

Second, while James 2:26 can be interpreted to mean that loss of breath indicates loss of life, that is not the only
interpretation. James could easily have been referring to the invisible spirit, rather than to respiratory function. The Greek
word pneuma can mean breath but it can also mean spirit, and that is how most translations render the text here. James
uses the same word in James 4:5 and there he definitely is not referring to respiratory activity.

James 2:26 does not suggest that James thought that eight-month-old pre-born individuals ought to be regarded on the
same level as rocks. Furthermore, the context of the verse ought to be considered. James was not addressing a question
about personhood; he was describing the importance of having an active, fruitful faith. To take a simile and turn it into
one's definitive basis for determining the presence of meaningful life is a very precarious interpretive method. It cannot be
shown that James, or any other Biblical author, would view a pre-born individual as anything other than a human being.

Third, although this is somewhat subjective, the plain appearance of a pre-born individual in the advanced stages of
pregnancy should not be overlooked. When a comparison is made of an eight-month-old individual in the womb, and an
eight-month-old individual prematurely born, they are basically the same as far as physical development is concerned.
Pre-born individuals in advanced stages of pregnancy have been observed exhibiting a sucking reflex. They hiccup. They
do what born babies would do in the same confined space. It seems arbitrary to say that the transition from the womb to
the atmosphere causes a fundamental change in the essence of the individual. Put more firmly, the use of birth as a
criterion for the presence of meaningful life has no medical or theological basis.

CONCLUSION

In light of these observations, natural conception ought to be understood as a possible creation of a soul and as a possible
sign of divine intent to bring forth a child. Implantation ought to be understood as a key transitional point in the process of
procreation; barring some exceptional circumstances, it ought to be considered a sign of divine intent to bring forth a child
or children. Also, the point at which personhood is initially and clearly manifest is the point at which brain waves, direct
blood-cell production, increased bone-formation, and respiratory activity are all present, that is, generally the tenth week of
pregnancy.

If we as Christians are to take seriously our responsibility to protect life, then under normal circumstances, even if we do
not know if a soul inhabits the body of an individual before the tenth week after conception, we have a responsibility to co-
operate with what appears to be a divine intention to bring forth a child. Knowing that "children are a heritage of the
LORD" (Psalm 127:3), as hospitable people, Christians ought to welcome God's gifts and the responsibilities to which He
calls us. Therefore it is immoral to procure an abortion, except in cases such as the ones described in Part Two.