RN student writes paper on Human Rights in Utero - Includes Conrad & Princeton

Kortney Coiner John Hansen December 9, 2016 Who Controls Basic Human Rights? The point in which a human becomes a human is often discussed and sometimes argued. Many believe that the second conception occurs, life is present. Others believe viability plays a factor and gestation times weigh in. By California and Arizona state law, a person does not gain basic human rights until they leave their mothers womb and take at least one breath. I think that is wrong. I wont even begin to argue when life “begins”, but I will argue that a baby fully viable in its mother’s womb deserves to be protected just like any other human being. At what point should a person be granted basic human rights? In a perfect world, it would be the second they have a heartbeat. I know we don’t live in a perfect world, but I would like to believe we live in a fair and just world, and in that case a baby should gain rights, just like everyone else that is living, the day they are considered viable babies. If a baby is born at 20 weeks, all precautions and every measure is taken to save that babies life. The same should occur when the baby is still in utero. One of the things that baffles me the most is how babies are protected by abortion laws all across the United States, but those same babies have no rights while in utero. According to an article form the New York Times published on June 17, 2016 the allowance of abortion ranges all the way from 6 weeks to full gestation. The state of North Dakota is the only state to ban abortions after 6 weeks gestation, or as soon as a fetal heartbeat is detected by a transvaginal probe. In Arkansas, the law is 12 weeks when a fetal heartbeat can typically be detected by an abdominal ultrasound. Arizona and North Carolina state law declares that after 20 weeks since a woman’s last menstrual cycle or 18 weeks, since fertilization abortions are no longer legal. The states of Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Nebraska, and Oklahoma have banned abortions anywhere past 22 weeks, based on that fact that a fetus can feel physical pain at that point. In Florida, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, South Carolina, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Tennessee, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming, and Nevada The law has been set at 24-26 weeks, being at that stage a baby is viable outside the womb. In the case of Iowa, Texas, and Virginia, they only ban abortions in the third trimester which is anywhere after 28 weeks. Aside from all of those, there are nine states that do not have any abortion restrictions at all. These states are Alaska, Colorado, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont and West Virginia. By all of these laws, there are 41 states in our country that protect unborn babies. However, these babies don’t have rights. They are not considered people yet in the eyes of a law. I have based the majority of my research on the state laws in Arizona and California being that I am from California and have resided in Arizona for the last 6 years. As stated above, in California abortions are allowed up to 24-26 weeks, depending on viability. In Arizona it is 20 weeks. At 20 weeks according to WebMD.com, a baby weighs approximately 10 ounces and is about 6 inches long. The baby can suck its thumb, yawn, stretch and even make faces. Their legs and arms are fully formed and their fully formed heart is still beating away. The neurons have connected from their brain to their muscles and they are busy turning cartilage into bone. Their taste buds are developed and they can taste whatever their mother eats through the amniotic fluid they are already swallowing and digesting. Their inner ear is fully formed and they can hear their mother’s voice. If you fast-forward to 26 weeks gestation, baby now weighs anywhere between 2-3 pounds and is completely viable with outside help from a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. At this stage the baby’s eyes are open and their brain waves are responsive. They now can respond to sounds and light. This tiny baby and their amazing body can create a response when stimulated! Now on a more somber note, I studied the process and what deciding factors are looked at when deciding if someone is no longer living. The book of Law & Ethics for Medical Careers, states “Death is indicated if the following signs are present: the patient: cannot breath without assistance, has no coughing or gagging reflex, has no pupil response to light, has no blinking reflex when the cornea is touched, has no grimace reflex when the head is turned or ears are flushed with ice water, or has no response to pain.” If you were performing these tests on a baby at the gestation of 26 weeks, you would be able to decide if they are dead or alive. At 26 weeks, a baby is breathing amniotic fluid in its mother’s womb. At 26 weeks, a baby would have gagging and coughing reflex if provoked. At 26 weeks a baby has the brain waves that are needed for their pupils to respond to light. At 26 weeks a baby has a response to physical pain. Just like any other human. So why would these tests be ok to deem a person dead, but not ok to deem a baby alive, and if they are why does that baby not hold basic human rights? If an 82 year old man gets in a car accident and is taken into the hospital the doctors present will do everything in their power to save said mans life. If a baby is