Stories like these are why the abortion fight won't ever disappear. They may actually show how the power of technology will do what no abortion protestor ever did and what no law could ever do - change hearts and minds about unborn children. The story also shows the dreadful limits of medical knowledge.
When doctors found that Gabriel was weaker than his brother, with an enlarged heart, and believed he was going to die in the womb, his mother Rebecca Jones had to make a heartbreaking decision.Doctors told her his death could cause his twin brother to die too before they were born, and that it would be better to end Gabriel's suffering sooner rather than later.
Mrs Jones decided to let doctors operate to terminate Gabriel's life.
Firstly they tried to sever his umbilical cord to cut off his blood supply, but the cord was too strong.
They then cut Mrs Jones's placenta in half so that when Gabriel died, it would not affect his twin brother.
But after the operation which was meant to end his life, tiny Gabriel had other ideas.
Although he weighed less than a pound, he put up such a fight for survival that doctors called him Rocky.
Astonishingly, he managed to carry on living in his mother's womb for another five weeks - until the babies were delivered by caesarean section.
Now he and Ieuan are back at home in Stoke - and are so close they are always holding each other's hand.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
JC:
Good catch on the Wills commentary.
Let's try that link one more time....
http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2007/11/01/vietnam/index.html
James, we've been able to arrive at a consensus without resolving the question of whether or not life begins at conception. What makes surgical abortion any different? Detection of a hearbeat is a well established standard for determining if someone is alive, and it doesn't depend on religion. If a heartbeat can be detected prior to a surgical abortion, what difference does it make whether life begins at conception or at some other point prior to the abortion?
Either I was very tired when I wrote the last posting or it was censored. Consequently, the first sentence doesn't make sense. I'll try this again, without any direct reference to inf*****ide, and hope that it makes it through. My point was that we currently prohibit killing of a human being subsequent to birth, even though we have not resolved the question of whether or not life begins at conception. We are able to do this, because we agree that life has begun by the time of birth, even though we are not in agreement on precisely when life begins. Democracy is about finding points of agreement, regardless of what differences may remain. Therefore, surgical abortions must be debated separately from the morning after pill. It is not necessary to determine whether or not life begins at conception in order to arrive at a consensus against surgical abortions.
Either I was very tired when I wrote the last posting or it was censored. Consequently, the first sentence doesn't make sense. I'll try this again, without any direct reference to inf*****ide, and hope that it makes it through. My point was that we currently prohibit killing of a human being subsequent to birth, even though we have not resolved the question of whether or not life begins at conception. We are able to do this, because we agree that life has begun by the time of birth, even though we are not in agreement on precisely when life begins. Democracy is about finding points of agreement, regardless of what differences may remain. Therefore, surgical abortions must be debated separately from the morning after pill. It is not necessary to determine whether or not life begins at conception in order to arrive at a consensus against surgical abortions.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.