viable at 26 weeks and its mother goes into labor, every precaution is taken to try and stop the labor and keep the baby in utero. If these precautions don’t work and the baby is born, those same doctors do everything in their power to save said baby. If something goes awry in delivery and the baby dies before taking a breath, they are no longer looked at as a person and in the eyes of the law, never existed. How is it, that before death, that baby was considered just as alive as the 82-year-old man, but as soon as it dies, it’s only a fetus with no rights? In the blink of an eye, it goes from a baby trying to be saved to a fetus with no rights and no chance. In both states of Arizona and California, a fetus only becomes a baby and is given a birth certificate when it exits its mother and takes at least one breath. There is no difference if they live one second, one minute, one hour after birth, or if they are completely healthy and go home with their family. Until that first breath is taken even though they had been very much alive and viable in their mother’s womb, they are not granted the title of human or given basic human rights. They don’t even exist. Now picture that same baby at any age gestation, happy in its mother womb while she is walking down the street. She randomly becomes the victim of a drive by shooting. If a man murders a woman that is pregnant, no matter how far along she is, he is charged with a double homicide. Even if that woman is six weeks pregnant and she doesn’t know it yet, with the baby still rapidly forming but having no chance of surviving outside of its mothers womb, if the pregnancy is later discovered in an autopsy the charges shift to double homicide and include the life of the baby. If a baby isn’t considered a human in the eyes of the law until it has taken a breath, then why is it considered a human in the eyes of the law the second its life is taken? In Arizona penal codes 13-1102, 13-1103, and 13-1104 negligent homicides, manslaughter, first-degree and second-degree murder ad defined. They specify that the offenses apply to an unborn child in any stage of development. California’s penal code 187 defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being or a fetus with malice afterthought. You can find those penal codes on NCLS.org. These laws have been put into place to protect women and their unborn children from acts of violence against both of them. In these cases there are always TWO people being protected and fought for. If these laws equally protect them and the criminals are charged for the murder of each person, then don’t both lives exist equally? If a fetus isn’t considered a person with basic rights until they take at least one breath, then how can they be protected in a court of law when they haven’t even reached a stage of viability? Please don’t mistake my confusion for a negative stance on these laws that are in place. I firmly believe any life that is taken should be awarded justice. I just can’t quite grasp how our government will acknowledge a baby if it is murdered but not if it dies of natural causes in utero. When a baby dies of natural causes, no one is to blame. But what if there is a matter of negligence? In medicine, according to Laws & Ethics for Medical Careers “a standard of care refers to the level of performance expected of a health care practitioner in carrying out his or her professional duties. If a high risk obstetrician does not do his job and misses a point blank case of a syndrome called twin to twin transfusion it is grounds for a mal practice lawsuit but only on behalf of the mother for her pain and suffering and not on behalf of the twins because in the eyes of the law, they are not people with rights. In a case of negligence like this, it would be deemed “nonfeasance” which according to this book, is “the failure to act when one should.” I personally know a woman who after the emotional and physically painful procedure of in vitro fertilization, she became pregnant with twin boys. Soon after she become pregnant she was diagnosed with TTS, which is twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. This syndrome occurs when the mother’s body only forms one placenta and the twins begin to share the same food and oxygen source. This is dangerous because of several reasons. One is the blood flow in the umbilical cords may be disproportionate. The twin with the lack of blood flow will not have enough to survive and the twin receiving too much blood will have its heart go into overdrive and this could possibly cause heart failure. Nutrients are also a big factor here. The twin getting less will inevitably be smaller and have a hard time surviving with a lack of food supply. This specific case I know of ended up becoming apparent in the third trimester, which is called acute TTS. It happens suddenly but is usually caught in time if the babies are being monitored, as they should. At a routine doctors appointment, the woman I know was due to give birth to her completely healthy twins in just twenty days and instead endured the worst day of her life. She was told that because of TTS both of her beautiful, fully developed babies had passed away in her belly. Not only did she have to bear the weight of this tragedy, but also it wasn’t over. She had to deliver her precious babies knowing she would not be taking them home with her. As a mother of two children myself, I could not even begin to pretend to understand that pain that this woman endured. After she gave birth to her sweet boys, they were not even awarded birth certificates. Even though she went through a severe labor and delivery and gave birth to her twins, they were denied recognition in the state of California. As if loosing her children was not enough, she then had to endure the pain of our government not even choosing to acknowledge them as people in the eyes of the law. She was however, given a death certificate. But I ask you this…how were they awarded a death certificate if they had never been considered alive? I explained in a previous paragraph all of the factors that come together to declare a human dead. Those babies would have been able to respond to all of those outside stimuli’s. So how in the world were they not people? This strong and unbelievably brave woman is now in the process of creating a law in her son’s honor granting rights to babies as soon as they are viable. I for one hope that she succeeds and continues to share the story of her beautiful boys. Their names are Conrad and Princeton Costa. And if any of you are interested in reading their story in further detail please visit https://www.change.org/p/california-governor-legal-rights-medical-protections-for-viable-fetuses-conrad-princeton-s-law. While you are there, please, if you can find it in your heart to sign the petition. This law that their mother, Brittanie, is rallying to create is so very important. The doctor in the case I just explained to you is not being held responsible for his negligence due to the fact that the boys were not considered alive as they did not ever take a breath outside of the womb. During her pregnancy, this mother had no idea until it was too late that she was not being monitored correctly. At every appointment she was brushed of and never actually cared for as she should have been. His sole job was to monitor the boys health and development and he didn’t do it. Other professionals in the same field, I’m sure would be able to tell her that her case of TTS was black and white and any capable doctor should have caught it in time to deliver her twins. Her specialist was negligent in the form of nonfeasance. He did not act and perform his duties, as he should have. This man took an oath to serve and protect and because he was lazy and in my opinion, views his patients as a number and not human beings, two babies that should have had every chance in the world to take this place by storm, now lay to rest beside each other. Because of the fact that they both died in utero and never took a breath outside of their mothers womb, they will never be considered people in the eyes of the law in the state of California. Now that their mom is ready to seek justice for not just herself but also for her boys, she has hit a wall because she cannot bring a case forward on their behalf because they were never considered alive. She only has grounds to bring a pain and suffering case for herself against this negligent doctor. This is where I have a hard time following the logic behind this. Her twins were very much alive. I personally saw her belly grow as they grew. I read about how she could feel them moving. She felt them kick, punch and roll. How could something “not alive” create movement? That is not physically possible. They were people from day one with hearts and souls and because of that, they should be awarded basic human rights. These sweet little boys deserve nothing but the best and even after this tragedy, their mom and dad are still doing everything in their power to make sure they get the recognition that they truly deserve. That is a movement I can pour my own heart into one hundred percent. Brittanie has said that Conrad and Princeton had their daddy, Shane’s, curly hair and that they both shared her nose. Please tell me, how these two fully developed, absolutely beautiful babies that resembled the parents that created and loved them; weren’t people with basic human rights? I believe that the second a heart starts beating in a mother’s womb, a child has been created. A human being is forming and therefore is a person. A person from day one, should have basic human rights that our founding fathers bestowed upon us so many years ago. If a fetus is protected by the law from a malicious attack, they should also be protected from negligence and harm while in utero. Babies are helpless and depend on their parents for everything. Even in the tragic event of the death of a child, that parent should be able to bring about justice for their loss. There should not be picking and choosing of when and where we want to protect babies. The should be protected from the time they are viable outside in this world all the way to the day they die, no matter how soon or far away that day may be. I hope to see the laws change in regards to this. Going back to my perfect world theory that all babies no matter what age gestation will be protected just like any other human that would be beautiful. It’s not bad thing, in my opinion, to have faith in this world still, and I will continue to fight for it. Kortney Coiner John Hansen December 8, 2016 Works Cited Judson, Karen, Carlene Harrison, and Karen Judson. Law & Ethics for Medical Careers. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2010. Print. Phelan, Jay. What Is Life?: A Guide to Biology. New York, NY: W H Freeman, 2015. Print. Cushman, Clare, and Talbot D'Alemberte. Supreme Court Decisions and Women's Rights: Milestones to Equality. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2001. Print.